I read through your links. I don't plan on rehashing the incident at Haditha point by point by point but I will address the newsmax link.
I will say that I can understand why you might have been excited by the newsmax article. It raises what might appear on the surface as glaring omissions. Problem is, many of the omissions that newsmax accuses Frontline of are just plain wrong or never occurred.
Frontline raised the concerns over the Hammurabi Rights Association that some sources were concerned about. The video shown during the show from the Iraqi sources was qualified by Frontline... as not being documentable as to the actual source of the video, the timeline, and location being shown.
A considerable amount of the video shown was from marine sources, including actual survelence video from unmanned drones flying over the action as it occurred. Newsmax completely fails to mention this. Frontline made fine use of this video, showing actual video footage that refuted step by step, many of the accusations made by the Iraqis.
Frontline did not portray Haditha "as peaceful and free of insurgents prior to the arrival of the Marines". As a matter of fact, marines interviewed on camera stated they were surprised that there was no immediate "Faluja" style battle as soon as they entered the city (which is what they had anticipated and prepared for). The marines stated that after being there for just a short time, tensions and dislike between the residents and the marines was readily apparent and that increased intelligence showed insurgent strikes in the area were being planned and would soon be executed. In other words, Frontline portrayed Haditha as a time bomb, waiting to explode.
Frankly, the newsmax article ignores many of the points raised by the Frontline show that indicated that both the US prosecution involved with the upcoming courts martial and accusations made by the Iraqi authorities was not, I repeat... NOT... supported by the available evidence. They even mentioned that the primary witness in the case was a marine who had cut a deal in exchange for his testimony.
Fact is... after watching the show, I thought much of the information presented went far towards exonerating the marines involved. I am surprised that Maxnews seems to feel it was a hatchet job.
I have to say that it appears you did not see the show yourself. Here is the link to the Frontline site. The show under discussion can be streamed to your computer if you should choose to see for yourself, and judge it to see just how accurate the newsmax story really was. I think if you take the time you will find that the show was very well formulated and made a great effort to present as much detail as possible, without editorializing. Quite honestly, that is why I brought it to the attention of SE. Of course, you can only judge it for yourself, if you actually watch it yourself.
avoid mentioning many crucial facts regarding Haditha?
?Frontline? accepted without question the legitimacy of the so-called Hammurabi Human Rights Association and allowed its alleged head man Abdul-Rahman al-Mashhadani to tell the story of the aftermath of Nov. 19, even though the organization consists solely of himself and one Thaer Thabit al-Hadithi ? the original source of the video excerpts ?Frontline? showed.
The "Human Rights Organization" ties to insurgents was known to the media long ago but "Frontline" "neglected" to mention so trivial a thing -
June 09, 2006
(b)?? Ali al?Mashhadani had been imprisoned for five months before his report?because of his ties to insurgents. He was subsequently placed under another 12 days in detention for being a security threat.
A key source for McGirk's report that US Marines in Haditha had deliberately attacked civilians was Thaer al?Hadithi. whom McGirk inexplicably described as 'a budding journalism student'. He is a middle?aged man, and was subsequently described by the AP as an 'Iraqi investigator.'
McGirk also failed to note that Hadithi is 'a member and spokesman for the Hammurabi.' The chairman of Hammurabi Organization and Hadithi's partner in publicizing the 'massacre' is Abdul?Rahman al?Mashhadani. It is unknown if he is related to Ali al?Mashhadani but their names suggest a possible relationship, and it beggars belief?that as Sweetness& Light?notes,
'Abdel Rahman al?Mashhadani just happened to be given a video by and unnamed local. And that he then turned it over to Ali al?Mashhadani who just happens to make videos for Reuters.'
A timeline of events and media inconsistencies:
The rest of the original link from NewsMax can easily be verified from other sources should you not happen to trust NewsMax. Even the left reclined WaPo got some of it right at times.
"Frontline" claims to be news but it is pretty clear from what it used and what it left out that it really is some rather biased sensationalism - used to call it Yellow Journalism.