A woman from Flagstaff, AZ (around where I grew up) was serving in Iraq recently. She refused to participate in the torturing of prisoners, and ended up committing suicide a couple of days later. Or did she? Something about the details smells mighty fishy to me:
According to KNAU, an Army investigation found that Peterson had objected to interrogation techniques that were being used on prisoners. …She was subsequently assigned to monitoring Iraqi guards at the base gate and was sent to suicide prevention training, stated the KNAU report. And on Sept. 15, Army investigators concluded she shot and killed herself with her service rifle, according to KNAU.
The KNAU report also stated that Army spokespeople for Peterson’s unit refused to describe the interrogation techniques and that all records of the techniques have been destroyed.
So she protests the torturing of prisoners, gets reassigned to guard duty, shoots herself in the head, and all records of the torture methods she witnessed were destroyed. Oh, and her parents weren’t even told that it was a suicide — the only way they found out was when a Flagstaff radio station filed a request for the documents under the Freedom of Information Act. Does all this sound…suspicious to anyone? Because, you know, the military would never try to obfuscate the facts.
I also noticed how the military translated her (alleged) suicide into “noncombat weapons discharge.” (Much like they took “shell shock” and diluted it down into “post-traumatic stress disorder.”) Gee, how informative. Sounds like good ol’ military thinking to me, though: distort, obfuscate, change the wording and hope it goes away.
Yes, something is definitely wrong here.