The Italian Kerfuffle

Other bloggers have been discussing the U.S. shooting of an Italian intelligence agent who was tasked with freeing a hostage in detail. The basics: the Italians, who have one of the largest forces in the coalition in Iraq, worked to free an Italian journalist, Giuliana Sgrena, who had been taken hostage in Iraq. After freeing the hostage, the two Italian secret service agents tried to take her to the Baghdad airport, but their car was fired upon by U.S. troops when it approached a checkpoint. Tragically, one of the agents was killed and Sgrena and the other agent were injured.

This has triggered a controversy in Italy, especially since the Prime Minister has stated that the agents had permission for the rescue operation, and that the journalist alleged that an "ambush" had taken place...

The possibility of an ambush had been raised by Sgrena, who in some of her first comments since being released contended that the United States disapproved of Italy's method of negotiations with kidnappers.

Sgrena, who works for the communist daily Il Manifesto, tried to distance herself from the ambush hypothesis Tuesday.

"I never said that they wanted to kill me, but that the mechanics of what happened are that of an ambush," she told state TV.

Of course, there are questions as to whether she is an unbiased witness or not, since she apparently refers to Americans as "the biggest enemies of mankind." Even more so, there are questions as to what the U.S. military was told regarding the rescue operation... which may have actually been a ransom payoff by the Italian government. Italian newspapers have the latest details, which makes this entire operation look like a half-assed mess from beginning to end.

The story's being run to ground by bloggers, who have noted that the pictures of the vehicle (here and here) seem to contradict the idea of an ambush. Frankly, the claim makes little sense, and the latest statement from the Italian journalist (that the car was shot "from the right and from behind") gets shredded by Captain Ed today...

Either one would have to believe that the checkpoint soldiers stopped the car and then shot it out -- from behind! -- or that the car never stopped at the checkpoint and traveled so fast that the soldiers could only catch up to it as it passed through. Think about the options for a moment. If a checkpoint successfully stops a suspicious vehicle, why would soldiers walk around behind it to open fire? They'd risk hitting their unit at the front of the car. Tactically, little gain would come from getting behind a potential VBIED in open space when one could get at least some partial protection from a potential explosion by the checkpoint barricades.

This story gets fishier and fishier on every retelling. First we have a "rain of bullets" and Sgrena scooping them up by the handful off the seats, and then we see a car with two bullet holes in it, one of which went through the right front tire. Next the Italians tell us that the US had full operational knowledge of the mission when it turns out their own military leadership was possibly kept in the dark. Now Sgrena tells us that the Americans fired from behind the vehicle when they stopped at the checkpoint, the only position where US soldiers would risk hitting their own troops.

I call "shenanigans" on the Italians.

Someone break out the brooms. This is one journalist with less credibility than Dan Rather.