1. What, exactly, is the Hammurabi Human Rights Group? They provided the initial video, and I can't find a thing about them.

Mark, if you're trying to discredit this group in order to discredit the video evidence, well, OK. But the US military sent it's own troops in after and the scene one of them describes matches description of the video.

2. The allegation is of 24 civilians killed; were there any terrorists in the area? If there were, how many? What were they doing before the alleged incident took place?

There are reports that troops came under from the houses that the killings took place. Even so, that would not exonerate the troops of the allegations brought against them.

3. What was the military situation in the area for the week prior to the alleged incident? Was there a lot of terrorist activity? None?

Not all that relevant to the charges. Would help understand their actions better if there was a lot of activity in the area, but would not justify what they are accused of doing.

4. Does anyone have any forensic evidence available? You know, ballistics tests, expended ammunition, fingerprints, that sort of thing.

I'm guessing the military does as they sent in an investigation team afterward.

5. The event happened in November; why did it take months for this video to surface?

I don't know. But again, US military eye witness accounts sound similar to descriptions of the tape.

6. Why would our Marines, who have behaved with exemplary discipline, suddenly run amok?

Well, stress, for one. One of their own was just killed, so anger. But, in reality, who knows?

7. A movie was made recently in Turkey which shows fictionalized American troopers busting in to Iraqi homes and massacring the inhabitants. This is a standard bit of enemy propaganda about us - am I the only one a bit suspicious that just what the terrorists accuse us of doing suddenly shows up on video?

I'm not because of the US accounts of the aftermath and the somber reaction and lack of skepticism about the charges of lawmakers of both parties after they were briefed on the case.

8. Who made the video - I mean, the names of the people, the organizations (if any) they belong to, and their past history?

From what I read, an Iraqi film student shot the video.

9. I understand that autopsies were performed; this is a rare thing in the Moslem world, as burial is supposed to take place very quickly after death. How many CSI groups are there in Iraq? Who ordered autopsies on 24 dead civilians when Iraqi civilians are killed by terrorists every day?

Don't know.

Mark,

I understand your obvious frustration at the situation, it kinda turns my stomach just thinking about it, but i'm sure the counsel for these guys is gonna be about as good as possible. I'm sure the Marines are gonna overturn EVERY stone possible to punch holes in this story, it behooves them to do so.

Mark,

I do believe that the military and pentagon are perfectly capable of concluding their investigation without you or the MSM.

Word on the wire is that murder charges are pending against some marines.

Considering as well that the pentagon and the investigators have released the information that they have, it is safe to say that the investigation in nearly wrapped up.

Who did what and who covered it up is what is left to be determined.

I am starting to develop some doubts over this story. When this story was politically and disgracefully broadcast to the media well in advance of the investigation, we all had that dread that this story was true. I think conservatives bought into it as well.

I read a story in the WAPO that they want to exhume the bodies to get more evidence, apparently there isn't much.

The photographer is an insurgent sypathizer. The witnesses are suspect.

However, the damage has been done. The Bush Administration has once again allowed itself to be forced into the situation where it loses no matter what the result. If the case proceeds, months of allegations against our nasty forces, if the case falls apart, it was because the investigation took too long to get started.

The Bush Administration needs to take on the media aggresively and continuously on this story, something they seem reluctant to do on every story.

Any theories on what is happening?

I'm sure that all of your questions will be answered by the investigation.

Jeez, heres another incident coming across the wires. I'm getting the feeling that this is the tip of the iceburg. The Iraqi PM yesterday said that troops are murdering civilians every day.

AP NewsBreak: U.S. troops to face murder charges in Iraqi man's death

Hammurabi Human Rights Group: Monitors the any progress in human rights since the fall of Saddam.

The IED was set up by someone in the neighborhood, so there had to be at least one, but there was no gunfire from any of the buildings. It was just one IED.
There is no evidence any of the people killed were terrorists. It was mostly women and children.

I don't know the answer to the third question.

Ballistic tests showed that the amunition was from American weapons.

Revenge for the death of a fellow soldier. Witnesses said the Marines just snapped.

There was an initial cover-up. Once the video surfaced they could not cover it up. It tooks months to expose the video because the people that took it did not know who to trust.

I don't know the answer to your 7th question.

To the best of my knowledge, the video was taken by a Marine that was sent to clean up the mess. The video was confiscated by his commanders during the cover-up. Someone in the Marines must have leaked it or there was a second video by unknown parties.

I don't know the answer to your ninth question.

"There was an initial cover-up. Once the video surfaced they could not cover it up. It tooks months to expose the video because the people that took it did not know who to trust."

Additionally, at least soldiers present at the scene after the acts took place were ordered by Navy Investigators to photograph the scenes (the kids had digital cameras with them). After they finished taking the photos, the Navy confiscated the cameras and the soldiers never got them back. This was in November right after it happened. The article is in the LA Times from either Wednesday or Thursday this week (I forget which day exactly). Any time a Marine commits a criminal act, the Navy is repsonsible for investigating it.

CORRECTION -

Additionally, at 2 least soldiers present at the scene after the acts took place were ordered by Navy Investigators to photograph the scenes (the kids had digital cameras with them).

Johan, Yes that is the story but how much of it is true? Who said they snapped? Someone who hated them already? If they were ALL innocent, then at least one of their neighbors set a bomb. Right? What if he's the one quoted as saying they "snapped?"

We need to reserve judgement until the real and verified facts are introduced into court. Note, simply being accused does not mean you're guilty.

"BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - A military investigation into allegations that American troops intentionally killed civilians in Ishaqi, a village north of Baghdad, has cleared them of misconduct, the U.S. said Friday - even though it acknowledged the deaths of up to 13 Iraqis in the March raid."

A similar news story might be written about Haditha some day. Or, they may end up in jail. We all have heard scenarios that explain their guilt - but we have not heard sworn statements and verified evidence. I'm willing to wait.

This is an interesting story on Haditha from today's Chicagoo Tribune.

Seems to back up that marines were fired upon after the bomb went off. Also interesting that Kimber didn't hear anything about these allegations. Seems the marine corp. did a good job of keeping it quiet, as it's now confirmed that two officers knew two days after the event that the civilians were shot and not killed by a roadside bomb, as initially reported.

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2006-06-03T052732Z_01_N03211198_RTRUKOC_0_US-IRAQ-HADITHA-PROBE.xml

My nephew is on his 3rd tour. I come from a long line of American War Vets. One thing we forget is that these young kids have been put through 3 years+ of hot, baking hell.

I'm not condoning their actions if they happened, I just think we should take this situation and examine it. It seems more and more these people are ungrateful, and unappreciative of our kids in uniform. Is this why 2500+ are dead? Our deficit in a huge mess?

I think we're staying the course to save face. Why are we nation building in a place that does not appreciate us being there? I personally would like to see a little nation building in my own hometown. Just my 2 cents.

I think we need to take a closer look at some of the leadership here. I've seen footage of 2 of the marines, and their accounts of pulling bodies from the house, even those of children. Vietnam destroyed my father. War changes people. Someof these poor kids (including my nephew) are on their 4th tour. I'm not sure why we're there when the Iraqi's hardly seem pleased with our presence. The deficit is compiling etc... It's time to think about nation building here at home, and not in some country that could care less about us. Are we staying the course to save our pride? I wonder. Just my 2 cents.

kate said: "I am starting to develop some doubts over this story."

Assuming you fully shape those doubts you might want to contact Sec. Rumsfeld. It sounds like he might appreciate hearing from you. According to one Pentagon official, Rumsfeld told aides that the case promised to be a major problem. He called it "really, really bad -- as bad or worse than Abu Ghraib".

Although the MSM is reporting what he said, I'm guessing Rumsfeld isn't basing his opinion on the MSM. I'm pretty sure he has other sources.

I have a question of my own, which I have not seen posted anywhere. Of course, it is not politically correct.

But how can anyone tell who is an enemy combatant and who is an innocent? When the enemy wears civilian clothes, and may be women or hides behind women and children, how can they all be sorted out?

In addition, I think it is pretty ballsy to have women hiding terrorists and then whining if they get caught up in the firefight. An "innocent" would not have been there in the first place, in most instances, and certainly any woman who places her children in harm's way to create a safe haven for terrorists is as responsible for their deaths as anyone who pulls a trigger.

I am NOT defending anyone who truly did shoot down innocent women and children out of rage or from merely "snapping". But at the same time, I think it's about time we started to get it across that merely being a woman is not guaranteed to provide protection. As far as I am concerned, if a woman hides killers behind her skirts, and tries to give them shelter when they are pursued, especially after they have slaughtered soldiers of ours, she has no right to expect or be granted any special treatment because of her gender. And if she knowingly places her children in such a situation to add to the illusion of innocence, she and the killers are the ones guilty of those deaths, no matter who fired the shots.

I think a good question might be to find out whether or not the killers ran into strangers' houses after they planted their bombs, or if they retreated to houses where their friends and allies were staying, women or not.

As far as the "Iraquis hardly being pleased with our presence" we have always said we would leave when they want us to. And they have not asked us to yet.

A poll which says "Do you want the US to leave?" will get nearly 100% yes in response. But a poll which asks WHEN they want the US to leave will say when they are ready to take over, and not a minute before. So we have to know what questions are asked before we pay too much attention to the answers we are given.

There is nothing to indicate that the Iraqis "could not care less about us". On the contrary, we are seen by many, very many, as liberators and guarantors of freedom. We are staying the course because it is the right thing to do.

The problem is the sectarian violence throughout the country. We can't get involved for fear of looking as if we are taking a side: Shia, Suni or Kurd.

This is a problem I read about 3 years ago in the run up to the war, and am still mindboggled as to why our administration did not prepare for this?

I realize that many people thought Chalabi was going to ride in, greeted w/ accolades, Iraq would be a democracy, and Iran would crumble through the pressure of it's own rebellions.

Yes, we asw our tanks greeted as we rolled into Baghdad. And, yes the purple fingers were uplifting. But, the idea that we will stand down when they stand up is absurd. It's like bad parenting. No stick. No carrot. Just wait til they stand up. This is not why we signed up for this war. This war was to protect us from WMD. Not referee a civil war.

We are staying the course is just simplified rhetoric to rally us around the liberty tree. I am not 8 years old anymore. I need something more substantial than sound bytes.

I would love for you to tell me what course we're on exactly? How do we know when we get there? How much will it cost in American lives and less importantly Dollars. And, why were we not told this all from the beginning? Things change. Courses change. Sure, but this is so far off the mark of what we were told we were doing.

I'm a conservative, but quite honestly if a bleeding heart liberal told me to stay the course, and let our troops die on foreign soil, and to wait til they stand up so that we can stand down it would be an insult to my intelligence.

Our kids have been there too long. I know, I talk to them. I see it in their eyes. I used to talk to my nephew jokingly about anything. Now, it's nothing but simple yes/no answers, and maybe a shrug.

So when I hear stay the course I sure the hell wish someone had told me what that heading was a long time ago because as far as a cost analysis benefit in lives & dollars we the American people are getting the shaft.

I may sounds bitter, but I refuse to go on any further purely on rhetoric. For the sake of my family I want to know what course we are on, and how do we gauge when we've gone off it, and how do we correct it.

"This is a problem I read about 3 years ago in the run up to the war, and am still mindboggled as to why our administration did not prepare for this?"

How would YOU have "prepared for it"? Do you really think you, sitting at home watching your TV, were privy to information that was simply overlooked by the White House? By the Pentagon?

Actually, as I watched the run-in to the war, I saw many discussions of this very concern, the future of the country where there were so many violent sectarian conflicts.

But the President said that we were not going to Iraq to impose our own view or our own style of democracy upon them, but merely to give them the freedom to choose their own government. He said it would be messy and would take a long time. He pointed out that our own democracy was messy, still is, and took a long time to get established.

He also said that the war on terror would take decades, possibly generations.

The Pentagon had been studying the possibility of what they call an Asymmetric War for a long time, and the one thing that kept coming up was the inability to predict an Asymmetric War. By definition, it is infinitely changing, infinitely variable, and infinitely unpredictable.

Because the war imposed on us by the terrorists is unlike any war ever fought, anywhere, at any time. It does not involve a uniformed army fighting for one country in an attempt to conquer another. The goal is not to gain land, or resources, or even political advantage.

It is, as the Pentagon says, a "war of preturbation". All they want to do is preturb us. And all we can do is to preturb them back. The theory is, if our counter-preturbation is enough to make their efforts at preturbing us not worth it, they will stop or at least slow down their efforts. And that is absolutely all we can do.

We can't conquer a country, because they don't represent a country. We can't fight an army, because they don't wear uniforms. All we can do is make their attempts too costly to continue.

By letting them turn the populace of Iraq against them, we have gone a long way toward getting that accomplished. They miscalculated by killing their own countrymen, their own co-religionists, and causing the destruction of their own religious sites, and in doing so set additional forces against them. Now it is not them against a nation of foreigners, it is them against people who look like them, talk like them, live with them, and who can infiltrate them and hurt them in ways we never could.

Our short attention span and inability to see the big picture are the worst enemies of this nation and the best friends of the terrorists. Their world view is of decades, of centuries, and they know we tend to fall apart if we can't get everything tied up in a nice neat tidy package and mark it "solved" within a very short period of time. We tend to like everything simple, easily understood, and easily dealt with. It's going to be hard on us, as a nation of instant gratification, to adapt to the idea that things will be in a constant state of flux for a long time, as we try to learn new ways of fighting, new ways of thinking of warfare, and new ways of thinking about our own security and our vulnerabilities and strengths.

Oh, and we will have to continue doing this with the constant distraction of the yip-yapping ankle-biters whose only goal in life is try desperately to feel important by picking away at everything attempted or accomplished by the Other Side---that is, by those who actually do attempt and accomplish things.