The American Spectator

A journalist published on your website, William Tucker, was recently embedded with my company recently and published his story “Midnight Raid” about my company. There are some issues with the fact checking inside this story. First of all, the “Sergeant Peter Green” is actually First Sergeant servicemen’s Green, and there begin the inaccuracies that only help contribute to the American service men’s distrust of the media. Referring to paratroopers as “GIs” doesn’t help my men with their hostilities, either.

Calling one of our interpreters “Hollywood’s stereotype of the Middle Eastern terrorist” infuriates me, especially considering these men risk life and limb to work with us in the first place. This particular interpreter chooses to cover his face because we live in his city and his mother has already been shot by terrorists because they suspected him of working with Americans somewhere. Had he bothered to ask why Chris (not Ali, as William called him) covers his face, we would have answered readily.

To say of another interpreter that “[h]e has a ferocity toward the suspects— and indeed begins slapping one around when Green momentarily leaves the room” is insinuating violations of the Law of Land Warfare. Is this what he insinuates? If so, it is my duty as commander to investigate the matter fully. I need a witness statement from Mr. Tucker, if this is the case. We follow the Geneva Convention.

Saying that my first sergeant gave an order to “tear the place apart” because an Iraqi lied to him is not only inaccurate, but is also completely contrary to what we do on a daily basis. Our goal here is to gain the trust of the Iraqi people we are trying to secure. Conducting “night raids” is about 10% of what we do on a daily basis. William did not bother to ask about the city council meetings we mentor our Iraqi counterparts through; nor did he seem interested in the fact that we are overcoming bureaucracy within both systems (Iraqi and American) to further reconstruction in Bayji. I feel betrayed by our media that our fellow patriots do not even get an accurate portrayal of what its Troopers do for their freedoms.

Reading this article, it seems to me that William had already decided the tone of his article beforehand. I am recommending to my chain of command that William have his credentials pulled and not be allowed to embed with us any longer. When did being a reporter go from a profession of service to the public of America to one of publishing stories simply to inflate one’s sense of self?

Again, I am thoroughly disappointed by the manner of your correspondent’s reporting. Please remember that, as reporters who provide America with a brief glimpse of what we do over here, you have an obligation to ensure that your stories are checked for fact. Is William’s main aim to report facts to Americans or sell himself as a modern-day Ernie Pyle?

Incidentally, William placed the following quote at the beginning of one of his article: “Karl Zinsmeister’s Boots on the Ground, which chronicled the event, has been read by almost every other soldier I’ve met over here.” This quote is blatantly wrong, I believe the poll of my company (146 Paratroopers) I conducted yielded zero Troopers having read his book other than myself. I apologize for the ranting diatribe, but I believe I owe the Troopers of my company their defense. We are not amateurs, as he portrays us; we are professionals fighting to win a war we understand is extremely unpopular at home. Things can be frustrating enough fighting an oftentimes faceless enemy without having to fight your own countrymen.