The military's medical examiner, Dr. Craig T. Mallak, cautioned the panel that the study his office prepared for the Marines was strictly a medical analysis that did not take into account other issues that military officials also weighed in deciding how much shielding to provide their troops, including the effect of additional armor on mobility. Dr. Mallak said he could not be certain how many lives would be saved by additional armor.The Marine Corps has said it first learned of Dr. Mallak's work in August 2004, but did not commission the $107,000 study until December that year because of financing and other delays. Dr. Mallak said a similar study was now being conducted for the Army.
Dr. Mallak told a military panel in 2003 that he was conducting autopsies on every member of the armed services killed in Iraq in part to assess the body armor.
"We've collected every bullet, every piece of shrapnel that we can get our hands on," he said at the time.
But on Wednesday Dr. Mallak said that in telling the panel that his work "screams to be published," a comment reported in the Times article, he was referring only to his work on the use of ephedra by military personnel. That work was eventually published.
Several lawmakers at the hearing criticized The Times for disclosing the medical study on body armor, with one calling the inclusion of a chart detailing the findings "nearly treasonous."
Another secret study that has found it's way to the public. It makes you wonder WTF? Take a quick look at this report from the USTimes using the NYTimes article. Take a close look at that little picture on the upper right. Looks like a diagram on where not to shoot a US soldier to me. I'd say that the insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan have learned where to shoot to get past the inserts, but this ensures that anyone can get this information. Why did this have to be printed? Why make the information convenient to the enemy? Wasn't there a way to print the article without detailing the vulnerabilities?
No comments:
Post a Comment