LA Times revisits controversial Ramadi airstrike story
posted at 2:54 am on December 29, 2006 by see-dubya
Back in November, blogger Patterico spent a lot of time looking into an incident in Ramadi in which it was alleged in the L.A. Times that U.S. airstrikes killed several civilians. The incident in many ways set the stage for the ongoing questions about coverage of the Hurriya burning and the AP’s reliance on “Capt. Jamil Hussein”.
The U.S. military adamantly denied that any airstrikes had occurred in Ramadi on November 15th, and they still do. Patterico asked for a response from Solomon Moore, the Times reporter who wrote that story, but never received one.
Now Moore has responded. And, well, it looks pretty good for Patterico. The headline is “U.S. Says Ramadi Operations Didn’t Rely On Airstrikes”.
There may have been tragic collateral damage as a result of tank fire (or insurgent fire, come to think of it) that day. But Patterico’s point wasn’t that everything is perfect in Iraq. His point was that the U.S. side of this story wasn’t getting told in the LA Times.
Now it is.
Good work, Patterico. And thanks to Solomon Moore for listening; even if he seemed a bit grudging about it, he did the legwork to follow up.
UPDATE: Patterico responds, with more to come.
Breaking on Hot Air