Tuesday, August 22, 2006

Murtha-Driven Talking Points (And Other Troubling Matters)

This morning, I was shocked to see UFPJ supporting Amy Klobuchar's campaign. I've written about UFPJ's work before here. Now they're using John Murtha's own words in their campaign to end the war in Iraq. Here's what they're saying:
Talking Points: Haditha Massacre
MAIN POINTS
U.S. Marines killed 24 innocent, unarmed men, women, and children of Haditha intentionally and without cause in Haditha, a city in the Al Anbar province of Iraq. Afterward, the Marines lied to cover up their actions by claiming they were under attack. Higher-ups in the military also tried to cover it up until revelations in the media forced them to conduct a serious investigation.

COVER UP
Afterward, the Marines lied to cover up their actions by claiming they were under attack. Higher-ups in the military also tried to cover it up until revelations in the media forced them to conduct a serious investigation.
In the Marines’ story the eight helpless men they slaughtered became "insurgents." The other 16, necessarily "civilians" because of age or sex, they first claimed were also victims of the same IED; later, some were supposed to have been "collateral damage" of a supposed "exchange of gunfire" with said "insurgents."
Unfortunately for them, a journalism student took photographs of the bodies in the Haditha morgue that showed victims shot in the head from close range in execution-style killings. Nothing forced the Marines to kill these Iraqis.
According to Rep. John Murtha (D-PA), a former marine, a military investigation of the incident expected to be released next week will show that marines killed innocent civilians in Haditha and tried to cover up the deaths. When Chris Matthews of MSNBC’ "Hardball" tried to spin the incident, Murtha calmly corrected him and said, no, there was no battle, no exchange of gunfire, no explosion, the troops killed 24 people "in cold blood." When Matthews asked him if this was like My Lai, Murtha said it was.
UFPJ is vehemently opposed to war in all its forms. They also lobbied against renewing the Patriot Act. UFPJ's lobbying against the Patriot Act is additional proof that UFPJ isn't interested in protecting us from terrorists. We also know that John Murtha voted against renewing the Patriot Act. I think it's reasonable to think that Murtha's voting against the Patriot Act was a result of UFPJ's lobbying against renewal. We certainly can't rule that out. This leads to some troubling questions for Murtha to answer:
  • Why would John Murtha oppose renewing the Patriot Act? The thought of not giving these tools to law enforcement is unimaginable. The thought of rebuilding the Gorelick Wall, which legally prevented Able Danger from telling the FBI about Mohammed Atta, should scare every American.
  • How much influence does UFPJ have on John Murtha? To those who are looking, it appears as though they wield alot of influence on him.
  • Doesn't John Murtha care that UFPJ is using his words to brand these Marines as war criminals?
The people of southwest Pennsylvania, especially active duty and reservist military personnel, have a right to know why John Murtha is fighting a daily battle against their causes.

Technorati: , , ,

Cross-post at LetFreedomRingBlog