[Barbara]

This is really unbelievable.
The Calipari report, result of the investigations of the US commission about the killing of Calipari and Sgrena shooting, was published on the Internet by the US govt with big classified parts.
Unfortunately, they made it with Acrobat using those black strips, and forgot to check the "uneditable" checkbox.
Someone downloaded the document, and with a simple copy-paste of the text showed the entire classified parts.
Everything is now on mainstream media here in Italy: the name of the shooters, the bosses, the orders, the chain of command, dates, hours, people, Negroponte, everything black on white from the classified paper!!!!

The great discovery was made by a Greek student living in Italy. He said he couldn't believe his eyes when he saw the un-classified pages right in front of his eyes. He also said he owed this to Italy and Calipari.

The document here:
http://www.corriere.it/Primo_Piano/Cron ... ssis.shtml
http://download.repubblica.it/doc/calipari_omissis.doc

Mainstream italian press:
http://www.repubblica.it/2005/d/sezioni ... omiss.html
http://www.corriere.it/Primo_Piano/Cron ... ssis.shtml

[Chuckmak]

since when was the coach of the university of memphis men's basketball team part of the CIA? i'm just sayin tho.

[BiGG]

Let me see …… I hope I have enough time to read this after I get done reading all about Dan Rather’s FAKE military records fiasco.

[Jack]

I went through the original pdf that Barbara made available and it does offer some interesting details about how many IEDs are being used, and so forth...if it were a fake, why spend that much time inserting such things?

People forget to protect their documents all the time. Why should whoever released this one be any different?

[UIUCstudent01]

It looks like the first 16 pages or so are trying to give a case that the area is dangerous part of the road and that the marines had reason to feel threatened. It then blamed conditions of the road, the fact that the marines and Sgrena convoy didn't know each other for the incident.
Nothing new in this 'unclassified' report except names and battalions. The story seems to be the same.

[Specop_007]

Gee, lets focus for a minute on the root of the problem.
Not the fact the Italian people are Socialist and HATE America.
Not the fact it was Iraq.
Not the fact it was a warzone.

Lets simply look at the fact its a military checkpoint. Now, I challenge you to get a car, and charge ANY military checkpoint in the world at 60+ miles per hour and see what happens. You do know that even right here in the good ole US of A you can be SHOT, as in shot dead aint breathing, for tresspassing on military installations? Why dont you try this "Charge the checkpoint" stunt on the N korea/S Korea border and see how far you get? Or maybe a Chinese military checkpoint.

There is NOTHING in the world we need to worry about other then this. Why in the Hell would you charge a military checkpoint? This isnt Top Secret super squirrel level shit here people.
You do not charge ANY military checkpoint ANYWHERE in the world. Period. End of story. Everything else past that is irrelevent. It doesnt matter it was a warzone. Doesnt matter the car was full of Anti-American people. Doesnt matter it was USGI's that were shooting. Doesnt matter if the car was purple, pink or black.
The ONLY thing that matter is this. They charged a military checkpoint. And the end result is the same as it would be virtually anywhere else in the world if you pulled the same assbrain scheme. You end up dead. Everything else beyond that is fluff for the press.

[k_semler]

[Barbara]

You don't trespass a checkpoint UNLESS a US General expressly authorizes you to do it for secret and emergency purposes. This is what happened.

And also, there were of course NO SIGNS on that road. It's Iraq, no Florida or whatever, and the check point was there just for few hours to take care of Negroponte. Nobody knew about the check point, and no signs there.

Please inform yourself before saying that the #1 agent of an ally is such a stupid.

[Keith_McClary]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '(')U) At approximately 2030 hours, Major General Marioli approached Captain Green and asked him how he was doing and if Lieutenant Colonel Zarcone had told him what was going on. Captain Green said no, but that he suspected it had something to do with the Italian journalist. Major General Marioli said ?Yes, but it is best if no one knows.? Captain Green took this as an order from a General Officer not to pass that information on to anyone. (Annex 109C). Moreover, Major General Marioli did not intend for Captain Green to take any action whatsoever on that information. He only told Captain Green so that he would not be surprised when Ms. Sgrena arrived. (Annex 100C).

[Specop_007]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Barbara', 'Y')ou don't trespass a checkpoint UNLESS a US General expressly authorizes you to do it for secret and emergency purposes. This is what happened.

And also, there were of course NO SIGNS on that road. It's Iraq, no Florida or whatever, and the check point was there just for few hours to take care of Negroponte. Nobody knew about the check point, and no signs there.

Please inform yourself before saying that the #1 agent of an ally is such a stupid.

[bart]

Riddle me this, Specop and k_s -- how is it possible that one of Italy's top agents would be as foolish as you portray him as being? That he would jeopardize his mission and his life? It just does not make sense.

The 60 mph is in dispute. The claim that there was a formal checkpoint is in dispute. MANY of the details about the incident are in dispute, and the Italians say the Americans quickly cleared the scene of the evidence before they could investigate.

In the end, it does not matter what we Americans think. The people who need to be convinced are the Italians, in particular the Italian military and intelligence community. FOX's huffing and puffing doesn't work with them as it does with us.

The underlying problem is that Americans are proceeding with a self-defeating arrogance. We can bellow and beat our chests, but in the end it is in the interest of the American empire to have a good relationship with its allies.

Someday, the Bushites will be out of office and the adults will have to clean up the messes. At that time, it would be very nice to be able to work with France, Italy and the other allies the Bush administration has pointlessly alienated.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4504855.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4503003.stm

[Specop_007]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('bart', 'R')iddle me this, Specop and k_s -- how is it possible that one of Italy's top agents would be as foolish as you portray him as being? That he would jeopardize his mission and his life? It just does not make sense.

The 60 mph is in dispute. The claim that there was a formal checkpoint is in dispute. MANY of the details about the incident are in dispute, and the Italians say the Americans quickly cleared the scene of the evidence before they could investigate.

In the end, it does not matter what we Americans think. The people who need to be convinced are the Italians, in particular the Italian military and intelligence community. FOX's huffing and puffing doesn't work with them as it does with us.

The underlying problem is that Americans are proceeding with a self-defeating arrogance. We can bellow and beat our chests, but in the end it is in the interest of the American empire to have a good relationship with its allies.

Someday, the Bushites will be out of office and the adults will have to clean up the messes. At that time, it would be very nice to be able to work with France, Italy and the other allies the Bush administration has pointlessly alienated.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4504855.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4503003.stm

[Roy]

Specop, where did you get the 60 mph number? The report linked above mentions repeatedly that the military estimated the speed at 50 mph. One of the soldiers at the checkpoint was an NYPD officer who "was trained in speed estimation" . Additionally, the military investigators weren't able to sufficiently investigate the scene for two reasons according to the report.

First, the soldiers involved in the attack were ordered to clear the road immediately after the incident.

And I qoute the report
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')"1. (U) 5 March 2005 Report
(U) Photographs of the incident scene were taken in the hours after the incident by Combat Camera personnel, as advised by CID personnel. (Annexes 32K – 69K). The exact locations of the three incident vehicles could not be determined since the two HMMWVs had been moved upon transporting Ms. Sgrena to the Combat Support Hospital, and the car had been moved during cleanup efforts at the site. (Annex 5I). "

[RickTaylor]

Unfortunately, I can't trust the military when it reports on this kind of thing anymore. Ever since we kept on insisting we'd shot a bunch of a terrorist meeting even after witnesses produced videos of the wedding, our credibility has been zero.

--Rick Taylor

[Specop_007]

Fired in error? What the hell.
Look, theres 2, and only 2, scenarios.
1) A car approaches a security checkpoint, slows down, stops, says Hi, waves whatever and is allowed to go.
2) A car approachs a security checkpoint, does nto stop, does not stop after warning shots, and end result is they get killed.

How could you even think they "fired in error" If you dont stop, they shoot. If you stop, they dont shoot. I mean damn, how hard is that? How can ANYONE make an error in that type of simple situation? Obviously though its possible, as the car didnt stop. 40, 50, 60, doesnt matter. (I heard 60 from sat images). Point is, he didnt stop and he got shot.

[Roy]

Specop and Hawkcreek,

I agree with you. If they ran the checkpoint then the soldiers had no choice but to fire upon their vehice. In that scenario, I would've done the same thing.

I think the point of this discussion is not whether they should've fired on a vehicle speeding through their checkpoint.

Rather, I think the issue is whether or not there was a checkpoint there, 800 meters from the airport. The Italians contend that they were fired upon without warning, and they also say that the Americans knew they were coming. The proof of that is that the Italians had passed through a number of American checkpoints prior to their meeting with the soldiers in question.

The security detail mentioned here was in place specifically to protect John Negroponte. His convoy had passed by their location sometime earlier. According to some reports, those soldiers were there well beyond the time they usually stay once a VIP convoy passes. Why? Did they know Sgrena was coming? Its hard to believe that the Italians, knowing US forces rules of engagement (both men in the car were former military themselves), wouldn't have notified the American command of their presence. Or that they would've sped toward something they recognized as a checkpoint where soldiers were armed with automatic weapons trained on the road. That's the problem I have with the official US version.

It is known that Sgrena may have had sensitive information regarding the battle in Fallujah. There are many sources reporting that the US used banned weapons( such as WP and Napalm) in subduing the city, and that there were many civilian casualties. That would not surprise me, being a student of military history. Add to that our government's official position that the Geneva convention rules do not apply to us. It does raise some rather unpleasant questions.

The US claims of negligible civilian casualties and their denial of the use of WP and napalm are questionable. Many photos on the internet are available from the Fallujah engagement showing bodies with injuries consistent with the use of incendiary weapons.

I see a possible motive here. They knew Sgrena was coming and opened fire in the hopes of silencing her so that any information regarding possible war crimes committed by US forces would be surpressed.

I don't believe that's been proven by any means, but questions remain, and no one has yet refuted the fact that this goverment has lied, decieved, and exaggerated to justify its policies and actions. Like every other controversial incident, the government goes into secrecy mode and fails to disclose all the evidence.

I think this war is a lie. Those guys over there are dying for business interests, not unlike Vietnam. My family lost members in SE Asia. And what was accomplished there? Nothing. Just 3,000,000 dead Vietnamese and 58,000 dead Americans. Two of which are directly related to me.

If our goverment had a shred of integrity our guys wouldn't be dying over there now, and Calipari would likely still be alive.

Now that the government is confronted with the fact that they're losing over there, they're spinning every bit of info that comes out of Iraq in order to make it appear as though we're the good guys and that everything over there is hunky dory.

I question that. There was a country in the 20th century who told its citizens that its military aggression was for the good of the subjugated peoples. Yet the rest of the world saw that country for what it was. The citizens of that country believed what their government told them, just like any patriotic citizen should. They didn't see what their government was doing was wrong. They didn't have the information available to the world at large due to their government's control of the media.

This incident is just a symptom of a much larger problem in this country.

Our government is out of control and has duped much of the citizenry of this country into believing what they're doing is the right thing, primarily through the use of propaganda broadcast on the mainstream media as news. Again, no one on this forum will likely dispute that. (Certain neocon posters excepted)

The parallels between that Central European country and this one, at least in that regard, are truly frightening. Most refuse to even consider the possiblity.

[Specop_007]

The Geneva Convention doesnt apply to us there. That point should be no argument.

[rerere]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', 'D')o you think their story is to be trusted?

[rerere]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', 'T')he Geneva Convention doesnt apply to us there. That point should be no argument.

[Specop_007]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rerere', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', 'T')he Geneva Convention doesnt apply to us there. That point should be no argument.