I have to say I am absolutely disgusted with our military this afternoon in regards to Italian journalist Giuliana Sgrena’s treatment at the hands our military. After being held for a month by Iraqi insurgents, she was released to Italian Secret Service officers. But while transporting her to freedom, their car was shot up by U.S. forces manning a checkpoint. One of the agents was killed, and Sgrena was slightly wounded.
According to this account in the Guardian, US forces fired “300 to 400 rounds” into the car.
This is what I am disgusted about. An anti-American “journalist” for a Communist newspaper is allegedly “captured” by insurgents, then released. On her way out, our forces shoot 300 to 400 rounds at their car. And the result of all that firepower? One killed, three injured — none apparently very seriously. Then they treat them and send them home.
Obviously all that money we’ve spent on training and equipment has gone to waste if our forces are performing that poorly.
J.
(Hat tip: Little Green Footballs)
Cousin Dave, apparently the intelligence agent was killed by a CLEAN SHOT TO THE TEMPLE. Now tell me, For some reason that was the only bullet to hit him, and for some odd reason, with a .50 cal machine gun, his brains weren’t splattered all over the car and that communist bitch. This is according to the autopsy report that the Italians gave us.
Stinks like a bleeding communist pussy.
Where’d you get that info, Henry? I have NOT been riding this story like I should have, so if that’s common knowledge, ‘scuse me for being ignorant.
I demand an investigation into this unconscionable waste of taxpayer bullets!!
lol Talldave-maybe Teddy Kennedy will order one right up for you.
Henry I am also interested in where you go the information on how the agent was shot. All I have seen is that he was killed, and that she had a wound from some kind of shrapnel. No other details about anyone else, injuries or how they got them.
I remember seeing it I’m trying to find where I found it…
Jeff, Just me:
“Calipari’s body was returned to Italy late Saturday, and an autopsy was performed Sunday. ANSA quoted doctors as saying Calipari was struck in the temple by a single round and died instantly.”
Just to let you know its at the VERY end of the story so you have to scroll all the way down.
What, if anything, do we know about this ANSA outfit? Is this report reliable? (Yes, I know I could Google it and find out for myself, but it’s way easier to get people to do stuff like that for me.)
Jeff Harrell, they “quoted” doctors, so the doctors are the ones who said it.
I think you’re missing my point, Henry. This agency, ANSA, said that they quoted somebody else. Can they be relied upon to get stuff like that right? Are they accurate, or do they get things wrong? Is there a translation issue here? Through careless translation, “an injury to the scalp” can become “a bullet to the skull.”
You’re taking this report at face value. I don’t know that that’s a reasonable thing to do at this point. That’s why I asked what we (you know, collectively) know about ANSA.
jeff, They are an italian news service…
ANSA translated to English via Yahoo
ah now I see what you’re saying. But if they are a standardized news service, one could assume that they don’t misquote (how often does CNN, Foxnews, BBC misquote? probably not very often, who knows) Anyways, I can understand where you’re coming from. I just barely found that at the bottom of a single story. That very fact should be publisized. Also the caliber of round that hit his head is VERY important.
We need the facts. And we aren’t getting them.
Uhh? I have many questions and comments.
1. What’s a “standardized news service?”
2. Reporters misquote all the time. Statements are taken out of context, words are misinterpreted, and in this case we have a language issue to consider, which makes it even more likely that the report is incorrect.
3. Have these alleged doctors been quoted anywhere else independent of ANSA? Do we even know they exist, for instance? Remember Jayson Blair. Anything you hear only once is just a rumor.
4. At this point, we have zero actual information about the cause of death of the person who died. We have a rumor, passed hand to hand in a game of transatlantic “telephone,” said to have originated with a doctor who may or may not even exist.
Which just goes to support what I started out saying: The complete lack of actual reporting on this story is astounding. In a day and age where you can download an original copy of the police report fired after Hunter S. Thompson’s suicide, the fact that we don’t even have the first fact in this story amazes me.
RE: Jeff Harrell’s post (March 7, 2005 07:51 PM)
The complete lack of actual reporting on this story is astounding. In a day and age where you can download an original copy of the police report fired after Hunter S. Thompson’s suicide, the fact that we don’t even have the first fact in this story amazes me.
To some extent, this is true. However, consider that this has turned into a political story (by Sgrena) with lots of spin to be spun. Thompson’s death didn’t have interested parties looking to capitalize on it, at least as far as I’ve seen it. I admit that I didn’t follow Thompson in life or in death.
Consider also that the U.S. military has a very structured process to handle such battlefield investigations and they are less likely to shoot from the hip, as it were, to report the story. What superficially may seem evasive may just be a quest to get the facts. Can the facts be tweaked? Sure, but I have more confidence now in the military’s coverage (forthright, that is) than many years ago. I might add further that my judgement of such historical military reporting has been through the eyes of a biased media that has not proven itself to be wholly trustworthy or necessarily fair. Considering this, even my potential bias questioning military reporting may be unfair.
Sgrena has proven herself to be untrustworthy and entirely partisan and will exploit this situation as best she can. Her reportage and that of her allies, along with the U.S. caution, will ensure that minimal or bad reporting will persist for some time. Hopefully, subsequent follow-up to this event will receive the same attention as it is receivng now and not be like some unproven accusation thrown out just prior to an election and then promptly ignored.