Wednesday, May 31, 2006

Murtha's Haditha is coming in November

Please join Jim Robinson & Free Republic in hosting Ms. Irey on Flag Day to discuss her campaign against John Murtha, the economy, our national security, and other issues of your choosing. Questions may be pre-submitted to Free Republic, and Ms. Irey is willing to answer live questions during the thread. Look for more details as June 14th approaches.

hat tip Free

The Truth, The Whole Truth & Nothing But the Truth?

That's what John Murtha statements sounded like. The conviction in his voice made it sound like there could be no doubt about what happened in Haditha nor what should happen to the guilty Marines. But as I suspected, there's more than one side to this story. As Paul Harvey says "Now you're going to hear the rest of the story." Or at least another side to the story than we've heard from Jihad Johnnie Murtha.
Military investigators piecing together what happened in the Iraqi town of Haditha on Nov. 19, when Marines allegedly killed two dozen civilians, have access to video shot by an unmanned drone aircraft that was circling overhead for at least part of that day, military defense lawyers familiar with the case said in interviews.
I've read that UAV's aren't a military asset that get used on anything except high priority operations. That tells me that if UAV's were being used, the military conducting operations thought there was something of substantial value in Haditha.
In addition to video from the drone, investigators have records of radio message traffic between the Marines and a command center, said military defense lawyers who have discussed the investigation with Marines who were at Haditha but who have not yet been formally retained by them.
"There's a ton of information that isn't out there yet," said one lawyer, who, like the others, would speak only on the condition of anonymity because a potential client has not been charged. The radio message traffic, he said, will provide a different view of the incident than has been presented by Rep. John P. Murtha (D-PA) and other members of Congress. For example, he said, contrary to Murtha's account, it will show that the Marines came under small-arms fire after the roadside explosion.
If this radio traffic shows that Marines came under "small-arms fire" right after the IED blast, then that tears a big hole in Murtha's account. That doesn't mean that they reacted properly but it does mean that Murtha's 'briefing' is factually challenged at best. It might also mean that Murtha's account was just a cheap political stunt aimed at criticizing the Bush administration's Iraq policy.
Two of the lawyers said the message traffic will show officers in higher headquarters knew early on that a large number of civilians had been killed and that they did not raise alarms. "The chain of command knew about it," said one, and "the number of deaths was reported" by the commander of the company involved, Capt. Lucas M. McConnell of Kilo Company, 3rd Battalion of the 1st Regiment of the 1st Marine Division.
If this paragraph is accurate, then the next logical question I'd ask is "How likely is it that Marines and their entire chain of command would lie"? This seems shaky at best to me because the tapes talk about gunfire immediately after the IED blast. We also know from past reporting that the IED that exploded was the type that needed detonation.

So let's timeline this:
  • An IED that needs detonation from short range explodes.
  • The Marines come under small-arms fire.
  • The Marines' commanders (a) "knew early on that a large number of civilians had been killed" and (b) "the number of deaths was reported" by the commander of the company involved, Capt. Lucas M. McConnell of Kilo Company.
Murtha's made statements that this was covered up. This report indicates that civilian deaths were reported up the chain of command. That's an odd way to cover something up, isn't it? The only other explanation for Murtha's opinion is that he thinks everyone in the chain of command is covering it up. We haven't seen proof of that at all.

Frankly, I find Murtha's version of events suspect at best. Here's what we know:
  • Murtha hasn't read any of the Marine investigation's reports.
  • There's video- and audio-tape of the attack, something that Murtha didn't bother mentioning.
  • The civilian deaths were reported up the chain of command, something that Murtha infers didn't happen. He said that Marines are covering Haditha up. Color me extremely skeptical of Jihad Johnnie's version of events.
Technorati Tags: , ,

Cross-post at LetFreedomRingBlog

Cross-posted at California Conservative

(topic bumped)

Michelle Malkin takes the gloves off

The queen of the blogosphere and TV pundit, a daily read of myself and many many others, continues with her defense of due process today as we are doing here at Murtha Must Go for our proud soldiers in this latest attempt from Murtha and left to undermine the Iraq and Afghanistan missions at every possible turn.

It is pretty scary and sad that in their hatred for President Bush they are willing to throw our country and it's defenders, military or non military under the bus day after day in order to destroy the very land they live and prosper, just trying to further their political agenda that they can't advance at the ballot boxes. Particularly at moments when the soldiers need us behind them more then ever.

WorldNetDaily: 'Cut and Run' Murtha goes off half-cocked: "Democrat Rep. John 'Cut and Run' Murtha thinks he knows the truth about Haditha – and he has been blabbing it to every last cable-show host that will host him. The loose-lipped former Marine has accused troops of wantonly killing some two dozen civilians, including children, 'in cold blood' in the terrorist stronghold in Iraq last November. There are two ongoing military investigations into the incident itself and the actions of higher-ups in the Haditha aftermath.

Let me repeat that: The investigations are ongoing. Not complete. Official reports aren't expected for several weeks.

I do not know the truth about Haditha. Neither do Murtha and the media outlets calling the alleged massacre a massacre before all the facts are in. It would be helpful if they could handle these grave charges without serving as Al Jazeera satellite offices. GOP Sen. John Warner, who like Murtha also served in the Marines, struck the right tone over the weekend – refusing, unlike Murtha, to render a verdict against the Marines before trial and avoiding Bush Derangement Syndrome, but also taking the allegations very seriously.

I do know this. Children are dead. Other children have been orphaned. There are pictures of bullet holes and bloodied homes. There are evolving stories about what happened last Nov. 19 and serious allegations of a possible cover-up.

I also know this: Lance Cpl. Miguel Terrazas, the Marine who was killed by a roadside IED (improvised explosive device) that day, followed a proud family tradition of military service. He had received a commendation for bravery on his first tour of duty in Iraq in 2004. One of his fellow Marines said Terrazas' body was split in two by the bomb explosion that rocked his Hummer while on patrol that morning. read more
Also posted at chicagoray.blogspot

Tuesday, May 30, 2006

Two more great additions to the MMG blogroll..

Beth from Blue Star Chronicles and JeremayaKovka have applied and received membership in the Murtha Must Go!! blogroll.

Beth is also a blue star parent, and Jeremaya is a writer extraordinaire and a great patriot. Both are bloggers par excellence!

Your click on the above links will be more than worth your while!


In a faux pas of enormous magnitude, I neglected to mention the addition of Heavy Handed Politics to our blogroll family.

A great digest and go-to place of all that is happening in the conservative blogosphere!

Is Murtha the only voice worth listening to regarding Haditha?

Murtha continues to play judge, jury and executioner. So sure is he regarding the guilt of the Marines at the incident at Haditha that he has convinced himself, again, without evidence, that there has been a coverup:
Earlier in the broadcast, Murtha said there was "no doubt" that the accused Marines were guilty, adding that he suspected that a cover-up of their war crimes goes "up the chain of command."
Other equally-qualified officials, such as John Warner, current Armed Services Committee chair, calls for cooler heads to prevail:

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner urged Rep. Jack Murtha on Sunday to stop prejudging allegations that U.S. Marines massacred 24 Iraqi civilians after their convoy was attacked by a IED last November.

Asked about Murtha's claim that Marines executed residents of the village of Haditha "in cold blood," Sen. Warner told ABC's "This Week":

"At this time, particularly on Memorial Day . . . I think we should be calm and reassuring to the American people that the men and women of our armed forces are admirably and professionally conducting their heavy responsibilities."

The top Republican said: "I respect my friend, John Murtha. I also was privileged to wear the Marine uniform. But we've got to let the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the investigation system, proceed before we reach any conclusions on this matter."

But to listen to anyone on the left, one would think that John Murtha's voice is the only voice that mattered.

But Murtha's opponent, Diana Irey, seems to get it:
"My opponent tells the story of this incident as if he was on the ground that fateful day. He somehow had a front row seat when all of the rest of America awaits the results of a monumental investigation, convicting these men without due process," Irey said.

Murtha alleges a coverup by the US military, but has not shown evidence of such a coverup. While making definitive statements about what occurred during the incident, Murtha is insisting on a congressional investigation, while at the same time admitting he never bothered to read the report on the incident released by the Pentagon.
Also from the story:
Mr. Murtha, who claims close ties to top defense officials as a retired Marine colonel and the top-ranking Democrat, said he had not read the Pentagon report because was basing his information on frequent discussions with "the commanders," he said, "people that know what they're talking about." Murtha did not disclose the names of these commanders or their connection to the incident and subsequent investigation.

Reporters have failed to ask Rep. Murtha why he hasn't read a report on which he is commenting, said a Pentagon source.
Gee... I wonder why...

Beth at Blue Star Chronicles has some more interesting background on the Haditha story--one that has a snowball's chance in hell of being covered:

The Party the Marines Spoiled in Haditha

From the Guardian Unlimited

The executions are carried out at dawn on Haqlania bridge, the entrance to Haditha. A small crowd usually turns up to watch even though the killings are filmed and made available on DVD in the market the same afternoon.One of last week’s victims was a young man in a black tracksuit.

Like the others he was left on his belly by the blue iron railings at the bridge’s southern end. His severed head rested on his back, facing Baghdad. Children cheered when they heard that the next day’s spectacle would be a double bill: two decapitations. A man named Watban and his brother had been found guilty of spying…

A three-day visit by a reporter working for the Guardian last week established what neither the Iraqi government nor the US military has admitted: Haditha, a farming town of 90,000 people by the Euphrates river, is an insurgent citadel.That Islamist guerrillas were active in the area was no secret but only now has the extent of their control been revealed…A three-hour drive north from Baghdad, under the nose of an American base, it is a miniature Taliban-like state. Insurgents decide who lives and dies, which salaries get paid, what people wear, what they watch and listen to.The Guardian reporter did not say he worked for a British newspaper. For their own protection interviewees cannot be named.There is no fighting here because there is no one to challenge the Islamists. The police station and municipal offices were destroyed last year and US marines make only fleeting visits every few months.The court caters solely for divorces and marriages. Alleged criminals are punished in the market. The Guardian witnessed a headmaster accused of adultery whipped 190 times with cables. Children laughed as he sobbed and his robe turned crimson.Two men who robbed a foreign exchange shop were splayed on the ground. Masked men stood on their hands while others broke their arms with rocks. The shopkeeper offered the insurgents a reward but they declined.DVDs of beheadings on the bridge are distributed free in the souk. Children prefer them to cartoons. “They should not watch such things,” said one grandfather, but parents appeared not to object. One DVD features a young, blond muscular man who had been disembowelled. He was said to have been a member of a six-strong US sniper team ambushed and killed on August 1. Residents said he had been paraded in town before being executed. (the US army denied that)

Read the whole thing for some intersting insights, including that of an embedded CNN reporter that is incredulous as to the accusations levelled against the Marines.

Another great added to the blogroll...

Linda from Something...and half of something has asked to join the "Murtha Must Go!" blogroll, and we've more than happily accepted her to the ranks. Linda's blog is a mixture of humor and biting political commentary, and she's a tireless advocate for our military and their mission.

Welcome, Linda, to our blogroll!

If you'd like your blog added to the list, drop me a line at psycmeistr#@#fastmail(dot)fm, and I'll add you (and send you the code, as well).

Monday, May 29, 2006

Some great Memorial Day news from Baghdad!

Only a month in Iraq, and my son has saved some lives!

I received word over this past weekend that my son was in a small convoy ahead of the larger convoy, when he noticed two slimeball terrorists laying an IED along a roadway.

He radioed back to the larger convoy, telling them to stay put. He then pursued said scumwads, which led to a firefight. One did get away, but he managed to capture another.

He received a combat patch, and from what I understand he may receive a medal for same.

Good going, Doug!!! You have one proud parent here!!

You keep provin ol Jihad Johnny wrong, son.

(Filed under heroes)


The AP's Douglass Daniel has written two articles on the Haditha incident. Here's a glimpse into both articles:
Said Pace: "This investigation is ongoing. It would be premature for me to judge the outcome." Asked how such a thing could have happened, he replied, "Fortunately, it does not happen very frequently, so there's no way to say historically why something like this might have happened. We'll find out."
Though Gen. Pace didn't think commenting was appropriate, that didn't keep Murtha from playing judge, jury and executioner on ABC's This Week.
"I will not excuse murder, and this is what happened," he said. "This investigation should have been over two or three weeks afterward and it should have been made public and people should have been held responsible for it."
Forgive me but isn't that statement proof that Murtha's 'case' is falling apart? When he first talked about Haditha, he told everyone that "Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them, and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood." How can they be overwhelmed by the pressure of being deployed too long and still be able to intentionally kill someone? Murder carries with it the highest evidentiary hurdle and with good reason.

But that legal hurdle apparently means nothing to Murtha. Is it because he's out to destroy a presidency and win control of Congress? Or is it that he's labored in anonymity all this time in the lower chamber of Congress and now he wants his 15 minutes of fame? Is it because he doesn't care if innocent peoples' reputations are destroyed in his quest for the Chairmanship of the House Armed Services Committee? Is it all of the above?
Murtha said high-level reports he received indicated that no one fired upon the Marines or that there was any military action against the U.S. forces after the initial explosion. Yet the deaths were not seriously investigated until March because an early probe was stifled within days of the incident, he said.
Who gave Murtha these "high-level reports"? Is he willing to name the names of these briefers? Or are they like-minded snitches who hate President Bush as much as Murtha? Are these briefers or are they leakers who want to put out a one-sided version of the Haditha incident? Until there's a name and/or face connected with these 'reports', I won't trust them at all. For all we know, they might be people whose objectivity is questionable.

Here's some of Mr. Douglass' reporting in "Iraq Killings May Hurt War Effort":
The deaths of as many as two dozen Iraqi civilians and an ensuing cover-up threaten to do more harm to U.S. efforts in Iraq than even the Abu Ghraib prison scandal, a prominent congressman and war critic says. "This is the kind of war you have to win the hearts and minds of the people," Rep. John Murtha, (D-PA), said Sunday. "And we're set back every time something like this happens. This is worse than Abu Ghraib."
As I said in my previous comments, I'm not willing to believe Murtha's version of events. He's been badly wrong before, making me question his credibility and motives. Furthermore, aren't Murtha's accusations, if they turn out to be wrong, doing more damage to our winning over the hearts and minds of Iraqis?

Murtha's statements also imply that we aren't winning over Iraqis hearts and minds. I'm not willing to concede that because of all the reports that I've read about how American troops are viewed. Check out Ralph Peters' 'post-Civil War' series to see how Iraqis react to Americans.
A defense official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly, told the AP on Friday that evidence gathered so far strongly indicated that the Haditha killings were unjustified. Early this year, a videotape of the aftermath of the incident, showing the bodies of women and children, was obtained by Time magazine and Arab television stations. The military then undertook another investigation.
People speaking "on condition of anonymity" aren't trustworthy at all. Furthermore, whatever happened to the legal principle that the accused gets to confront and attempt impeaching his accusers before the jury deliberates? It seems, at minimum, that Murtha is tainting the jury pool and violating these Marines' due process rights. If anything, shouldn't that be a source of embarassment for Murtha?

Technorati Tags: , , ,

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog

Sunday, May 28, 2006

Words From A Marine That Knows

As John Murtha continues his personal Memorial Day tribute to the Marines this past weekend, from the Washington ComPost comes this op-ed from a Marine who was a victim of a rush to judgement himself only to be later exonerated.
Mr. Murtha's Rush to Judgment: "A year ago I was charged with two counts of premeditated murder and with other war crimes related to my service in Iraq. My wife and mother sat in a Camp Lejeune courtroom for five days while prosecutors painted me as a monster; then autopsy evidence blew their case out of the water, and the Marine Corps dropped all charges against me ['Marine Officer Cleared in Killing of Two Iraqis,' news story, May 27, 2005].

So I know something about rushing to judgment, which is why I am so disturbed by the remarks of Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) regarding the Haditha incident ['Death Toll Rises in Haditha Attack, GOP Leader Says,' news story, May 20]. Mr. Murtha said, 'Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them, and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood.'

In the United States, we have a civil and military court system that relies on an investigatory and judicial process to make determinations based on evidence. The system is not served by such grand pronouncements of horror and guilt without the accuser even having read the investigative report.

Mr. Murtha's position is particularly suspect when he is quoted by news services as saying that the strain of deployment 'has caused them [the Marines] to crack in situations like this.' Not only is he certain of the Marines' guilt but but he claims to know the cause, which he conveniently attributes to a policy he opposes.

Members of the U.S. military serving in Iraq need more than Mr. Murtha's pseudo-sympathy. They need leaders to stand with them even in the hardest of times. Let the courts decide if these Marines are guilty. They haven't even been charged with a crime yet, so it is premature to presume their guilt -- unless that presumption is tied to a political motive.


Jacksonville, N.C.

The writer served as a Marine enlisted man in the Persian Gulf War and most recently as a platoon commander in Iraq."

Warner to Murtha: Don't Convict Before the Investigation Is Complete

Appearing after John Murtha on AB(DN)C's This Week, Senate Armed Services Chairman John Warner, (R-VA), "urged Rep. Jack Murtha on Sunday to stop prejudging allegations that U.S. Marines massacred 24 Iraqi civilians after their convoy was attacked by a IED last November." Here's more from that interview:
"At this time, particularly on Memorial Day...I think we should be calm and reassuring to the American people that the men and women of our armed forces are admirably and professionally conducting their heavy responsibilities." The top Republican said: "I respect my friend, John Murtha. I also was privileged to wear the Marine uniform. But we've got to let the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the investigation system, proceed before we reach any conclusions on this matter."
That's a polite way of telling Murtha that his rantings should stop until the investigation is completed. When Warner says "we've got to let the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the investigation system, proceed before we reach any conclusions on this matter", it's suggesting that Murtha's declarations are based on an incomplete set of facts.

On a matter as sensitive as this, the only time a sitting U.S. legislator should comment is when he's got a complete set of facts based on a complete investigation. Anything short of that is sloppy at best & ill-advised at worst.
Earlier in the broadcast, Murtha said there was "no doubt" that the accused Marines were guilty, adding that he suspected that a cover-up of their war crimes goes "up the chain of command." "This is very serious," Warner acknowledged. "But the military is looking at it equally seriously."
In contrast to Murtha's pronouncements of certain guilt, the former Navy Secretary said questions remain about "what happened and when it happened and what was the reaction of senior officers in the Marine Corps." Warner pledged to hold hearings on the Haditha incident, but not until the Uniform Code of Military Justice had "run its course."
Murtha's comment that "their war crimes goes 'up the chain of command'" is reminiscent of his comments about Abu Ghraib. That investigation's findings didn't support Murtha's claims then. It'd be awful if this investigation found that Murtha's comments weren't factually supported, too. Based on his history of being wrong on important aspects of past investigations, I'll hold off on making a conclusion in this current investigation.

Warner's statement that questions remain about "what happened and when it happened and what was the reaction of senior officers in the Marine Corps" shoots down, at least temporarily, Murtha's conclusions. If "questions remain about what happened", how can Murtha be certain? Does he have the ability to pierce the 'fog of war' & know with certainty things that the investigators don't know? Color me highly skeptical of that 'ability'.

I've got another question for Murtha: He's said that he's talked with people close to the investigation. My question for him is why he got briefed on this & the Senate Chairman of the Armed Services hasn't? You'd assume that Sen. Warner would've mentioned that during this interview if he'd been briefed. Why should I trust Murtha saying that he's been briefed when he's made such categorical statements based on an unfinished investigation?

For more on Murtha, see this post on Residual Forces blog.

Technorati Tags: , ,

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog

Was It Unprovoked?

Considering John Murtha's statements and the media coverage, you'd think that the raid in Haditha was an open and shut case. That might not be the case. Let's take a look at some things that don't point in that direction.
The Boston Globe reports that the confrontation was touched off when a roadside bomb struck a supply convoy of Kilo Company, Third Battalion, First Marine Regiment. The explosion killed Lance Corporal Miguel Terrazas, 20, of El Paso, who was on his second tour in Iraq. "Everybody agrees that this was the triggering event," Paul Hackett, an attorney for a Marine officer with a slight connection to the case, told the paper.
If the roadside bomb was the "triggering event" for the developments that followed, however, then how can it be said that there was "no provocation"? And while that provocation may not have been enough to justify the wanton murder of innocent Iraqis, it's far from clear at this point that all of those killed were indeed innocent. Or that any innocents who did die were killed in cold blood. In an April report that pre-dates the uproar over the Haditha allegations, a Marine press release describes the Iraqi town as "a hotbed of insurgent activity less than a year ago." That would be about the time of the so-called Marine massacre. Plainly, not all the residents of this terrorist hotbed were as innocent as Marine media critics are now claiming. The Los Angeles Times reports that after smoke from IED cleared, the Marines quickly determined that it was "a type that would have required someone to detonate it."
John Murtha said that there wasn't a 'triggering event'. Check it out here:
"There was no firefight. There was no IED that killed those innocent people," said Congressman John Murtha commenting on the outcome of a military investigation. "Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them, and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood."
Murtha assumes that the people killed were innocent. Some might well have been but why would he assume that when Haditha was "a terrorist hotbed"? That's the last conclusion I'd come to until I saw hard proof pointing me that direction. I don't consider John Murtha's conclusions proof, either.
The Los Angeles Times reports that after smoke from IED cleared, the Marines quickly determined that it was "a type that would have required someone to detonate it." Following standard procedure, the troops searched nearby houses, the closest of which was 50 yards away. That's close enough for its occupants to have tracked the Marine convoy and timed the explosion. It's also worth remembering that the press has so far reported only one side of the story.
The LA Times isn't a Bush schill by any stretch of the imagination. Yet they're reporting that the Marines determined that the IED "required someone to detonate it." They also came to the conclusion that the home "50 yards away" might house the terrorist that detonated the bomb.

Furthermore, we know that Iraqis have used human shields in the past. I remember watching a Gen. Schwarzkopf briefing where he showed satellite images of Iraqi military hardware sitting in the midst of a Baghdad neighborhood to protect his tanks and artillery weapons. I also remember the pictures of the men, women and children killed in a bombing that tried killing Saddam during Operation Desert Storm. After the war, Newsweek did a special issue devoted solely to the war.

What Newsweek learned was that Special Forces had intel that said that Saddam used that bunker at least 3 times a week. The people killed during that bombing were his prisoners there.

Knowing all that, why on earth would we conclude that terrorists and/or insurgents wouldn't have used the same technique to protect themselves in the raids?
Then there's this intriguing tidbit, again from the Times, which notes that after the IED was detonated: "Marines and Iraqi forces searched houses and other structures in the narrow, dusty streets [of Haditha], jets dropped 500-pound bombs." Whoever ordered those airstrikes must not have believed the houses of Haditha were filled with Iraqi innocents who knew nothing about planting roadside bombs.
Again, this is the LA Times reporting this. What this means is that Time magazine, the Boston Globe and the LA Times all are reporting things that don't mesh with Murtha's account. If "500 lb. bombs" were dropped on these homes, why should we conclude that Murtha's version of events is even close to what happened?
ABC News, for instance, reported Saturday morning that military investigators had already determined that the killings were unjustified, and that several Marines would likely face murder charges. But instead of quoting anyone in uniform, the report offered a soundbite from a Human Rights Watch spokesman.
This should send out all kinds of red flags. ABC's reporting is suspect at best, especially after Brian Ross's report that House Speaker Denny Hastert "was in the mix" of a Justice Department investigation involving Jack Abramoff. ABC's George Stephanopoulous said that "If true, the effects would be seismic."

If ABC was running this story, why didn't they get someone from the military to comment on it? Why would they rely on Human Rights Watch's statements? At best, HRW's information was secondhand. They certainly weren't briefed on this by the military. It's understatement to say that ABC's reporting is sloppy at best.

Based on the amount of reporting that's been done, I'd say that it's still far from a sure thing that the Marines did anything wrong. Is it possible that they didn't follow their terms of engagement? Sure. Is it certain that they did? Not at this point, it isn't.

Friday, May 26, 2006

Something's afoot here...

The left wing fever swamp is going crazy with regard to a supposed New York Times report that Minnesota Republican Congressman John Kline has stated that he felt certain that what reportedly happened in Haditha could not have been an accident.

I googled "Representative John Kline" and "Haditha" and got this...

BBC Bulgaria
Inquiry points to atrocity by marines
International Herald Tribune, France - 13 hours ago
... Representative John Kline, Republican of Minnesota, who is a retired Marine colonel, said that the allegations against the marines in Haditha indicated that ...
Military expected to report Marines killed Iraqi civilians International Herald Tribune
all 688 related »

but when I clicked on the link and did a search of the story, John Kline's name was suddenly nowhere to be found in the piece.

There is also no statement to that effect anywhere on Kline's webpage.

Unless I can find evidence elsewhere, and given that the original text containing Kline appears to have been removed from the story, I am going to chalk it up to a mis-reporting of what Kline stated. I will call Kline's office on Tuesday for a clarification.


Captain Ed has this take on it:
This post isn't about John Murtha, but I know people want to discuss it, so the comment section is open for that topic as well. I will note that in my original post, I acknowledged that Murtha may have had the story correct -- but that he should have held his commentary until it came out, and that he should not have used it as fodder for his anti-war rhetoric. Murtha politicized it, which was wrong. He also accurately described the conclusions, and that is unfortunate, and I'm sure that Murtha feels the same way about that.
While Confederate Yankee adds..

Eight days ago, before the joint NCIS/Multi-National Forces investigation had been completed on the case, before so much as one charge had been filed, ex-Marine John Murtha made the extraordinarily inflammatory and provocative statement that the Marines in this horrific incident "killed innocent civilians in cold blood."

I said then and maintain now that:

…it is unconscionable for any legislator to accuse U.S. military personnel of multiple counts of premeditated murder before an investigation into these charges is complete. Prosecutions must proceed at their own logical pace as evidence in the case dictates. Premature accusations by a public figure in such a case imposes an artificial timeline, endangering the accuracy and thoroughness of an investigation.

At the same time, such heated rhetoric as charges of murder of "innocent civilians in cold blood" is prejudicial against the defendants, poisoning public opinion against them. This would be an explosive charge in a civilian court, but to make such charges against members of the U.S. Military when they are engaged in military operations in that country is absolutely fissionable.

Even if these accusations are proven true—once charges are finally brought and duly prosecuted—Murtha's grandstanding is still a reprehensible act, trading upon horrible (alledged) murders for temporary political gain.

Sickening souls on the far left are already gloating that Murtha's premature pronouncements may turn out to be accurate, without considering for a second that it was not his place to make those accusations. He could have endangered the investigation and prosecution of these apparent crimes. Of course, due process doesn't much matter to these folks. Making charges, whether they can be proven or supported, is part of their stock in trade.

I find I am able to feel disgust for all the black hearts involved; those that could perpetrate such horrific acts, those that could cover it up, and those who would try to profit from it.

May justice find them all.

Dezinformatsia--the opiate of the left...

Some people take drugs or alcohol to escape reality. But all the true left-winged moonbat needs to do is merely make things up.
From Unalienable Rights:

Jesse MacBeth

The story of Jesse MacBeth is a classic tale of liberal standard operating procedure. If you can’t find real info supporting your view of the world - make it up. Micheal Moore would be proud.

Michelle Malkin and other bloggers blows wide open an attempt to produce an expose-type documentary where a supposed Army Ranger tells of arbitrary and brutal killings of Iraqi citizens.

In the tradition of Goebbels, Stalin and other purveyors of Machiavellian propaganda and techniques, the left of this nation, in absence of fact, proudly follow their lead.

Can anyone with even one fourth of a brain still give the antiwar left any credibility?

I thought not.

(Filed under the fifth column)

Judge, Jury and Executioner...redux.

Robin at Chickenhawk express has this:
According to a report in The Marine Times, Murtha received another briefing from the Marines about the Haditha incident on Wed. The door to the briefing room had barely closed behind him before he was spewing forth details from the briefing and giving his own take on the situation...

"A key member of Congress said he “wouldn’t be surprised” if a dozen Marines faced courts-martial for allegedly killing Iraqi civilians Nov. 19. Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., told Marine Corps Times that the number of dead Iraqis, first reported to be 15, was actually 24. He based that number on a briefing from Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Mike Hagee on Wednesday."

"Hagee visited Capitol Hill in anticipation of the release of two investigation reports, which are expected to show that among the 24 dead civilians, five of the alleged victims, all unarmed, were shot in a car with no warning, Murtha said. The killings took place in Hadithah, 125 miles northwest of Baghdad. At least seven of the victims were women and three were children."

Now contrast what the fat blow-hole said with the comments from the Marine Corps...
"Col. David Lapan, a spokesman at Marine Corps headquarters. “The investigations are ongoing, therefore any comment at this time would be inappropriate and could undermine the investigatory and possible legal process,” he said."
But Murtha appears to be salivating at the mere prospect of Marines being convicted for atrocities that he can't wait for a verdict, nor for all the facts to come out.

Due process be damned. Murtha is on a witch hunt.

Murtha, his Defenders & Detractors

This situation of the ongoing glee in the MSM and on the left regarding Congressman Murtha's criticism of the alleged actions of some combat Marines in Haditha Iraq will not go away without a doubt. Nor should it. If it turns out that these men indeed committed these alleged atrocities they will be dealt with by the military the way they should be. But until that time, they remain innocent until proven guilty.

The fact that Jack Murtha has already convicted them in the press simply by way of info he recieved who knows where is the real problem here that many on the other side of the argument do not seem to grasp. And as Psychmeister eludes in his post yesterday and can be confirmed by the chat room link he provided, folks against the war become defenders of military heroes and it's members only when it serves their argument to do so.

Disregarded by our criticizers and Murtha's defenders is the fact that his son (Psycmeister's) serves our country presently in the military, and to say that he or we cannot speak out against a sitting congressman who speaks out prematurely about an ongoing investigation feeding the enemy propoganda machine that those very soldiers are fighting is ludicrous. These congressmen and women work for us, not the other way around, (and certainly not for the enemy), be them war veterans or not.

Cindy Sheehan, who we all know too well, hasn't stopped her barrage of attacks against the commander in chief no less and the country since her son Casey was killed in action. Yet the left embraces her vitriolic lies and distortions to the point that the lady will soon need some medical attention of some sort when she no longer serves their agenda and they throw her overboard as many are known to do to folks they no longer need.

Meanwhile congressman Murtha hit the talk show circuit this week and on Wednesday he appeared on Alan Colmes radio show (below) to continue his premature conviction of these soldiers and also throws in some jabs at the American WWII vets while he's at it. He also appeared on Hardball on the same subject and expose the left has the video here..

Jack Murtha: U.S. Deliberately Killed Innocent Civilians in WWII: "Congressman Jack Murtha, D-Penn., said Wednesday night that the U.S. military was deliberately and indiscriminately killing innocent civilians in Iraq - much the same way, he added, that American pilots did during World War II.

Asked about his crusade to expose the alleged massacre of an Iraqi family in Haditha last November, Murtha told Fox News Radio's Alan Colmes: 'When this comes out, it's going to be much worse than' the initial reports.

Could the Haditha episode be characterized as 'the indiscriminate, deliberate killing of civilians?' Colmes asked.

'From everything I've seen,' said Murtha, 'that's exactly what it was. ... That's exactly what happened in this particular case.'" read the rest

Thursday, May 25, 2006

On criticizing a veteran...

Some people have criticized myself and this blog for its criticism of a Marine war veteran.

That is true. The purpose of this blog's existence is to criticize the irresponsible and seditious actions of a man in governmental power who is a Marine war veteran.

But does the fact that he is a veteran give him immunity from criticism?

Those on the left claim that criticism of Murtha is a slap to the face of veterans (I beg to differ). It is those same critics, however, who hold no compunction against criticizing the likes of Donald Rumsfeld, who served in the Navy during the Korean War. Or of George W. Bush himself, who served honorably in TANG.

It is Murtha's rhetoric itself that serves as a slap to the face of veterans, as he brings dishonor upon the Corps with his seditious remarks, and brings aid and comfort to those who would bring harm to United States soldiers currently serving in hostile territory.

Murtha may have served honorably in the Marine Corps. The purpose of this blog is not to dispute that. The purpose of this blog is to focus on the here and now, on what I would term seriously seditious and traitorous rhetoric by a current sitting member of the United States Congress.

Seditious behavior and rhetoric cannot go unanswered in a time of war regardless of its source; and the light of scrutiny must be shed on all, especially when its source is an elected official whose sworn duty is to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. When that most basic function is subjugated in the name of cheap political gain, then one has most certainly shed the honor and respect that would otherwise be bestowed by virtue of past military service.

Murtha, via his rhetoric, has by his own choices traded his military honor for poltical expediency.

In short, Congressman John Murtha has made his own bed.

Irey: Murtha needs to apologize!

From here:

Irey, Murtha Go Toe-To-Toe

As Congressman John Murtha prepares for the November election, on Wednesday his challenger headed to Washington, D.C., to deliver a message to him.

Washington County Commissioner Diana Irey and a busload of supporters headed to D.C. to demand Murtha apologize to Marines for recently accusing some of them of being cold-blooded killers.

Irey, 12th district challenger, said Murtha's stance on the war in Iraq is not her platform for the November election, but it is an issue.

"Mr. Murtha's comments, I believe, were irresponsible and they put our men and women serving overseas in greater danger,"

Irey said.Murtha recently said several Marines killed at least 15 Iraqi civilians in cold blood last November and said action should be taken.

While the U.S. military doesn't dispute the congressman's claim, Irey said Murtha is in the wrong.

"Being a former Marine himself, he should know they have a process in place to take care of situation that may have happened that should not have happened," Irey said."By coming out and calling them 'cold-blooded killers,' he's already tainted the minds and possible jury of those who will be hearing these allegations."

Irey's visit to Washington, D.C., comes on the heels of Murtha receiving the John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage Award for speaking out against the war.

Irey said she believes many eye the Kennedy family with suspicions and said she's never heard anything positive about the award.
...and to that, Ms. Irey, I say a hearty AMEN!

Wednesday, May 24, 2006

Murtha went down to Washington...

To the tune of "The Devil Went Down to Georgia"

Murtha went down to Washington
looking for an election to steal

He was in a bind, party's way behind
So he was willing to make a deal..

So the Devil said, "You're name's 'Jihad Johnny' and it may be a sin,
But sell out our soldiers--say they're killers and your party just may win!"

So Jihad Johnny spread your lies and propaganda hard...
Cause the dems are way down in the polls and the Repubs have the cards..
And if you win your party gets the leadership to hold--
But if you lose your party's out there cold!

So the devil started telling lies as he went on morning shows,
With fire coming from his eyes as he spun the Army's woes..
But Murtha said, "Hey devil there-you're pretty good ol' son... but sit down in that chair right there and let me show you how it's done!

Marines are killin in cold blood...
President's policies--crashin' with a thud..
Military's no good we can't win..
Hey there Katie listen to me spin!

...Well the devil hung his head in shame cuz he knew that he'd been beat... So he laid the majority of congress right down at Murtha's feet..
Murtha said, "Say devil come back if you ever want to try again,
But when it comes to selling out our troops I'm the best that's ever been!"

Sellin out our soldiers one-by-one...
Murtha's on a mission without a gun..
Givin' aid to enemies far and wide...
Pushin an agenda he can't hide..

(Filed under Murtha Must Go!!, the fifth column song parodies)

More rhetoric from Jihad Johnny...

The terrorist insurgents who have our soldiers in their crosshairs couldn't ask for a better spokesman...
Washington D.C. - The following is a transcript of a press conference held today by Congressman Murtha regarding the lack of progress in Iraq.

Six months ago today, I introduced my resolution to surrender like so many French Poodles redeploy the troops. Since that time, we’ve lost 370 Americans, we’re spending $9 billion a month, incidents have increased from 550 a week to 900 a week, and we lost 1,000 Iraqis in the last month.

My plan …recognizes we have done everything we can do militarily in Iraq and we must redeploy.

(Good 'plan,' surrender monkey).

The president insists our military needs to stay the course, but there’s no plan for progress. I have not seen a plan.

One of my imaginarymilitary friends said to me (that) when you open up the strategy for victory, there’s nothing inside. That’s the problem that I see, and that's the thing that's so difficult for me to accept.

Now (there are) those who disagree with me. Even a fourth-grade class the other day (asked), “What happens if we leave?”

(Something how a fourth grader has more smarts than you do, eh Mr. Murtha?)

Well, what happens if we leave today? What happens if we’d left six months ago? They have to settle this themselves. There’s no plan to make things better.

(Now there's the plan, eh? Let the beheadings commence. Stuff the women in Burkkas and keep 'em barefoot and pregnant. Let them eat cake. Good plan, Marie Antoinette).

And so it’s time for us to leave, to surrender redeploy. And I say that … the success of Iraq is up to the Iraqis. The Iraqis must settle their differences, and we must set a timetable for the Iraqis to take complete control of their country.


Now, every time a timetable has been set here in Congress, we meet the timetable. Every time they set one in Iraq, they meet the timetable. But here we have no timetable. It’s open-ended. And only Iraqis should settle these problems. And they aren’t looking for an American solution. We give them an American solution, they forget it and it won't work in the end.

(Note to Germans in WWII--We're gonna leave, Nazi regime gone or not. Screw the Marshall Plan. Jews--welll... rotsa ruck)

Murtha decries a lack of progress in Iraq, yet for every Murtha, I'd bet that there are hundreds of soldiers who beg to differ, like this one (who, incidentally is far from being a "yes man"):

A retired army general who was once called Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's "most outspoken critic" over the war in Iraq now says the U.S. is achieving its objectives there. Barry McCaffrey, perhaps best known as President Clinton's drug czar, blasted the Pentagon in 2003 for invading Iraq without enough troops to keep the peace after the fall of Baghdad.

But after a week in Iraq, McCaffrey praised the morale and effectiveness of U.S. forces as "simply awe inspiring," called the Iraqi Army, "real, growing, and willing to fight," and noted that "the Iraqi police are beginning to show marked improvement in capability."

And while he called foreign fighters a "tactical menace," McCaffery reports, "the foreign jihadist fighters have been defeated as a strategic and operational threat to the creation of an Iraqi government."

But such praise for the fruits of our military efforts have fallen on deaf ears for Murtha, who would most likely want to listen to this guy:

Ray McGovern, the former CIA analyst who last week accused Rumsfeld of lying about pre-war intelligence, has a long history of attacking the administration from the left. McGovern co-founded Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, which encourages intelligence operatives to undermine the Bush administration by leaking classified information. (read: Sedition)

He also called for the president's impeachment when he was a star witness in last year's Democratic hearing accusing the administration of misleading the country into war — claiming the U.S. invaded Iraq for oil, Israel, and to establish military bases in the region.

What's more, the Weekly Standard reports that McGovern served so-called "war crimes indictments" on the Bush White House in January on behalf of the left-wing group, Not in our Name, which was founded by revolutionary Maoist activists.

Judging by Murtha's affiliation with Code Pink, McGovern and his ilk are right up Murtha's alley.

A banner day at Murtha Must Go!!!

ChicagoRay, a graphic designer by trade, designed our new banner at the top of the page. Lookin' good!

A hearty thanks to Nick for this design. This place is lookin' pretty spiffy!

Also, Chief from Freedom Dogs did offer to design a banner. I've always admired his blog and his insights and invited him to contribute here whenever he so chooses.

You are known by the company you keep...

And John Murtha is no exception. It seems that Congressman Murtha has been more than cozy with Code Pink, an anti-war anti-American group with ties to International Answer, an avowed communist group. Code Pink raised over $600,000 for our enemies in Fallujah. Knowing even this, Congressman Murtha proudly accepted Code Pink's "pink badge of courage" award and posed for pictures with representatives of an organization that gives aid and comfort to those who have our brave soldiers in their crosshairs.

Yes, John Murtha is known by the company he keeps.

(Filed under Murtha Must Go!!, the fifth column)

More on Murtha's destructive rhetoric

As the posted commentary reiterates and has been touched on by other contributors here on this blog, the real travesty of the statements made by the likes of Jack Murtha and our own beloved (sarc) Illinois traitor Dick "Turban" Durbin is that those words are smacked around the arab world and the leftwing blogosphere like a super ball in a cement room for months and months, whether true or not. (in this case guilt or innocence is yet to be determined)

Information Warfare: "May 23, 2006: In a recent press conference, U.S. Congressman Jack Murtha claimed that U.S. Marines massacred Iraqi civilians in the wake of a bomb attack near Haditha this past November. The matter is currently under investigation by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, who will determine the facts of the case, and make the decisions as to whether or not people need to answer to a court-martial. If any civilians were murdered in cold blood, the perps will be dealt with by the military justice system. This has been the latest in a series of instances where wild claims have been irresponsibly made… and often these claims have been inaccurate.

In this day and age, it doesn't take long for a story to spread. Torture allegations last July by Senator Richard Durbin of Illinois were promulgated across the world in a matter of hours, and al-Jazeera featured them prominently. The same was also true of Newsweek's story claiming a Koran had been flushed by guards at Guantanamo Bay. In both cases, the charges were investigated. In both cases, the claims proved to have little, if any, bearing to what really happened. The claims of torture were found to be generally unfounded, and in the few cases where lines were crossed, corrective action had been taken, in some cases immediately (one such case involved an interrogator who smeared a detainee with a detainee with red ink after the detainee spat on her). The Koran-flushing turned out to have been done by a detainee, not guards at Guantanamo.

That said, the lies were already spread around by the time the truth was determined. In the case of the Koran-flushing, lives were lost. The comments by Congressman Murtha, who has advocated withdrawing American forces from Iraq, are also already on their way around the world – while NCIS is still investigating the case. The worst thing about this is that the myth of the "Haditha massacre" will be used to by various terrorist groups for recruiting, and the new recruits means that there is a greater chance that troops will get killed. – Harold C. Hutchison"

Tuesday, May 23, 2006

Diana Irey Responds to Murtha Press Conference

Diana Irey, the GOP challenger against John Murtha in the PA CD-12 race issued this press release after Murtha's press conference:
“I was shocked and dismayed by my opponent’s charge that U.S. Marines are responsible for murdering Iraqi civilians in cold blood. Why John Murtha would say such a thing in the wake of an ongoing investigation and accuse our troops of such horrific actions is beyond comprehension,” Irey said.
Murtha made these comments at a press conference yesterday. “Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood,” Murtha said. He made these comments to reporters regarding an incident that occurred November 19th in Haditha, Iraq. “There is no doubt that my opponent’s disregard for the presumption of innocence and Due Process will have an adverse effect on troop morale. Unfortunately, instead of showing support for our military personnel, his partisan rhetoric will only harm our country at this fragile time. His continued comments are a devastating blow to millions of men, women and children in the Middle East who are just getting their first taste of Democracy.” Irey said.

Diana Irey has spent the last decade in public service as a Washington County Commissioner, and she is now running to bring her vision of government responsibility, lower taxes, and family values to the United States Congress as the Representative of Pennsylvania’s 12th District.
Ms. Irey is right on the money in pointing out Murtha's total disregard for these soldiers' due process rights and that his statements will have "an adverse affect on troop morale".

The citizens of PA CD-12 deserve to finally get a representative who's more concerned with representing them than with playing cheap partisan politics.

It's obvious that Mr. Murtha is most interested in keeping his mug in front of a camera than he's interested in solid military policy.

NRO hits the nail on the head...

The Editors at National Review Online have an excellent piece called Profile in Disgrace:
...We don’t question Murtha’s physical courage, which he demonstrated while serving his country as a Marine. But the Profile in Courage Award is meant to celebrate courage in the public realm, and here Murtha is far from extraordinary. According to the JFK Library’s statement announcing this year’s winners, the award is for “public servants who have withstood strong opposition to follow what they believe is the right course of action.” In Murtha’s case, “strong opposition” included cheers of support from prominent Democrats, lionization by the broader antiwar Left, and press coverage that approached idolatry. Public opinion had already turned against the war by the time Murtha came out against it, transforming himself from a regional obscurity into a national figure. There are many words to describe this journey, but “courageous” is near the bottom of the list.
They go on to say...
The military’s investigation of those claims isn’t finished yet, but Murtha apparently can’t wait for all the facts to emerge before damning the accused. In doing so, he inflames international opinion against the United States and makes it more difficult not only to fulfill our mission in Iraq, but to conduct military operations anywhere in the world. Even if the allegations against the Marines are true, Murtha’s rhetoric is imbalanced: He declines to emphasize that the vast majority of soldiers perform their duties honorably and that those who break the rules are severely punished, choosing instead to cite the actions of a few sadists as though they were representative of the military.
...But of Murtha takes no blame for emboldening our enemies, nor any responsibility for his broad-brushed accusations of the military, stating:
...Further, to ignore this incident, which happened six months ago and has now been publicized around the world, is to invite criticism that the United States does not practice what it preaches. That will severely undermine our goals of promoting democracy, as did the Abu Ghraib scandal.
...There is a difference in "ignoring" an "incident" (of which Murtha admitted to not reading the reports) and trying to be the first to trot out and tripping all over yourself (even before all the facts are out), trying to find a camera to play judge, jury and executioner, for party-hack political gain.

The NRO editorial concludes:
...If the selection committee had cared more about celebrating courage than about attacking the Bush administration, it could have chosen any number of Iraqi politicians as winners. Foreign leaders have been honored in the past—Ukrainian president Viktor Yuschenko, for example—and it’s hard to imagine many people who face “strong opposition” like the Iraqi leaders do. These men and their families live under constant threat of assassination, but somehow they keep pressing forward. As just one example, consider Tariq al-Hashemi, Iraq’s newly appointed vice president. At the end of April, gunmen shot his sister dead. His brother had fallen to a similar attack less than two weeks before. Yet he remains in his post.

Such courage should make us count as dross the achievements of a mere Murtha.
The JFK Library’s decision to fĂȘte such an unworthy recipient dilutes the meaning of “courage” and diminishes the value of its award. But we suspect that, having gotten in a good dig against the war, it doesn’t much care.
...and JFK is spinning 360s in his grave right now.

Murtha's Accusations

I just finished reading the transcript of Murtha's press conference where he accused Marines of killing innocent Iraqi civilians. Not only did he make those outrageous accusations but he made other statements that didn't get noticed because of his playing judge, jury & executioner. Here's some of the other noteworthy statements Murtha made:
Far more than half the Iraqis are unemployed. There’s 90 percent unemployment in Al Anbar province, and that’s a province where we have the most trouble.
Mr. Murtha would be well-advised to stop using ancient information. When he announced his unserious plan to "immediately redeploy our troops six months ago, Murtha trotted out this misinformation. It was old informatio then; it's now ancient information. According to the latest reports I've heard, the unemployment rate is 16-18 percent, which is still high. Still, it's a far cry from 90 percent.
My plan…recognizes we have done everything we can do militarily in Iraq and we must redeploy.
Representative Murtha, is that like when you 'recognized' that our military had done all it could in Somalia? Let me refresh your memory:
The Pennsylvania Democrat announced that President Clinton had been "listening to our suggestions. And I think you'll see him move those troops out very quickly."
Two weeks later, after 18 U.S. Rangers were killed in the battle of Mogadishu, Murtha visited U.S. forces in Somalia.
Upon his return he proclaimed to the world that the Mogadishu defeat had a devastating impact on the Rangers' morale.
"They're subdued compared to normal morale of elite forces," Murtha said. "Obviously, it was a very difficult battle. A lot of Somalis were killed, but it was a brutal battle." Murtha said the U.S. had to no choice but to pull out now, explaining, "There's no military solution. Some of them will tell you [that] to get [warlord Mohamed Farrah] Aidid is the solution. I don't agree with that."
Representative Murtha, I'd submit that you'll never see a military solution to anything that lasts beyond a short period. There's nothing in your recent record that tells me otherwise.
Many see the United States as being at war with all Muslim nations. You know it's not true, but that's the way they see it. So who really wants us in Iraq? The Iraqis do not. It's interesting. In a recent poll the Iraqis termed those who attacked Iraqis as terrorists or criminals.
"So who really wants us in Iraq? The Iraqis do not." It's interesting that you should trot that propaganda out again. It's interesting because Fred Barnes & Mort Kondracke talked about that on the Beltway Boys this past Saturday. Fred pointed out that a poll question that you've never cited, at least that I've heard, asks "Do you want America out NOW? The result, as you well know, is 76 percent don't want us out now. So Representative Murtha, don't you think the American people should be told the full truth? Or is it more important that you only tell a portion of the story in your hopes of scoring cheap political points? No need to answer because I think we all know the answer.
Now, you can imagine the impact this is going to have on those troops for the rest of their lives and for the United States in our war and our effort in trying to win the hearts and minds. We can't operate, we can't sustain this operation. Eighty percent of the Iraqis want us out of Iraq; 47 percent say it's all right to kill Americans.
Enough with this misinformation campaign. You don't have a shred of credibility left with reporters who actually pay attention to what you're saying. It's only when you talk with adoring audiences like Chris 'Softball' Matthews or Tim Russert that you're taken seriously.

Let's take that 80 percent number you're so fond of citing. Shi'a comprise 60 percent of the nation's population. What's the likelihood that they want us out before the Iraqi military can protect them from Iran and Syria? What's the likelihood that they want us out before the Iraqi police forces can get the militias under control? I'd rate it as between slim and none, with it being alot closer to none than slim.

I know you're a Democrat but even a misinformation expert like yourself would admit that it's impossible for 80 percent of the people want us to leave if 60 percent of the people want us to stay awhile longer.
QUESTION: Have you read that report?
Congressman Murtha: I have not read it, no.
QUESTION: But you're aware of...
Congressman Murtha: I'm basing it on information that I've gotten from, all the information I get. It comes from the commanders. It comes from people who know what they're talking about.
Not that I don't trust you, Representative Murtha, but which commanders. Be specific because it's important. Be specific which "people who know what they're talking about"? Your use of anonymous sources isn't adding to the credibility of your claims.

At the end of the day, it's easy to poke gaping holes in Murtha's accusations and claims.

That's why Murtha Must Go.

Technorati Tags: , ,

More support of our enemies by Murtha...

There are those who think that the words uttered by John Murtha do not have an impact, one way or another, of what our enemies think.

I beg to differ....This from an Arab website:
The Marines turned their attention to two other homes that night. The first was devastated by a grenade that blew up a gas bottle in the kitchen before they turned their guns on three adults and four children. A family occupying the second house was shot dead after being herded into a closet. The Marines claimed they had come under fire from those homes. This has proved to be yet another cover-up.

"There was no firefight. There was no IED that killed those innocent people," said Congressman John Murtha commenting on the outcome of a military investigation. "Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them, and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood."
This said by Murtha, even before he had read any investigative reports of the incident.

Judge, jury, executioner, propandist for our enemies, and party hack. That, readers, is John Murtha.

Thanks, Congressman Murtha... for nothing. 

Monday, May 22, 2006

I'm going to like it here

Hello everyone. I just stopped by to introduce myself. I'm Lemuel Calhoon and I normally blog at Hillbilly White Trash.

I'm honored to be asked to contribute here and join in the effort to rid ourselves of America's Lord Haw Haw.

Here is a link to a post I put up about Murtha and his buddies back when he first began making news with his treasonous pronouncements.

I'll have more later, but now it's past my bed time.

Join the Murtha Must Go Blogroll!!

Just send me an email, and I'll blogroll you, and send you the code to put on your site.

Psycmeistr* at *

I'm going to try to get a slick logo made--

Maybe Chief at Freedom Dogs can help :)


Thanks to Chicago Ray for designing our blogroll logo!!

It may take awhile (a day or two) to get you on the blogroll, but I'll get it done as soon as I can!

Now I'm Feeling Ill

Gary at KvM notices that John Murtha will receive a JFK Profiles in Courage award today. Here's what the AP's Kimberly Hefling cites as the justification for the award:
On Monday, Murtha is to be awarded the John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage Award in Boston for his bold pronouncement that U.S. troops should be pulled out of Iraq, a statement many say helped change the public debate over the war, because of Murtha's past as a Democratic hawk and retired Marines Reserves colonel who enjoyed easy access to presidents.
As I just told Gary in an email, if Murtha's the new definition of courage, then I don't want to see how they define cowardice. I'd further note that that "bold pronouncement" had nothing to do with courage but rather had everything to do with trying to take advantage of the President's supposedly weakened status. Murtha's plan was pre-planned, in fact, and approved by Nancy Pelosi at the Democrats' weekly caucus meeting.

I'd further note that saying what the lunatic kook fringe wants to hear instead of sticking to the facts is the definition of unseriousness, if not cowardice. If you aren't running in a statewide race, then being the lunatic fringe's advocate isn't that difficult.

The AP's 'article' mentions Murtha giving President Reagan advice that they needed more troops in Beirut but it doesn't mention what Murtha told President Clinton about the fight in Somalia so I'll tell you:

After terrorists attacked U.S. troops in Mogadishu, Somalia 12 years ago, anti-Iraq war Democrat, Rep. John Murtha urged then-President Clinton to begin a complete pullout of U.S. troops from the region.
Clinton took the advice and ordered the withdrawal - a decision that Osama bin Laden would later credit with emboldening his terrorist fighters and encouraging him to mount further attacks against the U.S.
"Our welcome has been worn out," Rep Murtha told NBC's "Today" show in Sept. 1993, a month after 4 U.S. Military Police had been killed in Somalia by a remote-detonated land mine.
The Pennsylvania Democrat announced that President Clinton had been "listening to our suggestions. And I think you'll see him move those troops out very quickly."
Two weeks later, after 18 U.S. Rangers were killed in the battle of Mogadishu, Murtha visited U.S. forces in Somalia.
Upon his return he proclaimed to the world that the Mogadishu defeat had a devastating impact on the Rangers' morale.
"They're subdued compared to normal morale of elite forces," Murtha said. "Obviously, it was a very difficult battle. A lot of Somalis were killed, but it was a brutal battle." Murtha said the U.S. had to no choice but to pull out now, explaining, "There's no military solution. Some of them will tell you [that] to get [warlord Mohamed Farrah] Aidid is the solution. I don't agree with that."
The comments were eerily similar to Murtha's assessment of U.S involvement in Iraq last week, when he declared, "the U.S. cannot accomplish anything further militarily. It is time to bring [the troops] home."
This should set off red flags for anyone that cares about the GWOT. Murtha's statements now are as disgusting as his statements then. They show a willingness, possibly even an eagerness, to cut and run....I mean redeploy.

As for his statement that "the Mogadishu defeat had a devastating effect on the Rangers' morale", I'd just say that that's totally explainable. If the President had ignored your calls for more military forces, then you had 18 of your partners murdered by a Third World warlord, you'd feel betrayed, too.

From what I can tell, Murtha's military service was honorable. Since the early 90's, though, his advice on military matters is suspect at best. His statements that "Our soldiers are living hand to mouth" and his accusation that Marines killed innocent Iraqi civilians before the investigation is finished is proof of his playing politics with the military.

That shouldn't be confused with courage.

***Psycmeistr Adds:****

In receiving the prestigious moonbat ideologically-hijacked JFK Profile in Courage Award (heh--giving a "courage award" to a surrender monkey!!--anyone else see any irony in that?) Murtha stated,
But if Democrats win back a majority in the House of Representatives in November as Murtha predicts will happen, the Republican administration better be prepared to answer tough questions about the war, he said.

"It will be a stunning thing to them, and then the investigations will start,'' Murtha said. (emphasis added)

And he's so hell-bent on and drooling over the prospects of this that he's prepared to undermine the mission and lives of our soldiers to do it.