You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #9: My view [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
frogcycle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-27-07 06:52 PM
Response to Original message
9. My view
Edited on Fri Jul-27-07 06:53 PM by frogcycle
(ok, I confess, I posted this elsewhere earlier - but threads sink and get replaced...)

It was a "hit."

Not an accident. Not a comrade "losing it" and deciding spur-of-the-moment to off him because of his attitude, or a grudge, or something. Cold, calculated murder for hire.

  • He had been bandied about as a big poster boy for the war when he joined.
  • He was being very outspoken about opposing the Iraq debacle, keeping a journal many knew about, and had made arrangements to meet with an antiwar activist author.
  • His "coming out" against the war was going to be really, really bad pr for the cabal.
  • He was sent from Iraq to Afghanistan on some sort of temporary redeployment.
  • The unit headed out on a mission, a Humvee broke down, and despite the platoon commander's objections as unsafe, the platoon was split up with one group going ahead, the other dealing with the disabled Humvee.
  • When the two groups encountered each other later, there was this skirmish due to "mistaken identity" and he took three rounds from an M16 in the forehead from no more than ten yards away.
  • There was no enemy contact, no enemy fire, no damage to any equipment or personnel from enemy fire.
  • His journal vanished; his uniform was burned.
  • The Dr. that did the initial exam recommended an inquiry, but it was not done.
  • The official story that came out was a complete fabrication, encountering enemy forces, his being heroic, getting the silver star posthumously for valor, blah blah blah.
  • later it was amended to acknowledge "friendly fire" but still the details were off. The distance was not acknowledged; enemy involvement was still alluded to - blamed on the "fog of war"
  • There are reports that word went out to all who had any knowledge of it that they must keep mum (credit to hisownpetard for this addition)
  • most recently, the administration invoked "executive privilege" rather than provide information.

You do the math.

The most telling evidence, in my opinion, is, as with the Sherlock Holmes 'dog that did not bark', the lack of any alarm bells going off anywhere when it first occurred. Captains and majors and colonels don't instigate coverups like this on their own, with such a high-profile soldier. The communications necessary to pull it off - getting the fabricated story straight, running it up the chain of command, getting all the witnesses on board - just DOES NOT HAPPEN that fast. As Wes Clark said (either on MSNBC or Charlie Rose - I forget) decisions like this don't even happen at the 2 or 3-star level.

So if it was unplanned, somebody had to get all the way to the top to start the wheels turning on the coverup, and then it had to be implemented before anyone said anything else. It just doesn't happen that way.

As much as I think the 9/11 conspiracy theories suffer from the simple fact that you can't keep something like that quiet with the number of people who would be involved, now that we KNOW this was a coverup conspiracy, i don't believe it could have been pulled off without advance planning.

Our dear leader (b or c; take your pick; but I vote c) put out a hit on him. I firmly believe that, and will until it is proven otherwise.

And that explains all the obfuscation that we see. Not just this incident; if there is this then there are no doubt more. They know that if even some of the truth comes out as to what they have been up to, they are going to prison for a long, long time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC