Americans were not trying to kill me, hostage decides (Sgrena)

[Flammable Materials]

http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/story.jsp?story=619206

The Italian journalist Giuliana Sgrena, who was wounded by American fire last Friday soon after being released by kidnappers in Baghdad, has said that she does not think that the Americans were trying to kill her. "I never said that they wanted to kill me," she said on a television talk show, "but the mechanics of what happened were those of an attack."

In an interview with The Independent, her partner, Pier Scolari, said: "None of us is so stupid as to think the Americans did it on purpose. But the dynamic was that of an ambush and we want a convincing explanation of what happened, because the first American explanation was totally false."

Ms Sgrena, who writes for the daily newspaper Il Manifesto, was freed last Friday after a month in captivity. Two Italian government ministers have said that a ransom was paid to secure her release, although the Foreign Minister, Gianfranco Fini, has denied it.

After her release she was taken by Italian secret service officers in a rented car to Baghdad airport, where a plane was waiting to take her to Rome. But 700 metres from the airport the car was fired on by American troops. The chief negotiator, Nicola Calipari, was killed and Ms Sgrena and the Italian driver were wounded.

[NVMojo]

1. ...all I can say is ...wtf!

[Mika]

27. John Negroponte does not equal the US

The US may not have wanted her dead, but you can bet your bottom dollar that Negroponte did.

[ElectroPrincess]

28. Hello? John Negroponte is representing US = USA people in Iraq

I know he's NOT us but he is representing us. I wonder what they used to get to her. Everyone has a weak spot that can be threatened. A family member? A close friend? An associate? Her newspaper's future? I wonder.

As much as I despise these people, I can NOT shed the fact that as long as they are appointees of the Executive Branch of the USA, in essence, to the rest of the world community: <cough> Negroponte and those like him - ARE the USA. :(

[Spinoza]

63. You ar right that

extreme pressure must have been used on her. A friend thinks Negroponte is holding one of her children hostage. I'm not sure, but anything is possible.

[hector459]

34. Obiously she fears the US and Italian intel thugs.

Can you blame her...her life is in their hands.

[daleo]

2. The headline is mis-leading.

She says "I never said they were trying to kill me, but the mechanics were those of an attack". So she is not definitively saying that the U.S. wasn't trying to kill her (how could she know for sure) - just that it sure looked like it.

The partner basically says "prove it wasn't an attack, because you lied before".

I think they are trying to push the burden of proof onto the U.S. military, where it belongs, instead of on themselves.

[KoKo]

7. Thanks for pointing that out. The headline is misleading when you

read it you think: "Oh, no..."

[w4rma]

12. Yes, the headline is misleading. She's being logical, not a mindreader.

If one were to set up an ambush they would have set it up just like this, but she isn't a mindreader so she can't say what their motives are for sure. She can only describe their actions and note that those actions were actions that folks who would be trying to kill her would take.

[Azathoth]

3. Brace yourself for the conspiracy theories

It's only a matter of time before someone propounds the theory that she was threatened and coerced into changing her story by shadowy figures attempting to cover up a massive assassination plot.

[Frederik]

22. Actually

the figures who are doing that aren't shadowy at all. She has been publically advised to "watch what she says" by an Italian official, because "she has made enough problems with her talking as it is". Thread in General Discussion I believe.

[ElectroPrincess]

29. Wow! That was right on cue...

As soon as anything underhanded IS POSSIBLE, the naysayers are quick to discredit those of us that are suspicious by labeling us "conspiracy nuts."

I'm not buying into this insult. Everyone has a right to brainstorm *all* the possibilities.

Although everything this * Administration does that's not appropriate will be rationalized and swept under the carpet, at least let us guess what would occur if our "once great" country could once again enjoy TRUE Investigative Journalism?

[Azathoth]

60. I'm all for investigative journalism

but I seriously doubt that there is much to investigate here. It's POSSIBLE we faked the moon landing too, but just because something is theoretically possible is not cause enough to believe in it. There's a difference between reasonably solid theories, which are built on rational evidence or a conspicuously deliberate lack thereof (ie Dubya going AWOL during his guard service), and tin-foil hat theories, which are built entirely on paranoia and "brainstorming" and are promoted because people want to believe.

Now I'm not saying this accident shouldn't be thoroughly investigated. All I'm saying is that so far, I've seen nothing particularly substantial to suggest that this was anything but another screwup in a war zone. We've accidentally shot up lots of cars at checkpoints over there. The only difference this time, however, is that there were foreign nationals and a communist reporter with a huge ego in the car, and the reporter immediately afterward launched into the standard "I'm important enough for someone to carefully plan this, because, well, I KNEW SOMETHING" routine at anyone who was willing to listen to her.

[DBoon]

4. She doesn't know the motives of those who fired on her

but that it looked like a coordinated attack

[bilgewaterbill]

5. Great googly-moogly!

WTF is going on!

[solinvictus]

6. Either..

A) She's histrionic or...
B) Someone "advised" her that she'd better adjust her story to the currently accepted paradigm.

[daleo]

8. I think she is trying to avoid a no-win situation.

The people who are against her will try to frame it as "you said the Americans were trying to kill you, so prove it". She is saying "I didn't claim they were definitely trying to kill me, but that it looked like an attack (in the following ways...). Prove that it wasn't."

She is trying to shift the burden of proof to the U.S. side, where it belongs. If someone shot me, I would expect them to have to prove they weren't trying to kill me, rather than me having to prove they were.

[Ms. Clio]

10. That sounds exactly right n/t

[laylah]

13. My choice would be

"B"

Jenn

[oasis]

38. No use in modifying her original story, just ask the Dixie Chicks.

[Catt03]

9. Someone got to her to change her story....

Oh well. We will never know and she will quietly disappear. (sigh)

[Generic Guy]

11. Exactly

I can't say I blame her either. I probably would have as well I bet they threatened to kill her or someone close to her. I know if someone threatened to kill someone close to me I would say whatever they wanted me to say.

[bloom]

50. That's not so different from what she is saying here - previously...

She said: "The fact that the Americans don't want negotiations to free hostages is known. The fact that they do everything to prevent the adoption of this practice to save the lives of people held hostages, everybody knows that. So I don't see why I should rule out that I could have been a target."

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/03/07/1449232&mode=thread&tid=25

[rooboy]

14. All I have to say about this is that I can't speak Italian.n/t

[Nile]

15. Americans were trying to kill her and other occupants of car.

The problem is that they did not know who the occupants of the car were at the time. They were just trying to stop a car with who knows who in it and their motive.

[Chrisduhfur]

23. yeah exactly.

exactly

[ElectroPrincess]

30. According the the OFFICIAL Italian side of the story, including the PM

the car was already stopped.

[robcon]

16. She's changing her story again.

Her credibility declined with each time she has changed her story. It seems to me she'll say anything.

A few days ago, "The freed hostage, Giuliana Sgrena, 56, a journalist for the leftist Italian newspaper Manifesto, has said the soldiers may have deliberately opened fire on her car because Washington opposes efforts to negotiate with kidnappers in Iraq - a scenario the White House dismissed on Monday as "absurd." Mr. Fini also said today that there was no evidence to support such suspicion."
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/08/international/middleeast/08cnd-iraq.html

Now "Giuliana Sgrena, who was wounded by American fire last Friday soon after being released by kidnappers in Baghdad, has said that she does not think that the Americans were trying to kill her. "I never said that they wanted to kill me," she said on a television talk show, "but the mechanics of what happened were those of an attack."

-Were they traveling at high speed, laughing as they avoided potholes (old story)? Or were they traveling at normal speed (current story)?

-If there were numerous shots fired, as originally claimed, why are there so few marks on the car?

[DoYouEverWonder]

17. Becasue the US lied

The original version of the story the US put out has more holes then Sgrena's car.

Under the circumstances, Sgrena's story has been very consistant. The US is the one that keeps changing their version of things.

Here's the latest version:


Hostage's Joy Quickly Turned to Disaster
March 11, 2005

<snip>

La Repubblica says that sometime after 8 p.m., Maj. Gen. Marioli gets a call from a SISMI man in Baghdad telling him the agents are headed back, bringing an Italian with no documents. The paper says it's unclear whether Marioli knows the passenger is the freed hostage.

Premier Silvio Berlusconi has told lawmakers that Calipari sent word of their approach to an Italian liaison officer waiting at Baghdad airport along with an American officer.

As the car proceeds with interior lights turned on, Calipari makes phone calls, including to Gianni Letta, Berlusconi's right-hand man, and to an Italian general. He also makes several calls with the intention of notifying the Americans that his party is nearing the airport and seeking "every possible assistance for an easy and direct entry," Fini says.

The Toyota slows for a flooded stretch of road beneath an underpass, then a sharp turn, Fini says. The right lane is flooded, and the agent at the wheel knows from previous trips that it is also blocked by cement barriers so he stays on the left, traveling no faster than 25 mph, the foreign minister says.

Halfway around a curve, a bright light shines on the car from above, and the Toyota immediately stops, Fini says.

Things are about to go wrong.

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/world/wire/sns-ap-iraq-bittersweet-rescue,0,7270390.story?coll=sns-ap-world-headlines

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

20. Gibberish.

She's spouting a bunch of semantic nonsense.

[Frederik]

25. Her story

is about what happened to her, about which both she and the surviving driver have given accounts consistent enough for both the foreign minister and the prime minister to base their offical accounts on theirs. She does of course not know anything about the motives of those who shot her, but I'd say she's entitled to speculate. However, she has been "advised" publically by an Italian official to "watch what she says", because her talking has "created enough problems as it is".

The story of the survivors has consistently been that the speed was no faster than 25 mph and the driver claims he immediatey hit the brakes when a searchlight was directed at them. The "speeding" story came from the Pentagon, and was an obvious lie. They were avoiding potholes at an earlier stage of their journey. The car had come to a near halt when the shooting began, and shots may have been directed at the windows, considering the fact that the interior light in the car was turned on. The side windows were shot out, if I remember the photos correctly. The survivors' story has the shooting coming from the right and rear, which are the sides of the car that are not shown in the photos. The 3-400 bullets claim was calculated based on the claim, made by both survivors, that the shooting lasted 10-15 seconds and came from more than one automatic weapon. They obviously didn't count the bullets. If the shooting came in short bursts with pauses, the number of bullets would be significantly less. The conspicuous lack of bullet holes - at least in the front and left side, which we have seen - actually lends credence to the theory that the bursts were shorter and aimed at the windows. They had the interior light on, so it should be an easy target, and stationary or near stationary at that, from an apparently very close distance.

Anyway, they certainly didn't aim for the engine block.

The "tactical" checkpoint was set up just before they arrived, because Necroponte was going to pass by later, according to the Pentagon. He normally travels by helicopter, but it is of course possible that he sometimes travels by car, for whatever reason, on this highly dangerous road.

Whatever happened, and for what reason, it seems clear, based on the accounts of the two surviving vctims as well as the photos of the car, that the shooting started when the car was at a near standstill and came from the right side and possibly from behind. Which would, as Sgrena points out, be consistent with "the mechanics of an ambush".

[Selteri]

33. Re - 300 shots

I'll happily put someone in a car and start firing at their windows, blow the head off of someone in the car and wound two more passengers....


then you can tell me how many bulletrs were fired. Welcome to situational observations.

The shots that you can see from the picture we were given shows the right window from was either rolled down or blown out, there were two more bullers in the front window and one in the back, funny though, not any visable bullet holes for the 'engine block they were shooting at'

We'll never see the truth, but take off the tinfoil hat bullshit, this is a real incident that is not only questionable but highly suspicious. The way the MSM has spun this in America has been designed to put doubt upon the victims of this crime.

[NNN0LHI]

18. She does not want to sleep with the fish n/t

[teryang]

19. When you shoot someone it's intentional

What the motive is, is relevant, but doesn't mean that they weren't trying to kill her.

So the US response seems to be something like, we were trying to kill you, but we didn't know who you were, a variation on a self defense theory.

Now that more facts are being disclosed, it appears that the American explanation is false.

If the car is stopped in a remote area, why destroy it and its occupants?

[ausiedownunderground]

21. Ms Sgrena! 1000 million Lira or we'll "make you disappear!

This issue is "huge" in Europe. The "Bush Gang" need to cover Berlosconi's arse. He's Bush and Murdoch in one package.But i am hopeful from talking to my Italien "chums" that he's "Toast" anyway. We can only hope!

[BiggJawn]

24. "Juile! stop saying we tried to kill you..Or else we'll kill you!"

Wasn't Rumsferatu in "Old Europe" just this past week?

So when does Berlesconi change HIS tune?

[brentspeak]

26. So much for the tin-foil theories

that the U.S. was trying to assasinate her.

[ElectroPrincess]

31. This investigation ... just as * planned, is so FUBAR, we will not ever

know for sure what exactly happened. That is tragic. :(

Another damn whitewash - just like Gannon disappearing POOF!

Nothing to see here ... move along citizen!

[rustydad]

32. Yes, I know about Joe but..........

Sometimes he gets it right.

"Bush Ordered Attack on Sgrena and Calipari
Nicola Calipari was already 220 yards inside Baghdad Airport's security perimeter when he received an incoming call on his
cell phone. Calipari said "Yes?" and instantly recognised the positive ident trap. As Deputy Chief Calipari cursed & threw himself across Giuliana Sgrena to protect her, the kill team
from Langley fired more than 300 bullets at their car."

Copyright Joe Vialls, 10 March 2005

http://www.vialls.com/italy/sgrena.html

[leesa]

35. Good for her. 'They may not have been trying to kill me, but they

did attack us.' It's accurate and may keep BushCo and his pet Italian government from killing her.

[Blue_Tires]

36. maybe someone got to her?

[VegasWolf]

37. "because the first American explanation was totally false." What? We lied?

[phusion]

39. Have we seen the car yet?

Are there any pictures of the car she was driving in when the attack took place?

[bemildred]

40. Last time I heard, the situation was thus:

The car is in Iraq under military control and will stay there
for the "joint investigation".

I think the six pics on the italian site are the car that the
shooting occurred in, can't swear to it. I have seen none that
show all sides of the car, and I don't expect that will be
allowed.

The phone have been given to the italian prosecutors, but the
contents will be state secrets.

All of this of course depends on how much Berluscolini finds he
can get away with.

This stuff is covered in this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1304095&mesg_id=1304095

[phusion]

41. thank you n/t

:)

[Blue to the bone]

42. Yes, we've seen the car, and if there were 400 shots fired at it...

...someone needs to head back to the range for practice.

[Ms. Clio]

44. What car have we seen?

The only photos I've seen were of extremely poor quality, pulled from a videotape, and may actually depict the car she was kidnapped in--and in any case, only show the left side of the car--not the right side, where the gunfire came from.

[bemildred]

45. The 400 bullets is bullshit anyway.

It's just a number the guy pulled out of his ass. Who
was counting, and how?

But you are right, we can't see the part of "the car"
that the bullets would have hit. My guess is that what
is being hidden is that the car was not hit, just a few
well-placed shots and a lot of noise.

[Ms. Clio]

46. Yes, I don't think anybody was counting

Someone also mentioned that the shattering of safety glass in the windows might also have given the initial impression of a hail of gunfire, especially under such unexpected and shocking circumstances?

If the light was on in the interior of the car, a few well-placed shots could certainly have been all that was needed. The photos sure as heck don't show "10 or 20 bullets into the engine block," either.

[Blue to the bone]

47. She's still changed her story. n/t

[Ms. Clio]

48. No, she really hasn't changed her story in its essential details at all

The Pentagon keeps changing its story, though. Their first version was absolute bullshit, and the new one linking it to Negroponte is even worse.

[Blue to the bone]

51. As I've said, both sides have changed their story.

And I'd say going from "they wanted me dead" to "I never said they wanted me dead", sounds like a signifcant change to me.

The truth is, we've still not heard from the soldiers who did the actual firing, and until we do, we're working with only one side of the story.

[Ms. Clio]

53. There is no comparison between the "change" in her story

and that of the Pentagon--a version that doesn't even come close to being truthful or accurate.

What she says now is just more subtle--that she can't say for sure that they wanted her dead, but the mechanics of the whole thing sure look as if they did.

As daleo pointed out upthread, it's not up to the victim to prove intent, it's up to the those who did the firing to prove that it wasn't deliberate.

And, as I've said before, those soldiers are a) highly unlikely to ever give such testimony and b) are highly unlikely to contradict whatever the Pentagon's version of the events is at the time.

[Blue to the bone]

54. What I've stated clearly is that I'm reserving final judgment......

...until I hear what the soldiers involved have to say.

Her initial infammatory accusations about them wanting her dead did not serve the interest of getting to the bottom of what happened.

I suspect the entire episode was a terrible fuck up on the part of the US military. That's not an excuse for what happened, but is certainly a long way from all the breathless talk we heard on this forum of an assassination squad in action.

[Ms. Clio]

55. And I've stated clearly that you are never going to hear their version

unless you truly believe that they are going to testify in an Italian court of law.

And based on how the Pentagon kees changing its lying stories about this event, with the latest to involve John "Death Squad" Negroponte, those who believe that that this was a deliberate hit have ample reason to do so.

Funny, those of us who indulged in a lot of "breathless talk" about no WMDs, torture at Guantanomo Bay and Abu Ghraib, the holding of children in Abu Ghraib, etc. have all been proven right.

[Blue to the bone]

56. So you believe it was an Assassination Squad also?

Sorry, but I don't.

[Ms. Clio]

57. Well, that's your prerogative

But IMO, these lying, murdering Bushista bastards have completely forfeited any presumption of innocence.

Editing to clarify that does not refer to "the troops," since I know that gets your panties in a bunch.

[Blue to the bone]

58. Thank you for not bunching my panties.

But again, the more we hear from the Italians, the more muddled this thing gets with their conflicting stories.

I don't expect the Pentagon to allow US soldiers to testify in an Italian court. They'd probably say that sets a bad precendent.

However, I would like to see them place those boys before unbiased news reporters so they can answer questions publicly. Otherwise, we'll just continue to hear these conspriracy stories about the whole thing being a botched assassination attempt.

[Ms. Clio]

59. No, the more we hear from the Pentagon, the more muddled this thing gets

It's not up to the Italians to prove anything--they are the victims.

[bemildred]

49. No offense, but so what?

Nothing depends on her testimony.
She's just a shook up hostage riding in the car.
Everything she claims is backed up by the other guys in the car.

The US military has still refused to come up with any coherent
explanation for the facts as reported by the survivors in the
car, it's stall stall stall and various kinds of distractions.

Why did a "temporary checkpoint", with no lighting, off the side of
the road, shoot the car from the right rear, after they lit it up
with a searchlight, and after it stopped?

That is the question.

[Blue to the bone]

52. See my other posts re the subject. n/t

[bpilgrim]

62. yeah, she's a delusional old bird, ain't she

link please :toast:

i only saw a few shots at the front right side of the car.

was it actually a surgical strike as some THs have claimed :faint:

peace

[Blue to the bone]

43. The Italians appear to be lying as well. n/t

[TheWatcher]

61. And you have proof of this how?