Friendly fire in Iraq -- and a coverup

I don't know if I can watch the video. How bad is it? I've seen things like this before, though...
 
I haven't watched the 52 minute yet but the edited version, the first one on the list, doesn't really have anything that graphic on the eyes, the language is F-ing this and F-ing that, that's about it.
 
I wish the article was hard to believe, but honestly, this sort of thing isn't unusual. It is, however, unusual that they get caught in a cover-up.

I watched one of these play out several years ago. I worked at the APO, so I was one of the first three people on our post to know that there was a casualty in my husband's battalion. I got the death notice straight off the truck. My husband was 54th Eng Bn Co D, and the word was the casualty was Co C, friendly fire. Then the rumor was Lance Fielder, land mine. Then the official word was Lance Fielder, enemy fire. Eyebrows raised, and it became pretty common knowledge that the official word was NOT what really happened.

Eventually, the truth came out during Senate hearings, but it took four or five years. It was quite a deal, really. He was killed trying to carry a buddy to safety. No one had fired on the unit that killed him. Even if he had been the enemy, there was no reason for him to be killed.

Most cases are never resolved. This one just happened to be an exception, and hit pretty close to home for me.

http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/Quarters/2061/
 
I read some comments over there on the article and one of them made a good point, they said something like,
I'm paraphrasing ;).... why do they always do this stuff (cover ups) when they get caught anyway, but, wait a minute, I think that's it, they don't get caught most of the time.

It's a percentage thing, getting caught 1 out of *lots of times* is a plus for the Armed Forces PR wise. Did you listen to the man in charge, he was ordering those other soldiers to ignore what really happened and just go ahead and go with the "official story" even though he witnessed the tank shooting at him, knocking him to the floor. Soldiers need to speak out and pass all of the responsibility to the guys up on top and quit carrying the load home with them for the rest of their lives.
 
I read some comments over there on the article and one of them made a good point, they said something like,
I'm paraphrasing ;).... why do they always do this stuff (cover ups) when they get caught anyway, but, wait a minute, I think that's it, they don't get caught most of the time.

It's a percentage thing, getting caught 1 out of *lots of times* is a plus for the Armed Forces PR wise. Did you listen to the man in charge, he was ordering those other soldiers to ignore what really happened and just go ahead and go with the "official story" even though he witnessed the tank shooting at him, knocking him to the floor. Soldiers need to speak out and pass all of the responsibility to the guys up on top and quit carrying the load home with them for the rest of their lives.

Well, I hope the guy's mom gets some justice. It looks like there's some pretty compelling evidence that isn't going to be all that easy to ignore since the tape has gone public.
 
You have to remember, you're dealing with the Federal Government, they are experts at not giving real answers or justice, just ask the Tillman family.
 
You have to remember, you're dealing with the Federal Government, they are experts at not giving real answers or justice, just ask the Tillman family.

I hope the Tillman's use this - hopefully it creates more of a backbone and they continue to do something about it.

I watched the video, it wasn't that bad, but very very sad. It makes me wonder how many more lost their lives to friendly fire that we don't even know about.
 
Back
Top