....Still waiting for facts...

Thanks McG. We now have THREE versions and counting...
Silvio Berlusconi, who wasn't there, said the Italians stopped for the Americans BEFORE being shot.

Ms. Sgrena has said the Italians were not speeding and were not warned there was a checkpoint and received no orders to stop and were fired upon from a tank (I heard her on the BBC two days ago).

The Americans as of Tuesday night were saying that the Italian car was speeding and not responding to signals to stop. The photos that are supposed to be of the car show at most bullet damage.

From peripheral 'sources' I've heard that the Italians say the Americans were aware of what was going down. The Americans say they didn't know. Ms. Sgrena's article referenced by McGrath seems to indicate that it was considered important to keep the Americans from knowing.

Ms. Sgrena's article appears to be translated by someone with better English than she appeared to have when she was interviewed by the BBC. Reading the article makes me feel that she is a journalist in name only, or perhaps limited by her knowledge of the language if she wrote the English herself. Nevertheless it doesn't provide a firm timeline nor the observational acuity that I associate with perceptive people. Kind of like Hunter S. Thompson of recent memory only not at the Kentucky races and on a different 'stream' of consciousness. Let's be fair, the lady has been kidnapped, released, shot and wounded. But why does her narrative stop at shots fired? What happaned when the Americans found out who they were. There's an important point to be made. If she was indeed a conscious American target, and the Americans had killed her protector, why didn't they finishy the job. Then there would be only ONE story to tell. She also indicates a level of naivete that is normally reserved for Europeans to apply to Americans. In her articles conclusion of impressions from her captivity she seems to be surprised that kidnappers who force her to make taped entreaties don't want her to report from an 'anti-American' perspective. I don't know whether her charges of American 'targetting' of her car is due to a pre-conceived orientation, Stockholm sydrome, or a need to 'spin' an explanation from the chaos of events that occur in violent situations. But it ain't rational. And the duty of a journalist is to provide a rational framework in order to better understand events. Otherwise, she's just another body stopping a bullet for someone.

One interesting bit of 'information' in Sgrena's screed: The driver was on a cell-phone! This is the best argument I've heard to date for not driving while using those things. She may have inadvertently advanced the puzzle of what happened if by her words we can consider that the driver was distracted from THE MOST DANGEROUS ROAD IN BAGHDAD because he was using the phone!

McGrath, rather than murkier it could be getting clearer, BUT>>>>

....STILL WAITING FOR THE FACTS