A Suspicious Piece of the Haditha Puzzle
Amid a damaging scandal in which United States Marines in November 2005 may have killed Iraqi civilians in Haditha, Iraq, in retaliation for the death of a Marine by an insurgent’s IED (Improvised Explosive Device), a little Iraqi girl’s candid testimony of the events may shed some light on what actually happened.
The girl is 9 year old Eman Waleed, and she lost almost her entire immediate family in the killings.
THE BACKGROUND:
March 27, 2006 edition of Time Magazine reported in the article One Morning in Haditha:
Here’s what all participants agree on: At around 7:15 a.m. on Nov. 19, a U.S. humvee was struck by a powerful improvised explosive device (IED) attached to a large propane canister, triggered by remote control. The bomb killed Terrazas, who was driving, and injured two other Marines. For U.S. troops, Haditha, set among date-palm groves along the Euphrates River, was inhospitable territory; every day the Marines found scores of bombs buried in the dirt roads near their base.
Eman Waleed, 9, lived in a house 150 yards from the site of the blast, which was strong enough to shatter all the windows in her home. "We heard a big noise that woke us all up," she recalls two months later. "Then we did what we always do when there’s an explosion: my father goes into his room with the Koran and prays that the family will be spared any harm." Eman says the rest of the family–her mother, grandfather, grandmother, two brothers, two aunts and two uncles–gathered in the living room.
Eman says she "heard a lot of shooting, so none of us went outside. Besides, it was very early, and we were all wearing our nightclothes." When the Marines entered the house, they were shouting in English. "First, they went into my father’s room, where he was reading the Koran," she claims, "and we heard shots." According to Eman, the Marines then entered the living room. "I couldn’t see their faces very well–only their guns sticking into the doorway. I watched them shoot my grandfather, first in the chest and then in the head. Then they killed my granny." She claims the troops started firing toward the corner of the room where she and her younger brother Abdul Rahman, 8, were hiding; the other adults shielded the children from the bullets but died in the process. Eman says her leg was hit by a piece of metal and Abdul Rahman was shot near his shoulder. "We were lying there, bleeding, and it hurt so much. Afterward, some Iraqi soldiers came. They carried us in their arms. I was crying, shouting ‘Why did you do this to our family?’ And one Iraqi soldier tells me, ‘We didn’t do it. The Americans did.’"
CNN ran footage of an interview with Eman Waleed that gives this surprising insight: (THE TRANSCRIPT)
Narrator: But there is an intriguing variation in Eman’s account the 3rd time she tells it. She says she was expecting the bomb.
Eman: "I was planning to go to school. I was about to get out of bed. I KNEW THE BOMB WOULD EXPLODE SO I COVERED MY EARS. The bomb exploded. The bomb struck an armoured vehicle. I don’t know if it was a Hum-V or an armoured vehicle. When the bomb exploded, they came straight to our house."
Narrator: The question is, was her expectation of the explosion a premonition, a fear based on the sound of the passing convoy? Or was it based on some knowledge? The interviewer does not follow up. He says the 9 year old got confused and got her story mixed up.
She was "expecting the bomb to go off"? How could that be unless she had known ahead of time? And how would Eman know? It is possible that she *knew* for some other reason, but her comment is very suspicious.
Having some knowledge of the tactics used by insurgents from my husband’s year in the Al Rashid district of Baghdad from May 2003 to February 2004 with the 82nd Airborne Division, the likely conclusion is that she knew the bomb would go off because her father may have been an insurgent, or was helping them. He may have talked about planting the IED. That is unclear. It is also likely this is the reason Eman’s father was found "praying" when the Marines, who knew just where to find someone with "prior knowledge" of the IED bombing, was to avoid retribution.
Another possible explanation is that insurgents and/or terrorists killed the civilians themselves. It is not an unusual tactic for terrorists or insurgents to murder civilians, including women and children, and threaten the survivors with a similar fate if they do not blame it on US troops. In November 2004 when Marines enaged in the battle for Fallujah, this is exactly what happened. Insurgents went from house to house murdering civilians in cold blood. Unfortunately, this is not unusual.
This in no way excuses the Marines’ actions, if indeed they did kill unarmed civilians. With the investigations ongoing, it is irresponsible to accuse US Marines until they have been found guilty. Remember the deadly riots that erupted throughout the Middle East in May 2005 when Newsweek falsely reported that US interrogators at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, desecrated the Quran and "flushed it down the toilet"? It’s already starting again. Time Magazine offers a description of the fallout due to the article:
Insurgent groups have actually made more of the massacre. Within days of TIME’s story (which was picked up by the Arab media), pamphlets appeared in Haditha, congratulating “those who participated in exposing the dirty deeds of the Americans.” The pamphlets were released by a group using the name “Islamic Resistance” — a cover for the terrorist group Ansar al-Sunnah. TIME’s story was cited in websites and Internet bulletin boards known to be used by insurgent groups. The families say they have never been contacted by any insurgents.
Aljazeera is on top of the story as well: "Haditha Massacre Is Iraq’s Mai Lai "
Why not leave the accusations to our enemies and give the benefit of the doubt to the Marines until the facts are in?
Cross-posted at Amy’s Blog
UPDATE:
Michelle Malkin: “Hadith Marine: Insurgents Use Kids”
RELATED:
The Truth, The Whole Truth And Nothing But The Truth?
Technorati Tags: John Murtha, Haditha, Marines
May 31st, 2006 at 9:05 am
I was wondering how long it would take before the war whores accused the survivors of being liars and “terrorists”. Those 9-year-olds are dangerous. They might use their Pokemon cards give a paper cut to our oh-so-brave death troops. I’m sure next time they’ll cap the kids, too. Remember: We’re killing children execution-style over there so we won’t have to shoot kids execution-style over here.
“This in no way excuses the Marines’ actions, if indeed they did kill unarmed civilians.”
Yeah, for all we know those people aren’t really dead. They just spilled ketchup on their shirts before taking an afternoon nap. Of course by accusing this kid and his murdered family of being in on the bombing you most certainly ARE trying to excuse a massacre -and in a most smarmy and dishonest way.
Funny how you get a case of the vapors over what is clearly prima facie evidence of a war crime and start whining about Murtha and others who put two and two together, yet you’re quite willing to believe that murder victims took part in a bombing. The hypocrisy is annoying. The insinuation that unarmed civilians who were shot in the head and chest at point blank range is disgusting and shows that you are a moral leper.
May 31st, 2006 at 9:08 am
“at point blank range and had it coming is disgusting and shows that you are a moral leper.”
May 31st, 2006 at 10:34 am
Richard,
I understand how disgusting this situation is. It appears that the Marines may have done this. BUT, what I offered up in this post is the possibility they didn’t based on some obvious red flags.
This has all the earmarkings of an insurgent ploy. And yes, 9 year olds CAN be dangerous. When my husband was in Iraq, small children were strapped with explosives and sent to the compound gate or into a crowd. This was rare, but it did happen.
I’m not blaming the girl whatsoever. IF someone put her up to her story, that person would be to blame for intimidating her. In fact, the narrator mentioned (if you read the transcript or watch the segment on CNN) that the girl was prompted during the interview and that she knew her “lines” like a script.
This reminds me of the Jesse Macbeth debacle. Something doesn’t add up.
At least I’m open to the possibility that it could have happened despite that fact that I hope it isn’t true: closed-minded liberals leave no room for any other explanation and have already convicted the Marines. Murtha et al are irresponsible.
May 31st, 2006 at 2:06 pm
Your post is truly revolting. Grasping at straw to justify cold-blooded murder is as cowardly a intellectual position as could possibly exist. You should be ashamed of yourself.
May 31st, 2006 at 2:18 pm
You mean, revolting like how I gave the benefit of the doubt to the MPs at Gitmo who DIDN’T flush the Koran?
Is there some reason why, after all I’ve said about insurgents and their tactics, specifying that the Marines may indeed be guilty but the verdict is still out, that you choose to automatically condemn the Marines?
You have no idea what happened. Niether do I. So why give the benefit of the doubt to what could be the enemy? Let me guess… you hate the military?
May 31st, 2006 at 4:22 pm
Yes stupid. It is easy to give the benefit of doubts. But did you give it to Iraq before invading it ? Obvisouly not.
You are an hypocrite.
May 31st, 2006 at 6:17 pm
Bush upset with Iraq killings reports
President Bush promised on Wednesday that any Marines involved in the alleged murders of Iraqi civil
May 31st, 2006 at 6:29 pm
Media Coverage of Haditha
I was getting myself all worked up again over the MSM coverage of the Haditha incident. When I got home from work and turned the news on the little news people were explaining how the ‘troubling situationÂ’ has shaken the government all the way up to …
May 31st, 2006 at 8:29 pm
[...] California Conservative [...]
June 1st, 2006 at 5:13 am
Comrades,
Actually, the “grasping at straws” is being done by those most afflicted with BDS, “Bush Derangement Syndrome”. It is beyond their little minds to comprehend facts and thesis which in any way diverge from their own pre-conceived notions and assumptions.
You see, Haditha represents the very core of their beliefs, that all Americans are racist xenophobic imperialists, and it is the brass ring they have been dreaming of, another way to compare, however falsly, Iraq to Vietnam. As if….
That the facts may prove the story different from their beliefs is unacceptable. Their minds are closed to any other possibility other than the one they want.
The letists, with their cute little ad hominen attacks, simply don’t know any better. They can’t help themselves and are more to be pitied than attacked.
Keep up the good work sister, and thanks to your family for all the sacrifices you have made on behalf of all of us.
Respects,
Gwedd
June 1st, 2006 at 5:55 am
Jeesh, Amy… you’re really taking this on the chin, aren’t you?
To all of you who have been blasting Amy, consider this: IT IS A THEORY. It is a possible explination for what happened in Haditha. Our Marines have a little more common sense than to just randomly pick out a house and blow everybody away. Although possible, I find it very hard to believe that an entire group of trained, professional American Marines would just randomly pick a house to raid and kill everyone inside. They must have had some reason to believe that someone in that house had carnal knowledge about the IED explosion earlier that day.
Whether or not that knowledge justified the killings is yet to be determined. Like Amy, I find it disturbing and puzzling and I want to know the truth about the raid.
Let the Marine Corps handle this investigation and let the chips fall as they may when it’s all said and done. There may have been a crime committed here, which is why the investigation is on-going and charges may result. That’s what makes our military so great- they take care of their own… ESPECIALLY the ones who screw up.
June 1st, 2006 at 6:07 am
Hey Amy - Watch your open mind……you seem to be upsetting people. LOL
Interesting theory.
June 1st, 2006 at 7:31 am
IF it is true that Marines did what libs are claiming, it is totally NOT in keeping with military values. Period. Or.. should we start defining the Democratic Party by William Jefferson?
I’m a military wife (repeat) for 13 years. My husband is always assigned to military units.. 101st, 4th ED, 82nd ABN, 2nd ID… and this DOES NOT GO ON IN THE MILITARY.
Abu Ghraib was a bunch of Reservists and the main offender a renegade who was trouble for commanders from the get go. He’s in jail. So is the ugly England lady (yet another good reason women should not be in the military).
The more information comes out about this,the less convinced I am that is it as liberals hope and pray it to be. They WANT civilians to be killed at the hands of Marines. It makes them feel better about themselves. Check out what a CNN embedded reporter said about her shock regarding this incident, because she was embedded with them and saw NOTHING RESEMBLING WHAT THEY ARE BEING ACCUSSED OF;
Read CNN report
I have the video and its more compelling because you can hear the disbelief in her voice. I’ll try to post it.
But why would a liberal believe an embedded reporter or the troops? Much more convinient to believe the opposite despite what boots on the ground report.
And WATCH THIS VIDEO first exposed here on California Conservative. All Iraqi kids are sweet and innocent? Have any of you libs BEEN to Iraq? Didn’t think so:
http://www.filecabi.net/video/sticksandstones.html
And check out the testimony of the Marine who sat beside the Marine who lost his life to that IED:
See video at HotAir
He talks about how children are used in the war against the US.
June 1st, 2006 at 8:23 am
Amy,
I am at a loss to understand your comments. I am in complete agreement with you. My comments are directed towards those who were attacking you because you suggested that there might be something altogether different than what we were told.
I agree that I don’t know what went on there, and it’s certainly best to wait for the actual investigation report to be published, which it will.
My point is that if the report doesn’t completely agree with what the leftists are demanding it says, than it will be labeled a “cover up”. The truth of what happened, regardless of what happened, will not appease the left unless it paints everyone involved in the worst possible light.
You have a good site. I wish you well with it, and hope to come back often, because you have a good take on things.
Respects,
Gwedd
June 1st, 2006 at 9:10 am
Gewdd - I’m with you.
Amy, I think you got Gwedd confused with someone else, or just read too hastily.
Anyone talking about ‘Bush Derangement Syndrome’ on the part of lefties is on *your* side.
June 1st, 2006 at 9:16 am
Oh, Crap! You’re right. I’m wrong. I did indeed read too hastily. I always do that when I’m distracted and hurried. I’m sorry to have misread your comments, Gwedd.
Thanks for being gracious.
*I edited the comment.. I should have known when you signed off “Respects”…
June 1st, 2006 at 9:46 am
Are you people serious? Have you lost your minds? Are you saying that, even assuming arguendo the familes that were killed were involved with the IED, it was ok to kill women and children and defenseless, unarmed men? It is not ok from a moral standpoint, from a legal standpoint or from a rules of war standpoint. It is murder, anyway you slice it, and it is not what Our country and whatever we are doing over there is all about. They are the terrorists, we are the ones who believe in the rule of law. Let’s not forget it, and let’s certainly not couch our moral equivocations and shortcomings in “just a theory.”
Liberals want nothing more than for everyone to stop killing and being killed. We do not want to see America lose or our troops defeated. We just want a senseless war to stop.
It is scary how out of control the executive branch and the pentagon have become. True conservatives should be frightened of the centralization of power by this administration.
It is not we who have ‘Bush Derangement Syndrome’ it is you who pathologically can’t admit fault or conceive of the fact that war is ugly and mistakes have been made.
June 1st, 2006 at 10:06 am
“This in no way excuses the Marines’ actions, if indeed they did kill unarmed civilians.”
I guess a lot of folks skipped reading that sentence. Sheesh…
I was thinking about the insurgent set-up angle, too. I wonder how in-depth the investigation will turn out to be, i.e. did they check the caliber of the rounds used to kill these folks? Were they able to even examine the bodies, given religious scruples and whatnot, or did the investigators have to rely on photos and videos?
June 1st, 2006 at 10:54 am
No some of us didn’t, some of us are able to read into this post despite that disclaimer. My guees is you “conservatives” would not consider those people civilians if anyone in that house was involved with the IED.
And even if you did, I ask you this: what is the point of this post if it is not intended to be a moral equivocation, an apology, and excuse for killing women and children and elderly men in wheelchairs? What is the purpose of advancing this “theory”? There is only one answer: it is meant as a moral justification, or at least equivocation, or else there would be no reason to post about such speculative facts.
What happend ther is no longer subject to much reasonable doubt if you read the paper.
You all should be ashamed of yourselves and should get yourselves back to church or where ever it is you derive your sense of morality. Shame.
June 1st, 2006 at 11:17 am
Liberal, or not, Conservative or not, we all have to look at things from the point of view of someone who trully does not know what happened in Haditha. Why? Because we were not there, and we don’t know. It’s for that reason that Amy is absolutely right. Condemming those troops for something they may not have done, is a mistake. In case peoplve have forgotten, everyone is innocent untill proven guilty. Is it possible that the family was killed by marines? Yes, and if that is what happened, they will pay greatly. What makes me sad is this: No matter how this turns out, as someone else said, they will always be guilty in the minds of many Americans.
Now, humor me on something here. It doesn’t matter whether you agree with the war or not, just put yourself in a marines shoes. You see death every day, you feel fear that most men and women never know. All in the name of freedom for the people of Iraq. It’s basic psychology, they are going to want to protect those people, why? To make their cause valid. So that in their minds, their friends never died in vain. Please, if you are reading this, just wait and see how it plays out, before you decide to condemn those guys.
June 1st, 2006 at 11:21 am
“To all of you who have been blasting Amy, consider this: IT IS A THEORY. It is a possible explination for what happened in Haditha.”
I’m sure it is -just like it’s “possible” that Lt. Calley and his men were just cleaning their rifles at My Lai when they went off…
Are you trying to be funny when you write this kind of offal or are you really that stupid?
“ ‘This in no way excuses the Marines’ actions, if indeed they did kill unarmed civilians.’
I guess a lot of folks skipped reading that sentence. Sheesh…”
No, it’s just that most of us are familiar enough with that kind of nixon-like Freudian slip that we notice. Just as you don’t have to see the rat in the baseboards.
June 1st, 2006 at 11:43 am
“In case peoplve have forgotten, everyone is innocent untill proven guilty.”
Well that may be true as a matter of law, but not as a matter of common sense. It is ok to assume guilt where there are no other explanations.
I can only imagine what those troops go through. When people are appauled at their actions it is not as much a condemnation of them as it is the war as a whole. Stuff like this happens all the time in war and it is a tragedy. That is the whole point.
It is you bizzaro people who are so hell-bent on coing up with any justification or mitigating circumstances. We know enough now to know crimes were committed and inncoent children dies senselessly. Lets not equivocate here. You don’t always need to wait for a guilty verdict to know a crime and an atrocity has been committed.
What you need to do is put youself in the shoes of a child who wathces his house get invaded and his whole family murdered, shot in the head, in front of his eyes. Y’all seem to have a big problem doing that and calling it morally reprehensible.
War sucks. Looking for mitigating excuses for Marines who lose their shit and go on a killing spree is itself morally suspect. Time to statr admitting that this war is a serious problem and that a gurilla war with no end is going on there. That is the first step, not equivocation for atrocities.
June 1st, 2006 at 11:47 am
Richard, Lazerlou, et al,
I’m honestly confused about what seems to be so clearly stated here. Amy is not saying that killing innocent women and children is okay, nor is she saying that small children deserve to die if they are being used by insurgents.
As a side issue, she’s saying that having small children working for the enemy can cloud the battlefield, leading to children’s accidental deaths at the hands of coalition forces.
But her primary point is that since we don’t yet know the details, the entire event could be a setup by the insugents/terrorists. It is not unknown for insurgents/terrorists to kill civilians and blame it on the Americans, so that’s theoretically possible here. I (unfortunately) think that’s unlikely in this case, but certainly not impossible.
As to those of you who say you know “what she really means,” I’m thinking you should be able to find quite the career in mind-reading.
June 1st, 2006 at 2:54 pm
Guys - both sides have made up their minds, and no one is saying anything new any more.
Nor is anything said by either side going to change any opinions among the commenters.
And absent any truly new ground - even the silent audience isn’t getting anything new.
I say pack it in on this post and wait for the next round.
June 1st, 2006 at 3:12 pm
Reaching into our archives, we submit that perhaps not all children are “innocent.” After all, upon this notion the entire argument is hinged.
While we can’t imagine such a ghastly idea here in the U.S., throughout the radical Muslim regions within the Middle East, children are being groomed for terrorism and violence. As we pointed to yesterday, sometimes they throw rocks, other times grenades.
If we discover that our troops killed kids, might there be a reason for it? Should we not give them the benefit of the doubt? They’ve earned that and then some.
Or will anti-military, anti-America activists succeed at sensationalizing every negative report, and portray our military as cold-blood killers? The facts suggest that this description is more appropriate for describing the enemies we’re fighting against.
June 1st, 2006 at 3:31 pm
“If we discover that our troops killed kids, might there be a reason for it? Should we not give them the benefit of the doubt? They’ve earned that and then some.”
No, there will not be a reaons for it, unless they were armed and threatening troops at the time they are killed. And 88 year old grandfathers in wheel chairs? Unarmed praying men? How about them? There are plenty of facts out now. This happend and it was unjustified.
It is idiots like you people who really endanger our country - people unwilling to admit we make mistakes, people who grasp at straws to justify murder. People who think our military can do no wrong, and try to rationalize it when they do commit crimes against humanity. It makes me sick. Shame on all of you.
June 2nd, 2006 at 8:23 am
Hertz: “I’m sure it is -just like it’s “possible†that Lt. Calley and his men were just cleaning their rifles at My Lai when they went off…”
No, Lt Calley and was tried and convicted by a court martial. There’s no doubt about what happened at My Lai.
Lazerlou: “It is you bizzaro people who are so hell-bent on coing up with any justification or mitigating circumstances. We know enough now to know crimes were committed and inncoent children dies senselessly.”
No, we do not know enough. Not yet.
You guys are jumping the gun, convicting before you have all the facts. The investigation hasn’t been released yet, charges haven’t been filed, you are relying on some anonymous leaks to come to your conclusions.
June 2nd, 2006 at 1:17 pm
Tell ya what lazerlou and all those fine upstanding types who are quick to find fault with these marines - let’s give you the opportunity to go over and show us how it should be done. The only thing that’s holding you back is fear. Fear of reality and the fear that you will have to deal with it or die.
Until you have looked down the business end of an AK, or held a buddies’ guts or brains in your hands, you have no IDEA what you are talking about. Using kids as explosive platforms plays on our western notion that children are innocents, when in fact, children are apprentice jihadi, learning the trade on the job.
Pull your head out and pay attention. It’s dark and stinky giving yourself a colonoscopy using only your own body.
June 3rd, 2006 at 2:04 am
[...] If we’re going to put our troops on trial, we demand exacting accuracy. CSI-style or beter. If they’re just lookig for a circus, see the recent comments from our moonbat readers. [...]
June 3rd, 2006 at 9:21 pm
I’m with Amy, if we did kill a bunch of sand niggers, they probably had it coming…but…uh….it didn’t happen
nice logic #25, unless these liberals are willing to do away with logic and critical thinking and back an unjust war they don’t believe in, they don’t deserve to be Americans