LA Times Prints Enemy Propaganda?

Information has been received from a credible source suggesting that the Los Angeles Times is reporting news from Iraq by copying, near verbatim, the content of insurgent terrorist propaganda. The source is a U.S. Army soldier who mailed a personal letter to his family describing a military engagement in Ramadi which largely contradicts the content of the LATimes story. Either the soldier's personal account or the LATimes news report is fictionalized. I'll trust the readers to decide.

From LATimes.com:

Iraqi residents say U.S. airstrike kills 30

Victims include women and children, witnesses in Ramadi say. The military has no immediate comment.

By Solomon Moore, Times Staff Writer
November 15, 2006

BAGHDAD -- A U.S. airstrike in the restive town of Ramadi killed at least 30 people, including women and children, witnesses said Tuesday.

The aerial attack, which took place late Monday, brought the number of violent deaths reported in Iraq on Tuesday to at least 91, according to military sources and witnesses.

The last statement is misleading. As indicated later in the report, military sources had no comment on any U.S. airstrike.

U.S. military officials had no immediate comment on an airstrike in Ramadi. The military released a statement announcing that American troops in Ramadi killed 11 alleged insurgents in a series of attacks that appeared to be unrelated to an airstrike.

A Times correspondent in Ramadi said at least 15 homes were pulverized by aerial bombardment and families could be seen digging through the ruins with shovels and bare hands. Other families attempted to leave Ramadi on foot or gathered at the city hospital, where a passionate crowd called out "Allahu akbar!" or God is great, in unison.

The correspondent describes a terrible attack resulting in significant civilian casualties. If one were to rely on the Times report, one would be led to believe that the U.S. military is blindly bombing the city without regard for innocent human life. I question the Times report since the American military is quite sensitive about avoiding collateral damage. Additionally, the Times report should be questioned after considering the soldier's letter which explains the events he witnessed that day.

The article [above] below is an example of why you simply cannot believe most media reports coming out of Iraq. The LA Time reporter, Solomon Moore, is not in Ramadi. He relies on an Iraqi stringer here who has ties to insurgents. In this article, Moore repeats almost verbatim, insurgent propaganda we have intercepted. The fighting in question occurred in my battle space within Ramadi and I was personally and intimately involved.

There were no air strikes anywhere in Ramadi on the day in question. Through two different means, we acquired a group off AIF [anti-Iraq Forces - ed.] emplacing a large IED on a neighborhood street. After I was sure they were enemy, I ordered one of my tanks to engage. Its cannon fire killed the enemy and set off the IED. Shortly afterwards, one of my Bradley crews engaged and killed two more AIF emplacing an IED on a nearby street.

In both cases, we continued to observe the area and the locals left the dead lying in the street; this is a sure sign that they are AIF because the Iraqis normally pick up dead civilians in the street quickly. Later that night, I had a route clearance team move through the area. We found the bodies and removed multiple hand grenades off one of them. During that same operation, one of Bradleys escorting the route clearance team was attacked by an IED. The IED set the Bradley on fire and wounded the three Soldiers aboard. One of those brave men now clings to life with burns over 93% of his body.

We established a security perimeter around the burning vehicle and over-watched it until it burned out and we were able recover the hulk. While over-watching the burning vehicle, we had multiple tank main gun and machine gun engagements against AIF who were desperately trying to steal ammunition from the vehicle (a fool's errand if ever there was one) or emplace additional IEDs to attack the recovery mission they knew would follow. No houses were destroyed and only one courtyard wall was damaged.

Every target engaged was well within what our restrictive rules of engagement authorize. I am disgusted by the editorial slant of this article, by what passes from journalistic integrity at the LA Times, and by their complicity with our mortal enemies. My Soldiers fight with great precision and skill on a very difficult urban battlefield. The LA Times dishonors them and give aid and comfort to my enemies. (sic all)

The soldier's identity is being withheld and rightly so. He wrote a personal letter to his family to assuage the apprehension created by the Times report. There's nothing official about his letter and, as such, one might be persuaded to dismiss it. In that case, however, one would also have to believe that a soldier's personal letter is part of a military disinformation conspiracy or that the soldier lies to his family.

On the other hand, the MSM has a reputation of being lazy about reporting from the battlefield with the current joke being told that most copy is composed in the bar of a four-star hotel many miles from any action. The LATimes story was likely polished in Los Angeles based on a communique from an Iraqi stringer with questionable loyalties.

Believe what you want. I tend to trust U.S. soldiers.

A salute to Brian Duffy for catching this story.