Talk:Hamdania incident
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Removed a large block of text as it was incorrect. The NyTimes article clearly states
"Tony Snow, the White House spokesman, said today that President Bush was "troubled" by allegations concerning the Haditha and Ishaqi incidents, as well as the fatal shooting of an Iraqi man in Hamadiya. In that case, which was first reported Thursday by The Associated Press, military prosecutors say they are preparing murder, kidnapping and conspiracy charges against seven marines and a Navy corpsman, and the death of civilians in a March attack in Ishaqi, a village north of Baghdad. "
This says the seven marines were being charged in links to Ishaqi not Hamadiya. Those investigations also ended finding the soldiers obeyed the proper escalation routine. --zero faults |sockpuppets| 01:31, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
- I beg to differ. The phrase "In that case" cannot refer to the Ishaqi incident, as the Ishaqi and Haditha incidents are paired together grammatically in the sentence. Logic dictates, then, that the clause refers to the third incident, which stands alone in the text. The issue is clarified in a slightly different (later?) version of the NYT News Service text (found here[1]). Read it carefully:
-
"Tony Snow, the White House spokesman, said Friday that President Bush was "troubled" by allegations now being investigated in connection with three incidents, news services reported. Along with the killings in Haditha, the investigations involved the fatal shooting of an Iraqi man in Hamadiya, a case in which military prosecutors say they are preparing murder, kidnapping and conspiracy charges against seven Marines and a Navy corpsman, and the death of civilians in a March attack in Ishaqi, a village north of Baghdad."
- I'll restore the deleted text to the article. 69.228.214.183 17:41, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Hamadiya/Hamdania
Could someone please rename the article or at least include a redirect? Thanks. --217.235.208.92
The article now has the correct name. Juansmith 23:46, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks! --217.235.210.210
[edit] Merging of articles
Disagree - It is to early to say how this is going to pan out. Some of these Marines may get convicted others may not. A whole host of things may happen between now and the end of this episode. Recommend keeping them separate for now and when it is all played out then revisiting this topic.--Looper5920 04:45, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Disagree, and concur with Looper5920's suggestion to re-evaluate after the story settles out and we see if one or two of these guys prove to be William Calleys, or if they are all equally culpable. Another very, very weak (OK, indefensible) reason for keeping separate articles is that on Corporal Magincalda's page there's an external link to a fund-raising website put up by his wife and attorney to raise legal fees for Mr. Magincalda, who appears to be in a whole heap 'o trouble. Totally a violation of Wikipedia policy to allows a personal fund-raising link like that to remain, but part of me values it as at token effort to hear the other side of the story. I know, I know, I'm losing it as a Wikipedian. --technopilgrim 04:41, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- OK, it's been two weeks & the two votes have been for not merging the articles. I'll remove the tag. --69.228.81.49 18:37, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Libel suit against Congressman Murtha is not associated with this incident
I've removed the sentence saying the families of the accused soldiers are suing Congressman Murtha for libel. The Hamdania and Haditha cases are being confused. There is a libel lawsuit against Murtha made by a Marine accused in the Haditha incident, but as far as I know the families of the Handania defendents have not sued the congressman for anything. If I've missed a lawsuit by the family members, re-instate the sentence along with a reference. --- technopilgrim 20:29, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] November 2006 Conviction
I have added news of the November 2006 conviction. The article would benefit from a rewrite as it is no longer an "alleged" crime and many previously unverifed facts are now verifiable. However, the story is still unfolding so it may be best not to rewrite just yet.
