Don't expect much folks...
Our boy Greg Grant got his hands on the investigation report into the incident at COP Keating and true to form, the Army redacted 90 percent of it.
Here's an example. This is the "Recommendations" page: Keating Recommendations
Granted, this is the recommendation page, but to wholesale redact the entire thing is retarded. Also, notice the only thing left in is the praise for the medical training. So there was nothing else in there like that?
Also, here's another section -- the Findings.
Look at page 9 which asks about intelligence indicators of an attack and synthesis of the info. All redacted...
But in the press release from ISAF, a partial answer is right there: intelligence assessments had become desensitized to reports of massing enemy formations by previous reports that had proved false. So why can that say that in a press release but redact it in the official report?
And this one is good too. Look at page 10 on the above section -- what was the drone/ISR situation for COP Keating? Redacted. But the press release tells us: critical intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance assets which had been supporting COP Keating had been diverted to assist ongoing intense combat operations in other areas.
Hmmm, is the right hand trying to cover up something the left hand doesn't know about?
Don't worry, I'm preparing a FOIA my friends...