Brian Williams steps away from news desk after Iraq story called into question

WASHINGTON — NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams, facing withering criticism for “misremembering” events in Iraq in 2003, is voluntarily taking a leave of absence while the network investigates his reporting.

On Friday, NBC Universal sent out a news release in which the news division’s president, Deborah Turness, said in part:

“We have a team dedicated to gathering the facts to help us make sense of all that has transpired. We’re working on what the best next steps are.”

On Saturday, Williams sent a note to the NBC News staff, which said in part:

"[It] has become painfully apparent to me that I am presently too much a part of the news, due to my actions.

"As Managing Editor of NBC Nightly News, I have decided to take myself off of my daily broadcast for the next several days, and Lester Holt has kindly agreed to sit in for me to allow us to adequately deal with this issue."

The Iraq issue erupted online when Iraq veterans took umbrage at a news report in which Williams used a ceremony honoring a retired command sergeant major at a New York Rangers hockey game to repeat the story that his aircraft was forced down in Iraq.

Days later, Williams admitted the claim was false after Stars and Stripes’ reporter Travis Tritten contacted NBC News to ask for comment to statements by some servicemembers challenging the veteran anchor’s version.

But Williams’ apology, delivered on NBC Nightly News, failed to stem the criticism. He admitted his helicopter was not hit, but claimed that he “was instead in a following aircraft” and said he had bungled the tribute to a veteran.

The apology was met with scorn and derision, particularly online, and deeper scrutiny followed.

Some media outlets have questioned Williams’ description of what he saw while reporting on Hurricane Katrina. In an interview a year after the storm, he described seeing a body floating down the street from his hotel window in the French Quarter of New Orleans, which was not severely flooded.

Early Friday, news organizations reported that NBC News had launched an internal investigation into Williams’ reporting. The New York Times reported that NBC executives canceled meetings and said that the issue was absorbing all of their focus.

Tall tale

Williams did not mention in his reports from Iraq in 2003 that his Chinook had been hit by ground fire.

But by 2013, he told Alec Baldwin on his public radio show that “I had no business being in in Iraq with rounds coming into the airframe.”

When Baldwin asks if Williams thought he would die, he replies, “Briefly, sure.”

Weeks later he told David Letterman on air that “two of the four helicopters were hit, by ground fire, including the one I was in” — “No kidding!” Letterman interjects — [by] “uh, RPG and AK-47.”

When the hockey game report hit the air, some soldiers called him on it.

The claims bothered several soldiers aboard the formation of 159th Aviation Regiment Chinooks that were flying far ahead and did come under attack March 24, 2003, Tritten wrote.

One of the helicopters was hit by two rocket-propelled grenades — one did not detonate but passed through the airframe and rotor blades — as well as small arms fire.

“It was something personal for us that was kind of life-changing for me. I know how lucky I was to survive it,” said Lance Reynolds, who was the flight engineer. “It felt like a personal experience that someone else wanted to participate in and didn’t deserve to participate in.”

Reynolds said Williams and the NBC cameramen arrived in a helicopter 30 to 60 minutes after his damaged Chinook made an emergency landing at an Iraqi airfield near Objective Rams, a temporary base being hastily set up near Najaf in southern Iraq.

Soon after the Stars and Stripes report, a media feeding frenzy began. Tritten appeared on several news shows as cable news followed up. Social media users mocked Williams mercilessly.

Reactions among the soldiers contacted again after the issue exploded was mixed. Some felt the record had been corrected, and just wanted to move on. Others felt the apology was half-hearted, and perhaps forced on a man who never would have come forward otherwise.

dickson.patrick@stripes.com

Twitter: @StripesDCchief

6 Bosnian immigrants supplied military equipment, money to terrorists, US says

ST. LOUIS — Six Bosnian immigrants have been accused of sending money and military equipment to terrorist fighters overseas, including the Islamic State group and al-Qaida in Iraq.

An indictment unsealed Friday in U.S. District Court in St. Louis said the defendants donated money themselves and in some cases collected funds from others in the U.S. and sent the donations overseas. It says two of the defendants used some of the money to buy U.S. military uniforms, firearms accessories, tactical gear and other equipment, which was shipped to people in Turkey and Saudi Arabia who forwarded the supplies to terrorists.

The supplies and money eventually made their way to fighters in Syria, Iraq and elsewhere, according to the indictment. Money also was sent to support family members of terrorist fighters, the indictment says. All of the defendants knew where the money and supplies were going, the indictment says.

The indictment alleges the conspiracy began no later than May 2013 and that the defendants used email, phones and social media websites including Facebook to communicate using coded words, such as "brothers," ''lions" and "Bosnian brothers."

All six people who are charged are natives of Bosnia who were living in the U.S. legally. Three are naturalized citizens; the other three had either refugee or legal resident status, according to the U.S. attorney's office.

The indictment names Ramiz Zijad Hodzic, 40, his wife, Sedina Unkic Hodzic, 35, and Armin Harcevic, 37, all of St. Louis County; Nihad Rosic, 26 of Utica, N.Y.; Mediha Medy Salkicevic, 34, of Schiller Park, Ill.; and Jasminka Ramic, 42 of Rockford, Ill.

All face charges of conspiring to provide material support and resources to terrorists and with providing material support to terrorists. Rosic and Ramiz Hodzic are also charged with conspiring to kill and maim people in a foreign country.

The indictment says that last July, Rosic tried to board a flight from New York to Syria to join the fight.

The U.S. attorney's office said five of the defendants have been arrested; the sixth is overseas, but the Justice Department declined to say exactly where.

Online court records do not list defense attorneys for any of the defendants. According to court records, the Hodzics had a first appearance before a U.S. magistrate judge in St. Louis on Friday and the court said it would appoint attorneys for them.

The property manager at the complex where the Hodzics live told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch that the couple had been living there for 1½ years with their three children. Larry Sorth, and his wife, Joyce, said they were surprised by the arrests and that the couple was friendly.

"She was very sweet, to tell you the truth," Joyce Sorth said of Sedina Hodzic.

In a news release announcing the charges, the U.S. attorney's office said the crimes of conspiring to provide material support and providing material support carry penalties ranging up to 15 years in prison. Conspiring to kill and maim people in a foreign country carries a penalty of up to life in prison.

Without budget deal, deployments 'probably' to extend again, Greenert says

JOINT BASE PEARL HARBOR-HICKAM, Hawaii — The Navy’s chief of naval operations had some positive news for sailors about shortened sea deployments during an all-hands call Friday afternoon — but budget cuts this coming year could undo all that progress.

The USS Carl Vinson is now deployed in the Arabian Gulf on a nine-and-a-half month deployment, said Adm. Jonathan Greenert to about 1,500 sailors seated in a basketball arena. However, its eventual replacement, the USS Theodore Roosevelt, will deploy for more than a month less than that.

“The carrier after that should be on a seven-month deployment,” Greenert said, adding that amphibious groups, submarines and maritime patrols with aircraft are all now down to deployments of seven months or less.

Greenert said the extended deployments sprang out of mandatory budget caps enacted by Congress several years ago after lawmakers came to an impasse on spending and taxes.

Those so-called sequestration cuts call for a mandatory reduction of about $1.1 trillion in discretionary spending — which includes defense — over the years 2013 to 2021.

Lawmakers eventually agreed on a deal allowing higher defense spending for the past two budget cycles, but further cuts are slated for the budget year that begins Oct. 1 unless another deal is hammered out.

That would “probably” lead to more extended deployments, Greenert told reporters during a news conference after the all-hands call, after which he planned to travel to Australia and New Zealand.

“Some would say that’s because we’re going to try to get all this done with less force,” he said. “But really, it’s because we wouldn’t get maintenance done on time. We wouldn’t have enough people in the public ship yards at Pearl Harbor. That work would take longer to do. You may not have overtime authorized.”

That delay in work has a “cascading downward effect,” which means deployed ships would have to stay at sea longer.

He described the work of modernizing and maintaining ships to a conveyor belt, “and I can’t crank up the speed on this thing. I don’t have the money to do it.”

Greenert was adamant, however, that the sequestration cuts won’t affect the Pacific rebalance.

“Presence in the Pacific won’t change much, because I will invest in that, very much.”

He said his top priorities are the strategic deterrent of ballistic missile-armed submarines and providing forward presence “where it matters, when it matters, in that distribution.”

He said that the 50 ships now forward-deployed in the Pacific will increase to 60 by 2020.

“That will pretty much remain on track regardless of sequester,” he said.

The effects of sequestration cuts will come in shore operations, maintenance, training and modernization, he said.

“So if you’re not on deployment and you come back, you’ll probably shut down, stop flying. I’m sure you’ll be delayed going into maintenance, a smaller maintenance package because of what we can afford. That will affect Hawaii from the perspective of these modernization packages that we bring in. We bring a destroyer in and take it to the next level in ballistic missile defense. We’ll be pushing those out.”

Ultimately, if the sequestration caps become the new norm, Greenert said he and the other service chiefs would recommend a new national defense strategy, one that matches the budget rather than some other greater goal.

He said that continued sequestration would force the Navy to abandon important elements of the current 10-point strategy. He said such cuts would not allow the force to “project power in an anti-access, area-denial environment” and would deprive its ability to simultaneously “defeat an enemy and deny an enemy in another area of the world.”

olson.wyatt@stripes.com

Twitter: @WyattWOlson

Joe Langdell, survivor of 1941 Pearl Harbor attack on USS Arizona, dies at 100

(Tribune Content Agency) — Joe Langdell was known for the World War II stories he could tell.

He was well qualified, having watched from shore as his ship, the USS Arizona, sank during the Dec. 7, 1941, surprise attack on Pearl Harbor.

The 100-year-old Langdell — the Yuba-Sutter, Calif., area's last Pearl Harbor survivor and a fixture in Marysville's annual Veterans Day parade — died Wednesday, family members confirmed.

He had an outgoing personality as well as an affinity recounting the historic attack and had been living in Yuba City, Calif.

"He talked to anybody about it," said John Langdell of Spearfish, S.D., one of his two sons. "He relished being the center of attention. That was part of his makeup."

Son Ted Langdell, who lives in Marysville, said his dad kept high spirits at The Fountains care facility.

"I guess you might say he was creating an endearing character over there," he said, adding a bit of mischief was likely involved.

Joe Langdell's death came almost four months after his 100th birthday. Ted Langdell was there holding his hand when he passed away.

Riding in a wheelchair, Joe Langdell took part in November's annual Veterans Day Parade in downtown Marysville. His presence in the parade became a focal point for the yearly event.

John Langdell said his father's remains will be interred at the site of the USS Arizona, the ship on which he served, next Dec. 7. A local public memorial service will likely be held in April, he said.

Don Schrader, a local veterans advocate and a board member of the Museum of Forgotten Warriors in Yuba County, noted Langdell visited the museum from time to time.

"He went to the parades and always wore his uniform," Schrader said. "It's the passing of an era. It is unfortunate, but we are losing those guys."

Schrader also noted that Langdell seemed to take pleasure in letting people know about his wartime experiences.

"I think he enjoyed it greatly, and I think he was very proud of it," Schrader said. "And he should have been."

Langdell's passing leaves the Yuba-Sutter area with no surviving members of the Dec. 7, 1941, Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Fellow survivor Art Rodda, who lived in Sutter, died in 2013.

"It certainly was the focal point of his service in the Navy and the attack on Pearl Harbor was the center of his life," John Langdell said of his father. "He took pride in it."

The Appeal-Democrat has recounted Joe Langdell's story multiple times during the past several decades. As told to the A-D in 2009, he was 28 years old and asleep on Ford Island when the attack happened and watched helplessly from shore as the Arizona sank and 1,177 sailors assigned to it were lost.

Retiring as a lieutenant commander, Joe Langdell was thought to be the last surviving officer assigned at that time to the Arizona. He was recently one of only seven survivors from the ship, John Langdell said.

Joe Langdell told the Appeal-Democrat in 2009 that he likely would have been killed if he had been on board the Arizona when it was attacked. "Saw it sink? Hell, yes," he said in 2009. "I was right there on shore, as close as you could get while keeping out of the bomb range."

Langdell helped other men wade to shore and get to the hospital, according to the A-D account. He said he was later asked to go with 15 other men who had sheets and pillowcases to gather all the bodies above the waterline.

"You'll always remember it," Joe Langdell said at the time. "It's a milestone in your life — one of the most important battles in the world, in world history, and I've got my medals to tell about it."

Born Oct. 12, 1914, in Wilton, N.H., Joe Langdell was employed as a salesman after the war and, with his wife, sought out the warmer California climate — first in the Bay Area and later in the Yuba-Sutter area. He was a former owner of the Village Mart store in Yuba County.

Arrangements are pending at Ullrey Memorial Chapel in Yuba City.

©2015 the (Marysville, Calif.) Appeal-Democrat. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Jordan's King Abdullah thrusts country to center of Islamic State war

AMMAN, Jordan — King Abdullah II has thrust Jordan to the center of the war against the Islamic State group with his pledge of relentless retaliation for the killing of one of his pilots.

The 53-year-old monarch also highlighted his personal role as he tried to shore up public support for what could be a long campaign. In video played repeatedly on state TV, the career soldier was shown in military fatigues, sleeves rolled up, as he huddled with military chiefs.

In the short term, the crisis over the killing of the captive airman, who was burned to death in a cage, appears to have strengthened Abdullah.

Until recently, he had been on the defensive about Jordan's participation in the U.S.-led military coalition conducting airstrikes against the Islamic State group. The public's misgivings have been replaced by cries for revenge this week after the militants released a video showing the horrific death of 26-year-old Lt. Muath al-Kaseasbeh.

"The king is in a very strong position," said Fayek Hijazeen, who covers the monarch for the official Petra news agency. "All the people are standing behind him."

But stepping up the pace of airstrikes could also mean more combat casualties. "This is not a cycle the king would relish," said David Schenker of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a think tank.

Others said the pounding from the air could provoke Islamic State to carry out attacks inside Jordan.

In the months before the killing of al-Kaseasbeh, Abdullah had warned in increasingly strident tones of the threat posed by the militants, not just to Jordan, but to the world, and he called on moderate Muslims to take a stand.

"This is a war the world cannot afford to lose," he was to have said in a speech Thursday in Washington that was instead delivered by Jordan's ambassador because Abdullah had rushed back home to deal with the crisis. "But to win it, all of us must be in it."

After his return to Jordan, he met with army commanders to plan a swift response. By Thursday, as he visited the pilot's family at their mourning tent in southern Jordan, fighter jets roared overhead, having returned from bombing raids against Islamic State targets in Syria.

The military carried out airstrikes on Islamic State weapons depots and training sites on Thursday and Friday. Foreign Minister Nasser Judeh warned that "we are going to take this all the way," and suggested targets in Iraq could also be hit. Up to now, Jordan and other Arab members of the coalition have struck in Syria but not Iraq.

The militants control about one-third of both Syria and Iraq, neighbors of Jordan.

A statement attributed to the Islamic State claimed that a female American hostage was killed in Jordanian airstrikes Friday near their stronghold, the Syrian city of Raqqa. Jordan dismissed it as "criminal propaganda," and U.S. officials said they were checking the claim.

In leading the military campaign, Abdullah seems to be in his element. Before succeeding his father, the late King Hussein, in 1999, he had spent most of his adult life in the military, parachuting from planes and flying combat helicopters.

Abdullah has maneuvered through a series of crises in 16 years on the throne, an anniversary he marks Saturday. In 2005, al-Qaida sent suicide bombers who targeted three Amman hotels, killing 60 people in the worst terror attack on Jordanian soil. The king maintains close security ties with Israel, while appealing to Israel's leaders to do more to reach a deal on Palestinian statehood.

"This is an opportunity to shine, to really play a leadership role ... in an area in which he is comfortable, in which he is confident, and in which he as great international and domestic support," Schenker said.

The latest crisis could also help him reconnect with the Jordanian tribes, a traditional mainstay of support for the monarchy, but a minority in a country that has absorbed millions of refugees and their descendants, including Palestinians, Iraqis and Syrians.

Abdullah, educated in the U.S. and Britain, has been perceived at home as being more comfortable speaking English than Arabic and more at ease in Western capitals than in the company of tribal leaders.

But at the wake for the pilot, who grew up in southern tribal region of Karak, the king warmly embraced the family, at one point walking hand-in-hand with the bereaved father, Safi al-Kaseasbeh, to the mourning tent. The king's tough response to the killing of the airman is bound to reassure the tribes, the main pool of recruits for the army and the security services.

On Thursday and Friday, several thousand people attended solidarity rallies in which marchers help posters of Abdullah. "We all stand united with the Hashemite leadership in facing terrorism," read one of the banners.

Queen Rania, the king's wife, joined Friday's demonstration, ringed by a cordon of security men as the crowd slowly walked in downtown Amman.

It was not clear to what extent these rallies were spontaneous, but analysts said there has been a clear shift in public opinion that left Abdullah in a better position than just a few days ago.

"The king gets the consensus of the street, he gets international support, as well as financial and military support," said Bassam Badareen, a Jordanian political analyst.

He said the ramped-up confrontation could increase the risk of Islamic State attacks inside Jordan, but that the country would likely be able to deal with such a scenario.

The killing of the pilot served as a wake-up call, with Jordanians feeling directly threatened by Islamic State and now placing the relative stability provided by the monarchy above longstanding demands for political and economic reforms, analysts said.

"I think there is a national consensus on the need to preserve the stability and integrity of the country," said Abdul-Ilah Khatib, a former foreign minister. "There is a conviction that we are a target, as a country, and that we need to face the challenge."

Family of US hostage breaks silence after Islamic State claims airstrike killed her

IRBIL, Iraq (Tribune Content Agency) — After 18 months of closely guarding the identity of a 26-year-old American aid worker thought to be the last American held hostage by the Islamic State, her family revealed her identity Friday, reacting to an unconfirmed assertion from the terrorist group that she had been killed in a Jordanian air strike.

The United States government said it had no evidence that Kayla Mueller, of Prescott, Ariz., had been killed. Jordanian government sources speaking with reporters in Amman insisted the claim was “illogical” and “propaganda” and questioned how the Islamic State could be certain it was a Jordanian strike that was responsible.

But the assertion was enough to prompt her family to release news organizations from promises to withhold her name under a blackout that has enveloped her case since she was taken hostage as she left a Doctors Without Borders clinic in Aleppo, the besieged city in northern Syria, on Aug. 4, 2013.

In addition to photos of Kayla, including one with her mother, Marsha Mueller, the family provided details of her work on behalf of refugees in India, Israel and the Palestinian territories, with HIV patients in Arizona, and finally, in 2012, with refugees from the Syrian civil war on the Syrian-Turkish border.

The time line of her life the family provided said she graduated from Northern Arizona State in Flagstaff, Ariz., in 2009, and noted that her family had been contacted by her kidnappers with evidence that she was still alive in May 2014.

U.S. officials said they were trying to verify the report, which came in a brief statement from the Islamic State. “The failed Jordanian aircraft killed an American female hostage,” the message said, according to a translation by the SITE Intelligence Group, a Washington organization that monitors jihadist communications. “No (Islamic State) fighters were killed in the bombardment.”

“We are obviously deeply concerned by these reports,” said State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf. “We have not at this time seen any evidence that corroborates ISIL’s claim.” ISIL and ISIS are acronyms for the Islamic State.

“Obviously our prayers and thoughts and hopes are that she’s still OK,” Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., told McClatchy in Munich, Germany, where he is leading a U.S. congressional delegation to an international security conference.

“She was a great person who spent a great part of her life in humanitarian endeavors, and it’s tragic for her and her family and obviously there has to be some kind of accountability for this kind of terrible action.”

McCain said he didn’t know if the U.S. government had tried to open negotiations with the Islamic State for her release. “I’ve had a lot of contact with the family and I know that efforts have been made through certain Middle Eastern contacts, but I don’t know of any negotiations,” he said, declining to elaborate.

Mueller’s name had been widely known in circles of activists who had been trying to free at least seven American and British hostages whose governments had, unlike many European nations, refused to negotiate or ransom their citizens held by the Islamic State.

Jordan has been conducting extensive air raids over Islamic State targets in response to a video posted Tuesday that showed the immolation of a Jordanian pilot, Muath al-Kaseasbeh, who was captured after his plane crashed outside Raqqa, Syria, on Dec. 24. Jordan has also said it plans to expand a war against the Islamic State but has yet to elaborate beyond a high pace of air strikes.

Although the Islamic State has publicly displayed and executed three American hostages, two British citizens and the Jordanian pilot, the group previously had never admitted publicly to holding Mueller.

In its messages sent to her family and colleagues last May, the group had said that it was unlikely to kill her but were demanding about $6 million for her safe release. Her captivity had been kept so secret that her kidnapping was conclusively determined only when French and Spanish hostages held with her began to be released in early 2014.

Mueller never spoke publicly from captivity but officials and other hostages have confirmed that she had traveled to Aleppo with a friend and was kidnapped while leaving a hospital operated by Doctors Without Borders in that city. The family’s statement said she had arrived on the Turkish-Syrian border in December 2012 to work with the Danish Refugee Council and the humanitarian organization Support to Life to assist families who had been forced to flee their homes.

The Islamic State’s claim that she was killed in a strike was confirmed by sources with an anti-Islamic State advocacy group, Raqqa Silently Slaughtered, which maintains a number of sources throughout the city. The group stressed its belief only that she was dead and said it had no information to support, or refute, the claim that she’d been killed by an air strike.

The Islamic State has released at least a dozen European hostages, mostly aid workers and journalists, over the last two years, reportedly for tens of millions of dollars, but the United States and Great Britain have refused to negotiate, which led to a series of brutal executions that began in August with the beheading of journalist James Foley. Subsequent videos documented the murders of journalist Steve Sotloff and aid workers David Haines, Alan Henning and Peter Kassig.

In the past two weeks, the group has also demanded the release of a longtime al-Qaida prisoner, Sajida al-Rishwa and $200 million for the release of journalist Kenji Goto and mentally ill adventurer Haruna Yukawa. Both Japanese were eventually executed and the Islamic State released images of their bodies.

But the Islamic State provided no photographs to back its claim that Mueller had been killed, though the group has consistently delivered accurate information about the current well being of its hostages during the past two years.

Accurate reporting of civilian casualties in the U.S.-led campaign of airstrikes has proven extremely difficult, because neither side has been willing to acknowledge in a timely manner deaths from bombing missions. The Islamic State is widely alleged to have placed civilians in makeshift prisons located in buildings set up for an entirely different purpose, such as local government record-keeping. But it has yet to acknowledge this nor to announce regularly the deaths of civilians it’s been holding, raising suspicion about the accuracy of its report of Mueller’s death.

The accuracy of information from the anti-Islamic State coalition is also in question. Only the United States regularly provides public information about air strikes conducted by its aircraft. But in response to questions by reporters, the U.S. Central Command, which oversees the anti-Islamic State campaign in Iraq and Syria, has acknowledged on several occasions that it’s left out of its statements some important airstrikes in Syria or inaccurately reported their locations. It also has insisted that there are few credible reports of civilian casualties from its actions, though Syrian activists have identified dozens of deaths.

On Friday, Central Command said in an email that it was “obviously deeply concerned” by reports of Mueller’s death “but have not at this time seen any evidence that corroborates ISIL’s claim.”

Prothero is a McClatchy special correspondent. Hannah Allam and Maria Recio in Washington, Roy Gutman in Amman, Jordan, and Jonathan S. Landay in Munich, Germany, contributed to this report.

©2015 McClatchy Washington Bureau. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

McCain to Pentagon: Don't let our aircraft carriers visit China

WASHINGTON — As the Pentagon considers whether to allow a U.S. Navy aircraft carrier to make a historic port visit to China, the idea is drawing flak from Capitol Hill.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the new chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, urged the Defense Department to scuttle the proposal in a letter dated Monday to Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Deputy Defense Secretary Robert Work. Calling the Navy's Nimitz-class carriers "one of the most sophisticated and lethal military tools in world history," McCain said it would be a political and symbolic mistake for the Navy to accept a Chinese invitation for one of its massive flattop vessels to swing by for a visit.

RELATED: More Stars and Stripes coverage of the Pacific pivot

"Sending such a platform to China would be seen as an international display of respect to China and its Navy, despite Beijing's recent record of aggressive behavior in the East and South China Seas," McCain wrote. "I believe it would also send the wrong signal to allies and partners throughout the region, including Japan, the Philippines, Taiwan, and Vietnam, who are looking to the United States for leadership in the face of China's continued use of coercion to pursue its territorial claims."

On Friday, Army Col. Steve Warren, a Pentagon spokesman, said defense officials have decided to shelve the idea of a carrier visit to China, at least for now. "We have no plans for a carrier visit to mainland China this year," he said.

The announcement came a day after U.S. and Chinese military officials met at the Pentagon to discuss various forms of military exchanges for the remainder of the year.

The Pentagon has been seeking closer military ties with China — such as more frequent military exchanges, multilateral exercises and visits by senior leaders — even as both countries have sought to project more force in Asia. Relations have gradually improved since January 2010, when Beijing suspended military visits and exchanges with Washington to protest U.S. arm sales to Taiwan. But turbulent moments have arisen, such as an increasing number of dangerous midair encounters between U.S. and Chinese aircraft. As a result, some lawmakers have questioned whether the Pentagon is too eager to become friendly with the People's Liberation Army.

In December, Rep. J. Randy Forbes, R-Va., sent a letter to Hagel expressing "a growing concern with the overall trajectory of the military-to-military relationship" with China. He questioned whether the efforts to cultivate ties with the PLA had paid off, and requested that Hagel conduct a formal review of the Pentagon's policy.

China's Navy chief, Adm. Wu Shengli, suggested in July to his American counterpart, Adm. Jonathan Greenert, the U.S. chief of naval operations, that he would consider sending a U.S. carrier on a port visit. The idea has been batted around since then in the halls of the Pentagon, but officials said no decision had been made.

Part of the reason that China has been interested in arranging a visit is because the PLA-Navy has been trying to develop its own fleet of carriers. Its first carrier, the Liaoning, completed its first sea trials last year; Hagel toured the ship in April during an official visit to the port of Qingdao.

More recently, word has leaked out that China is building a second carrier, though the PLA has been mum about the subject. The U.S. Navy has 11 carriers — nine more than any other country in the world.

Obama's 'then-what?' question shapes debate on arms to Ukraine

WASHINGTON — Washington policymakers are caught up in a debate reminiscent of the Cold War era: Should the United States send weapons to help an outgunned country resist Russian-backed aggression?

What type of military aid to provide Ukraine's struggling government is being debated by foreign policy analysts and former diplomats as officials at the Pentagon as the State Department and White House consider the risks of action and inaction.

Advocates for sending weapons got an unexpected boost Wednesday when President Barack Obama's nominee for defense secretary said he's in favor of it.

"I'm very much inclined in that direction," Ashton Carter said at his confirmation hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee, a comment that drew a rebuff from the White House.

The issue is a particularly perplexing one for Obama, who's known to ask aides "then what?" when presented with recommendations about military measures, as he did before calling off plans to attack Syria for using chemical weapons.

Moving beyond the current administration policy — imposing economic sanctions on Russia and providing economic aid and non- lethal military equipment to Ukraine — raises questions hard to answer with any certainty.

Efforts at crisis negotiations escalated amid gains by Russian-backed separatists, who have advanced around the city of Debaltseve, a strategic transportation hub in eastern Ukraine. Secretary of State John Kerry met with officials in Kiev, Ukraine's capital, on Thursday. German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Francois Hollande were to stop there as well to discuss a new initiative before going to Moscow on Friday to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

So far, the Obama administration has played down the possibility of sending weapons, a move that could ratchet up tensions with Putin as fighting intensifies in a conflict that already has cost more than 5,000 lives. It also risks undercutting criticism of Putin by the U.S. and allies for arming the rebels.

"Providing additional military assistance could and is likely to have the effect of increasing the bloodshed," White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Tuesday, responding to a report that the president's aides were giving the question a fresh look.

Then Carter's statement the next day drew a curt response. "A decision like this will be made by the commander in chief," Earnest said at a press briefing. "The president will certainly take that advice into account."

Ukraine has asked the U.S., Britain, France and Germany, for military training and equipment, including munitions, armored vehicles, access to surveillance drones and radar to warn of artillery attacks, as well as financial aid, Deputy Foreign Minister Vadym Prystaiko said in an interview in Washington on Jan. 29.

"We're asking the world, 'Can you help us with weapons?'" he said. "We don't want the conflict to be escalated, but we have to remind them we are fighting on our own territory, we're not crossing the border."

The U.S. already has supplied Ukraine with lightweight counter-mortar radar systems, night-vision gear, body armor and vehicles.

U.S. Vice President Joe Biden planned to meet with Merkel and Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko this weekend in Munich to discuss the need to impose additional costs on Russia and boost Ukraine's economy, according to a White House phone briefing for reporters on Wednesday. Merkel has rejected calls to send weapons.

The U.S. is reevaluating its security assistance in light of the escalation in fighting and Russia's significant resupply of weapons to the separatists, according to a U.S. official previewing Biden's trip. The administration's goal remains to find a diplomatic resolution to the conflict because a military one isn't in the offing, said the official, who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity.

While Ukraine, the U.S. and their NATO and European Union allies say there's ample evidence that Russia is providing military equipment and even troops to the separatists, Putin's government denies it.

The case for lethal aid was pressed this week by a group of former American diplomats and national security officials, including former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Steven Pifer, former U.S. representative to NATO Ivo Daalder, former Under Secretary of Defense Michele Flournoy, and retired Admiral James Stavridis, who served as NATO's top military commander.

In Congress, a bipartisan group of 15 senators sent Obama a letter Tuesday saying that Russia aggression in Ukraine "must not be allowed to succeed. We believe it is time to increase military assistance to Ukraine and urge the U.S. and NATO to move quickly."

The lawmakers called for sending "defensive" military equipment to "thwart Putin's naked aggression."

"Defensive military assistance such as antitank weapons, counter-battery radars, armored Humvees, and training are all critical to ensuring Ukraine has the capabilities to defend its territory and its citizens," they said.

It's not clear that Putin would draw distinctions about what qualifies as defensive weapons. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on Monday accused Ukraine of opting for a purely military solution to the conflict, with U.S. support, and urged direct talks between Kiev and the rebels.

Sending lethal aid risks an arms race that Ukraine couldn't win, said Sean Kay, a professor of politics and international studies at Ohio Wesleyan University.

"Advancing weapons into Ukraine is precisely the kind of evidence that Putin wrongly says justifies his illegal actions," Kay wrote in a commentary this week. "There is every reason to believe that Russia would respond not with negotiation, but perhaps with more, and even deadlier, war."

Obama remains unconvinced that providing anything more than non-lethal aid or limited and purely defensive weapons is wise, said an administration official familiar with the thinking of the president and White House national security aides.

Some administration officials argue that sending arms to Ukraine would destroy rather than promote attempts to devise a political solution, according to the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal policy deliberations.

That said, the administration's public line is an attempt to mollify both camps by weighing some increased aid without defining what's being considered, the official said.

Any dramatic, public step to arm the Ukrainians would risk fracturing the fragile unity between the U.S. and its allies in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and in the EU at a time when unity is essential to maintaining or tightening economic sanctions on Russia, the official said. Sanctions, whose impact is multiplied by falling crude oil prices, are starting to exact a heavy toll on Russia's economy and to separate Putin from some of his longtime allies.

The official also said it would take many months to decide on what aid to send, prepare and deliver it and train Ukrainian units to use it. One option, the official said, would be to provide Ukraine with some Soviet-made weapons from a CIA warehouse in North Carolina. The U.S. has done that in other countries accustomed to using that equipment, which generally is less complex and easier to maintain than American-made weaponry.

Sen. Angus King, an independent from Maine, said at Carter's confirmation hearing Wednesday that he worries about the risk of setting off an "escalation situation" even though he favors sending military aid.

"In strategy and working on these international problems, you always have to ask yourself not the next step but what's the step after that," Carter replied. "As I consider what kinds of assistance we may give to the Ukrainian military, one does need to think two and even three steps ahead on this matter."

Reported with assistance from David Lerman, John Walcott, Brian Wingfield and Nicole Gaouette in Washington, Tony Halpin in Moscow, Patrick Donahue in Berlin and Mark Deen in Paris.

Brian Williams' false Iraq statements now full-blown crisis at NBC

NEW YORK (Tribune Content Agency) — Brian Williams’ false statements regarding his experience on a military helicopter during the 2003 invasion of Iraq have turned into a full-blown crisis.

NBC News has launched an internal investigation into the anchor’s accounts of his travels in Iraq, which have come under attack from Iraq War veterans and are spurring a growing chorus from media critics who say his journalistic credibility has been seriously undermined. Williams has said in recent years that he was in a Chinook helicopter that was brought down by grenade and small arms fire, even though his original 2003 reporting said it was another helicopter in the convoy that was hit.

NBC News President Deborah Turness said an internal investigation is underway.

“We have a team dedicated to gathering the facts to help us make sense of all that has happened,” she said in a statement. An NBC News executive who was not authorized to speak publicly told the Los Angeles Times that Richard Esposito — the head of the news division investigations unit — is overseeing the inquiry.

The controversy has now extended to Williams’ reporting in New Orleans in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in 2006. The executive also said possible contradictions that have surfaced in that coverage will be examined as well.

If the investigation demonstrates a pattern of Williams straying from the facts, the anchor’s status could be in jeopardy. NBC News executives are discussing possible scenarios if Williams has to take a leave of absence or resign from “NBC Nightly News,” the executive told the Times.

Williams, who perpetuated the erroneous version of the Iraq incident on “NBC Nightly News” and in a 2013 interview on “The Late Show with David Letterman,” apologized for the mistake on the air Wednesday, and again before news division staffers on Friday afternoon. But his statements have failed to alleviate the criticism and comments from members of the crew on the helicopter that was attacked that day who contradict Williams’ account.

One pilot who verified parts of Williams’ story to CNN on Thursday has recanted his story, saying his memory of the events is unclear.

The pilot, Richard Krell, told CNN in an interview Thursday that he was flying the helicopter that Williams was on in Iraq in 2003 — a helicopter the anchor initially claimed was forced down by enemy fire. Krell contradicted Williams’ claims about being aboard the helicopter that was forced down, but said Williams had been there during the time of the attack.

Krell said the three helicopters in the formation, which included the one Williams was on, came under “small arms fire.”

But on Friday morning, in a text to CNN reporter Brian Stelter, Krell seemed to question his own account after other helicopter pilots told The New York Times that they had piloted Williams’ helicopter and did not recall their convoy coming under fire.

“ … the information I gave you was true based on my memories, but at this point I am questioning my memories,” Krell said, according to CNN.

Times staff writer Brittny Mejia contributed to this report.

©2015 Los Angeles Times. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Islamic State group claims US hostage killed in Jordan airstrike

BEIRUT — Islamic State extremists claimed that an American woman held hostage by the group was killed Friday in a Jordanian airstrike in northern Syria, but the government of Jordan dismissed the statement as "criminal propaganda" and the U.S. said it had not seen any evidence to corroborate the report.

The woman was identified as Kayla Jean Mueller, an American who went to Syria to do aid work, but there was no independent verification of the militants' claim. The statement appeared on a militant website commonly used by the group and was also distributed by Islamic State-affiliated Twitter users.

The 26-year-old Mueller, of Prescott, Ariz., is the only known remaining U.S. hostage held by the Islamic State group.

If the death is confirmed, she would be the fourth American to die while being held by Islamic State militants. Three other Americans — journalists James Foley and Steven Sotloff, and aid worker Peter Kassig — were beheaded by the group.

Journalist Austin Tice, of Houston, Texas, disappeared in August 2012 while covering Syria's civil war. It's not clear what entity is holding him, but it is not thought to be the Islamic State group or the Syrian government, his family has said.

The announcement was the second time this week that extremists announced the death of a hostage. They released a video Tuesday showing Jordanian air force Lt. Muath al-Kaseasbeh, also 26, being burned to death in a cage in gruesome images that caused outrage in Jordan and the rest of the region.

Al-Kaseasbeh, whose F-16 came down in December while conducting airstrikes as part of a campaign against the militants by a U.S.-led coalition, was thought to have been killed in early January.

Friday's statement said Mueller was killed in the militants' stronghold of Raqqa in northern Syria during Muslim prayers — which usually take place around midday — in airstrikes that targeted "the same location for more than an hour."

It published photos purportedly of the bombed site, showing a severely damaged three-story building, but offered no proof or images of Mueller.

The statement said no Islamic State militants were killed in the airstrikes, raising further questions about the veracity of the claim.

Jordanian government spokesman Mohammed al-Momani said it was investigating.

"But as a first reaction, we think it's illogical and we are highly skeptical about it. How could they identify a Jordanian warplane ... in the sky? What was the American lady doing in a weapons warehouse?" al-Momani said.

"It's part of their criminal propaganda. They have lied that our pilot is alive and tried to negotiate, claiming he is alive while they had killed him weeks before," he added.

American officials said they also were looking into the report.

Bernadette Meehan, the spokeswoman for President Barack Obama's National Security Council, said the White House has "not at this time seen any evidence that corroborates" the claim."

"We are obviously deeply concerned by these reports," she added.

A U.S. official said coalition aircraft did conduct bombing near Raqqa on Friday, but had nothing to confirm the claim that the American captive was killed in the airstrike. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he wasn't authorized to discuss the issue with reporters.

White House spokesman Eric Schultz told reporters the U.S. coordinates with the Jordanian air force as they fly airstrikes. He wouldn't say whether the U.S. was aware of the hostage's location.

Mueller had been working in Turkey assisting Syrian refugees, according to a 2013 article in The Daily Courier, her hometown newspaper. She told the paper that she was drawn to help with the situation in Syria.

"For as long as I live, I will not let this suffering be normal," she said. "It's important to stop and realize what we have, why we have it and how privileged we are. And from that place, start caring and get a lot done."

According to the newspaper, Mueller had been working with the humanitarian aid agency Support to Life, as well as a local organization that helped female Syrian refugees develop skills.

A 2007 article about Mueller from the same newspaper said she was a student at Northern Arizona University and was active in the Save Darfur Coalition. A statement from the office of Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said Mueller graduated in 2009 and had worked to help people in need in India, Israel, the Palestinian territories and in Arizona.

On Sunday, Obama said the U.S. was "deploying all the assets that we can" to find Mueller.

"We are in very close contact with the family trying to keep them updated," he said in an interview with NBC's "Today" show. "Obviously this is something that is heart-breaking for the family, and we want to make sure we do anything we can to make sure that any American citizen is rescued from this situation."

Mueller's identity had not been disclosed until now out of fears for her safety.

Jordan has stepped up its attacks against the Islamic State group after the extremists announced they had put al-Kasaesbeh to death.

The Syrian government said Thursday that dozens of Jordanian fighter jets had bombed Islamic State training centers and weapons storage sites. It did not say where the attacks occurred.

The Jordanian military said its warplanes carried out a series of attacks Friday and "destroyed the targets and returned safely." It did not elaborate.

Activists who monitor the Syrian conflict from inside the country said coalition planes hit several targets on the edges and outskirts of Raqqa in quick succession.

A Raqqa-based collective of anti-Islamic State activists known as "Raqqa is Being Slaughtered Silently" said the planes targeted multiple Islamic State positions and headquarters in the western and eastern countryside of Raqqa, sending up columns of smoke. Explosions could be heard in the city. The collective said there were no recorded civilian casualties and did not mention any jihadi casualties.

The Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said dozens of Islamic State members were killed in coalition airstrikes that targeted a tank and vehicle depot in the area of al-Madajen and at least six other militant positions, including a training camp and a prison.

Associated Press writers Julie Pace and National Security writer Robert Burns in Washington, and Karin Laub in Amman, Jordan, contributed to this report.

Soldiers offer eyewitness accounts of the Brian Williams' Chinook story

NBC News anchor Brian Williams has told a war story over the years since the 2003 invasion of Iraq. It grew to where he was claiming to be on a Chinook helicopter that was forced down after taking rocket-propelled grenade and small-arms fire.

In his on-air apology Wednesday, he backed off that, but said that he “was instead in a following aircraft.”

Soldiers who were in two Chinook companies say he was not in, nor ever near, a helicopter that was being fired upon:

“I can say with 100 percent certainty that no NBC reporters were on any of the aircraft.”

— Jerry Pearman, a veteran who was a lieutenant colonel and the mission commander when one of the three Chinooks in Big Windy Company came under rocket and small-arms fire

“This is etched pretty well into my brain … We had just entered the battle so that was Day 1 for us.”

— Pearman

“Over the years it faded and then to see it last week it was I can’t believe [Williams] is still telling this false narrative … He was definitely on those other aircraft.”

— Mike O’Keeffe, veteran who was the door gunner on the Big Windy Company Chinook hit by rocket-propelled grenades and small-arms fire

“It is not about the glory or anything. There are people who did things that day … To go out and talk like you were on that aircraft — and [Williams] wasn’t — and not acknowledge what that [Chinook] pilot did [to keep the crew safe] is horrible.”

— O’Keeffe

“From my knowledge, [Williams] was riding on another flight of Chinooks that were transporting bridge parts.”

— Lance Reynolds, veteran who was the flight engineer on the Big Windy Company Chinook hit by rocket-propelled grenades and small-arms fire

“When we saw Brian Williams, we were miles and miles away from where the engagement happened.”

— Reynolds

“Like I said, it was at least a half hour later [after the attacked helicopter’s emergency landing] … a ramp opened and I remembered seeing news crews coming out of the Chinook that just landed.”

— Reynolds

“There was no need to polish the story by saying, ‘I was on the aircraft that took fire.’ I don’t know how he could have mistaken that … I don’t think it was a mistake he made at the moment.”

— Reynolds

“It was something personal for us that was kind of life-changing for me. I’ve known how lucky I was to survive it. It felt like a personal experience that someone else wanted to participate in and didn’t deserve to participate in.”

— Reynolds

“I can see how it would be appealing for him to add a little to the story. I’m sure it sounded good when he pitched it.”

— Reynolds

“They [Williams and the NBC crew] recorded everything we were hearing about this aircraft being shot down.”

— Sgt. 1st Class Joseph Miller, a Chinook platoon sergeant in Germany who was the flight engineer on the helicopter carrying Williams and the NBC crew

“Soon after we passed them [the three Chinooks in Big Windy Company] they got shot down.”

— David Luke, a veteran who was a flight engineer on one of the Hercules Company helicopters flying on the mission carrying Williams and NBC

“I have a feeling that [Williams] didn’t have a choice [but to apologize] … I don’t think it would ever of happened [otherwise]. He would have told that war story until he was on his dying bed.”

— Luke

“I think it wasn’t enough for [Williams] and he needed to put a little more of a twist on it.”

— Luke

“When we arrived at Objective Rams, [there was] a CH-47 from the “Big Windy” unit out of Germany. After landing, we learned that the parked aircraft had received small-arms fire and had been hit with an RPG ... We were not flying ‘behind’ them. Our missions were completely separate.”

— Chris Simeone, pilot in command of the flight that carried Brian Williams, in an Op-Ed in the New York Post

tritten.travis@stripes.com

Twitter: @Travis_Tritten

South Korea presses diplomatic offensive with North

SEOUL, South Korea — Even as the U.S. and South Korea prepare for their annual spring war games, a diplomatic offensive is taking place as Seoul presses for talks with the North and outlines steps it hopes will lead to reunification.

Last week, South Korea announced a series of measures it plans to undertake this year to increase cooperation with the North and lay the groundwork for the two Koreas to reunite. The measures include events to mark the 70th anniversary of the Korean peninsula’s liberation from Japanese rule, increased class time on “unification education” and trial runs of an inter-Korean and trans-continental railway.

President Park Geun-hye also has urged the North to agree to reunions around the Feb. 19 Lunar New Year’s holiday for family members separated since the 1950-53 Korean War.

While reunification is one of Park’s signature policy initiatives, some experts question whether her call for the first inter-Korean summit since 2007 is aimed more at Pyongyang or at South Korean voters.

Kim Joon Hyung, a professor of international politics at Handong Global University in Pohang, said Park’s focus on reunification as she enters her third year in office may be designed to counteract her declining approval rating and growing lame-duck status. South Korean presidents serve only a single five-year term.

“People here are very interested in reunification, so her appeals for reunification may be welcomed,” he said, adding that he expects Park’s calls for dialogue to go nowhere.

There are big questions about how a peaceful reunification could occur without major concessions by both sides. The two countries have drifted apart for the last 60 years, and their political and economic systems are almost polar opposites.

Asked if the North’s vision for reunification is the same as the South’s, a Ministry of Unification spokesperson said, “We can’t grasp what North Korea wants.”

Yang Mu-jin, a political science professor at the University of North Korean Studies in Seoul, believes Pyongyang is considering dialogue with Seoul, not to leverage aid or gain official recognition as a nuclear power, as some have speculated, but in hopes of using talks as a stepping stone to improve relations with other players in the region — including China and the U.S. — which would help stabilize Kim’s rule.

Ultimately, Yang doesn’t expect inter-Korean talks to take place, because neither side — a North Korea that claims to want unity under its own brand of communism, and a South Korea that wants to reunify under a liberal democratic system — can budge from its position.

Meanwhile, the joint Foal Eagle and Key Resolve exercises are scheduled to begin in early March. The U.S. and South Korea call them defensive in nature, but the North blasts them acts of war and typically levies a barrage of threats at the two countries during that period.

During last year’s exercises, the North conducted several rocket and ballistic missile launches, and the two Koreas fired hundreds of shells across their disputed maritime border. In 2013, a series of North Korean threats during the spring exercises heightened tensions to the point that the U.S. flew nuclear-capable B-52s over the peninsula on a practice mission. The U.S. beefed up its missile defense systems and conducted other shows of force that included F-22 fighters and a nuclear attack sub, while South Korea warned it would respond with force to even a small provocation

Earlier this month, the North offered to halt its nuclear testing in exchange for cancellation of the drills, an offer that analysts say the allies almost certainly will reject and which Washington called a veiled threat.

Still, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, who succeeded his father and grandfather, has left the door open for a possible summit, floating the idea in his annual New Year’s address.

“I think the North is pretty serious, but they don’t want to look like they’re being taken to the cleaners or pushed there,” said David Garretson, a professor of international relations at the University of Maryland University College in Seoul, who said backchannel discussions on a summit may be taking place.

He noted that the South Korean government has pushed activist groups to stop launches of balloons carrying anti-North Korean materials, including DVDs, over the border, a particular irritant to Pyongyang.

Pyongyang’s apparent willingness to consider talks may be tied to the third anniversary last month of Kim Jong Il’s death, a symbolic marker that may have freed his son to create his own policy agenda rather than follow in his footsteps.

“He can reach out on his own without insulting his father in terms of his death,” Garretson said. “Basically, he can take his own initiatives and do his own thing, which is related to the fact that he’s got pretty solid control right now.”

Pyongyang said recently it wants reunification this year, though it has not offered details. On Sunday, the North called for the South to create conditions for dialogue, claiming the upcoming joint exercises and launching of anti-Kim leaflets across the Demilitarized Zone were hampering things, according to South Korea’s Yonhap News.

The National Defense Commission statement, posted on the North’s official Korean Central News Agency’s website, warned that it would “resolutely punish” the South if Seoul did not did not give in to the North’s conditions for talks.

Also on Sunday, a KCNA statement criticized President Barack Obama for saying the North’s government would someday collapse.

“The recent wild remarks made by Obama are nothing but a poor grumble of a loser driven into a tight corner in the all-out stand-off with the DPRK,” Yonhap quoted KCNA as saying.

rowland.ashley@stripes.com

chang.yookyong@stripes.com

A-10 warplane tops list for friendly fire deaths

WASHINGTON (Tribune News Service) — The Air Force A-10 attack jet has killed more U.S. troops in friendly fire incidents and more Afghan civilians than any other aircraft flown by the U.S. military, according to data declassified and obtained by USA TODAY.

The close-air-support aircraft has been embroiled in a battle over its survival between hawks on Capitol Hill and the Air Force. To Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and others, the jet represents an Air Force commitment to troops engaged in ground combat. To the Pentagon, it's a Cold War relic with no future in a time of tight budgets.

Wednesday, Ashton Carter, President Obama's choice to be Defense secretary, was drawn into the fight to kill or save the Warthog, as it is known. Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., a member of the Armed Services Committee, wrested a commitment from Carter to meet with an association of troops and veterans who support the jet.

The A-10 can strike fear in an enemy. Its 30mm cannon can fire as many as 3,900 rounds of depleted uranium shells per minute at targets posing a threat to U.S. ground troops, many of them from the Army. Those bursts can shred the armor on a tank. They can also hit unintended targets.

Since 2001, the A-10 has been involved in four friendly fire incidents that killed 10 U.S. troops. The next highest is the B-1B bomber, which killed five soldiers last year in one incident. Friendly fire deaths are exceptionally rare. There have been 45 total friendly fire incidents out of about 140,000 missions flown by the Air Force, Navy and Marines.

The A-10 is the aircraft responsible for the most civilian deaths in Afghanistan since 2010, when data on those deaths started to be collected. Thirty-five people have been killed compared with 19 killed by the Harrier, data show.

In close-air-support missions in which weapons were dropped in Afghanistan, the A-10 has a slightly lower percentage of civilian casualty incidents per missions flown than B-1 bombers or F-16 fighters. More than 99% of the missions in which warplanes attack enemy ground fighters avoid harm to U.S. troops or civilians.

The Air Force would like to phase out the A-10 by 2019, but pilots still use it. Since August, it has flown 14% of the missions against militants from the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, or ISIL.

Its limited range and speed have prevented it from taking part in strikes against Kobani, a senior Air Force official said. The siege on the city by ISIL militants was lifted last week after months of airstrikes, many by the B-1, whose range, speed and payload far exceed the A-10.

The data do not prove the A-10 is poorly suited to its mission, according to Dustin Walker, a spokesman for the Senate Armed Services Committee. "While any loss of life is a great tragedy, in the context of tens of thousands of Air Force combat missions, this data is inconclusive and statistically insignificant to determining which weapon system is most effective in its primary mission, or at avoiding civilian casualties or friendly-fire incidents," Walker said.

The Air Force wants to retire the A-10 and use some of the $4.2 billion savings over five years to pay for crews to maintain the F-35, a costly new warplane that can perform multiple missions, from close-air support to attacking enemy fighters.

"The A-10 has been in service for 40-plus years," said Lt. Col. Chris Karns, an Air Force spokesman. "While the A-10 and its airmen have a long and proud history, fiscal realities and the significant cost savings associated with A-10 divestment are resulting in tough decisions."

The debate continues about the jet's value. Four senior-level Army and Air Force officers spoke to USA TODAY on condition of anonymity because the A-10 issue has become politically charged and the data are sensitive.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, where insurgents blend with average people, avoiding civilian casualties is a paramount goal. Incidents have been used as propaganda by insurgents or have driven a wedge between the U.S. effort and the Afghan government.

"First, you better do no harm," a senior Army officer told USA TODAY. The officer commanded at high levels in Iraq and Afghanistan and, like other senior officers, has seen the A-10s work up close. "I didn't want any stinkin' A-10s flying unless they were going to drop a (satellite-guided bomb) or other precision-guided munition."

Two other senior Army officers, both with combat command experience in Iraq and Afghanistan in the past two years, had more charitable views of the A-10. Both said they understood that automatic budget cuts known as sequestration, which occurred two years ago and are scheduled again for October, forced the Air Force to make tough choices. The sight of the slow-moving jet above a battlefield and the guttural sound of its gun can reassure troops facing enemy fire, they said.

For pilots and ground troops, "the most important thing is for the (warplane) to get there and provide support," said Brig. Gen. Patrick Malackowski, a former A-10 pilot and expert on close air support. "If time is an issue and you need to get there quickly, then the A-10 is not the preferred platform."

The best aircraft for a mission depends on the threat, Malackowski said. All of the aircraft the Air Force uses for close air support work well, he said.

The Project on Government Oversight, a non-partisan group, wants the Air Force to release more data about the performance of aircraft in close-air-support missions, said Mandy Smithberger, a military analyst with the group. POGO would like to see the Government Accountability Office conduct an audit to determine which plane is superior for close air support.

"It's not about not liking or not wanting the A-10," Gen. Mark Welsh, the Air Force chief of staff, said. "It's about some very tough decisions that we have to make to recapitalize an Air Force for the threat 10 years from now."

———

©2015 USA Today

Visit USA Today at www.usatoday.com

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC

Family of journalist and former Marine missing in Syria campaigns anew for return

WASHINGTON (Tribune Content Agency) — With blindfolds to symbolize the plight of captives, the parents of missing journalist Austin Tice on Thursday launched a campaign to raise awareness of his ordeal and to push for reforms to U.S. hostage policies.

Marc and Debra Tice, together with the journalist advocacy group Reporters Without Borders, said the goal of the renewed campaign is to intensify pressure, through social media and other publicity, on both the “Syrian entity” holding their son and on the Obama administration to win his freedom.

Tice disappeared near Damascus in August 2012. His parents said they’ve been assured that he’s alive and not with the Islamic State militant group, though they declined to elaborate.

“We’ve come to the realization that in Austin’s case we really have two entities best placed to bring him home — one is the United States government and one is the Syrian government,” Marc Tice told a news conference at the National Press Club in Washington.

The new campaign encourages people to post photos of themselves on social media, wearing blindfolds, with the hashtag #freeaustintice. Starting the week of Feb. 16, digital banners calling for his release will appear on more than 250 news sites in a project Reporters Without Borders called “a first in U.S. media history.” McClatchy is participating in the project.

“We’re starting now, and we’re going loud,” Debra Tice said.

The Tices said they spent more than three hours Monday with the government officials tasked with reviewing U.S. hostage policies, which families of captives have complained are too inflexible and disjointed to be successful. The Tices said they have been told that 70 to 80 people were working on that review.

But the frustrations, Debra Tice said, have been many: A U.S. government that doesn’t share information with her or seemingly among its own departments. An FBI that seems interested in finding out what she knows, but doesn’t tell her what it knows. An administration that refuses to talk to the Syrian government, even though both governments have assured her they want to see her son returned home.

“They have this common interest but they won’t talk to one another,” Debra Tice said before the news conference. “How about one chat? A single-agenda meeting?”

Later, she added, “I don’t believe in not speaking. How is that an effective form of diplomacy?”

Austin Tice’s satellite phone, which he used to communicate with his editors at McClatchy and at The Washington Post and his family in Houston, last transmitted in the midafternoon Syrian time on Aug. 13, 2012. The Tices think their son was kidnapped the next day as he began a trip that was to take him from south of Damascus, where he had been reporting for several weeks, to Beirut, the Lebanese capital.

The only news of him since has been a video that was posted to YouTube on Sept. 26, 2012. It shows an obviously distraught Tice, blindfolded, being led up a hillside by his captors. The video breaks off as he’s heard speaking fractured Arabic, then saying, “Jesus. Oh, Jesus.”

Since that video was posted, the Tices have traveled to Beirut twice in hopes of making contact with someone who can help them win their son’s release. They’ve given television and newspaper interviews. They’ve spent uncounted hours with officials of several countries. They’ve met repeatedly with the FBI agents assigned to investigate Austin’s kidnapping. Debra Tice described her relationship with the FBI as “acrimonious, in a middle-school kind of way.”

That’s been a theme of families of Americans who have been kidnapped in Syria, and it was echoed Wednesday by Diane Foley, whose son, journalist James Foley, was taken captive four months after Austin Tice and whose beheading by the Islamic State group was recorded in a video posted online Aug. 19. Foley and the Tices joined in a panel discussion on American hostages held at the Newseum.

“I found out when Jim was killed from a hysterical AP reporter,” Diane Foley said Wednesday. “I never heard from the government until the president went on TV.”

She voiced other frustrations with the way the government had dealt with her son’s case, which began when he failed to return from Syria on Nov. 22, 2012. It was Thanksgiving Day.

“Our FBI knew where Jim was after six months,” she said, but the U.S. government was unwilling to do anything to win his release from his Islamist captors.

She said her son’s captors had been in regular contact for a month, making demands for his release. The FBI declined to communicate with them, she said, and told the Foleys they would have to do the negotiations. “But we’re not negotiators,” she said. The FBI’s refusal to engage angered the captors, she said.

The FBI couldn’t immediately be reached for comment.

“It doesn’t make sense to me that no one would talk to Jim’s captors,” she said, adding, “Our government didn’t engage at a high-enough level.”

President Barack Obama has ordered a review of government hostage policy, and Debra Tice said she had met Monday with the group that’s undertaking the review. The review is being led by the government’s National Counterterrorism Center, and Doug Frantz, the assistant secretary of state for public affairs, who also spoke Wednesday at the Newseum, said the government wanted to do better.

The panel members are drawn from across the government and are engaged full time in the review, Frantz said, which is led by a three-star general. The group gathers twice a week for six hours to discuss its progress. It has contacted 83 hostages or family members and 20 have come forward to be interviewed, he said.

One issue not on the table, though, is paying ransom, the way several European journalists held by the Islamic State have won their freedom. “If we pay ransom, we put targets on the back of every American,” Frantz said.

Debra Tice disagreed. “When you’re looking at your primary goal is to get your hostage home, every option should be on the table,” she said.

The Tices said the officials told them the review should be complete by this spring, perhaps as early as March. If the government shuts them out of the reform process, Debra Tice said, “we are the pavement pounders and the door knockers, and we will be back.”

©2015 McClatchy Washington Bureau. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

In final video, Jordanian pilot said he was shot down, contradicting US account

IRBIL, Iraq (Tribune Content Agency) — The 22-minute video released Tuesday by the Islamic State depicting the brutal death by immolation of a captured Jordanian pilot includes a long and detailed account by Lt. Muath al-Kaseasbeh of his last mission as well as a general outline of the contributions of Arab countries to the U.S.-led anti-Islamic State coalition.

In the video, al-Kaseasbeh said he ejected from his aircraft over Raqqa, Syria, after it was hit by anti-aircraft fire, disabling his F-16’s single engine. That detail contradicts American statements at the time, which said there was no evidence his plane had been shot down.

It is difficult to judge the accuracy of al-Kaseasbeh’s statements. He was no doubt speaking under duress, dressed in the orange jumpsuit that has become the hallmark of prisoners the Islamic State is about to put to death and with an obvious bruise under his left eye. But his account of the mission is consistent with what is known about Arab militaries generally and conforms to military practice. If accurate, it would be the first detailed accounting of an Arab bombing mission over Syria.

Col. Patrick S. Ryder, a spokesman for U.S. Central Command, which oversees operations in Iraq and Syria, declined in an email to discuss al-Kaseasbeh’s assertions, saying the Jordanians were still investigating the cause of his aircraft’s crash and “it therefore would be inappropriate to discuss specific details.” The Pentagon did not respond to a request for comment.

Arab participation in the campaign against the Islamic State has been controversial, with several of the participants requesting that the United States not release information about their aircrafts’ participation in bombing missions. As a result, Centcom’s daily summaries of airstrikes no longer include the role of Arab aircraft.

But al-Kaseasbeh’s account suggests that Arab nations have been taking a robust role in the campaign over Syria, though at least one country, the United Arab Emirates, reportedly suspended its combat missions after al-Kaseasbeh’s plane went down. The New York Times reported this week that the UAE stopped flying missions after al-Kaseasbeh was taken prisoner by the Islamic State Dec. 24 because it did not believe the U.S. had stationed search-and- rescue aircraft near enough to the combat zone to rescue downed pilots.

Reporting on the video has focused primarily on al-Kaseasbeh’s horrific death — confined to a cage, his orange jumpsuit soaked in a flammable liquid, and set aflame, a sequence that consumes approximately two minutes and 26 seconds.

The vast majority of the video, however, is devoted to making the case that al-Kaseasbeh deserved his fate. In addition to al-Kaseasbeh’s nearly nine-minute account of his last mission and the contributions of Arab nations to the coalition, the video includes two minutes in which al-Kaseasbeh is shown walking through bombed-out structures, interspersed with scenes of rescuers pulling burned bodies from under rubble. The video closes with the names of Jordanian air force pilots under a label that reads “Wanted Dead.”

Unlike many previous videos, this one contained no English subtitles, making clear it was intended for an Arabic-speaking audience.

In al-Kaseasbeh’s account, he was briefed on his mission at 4 p.m. Dec. 23. He said the aircraft took off the next day from Muwaffaq Salti air base, a facility in the Zarqa governorate of eastern Jordan. The aircraft were refueled in the air at 7:55 a.m. before turning toward their target in Raqqa, the Islamic State’s de facto capital.

In addition to his aircraft, al-Kaseasbeh said the contingent of planes included a Saudi Arabian F-15, an F-16 from the United Arab Emirates and a Moroccan F-16. Those planes made up a “sweeper” team assigned to clear the approaches to the designated targets. The targets themselves were to be bombed by a pair of more advanced aircraft from Morocco.

“Then two up-to-date Moroccan planes would bomb the targets assigned to them using laser technology and laser-directed GBU bombs. After that, Saudi and Emirati planes would intervene to do secondary cleanup,” he said. GBU stands for “guided bomb unit.”

“After the process of entering was completed, I heard the sound of one anti-aircraft weapon hitting my plane, and 1st Lt. Saddam Mardini told me that there was fire coming out of the opening of the engine. I checked the instruments and discovered that the engine had broken down and a fire had started. The plane started to veer off course so I ejected and fell in the river.”

He said he remained fastened into his seat until Islamic State fighters “imprisoned me.”

The rest of his detailed explanation of how the operations work is consistent with widely known facts: That targets are chosen and operations coordinated from a central command center in Qatar, where the U.S. has long coordinated Middle East military operations.

“As for the countries that share the strikes against the Islamic State whether in Iraq or Syria, I will speak in particular about Arab states,” al-Kaseasbeh said, before breaking down the types of planes used by the Arab air forces. “These are Jordan, Emirates, Saudi, Qatar, Oman, Bahrain and Morocco: Jordan is participating with F-16s, Emirates uses F-16s that can use lasers to direct accurate bombs, Kuwait flies mid-air tankers for refueling, Bahrain uses the F-16, the Saudis use F-15s and modern F-16s with laser-guided weapons and the first participation of Morocco was by laser-equipped F-16s.”

He added that most missions were flown from Jordanian air bases as well as bases in Qatar and Oman. He said midair refueling was provided by Kuwaiti tankers.

“As for the foreign planes, especially the American and the French, they fly from Jordanian bases especially from Muwaffaq Salti and the base of Emir Hasan,” he said. He also mysteriously referred to American planes flying missions from Turkey, which has so far refused, at least publicly, to allow its bases to be used for anti-Islamic State missions.

Prothero is a McClatchy special correspondent.

©2015 McClatchy Washington Bureau. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

In Japan, some see slain hostages, PM Abe as stirring up trouble

TOKYO — In Japan, where conformity takes precedence over individuality, one of the most important values is to avoid "meiwaku" — causing trouble for others. And sympathy aside, the two Japanese purportedly slain by the Islamic State group are now widely viewed as troublemakers.

So is Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. Many Japanese feel that if the hostages had not ignored warnings against travel to Syria, or if Abe had not showcased Tokyo's support for the multinational coalition against the Islamic State militants, Japan wouldn't have been exposed to this new sense of insecurity and unwelcomed attention from Islamic extremists.

"To be honest, they caused tremendous trouble to the Japanese government and to the Japanese people. In the old days, their parents would have had to commit hara-kiri (ritual suicide) to apologize," said Taeko Sakamoto, a 64-year-old part-time worker, after first expressing sympathy over the deaths of Kenji Goto and Haruna Yukawa.

Sakamoto also sees Abe as part of the problem for not being more mindful of the risks at a time when he had already been pushing to expand Japan's military role, which is limited to its own self-defense under the U.S.-drafted pacifist constitution after its defeat in World War II.

"I don't want Mr. Abe to do anything else that may be seen as provocation, because that's what would put us at a greater risk," Sakamoto said.

Japan until recently had not become directly involved in the violence surrounding Islamic State militants, who now control about a third of Syria and neighboring Iraq. Days after Abe announced during a Middle East trip last month that Japan would give $200 million in non-military aid to support the fight against Islamic State, the militants demanded a $200 million ransom for the two hostages.

The hostage crisis came to a grisly end with news Sunday that Goto, a journalist, had been beheaded by the extremists. The killing of Yukawa was announced earlier.

In the video posted on militant websites that purportedly shows Goto's slaying, a man says, "Abe, because of your reckless decision to take part in an unwinnable war, this knife will not only slaughter Kenji, but will also carry on and cause carnage wherever your people are found. So let the nightmare for Japan begin."

Abe has been adamant about his commitment to fight terrorism as part of an international effort. On Thursday, Japan's lower house, the more powerful of the two parliamentary chambers, unanimously endorsed a resolution condemning the Islamic State group's "beyond dastardly act of terrorism" against the two Japanese nationals.

In the resolution, Japan also vowed to expand humanitarian support for the Middle East and Africa, and to strengthen anti-terrorism efforts with the international community.

Japan's tensions with other countries have been largely limited to its neighbors China and South Korea. The Middle East is an unfamiliar, distant, dangerous place.

"That's where the two men dared to go and that's probably why many people see them causing trouble," said Koichi Nakano, international politics professor at Sophia University in Tokyo.

The public's response to the hostages was chilly from the beginning. Few seemed to sympathize with Yukawa, a 42-year-old gun aficionado and adventurer who was taken hostage in August. Media attention toward his case quickly faded and he was largely forgotten until Jan. 20, when militants made their ransom demand in a video that showed Yukawa and Goto in orange gowns and kneeling beside a masked militant.

Goto's reputation as a veteran journalist whose reports focused on children and refugees in war-torn areas won him more sympathy and small rallies by his friends and other supporters. According to his wife and others who had spoken with him, Goto had gone to Syria late last year to try to save Yukawa.

Still, to address the "meiwaku" problem, both victims' families apologized repeatedly to the government and the people for the "trouble" their sons caused, even after they died.

Just two days after Abe's office put a national flag at half-staff to mourn for the pair, a senior member of his ruling party cast Goto as a troublemaker, not a tragic hero.

Masahiko Komura, vice president of the Liberal Democratic Party, said Wednesday that Goto ignored the government's repeated warnings against his trip to Syria.

"I must say that was reckless courage, not true courage, no matter how high his aspirations might have been," Komura told reporters, reminding them not to cause trouble by following Goto's path.

Criticizing the dead in public is extremely rare in Japan, and Komura's comment reflects how individuals are expected to act in line with the national interest.

When three young Japanese were taken hostage in Iraq and later freed in 2004, they faced nationwide bashing as troublemakers. They had to cover their own medical examinations and part of their chartered flights home.

Some critics accuse the government of promoting the "self-responsibility" idea as a way to shirk its own responsibility to protect Japanese citizens.

"It's a dangerous trend and we must watch," said Taku Sakamoto, a journalist and Middle East expert.

While Abe, his party's lawmakers and other nationalists say the terrorist threat justifies Abe's push for a tougher military posture, others say it is exactly that sort of policy that is putting Japan at greater risk of attack.

"The hostage crisis is causing a tremendous impact on Japanese society, and has polarized views about which direction Japan should go in terms of national security," said Nakano, the professor. "In a way, people saw what could happen under Abe's security policy."

Some Japanese, like Toshihiko Ozeki, a 67-year-old pensioner, say Japan should be strong enough to defend itself and that he supports Abe's push to expand Japan's defense role.

"Mr. Abe has gone a bit too far, trying to make Japan look tough," said a 55-year-old man who would provide only his family name, Arai, because he is afraid of being targeted by the Islamic militants. "We don't want to be seen in that image, and we don't want to have anything to do with combat."

Obama poised to ask Congress for new war authorization

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama is poised in coming days to ask Congress for new authority to use U.S. military force against Islamic State militants, the White House said Thursday. But the top Republican in Congress warned it won't be easy to pass the measure and that it will be up to Obama to rally support from lawmakers and the public.

"His actions are going to be an important part of trying for us to get the votes to actually pass an authorization," Republican House Speaker John Boehner, said Thursday. "This is not going to be an easy lift."

White House spokesman Josh Earnest responded that the administration is dedicated to getting a new authorization with support from Republicans and Democrats. That's even though Obama has argued new authorization isn't legally necessary and has been ordering airstrikes on militant strongholds in Iraq and Syria for months.

"The president believes it sends a very powerful signal to the American people, to our allies, and even to our enemies, that the United States of America is united behind this strategy to degrade and ultimately destroy ISIL," Earnest said, using an acronym for the Islamic State group, "That across branches of government and even across political parties, even in this divided time in our nation's political history, at least, that Democrats and Republicans are committed to this very important task."

Earnest declined to discuss specific provisions being discussed, such as how long the authorization will last, what geographical areas it will cover and whether it will allow for the possibility of ground troops. He said details are still being worked out with lawmakers from both parties, with the hopes of coming up with the authorizations can draw bipartisan support.

But top House Democrat Nancy Pelosi said talks with the administration are focusing on a time frame of three years, while the other issues are still being worked out. Pelosi told journalists it will be a challenge for wary Democrats, the White House, and Republicans seeking a broader use of military force to forge an agreement, but that she ultimately expects one to be reached.

Obama has been relying on congressional authorizations that President George W. Bush used to justify military action after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Critics say the White House's use of post-Sept. 11 congressional authorizations is a legal stretch, at best.

Pelosi said she hopes Congress will repeal the 2002 congressional authorization for the war in Iraq but retain the 2001 authorization for military action in Afghanistan. Earnest said the White House also supports repeal of the Iraq authorization replaced by the new authorization.

The developments come after Islamic militants released a grisly video of the murder of a Jordanian Air Force pilot by burning him alive. Pelosi also said that the U.S. should "move quickly" to steer military aid to Jordan, which has begun a stepped-up campaign against the militants, including a series of air strikes in Syria.

Associated Press writer Deb Riechmann contributed to this report.

Brian Williams' apology draws mixed reviews from mission vets

WASHINGTON — Apologies by NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams for a false claim of being on a helicopter forced down by Iraqi rocket fire in 2003 satisfied some soldiers who were there but left a few insisting that details were still misrepresented.

Williams admitted on air Wednesday that he was not aboard a Chinook struck by hostile fire on a flight from Kuwait in March 2003, saying instead he was aboard a “following aircraft.”

In a Facebook apology to the soldiers, Williams said, “I was indeed on the Chinook behind the bird that took the RPG.” He blamed the discrepancy on poor memory almost 12 years after the fact.

Since the 2003 incident, Williams has said on different occasions that he “came under fire” and that his helicopter was forced down due to the attack. Former and active-duty soldiers who were on the same mission had said the anchor’s aircraft landed in the Karbala area because of a blinding sandstorm and not hostile fire.

Williams’ admission and his insistence that he had made an innocent mistake drew sharp criticism on social media, which subjected the veteran newsman to enormous ridicule, including posts depicting him in other historical events.

Among those who were part of the mission, reaction was less intense.

“I have a feeling that he didn’t have a choice [but to apologize],” said David Luke, a former soldier and flight engineer with the 159th Aviation Regiment who was aboard a helicopter flying along with the one carrying Williams and his NBC crew.

Luke said he thought the apology came only because soldiers challenged Williams’ version and otherwise, “he would have told that war story until he was on his dying bed.”

Mike O’Keeffe, who was a door gunner on the Chinook hit by RPGs, said he was generally satisfied with the apology and no longer wanted to press the issue by making public comments.

“I understand your interest and very much appreciate you getting the truth out there, but from my perspective, Mr. Williams has been outed and has enough to deal with,” O’Keeffe wrote in an email to Stars and Stripes. “Guess I just don’t want to kick the guy when he is down. Though he wordsmithed his apology to downplay what he did, he did recant and I am satisfied.”

Williams’ admission was an embarrassment for the veteran journalist who has been the face of NBC News since he became anchor for its main news show in 2004. NBC has not said whether he will face discipline for perpetuating a false story.

Despite Williams’ effort to contain the damage, some former soldiers thought there were still discrepancies between his account and their own memory of the events.

Luke said it was “misleading” for Williams to say his aircraft was following the stricken Chinook. Luke told Stars and Stripes that Williams’ Chinook was headed south, back toward Kuwait, when it passed another formation from a separate aviation company flying north.

After the two formations passed each other, Luke’s crew heard on the radio that a northbound aircraft had been hit by RPG and small-arms fire, presumably from gunmen in a white pickup truck they had seen minutes earlier. Soon after the attack, Luke said his helicopter and the one carrying Williams were forced to change course because of the sandstorm and land near a makeshift supply camp — Rams Base — where the stricken helicopter had also put down.

Stars and Stripes compiled its account of what happened to the two helicopter companies that day — one based in Germany and the other in Savannah, Ga. — through interviews with five soldiers who were there, including a mission commander, retired Army officer Jerry Pearman of California who was a lieutenant colonel at the time.

Their account, however, was disputed by another former Chinook pilot, Rich Krell, who told CNN that he was flying Williams’ aircraft during the mission. Krell told CNN that Williams’ plane did suffer minor damage from small-arms fire but did not say the damage was enough to force him to land.

"Yeah, he messed up some things and said some things he shouldn't have,” Krell told CNN, referring to Williams.

Krell’s version was at odds with the recollections of both Luke and Sgt. 1st Class Joseph Miller, who was the flight engineer on the aircraft carrying Williams and his crew. Miller and Luke insisted separately that aircraft in their formation did not take ground fire that day and landed in Iraq only because of the sandstorm, which paralyzed coalition operations for days.

“No, we never came under direct enemy fire to the aircraft,” Miller told Stars and Stripes on Wednesday.

Miller said the NBC crew affixed microphones to a helicopter headset and recorded air traffic from the Chinook that had been hit.

Luke said that after the formation carrying the NBC crew landed at Rams Base, Williams and the soldiers approached the stricken helicopter to ask the crew what had happened.

They all ended up spending two or three days stranded at Rams Base until the sandstorm passed and helicopter flights could resume.

tritten.travis@stripes.com

Twitter: @Travis_Tritten