July 10-11, 2007
Jul 10 01:23 Redefining the Mission? Jul 10 09:18 Take That, You Whiners Jul 10 10:49 Pelosi Picking a Fight On Iraq Jul 10 11:28 Signs That They've Lost It Jul 10 13:20 We Will Bear Any Burden... Jul 11 03:51 Stars & Stripes On Baqouba Jul 11 10:18 Rep. Murtha Running For Cover Jul 11 16:25 Washington Post Weighs In on Murtha Scandal Jul 11 23:17 Truth From Iraq
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Prior Years: 2006
Redefining the Mission?
According to this AP article, Susan Collins is co-sponsoring a bill with Ben Nelson to change the mission in Iraq:
Also being drafted are several Republican-backed proposals that would force a new course in Iraq, including one by Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Ben Nelson, D-Neb., that would require U.S. troops to abandon combat missions. Collins and Nelson say their binding amendment would order the U.S. mission to focus on training the Iraqi security forces, targeting al-Qaida members and protecting Iraq's borders.I hate telling Sen. Collins this but OAR is "targeting al-Qa'ida members." Here's something from a CNN article on that very subject:
"My goal is to redefine the mission and set the stage for a significant but gradual drawdown of our troops next year," said Collins.
An operation west of Baghdad on Thursday focused on a cell making roadside bombs. Coalition forces killed one person and wounded another, the statement said. Three suspected were detained.Forgive me if I don't understand why senators like Collins , Gregg , Domenici , Warner , Alexander , Lugar , Bennett , Sununu and Voinovich don't get it. It's like Harry Reid and John Murtha hypnotized them and gave them a defeatist attitude. They should know better than that.
Coalition forces detained another suspected al Qaeda terrorist in a separate raid in the Tarmiya area Thursday.
"We're continuing to target all levels of the al Qaeda in Iraq organization and are disrupting both their leadership structure and operations," said U.S. military spokesman Lt. Col. Christopher Garver.
In raids Wednesday, forces captured a man suspected of being the al Qaeda in Iraq administrative emir for a Baghdad neighborhood. He is thought to handle logistics and financing for terrorist cells in the area. Three people believed to be his associates were also detained.
GOP support for the war has eroded steadily since Bush's decision in January to send some 30,000 additional troops to Iraq. At the time, Bush said the Iraqis agreed to meet certain benchmarks, such as enacting a law to divide the nation's oil reserves.TRANSLATION: GOP support for the war has eroded since the Agenda Media and the Defeatocrats started a nonstop, fact-free, defeatist anti-war campaign.
I'm not giving these GOP wobblies a pass; I'm just placing a substantial part of the blame where it rightfully belongs: on the Defeatocrats and their Agenda Media allies.
In addition to contacting these senators, I'd also recommend contacting the White House to tell them that we've got their backs on fighting for victory. We can't leave any stone unturned or any option ignored. Defeating AQI and Sadr's militia while stabilizing Iraq is just too important.
Here's another important consideration:
Iran is pulling the strings in Iraq. Only a weak-minded person would believe that we have no choice but to retreat in this war. Iranian arms, resources, and military personnel have been found in Iraq. They are actively at war with us, do we need more burning buildings to realize this?That's the best summarization I've read about what's at stake in Iraq.
And now there is a report of Chinese weapons in Iraq that hits the wires. then add to that the news that 45 Muslim doctors were planning to carry out similar operations in the US, that had just been attempted in the UK.
Wake up Senators. There is no losing this war. there is no ending it on YOUR terms. We must defeat evil, however we have to so that our country can remain safe. Just because the Iraqi government is not running as seamlessly [snicker] as ours, does not remove the fact that we're engaged in a global war. If we leave Iraq, Iran and al Qaida will take it over and use it as a staging ground for their goal, world domination.
UPDATE: Here's Fred Thompson's thoughts on the necessity of winning:
Posted Tuesday, July 10, 2007 1:35 AM
Comment 1 by Alexa at 20-Oct-07 11:42 PM
Really nice site you have here. I've been reading for a while but this
post made me want to say 2 thumbs up. Keep up the great work.
http://stopsmoking-hypnosis.blogspot.com
Take That, You Whiners
I just got an email from one of my favorite relatives, my aunt Alice. What I found is today's must reading. It's attributed to Jay Leno. When I finish posting this, I think I'll meander over to the Tonight Show website and send him an email thanking him for this 'reminder'. Here's what he said:
If you're not a Jay Leno fan read what he wrote anyway. My respect and esteem for him has really increased.Thank you, Mr. Leno, for saying what I've often thought. Being the student of presidential polling and campaigns, I've noticed that President Clinton got re-elected while the wrong track number (of right track-wrong track fame) was 69 percent, depending on which poll you used. Similarly, President Bush got re-elected with the wrong track number stuck on 61 percent, depending on which poll you used.
"The other day I was reading Newsweek magazine and came across some poll data I found rather hard to believe. It must be true given the source, right?
The Newsweek poll alleges that 67 percent of Americans are unhappy with the direction the country is headed and 69 percent of the country is unhappy with the performance of the president. In essence 2/3s of the citizenry just ain't happy and want a change.
So being the knuckle dragger I am, I started thinking, "What we are so unhappy about?"
Is it that we have electricity and running water 24 hours a day, 7 days a week? Is our unhappiness the result of having air conditioning in the summer and heating in the winter? Could it be that 95.4 percent of these unhappy folks have a job? Maybe it is the ability to walk into a grocery store at any time and see more food in moments than Darfur has seen in the last year?
Maybe it is the ability to drive from the Pacific Ocean to the Atlantic Ocean without having to present identification papers as we move through each state? Or possibly the hundreds of clean and safe motels we would find along the way that can provide temporary shelter? I guess having thousands of restaurants with varying cuisine from around the world is just not good enough. Or could it be that when we wreck our car, emergency workers show up and provide services to help all and even send a helicopter to take you to the hospital.
Perhaps you are one of the 70 percent of Americans who own a home. You may be upset with knowing that in the unfortunate case of a fire, a group of trained firefighters will appear in moments and use top notch equipment to extinguish the flames thus saving you, your family and your belongings. Or if, while at home watching one of your many flat screen TVs, a burglar or prowler intrudes , an officer equipped with a gun and a bullet-proof vest will come to defend you and your family against attack or loss. This all in the backdrop of a neighborhood free of bombs or militias raping and pillaging the residents. Neighborhoods where 90 percent of teenagers own cell phones and computers.
How about the complete religious, social and political freedoms we enjoy that are the envy of everyone in the world? Maybe that is what has 67 percent of you folks unhappy.
Fact is, we are the largest group of ungrateful, spoiled brats the world has ever seen. No wonder the world loves the U.S., yet has a great disdain for its citizens. They see us for what we are. The most blessed people in the world who do nothing but complain about what we don't have , and what we hate about the country instead of thanking the good Lord we live here.
I know, I know. What about the president who took us into war and has no plan to get us out? The president who has a measly 31 percent approval rating? Is this the same president who guided the nation in the dark days after 9/11? The president that cut taxes to bring an economy out of recession? Could this be the same guy who has been called every name in the book for succeeding in keeping all the spoiled ungrateful brats safe from terrorist attacks?
The commander in chief of an all-volunteer army that is out there defending you and me? Did you hear how bad the President is on the news or talk show? Did this news affect you so much, make you so unhappy you couldn't take a look around for yourself and see all the good things and be glad?
Think about it...are you upset at the President because he actually caused you personal pain OR is it because the 'Media' told you he was failing to kiss your sorry ungrateful behind every day.
Make no mistake about it. The troops in Iraq and Afghanistan have volunteered to serve, and in many cases may have died for your freedom. There is currently no draft in this country. They didn't have to go. They are able to refuse to go and end up with either a 'general' discharge, an 'other than honorable' discharge or, worst case scenario, a 'dishonorable' discharge after a few days in the brig.
So why then the flat-out discontentment in the minds of 69 percent of Americans? Say what you want but I blame it on the media. If it bleeds it leads and they specialize in bad news.
Everybody will watch a car crash with blood and guts. How many will watch kids selling lemonade at the corner? The media knows this and media outlets are for-profit corporations. They offer what sells, and when criticized, try to defend their actions by "justifying" them in one way or another. Just ask why they tried to allow a murderer like O.J. Simpson to write a book about how he didn't kill his wife, but if he did he would have done it this way...Insane!
Stop buying the negativism you are fed everyday by the media. Shut off the TV, burn Newsweek, and use the New York Times for the bottom of your bird cage. Then start being grateful for all we have as a country. There is exponentially more good than bad.
We are among the most blessed peoples on Earth and should thank God several times a day, or at least be thankful and appreciative."
"With hurricanes, tornadoes, fires out of control, mud slides, flooding, severe thunderstorms tearing up the country from one end to another, and with the threat of bird flu and terrorist attacks, "Are we sure this is a good time to take God out of the Pledge of Allegiance?"
Jay Leno
The fact is that, as a nation, we're a complacent, negative lot that accepts too much negativity from Newsweek, NY Times and CBS. We're living at a time when we can get our hands on all kinds of positive information ranging from the positive things happening as a result of Operation Arrowhead Ripper to the most recent jobs report that showed our unemployment rate a very acceptable 4.5 percent to reports about how experts are finding cures for things that we never thought we'd ever find cures for.
It's time to ignore the media's whining. In fact, it's time we ignore politicians' whining, too.
Instead, it's time that we realized the power we have to change the course of events. Wasn't it exhilarating when we filled senators' inboxes with emails with reasons for killing the immigration 'reform' bill? That bill didn't die because politicians ran out of platitudes for the bill. It died because of the power we have thanks to Al Gore's internet.
If you want to complain, that's your right. If you want a better life, then do something about it. It's that simple.
Posted Tuesday, July 10, 2007 9:19 AM
Comment 1 by Soldiers.dad at 12-Jul-07 08:22 PM
Dude.
Jay Leno did not say that.
It is a good piece, and I agree totally with the sentiments expressed, but check out snopes.com before quoting things you receive in your email in box, I do.
I like your efforts, but "Keep it real".
http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/hitnail.asp
Pelosi Picking a Fight On Iraq
That's a fight she's gonna lose and look foolish in losing. That's the reality of this fight. I just had the privilege of talking with Pete Hegseth, the executive director of Vets for Freedom. I told him, in detail, about Operation Good News. I told him how I wanted to work in unison with him on this issue. I told him that I wanted to repeat the things that we used in collapsing the 'Grand Bargain' and its Frankenstein followup.
Mr. Hegseth said that that's the exact paradigm he was hoping to use. He said that we needed to "use force multipliers" to persuade our representatives and senators to give Gen. Petraeus' plan a legitimate shot at success.
One thing that we immediately agree on was the use of the internet to collect the articles that provided firsthand reports of OAR's successes. I said that "information is power" and that "we've got a ton of positive information" regarding Operation Arrowhead Ripper.
How does that tie into Ms. Pelosi. This article from the Hill Magazine will explain that:
The first votes in what Pelosi's office termed "a month of action in Congress to end the war" could start as early as this week. Likely topics include legislation banning permanent bases in Iraq and cracking down on what Democrats call "war profiteering." In addition, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) last month announced withdrawal legislation to "redeploy" troops by next spring.I can't wait to see Pelosi's "month of action" be swept aside in a tidal wave of emails from W e T he P eople. I'll bet that politicians don't understand that we aren't living according to the old paradigm where their allies in the media controlled the flow of information. They haven't adapted to the new paradigm where activists like me and military officers like Lt. Hegseth can jump on the internet and find good news reports from Iraq, whether they're from the AP, Reuters, Michael Yon, BlackAnthem or the US military websites.
"Republicans are breaking ranks with the president and many have said we need a new strategy starting in July, not September," said Pelosi spokesman Nadeam Elshami. The timeline legislation Pelosi announced before the Independence Day break has not been introduced, but it closely tracks the proposal by Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-MI) that the withdrawal begin within 120 days, with most troops ordered out by next spring.Mr. Elshami is betting that W e T he P eople are gonna sit on our hands while Democrats throw Iraq under the bus. That's a major mistake. Based on the numerous conversations I've had with Minnesota activists, people like Lt. Hegseth and others, that isn't our plan.
The idea is to present the House and the Senate as unified.
Ms. Pelosi's goal is to intimidate GOP legislators into voting for John Murtha's defeatism. My goal is to unleash an Army of Davids to intimidate those GOP legislators into doing the right thing. I'll bet that the Army of Davids will win this fight. In fact, I suspect that politicians jump alot higher when voters tell them to do what's right or get retired in the next primary than they'd jump when a Washington Post poll tells them that 'the American people don't support the war anymore'.
Let's rally behind the troops and Gen. Petraeus. If we do this right, we'll leave Ms. Pelosi's defeatists with a 'What hit us' look in their eyes.
Isn't that alone worth the effort?
Posted Tuesday, July 10, 2007 10:50 AM
Comment 1 by rick kennerly at 10-Jul-07 12:15 PM
Pete Hegseth leaves a lot unsaid.
Like we're bleeding blood and treasure so that the princes of the greenzone can make zero progress all these months on actually forming a working government and standing up a military that can control the country.
Like the war is over, we conducting an occupation here and never in recorded history has there been a successful occupation of an arab country by a western country. Israel would be gone if it weren't for us and her nukes.
Lt Hegseth needs to leave his part-time work with the national guard and go to the regular Army, where he can see plenty of the combat he advocates. Company grade officers like himself have been leaving the service in droves, so there is lots of opportunity for him to put his beliefs into practice. Most soldiers and marines are on their 3rd or 4th deployment to his one, the real troops are worn out.
If he really believes in this fight, he needs to put his butt on the line again and get the job done.
Signs That They've Lost It
It isn't often that I get to tell you that a Democrat in leadership has thrown in the towel but that's what I'm about to do. It isn't that this Democrat has said that they've thrown in the towel outright. But this 'leader' hinted at it nonetheless. Here's a statement from a "congressional expert, followed by Harry Reid's way of saying they've lost:
"I think Americans were expecting a great deal from the new Congress, and Congress has always been held in low esteem, but Congress really hasn't delivered on what it promised, especially on Iraq," said Paul Light, a congressional expert who is a professor at New York University.Get serious, Harry. The day that Democrats stop relying on polling to determine their tactics and strategies is the day I'll start watching for pigs flying in V-formation over my house. His line about "doing what we think is the right thing for the American public" is just as laughable. Let's translate that quote using truth in advertising laws. Here's that translation:
Democrats in charge of Congress insist they have made progress on several issues, like increasing the minimum hourly wage and getting money for victims of the 2005 Katrina hurricane. They blame the Republican minority for a failure on others such as immigration, greater energy independence, and on negotiation of lower-priced drugs for Medicare.
"I'm not really much for polls," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada. "We're going to continue doing what we think is the right thing for the American public in spite of a White House and the Republicans who are stalling every step of the way."
We'll continue doing what we think will give us the most political capitol while whining about the Republicans' partisanship.
Here's another sign that they're losing:
Democrats drew a line in the sand over Iraq in the spring, using a $100 billion war spending bill to try to force Bush to accept a troop withdrawal date.When Reuters talks about Democrats failing miserably, you know that Democrats have lost it. When Reuters says that, it's a signal that they realize that they can't defend the indefensible. When that happens, Democrats are forced to fend for themselves, which isn't a pretty sight:
The effort failed miserably, with Bush finally getting what he wanted with no strings attached, and the White House saw the fractious debate as taking time away from work on other priorities.
Democrats beg to differ, pointing out that under their stewardship the Congress has resumed its traditional watchdog role over an administration they feel got off scot-free under Republican leadership.Ms. Pelosi talks about draining the swamp but she isn't credible. The truth is that what's really happened is that they've drained the swamp of Republican corruption and refilled it with liberal corruption. As for the oversight part, you can't have oversight without transparency. That's something that David Obey has struggled with:
"I would say in the first six months, gauging how things operate here from the majority, that we had some important work to do," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California. "We had to drain the swamp. We had to create the oversight."
House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey first skirted the new rules by claiming no earmarks were contained in the supplemental appropriations. Last week, he decreed that henceforth, earmarks in his bills would not be revealed until a measure passes both the House and Senate.So much for Democrats' credibility in draining the swamp and changing course in Washington.
---------------------------------
Rather than including specific pet projects, grants and contracts in legislation as it is being written, Democrats are following an order by the House Appropriations Committee chairman to keep the bills free of such earmarks until it is too late for critics to effectively challenge them.
Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., says those requests for dams, community grants and research contracts for favored universities or hospitals will be added to spending measures in the fall. That is when House and Senate negotiators assemble final bills to send to President Bush.
Last fall, I said that Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi weren't ready for primetime. Now I'm taking a minute to relax while I enjoy being vindicated. To be fair, though, it wasn't difficult to predict.
Posted Tuesday, July 10, 2007 11:29 AM
No comments.
We Will Bear Any Burden...
That's what Democrats used to stand for. Nowadays, they stand for whatever George Soros and the Nutroots tell them to stand for. The title for this op-ed is proof of that:
This is not our fight
This firmly paints Hillary into the anti-war corner. She's now officially declared herself a defeatist. Here's part of her op-ed:
The American people have waited long enough for progress in Iraq. They have waited long enough for the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own future. Today, more than 150,000 members of our armed forces are caught in a civil war. According to the Pentagon, overall levels of violence in Iraq have not decreased since the surge began. The last three months have been the deadliest period for American troops since the start of the war. It is time for the waiting to end and for our troops to start to come home.Though she wrote this op-ed with Robert Byrd, there's no mistaking that this is Hillary's writing. Let's dissect this bit by bit, starting here:
According to the Pentagon, overall levels of violence in Iraq have not decreased since the surge began.That might be what Murtha's cronies at the Pentagon are saying but that doesn't square with what the AP reported:
At least 1,227 Iraqi civilians were killed in June along with 190 police officers and 31 soldiers, an officer at the Iraqi Interior Ministry's operations room said. The officer spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to release the figures. That represented a 36 percent drop from the ministry's May figures, 1,949 civilian deaths along with 127 police and 47 soldiers.I don't blame Hillary for ignoring the AP's reporting on what the Iraqi Interior Ministry said. She's in a situation that's described as precarious at best. The worst news she could get politically is that the surge is working and that the media isn't hiding the positive things that are happening in Anbar and Diyala provinces. If the truth about the improvements happening as a direct result of Operation Arrowhead Ripper got out, Hillary wouldn't stand a chance of getting elected.
That is why we propose to end the authorization for the war in Iraq. The civil war we have on our hands in Iraq is not our fight and it is not the fight Congress authorized. Iraq is at war with itself and American troops are caught in the middle.That's a steaming pile of BS. Iraq isn't "at war with itself"; it's at war with al-Qa'ida and Iran, as I talked about here:
An operation west of Baghdad on Thursday focused on a cell making roadside bombs. Coalition forces killed one person and wounded another, the statement said. Three suspected were detained. Coalition forces detained another suspected al Qaeda terrorist in a separate raid in the Tarmiya area Thursday.That lays to rest the tired Murtha line that Sens. Byrd and Clinton used. If that doesn't convince liberals, perhaps this will:
"We're continuing to target all levels of the al Qaeda in Iraq organization and are disrupting both their leadership structure and operations," said U.S. military spokesman Lt. Col. Christopher Garver.
In raids Wednesday, forces captured a man suspected of being the al Qaeda in Iraq administrative emir for a Baghdad neighborhood. He is thought to handle logistics and financing for terrorist cells in the area. Three people believed to be his associates were also detained.
The self-proclaimed Islamic State of Iraq has given Iran a two-month ultimatum to stop meddling in Iraqi affairs or face all-out war, according to an audiotape posted on the Internet on Monday.Hillary isn't too bright if she's relying on John Murtha's propaganda. This section highlights what's happening: Sunni militant groups are threatening Iran for supplying Shi'ites with weapons. The last time I looked, civil wars are fought between rival factions of the same nation.
"We give... the leaders of Iran a period of two months to stop all forms of support to the rejectionists of Iraq, and stop direct and indirect interference in the affairs of the Islamic state," said a voice attributed to the group's leader Abu Omar al-Baghdadi.
The term rejectionists is used by Sunni militant groups to refer to Shiites, who dominate the government in Iraq and are in a majority in both Iraq and neighbouring Iran.
"Otherwise, expect a fierce war that will annihilate you, which we have been preparing for over the past four years and just waiting to issue the orders to wage the campaign," the voice said.
When we fought our Civil War, it wasn't a battle between Quakers and Canada. It was a war pitting the secessionist states against the rest of the states. I'd further argue that the Iraqi Interior Ministry statistics of Iraqi casualties dropping by 36 percent is proof that Operation Arrowhead Ripper is well on its way to reducing the level of sectarian violence in the hottest provinces.
If the Bush administration believes that the current war, as it is being executed, is critical to America's future, then it should make the case and let the people decide. Explain to the public why our young men and women should be sent into the middle of a fight between religious factions. Explain why we should continue to devote $10 billion each month to this fight.The last thing we want to do is give a bunch of grandstanding presidential candidates the chance to bloviate endlessly about how awful Iraq is, etc. Rather than making the case anew, perhaps it's best if Congress started dealing with facts instead of peddling half-truths and bald-faced lies. Perhaps the right thing to do is to have Congress use current, verifiable information to base their claims on.
That said, I know that people like Hillary and Robert Byrd won't start using verifiable information during debates. That's the last thing they want to do. They know that if they start using the information that Reuters, the LA Times, USA Today, Michael Yon, John Burns and CNN have reported, they couldn't demagogue this issue.
It's time that activists realized that this isn't just about Iraq. It's about selling the American people a bill of goods so that Democrats can maintain and/or increase their political power. That's why they don't care about the truth.
What a far cry today's Democratic Party is from the Democratic Party that JFK spoke so eloquently about in his inaugural address:
Let the word go forth from this time and place, to friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans, born in this century, tempered by war, disciplined by a hard and bitter peace, proud of our ancient heritage, and unwilling to witness or permit the slow undoing of those human rights to which this Nation has always been committed, and to which we are committed today at home and around the world.Hillary's Democratic Party thinks that any price is too high, any burden too heavy, any hardship too unbearable. Hillary's Democratic Party also thinks that supporting our friends and opposing the enemies of liberty is just too much work. Look what they're advocating in this op-ed.
Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.
I'd like to ask honest liberals of the Lieberman ilk if that's the political party that you feel honored to be part of. If it isn't, then isn't it time to announce, like Reagan did, that the Democratic Party has left you, that you haven't left it? Isn't it time that you said that you still believe in JFK's soaring rhetoric about liberty and reject the defeatism of Hillary Clinton, John Murtha and Harry Reid?
Posted Tuesday, July 10, 2007 1:20 PM
No comments.
Stars & Stripes On Baqouba
This article in Stars & Stripes ' online journal offers more proof that the surge has worked. Here's the specific progress that's been made:
While the military has largely changed its focus to cementing the gains made by U.S. and Iraqi troops who swept through Baqouba, troops continue to find weapons and ammunition caches, officials said Monday.That isn't their only accomplishment:
The fight to clear Baqouba of al-Qaida in Iraq operatives has been dubbed Operation Arrowhead Ripper, and has been going on for more than three weeks.
According to the U.S. military command, troops from the 5th Battalion, 20th Infantry Regiment and 3rd Battalion, 1st Brigade, 5th Iraqi Army Division "discovered and disabled five vehicles being prepared as [car bombs] and caches containing pipe bombs, sniper rifles and other explosives and IED-making materials."
In western Baqouba, troops from 1st Battalion, 12th Cavalry Regiment reported finding an al-Qaida "safe house" with medical supplies and equipment. The supplies were seized and distributed to civilians , officials said.Then there's this:
Brig. Gen. Mick Bednarek, the Task Force Lightning deputy commander for operations, was quoted as saying, "Not only have we cleared out the active al-Qaida operatives in the western part of the city, but more importantly, started to return fundamental life and normalcy to the citizens in that part of the city, food, water, fuel, those things that are essential to the trust and confidence of the people in their government."Finally, there's this:
Since the beginning of the operation, some 60 suspected al-Qaida operatives have been reported killed and 215 have been arrested. Fifty-five weapons caches have been discovered and 24 booby-trapped structures have been destroyed, officials said Monday.That isn't too bad for less than a month's work, is it?
Posted Wednesday, July 11, 2007 3:52 AM
No comments.
Rep. Murtha Running For Cover
John Murtha is running for cover following this Foxnews.com article and my call to his office for a statement. First, here's the key part of the Foxnews story:
The government's theory that Lance Cpl. Justin L. Sharratt had executed the three men was "incredible" and relied on contradictory statements by Iraqis, Lt. Col. Paul Ware said in the report, released Tuesday by Sharratt's defense attorneys.After reading this article, I called Congressman Murtha's office to see if he had a statement, "especially in light of his statements on This Week With George Stephanopoulos over a year ago."
"To believe the government version of facts is to disregard clear and convincing evidence to the contrary, and sets a dangerous precedent that, in my opinion, may encourage others to bear false witness against Marines as a tactic to erode public support of the Marine Corps and mission in Iraq," Ware wrote.
Defense attorneys James Culp and Gary Myers said in a statement that he was pleased with the report and that it "reflected the value of the calm of a courtroom and the adversarial process."
Sharratt's mother Theresa said she was overjoyed.
"This is a huge result, that report is a declaration of Justin's innocence ," she said. "This is very, very good news."
I asked the woman that answered the phone "if Congressman Murtha had a statement following a news story regarding Lt. Col. Paul Ware's report stating that "The government's theory that Lance Cpl. Justin L. Sharratt had executed the three men was "incredible" and relied on contradictory statements by Iraqis."
Instead of answering that question, she asked "So the trial is over?" I told her that it wasn't, that the recommendation was nonbinding. Then she asked "So it isn't over?" I confirmed that it wasn't. I asked if Congressman Murtha would "like to make a statement considering his accusations made over a year ago on 'This Week With George Stephanopoulos'"? Here's her response: "Congressman Murtha doesn't have a statement because the investigation is still ongoing."
Undeterred, I read her the quote from Cpl. Sharratt's mother:
"This is a huge result, that report is a declaration of Justin's innocence," she said. "This is very, very good news."I said, "In light of Cpl. Sharratt's mother's quote, isn't it appropriate to make a statement?" Murtha's spokeswoman repeated "Congressman Murtha doesn't have a statement because the investigation is still ongoing."
I asked a third time only to get the same response.
They'll have to back away from that statement because the investigation isn't ongoing . The investigation ended when Cpl. Sharratt's Article 32 trial started. Therefore, Murtha's official statement is spin and isn't based on the facts.
It's my considered opinion that Murtha's office is tapdancing as fast as they can because they've been exposed.
I'd further suggest that this statement fails on another level. Murtha's spokeswoman said that he won't comment because the investigation is ongoing.
- If he was worried about not influencing the investigation, why did he accuse these Marines of "killing innocent civilians in cold blood" on national TV?
- Why did Rep. Murtha say "It's much worse than was reported in Time magazine"?
- Why did Rep. Murtha say "There was no firefight. There was no [bomb] that killed those innocent people"?
Rep. Murtha has reason to worry. He's accused a group of heroic Marines of cold-blooded murder. He made that accusation before being briefed by Gen. Hagee:
Murtha, a Pennsylvania Democrat, is being sued by one of the accused Marines for libel. He had told The Philadelphia Inquirer that Gen. Michael Hagee had given him the information on which he based his charge that Marines killed innocent civilians.Now he's concerned about not influencing the investigation and trial?
But a spokesman for the Marine Corps said Hagee briefed Murtha on May 24 about Haditha. Murtha had made comments on the case as early as May 17.
On May 17, for example, he said at a news conference, "Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood."
Given what we know, isn't it much more likely that his spokeswoman knows that he's been caught wrongfully accusing a group of Marines of killing "innocent civilians in cold blood"? Isn't it much more likely that his accusations weren't based on facts presented at a Pentagon briefing? Isn't it much more likely that his accusations were based on his agenda to become House Majority leader?
His spokeswoman's statement is the least of his worries. This article clearly shows that Rep. Murtha's accusations were, at best, premature, which means he violated Cpl. Sharratt's rights to a fair trial and Cpl. Sharratt's due process rights.
This information should lead to an investigation into Rep. Murtha's accusations. Furthermore, he should testify under oath about the source of his information. Additionally, Rep. Murtha should be asked to explain why he wasn't initially concerned with Cpl. Sharratt's constitutional right to a fair trial.
If Rep. Murtha is found to have railroaded Cpl. Sharratt and the other Marines, shouldn't that be grounds to have him punished by the House of Representatives up to and including his removal from office? It seems to me that congressmen violating a soldier's constitutional rights and accusing the military of covering the underlying incident up before being briefed is about as serious an offense as it gets. It seems to me that that's corruption of a most odious nature.
Finally, shouldn't members of the Democratic leadership be asked if they knew that Rep. Murtha's accusations weren't based on an official Pentagon briefing. If they knew that he hadn't been briefed but still accused Cpl. Sharratt and the other Haditha Marines, aren't Democratic leaders guilty of throwing Cpl. Sharratt's constitutional protections under the bus? At minimum, they were morally responsible for chastising Rep. Murtha for his actions.
Finally, shouldn't Cpl. Sharratt and the other Haditha Marines be set free? Based on Paul Ware's report and recommendation, isn't it impossible to convict these men?
UPDATE: Welcome Instapundit readers. Read all my posts on Murtha's ethical problems. And by all means tune into the Dirk Thompson show Saturday night at 6:05 CT to hear how we can put pressure on one of the most unethical members of congress.
Finally, make sure you check out the great reporting on Murtha over at California Conservative.
UPDATE II: If you want to put more pressure on Murtha, call Nancy Pelosi's office & ask if she plans on asking that the ethics committee will hold hearings on this.
UPDATE III: Welcome Michelle Malkin readers. Check back tomorrow for more updates. I will be calling John Murtha's office to get an official response. I expect to get the silent treatment but I'll still attempt to prod them for a response.
Originally posted Wednesday, July 11, 2007, revised 09-Aug 3:40 PM
Comment 1 by Mike H. at 12-Jul-07 02:08 PM
We need to have the Marine Corps excommunicate rep. murtha.
Comment 2 by ic at 12-Jul-07 10:30 PM
Murtha was Nifong-ing the Marines.
Comment 3 by Jessica Friedman at 12-Jul-07 11:53 PM
Apparently, the San Diego Natural History Museum has decided to present only the old, and today hotly disputed, theory about who wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls, because to explain the current debate opposing two groups of scholars would "confuse" the public. Meanwhile, the exhibit's curator has backed away from her initial claim to be a "Dead Sea Scrolls scholar." What isn't clear, is whether the museum hired her on the basis of that claim...
http://www.nowpublic.com/dead_sea_scrolls_exhibit_misleads_public
http://www.nowpublic.com/dead_sea_scrolls_san_diego_natural_history_museum_update
Comment 4 by rangerRon at 13-Jul-07 03:55 AM
Actually, because Murtha was a serving Officer in the Marine Corp Reserve, and they are subject to recall to active duty at any time from Retirement, Murtha may be subject to Courtsmartial under the U.C.M.J. for interferring in an active Artical 32 investigation, by making prejudicial statements about active duty Marines!This could be Conduct Unbecoming an Officer, if nothing else.Murtha is a sad example of the Vietnam era leadership, who like Kerry and Gore, showed up, collected what medals they could weasle and cut and run, leaving the enlisted pukes to carry the load, and they haven't changed a lick. If anyone knows a JAG officer, check out to see if I'm right about the UCMJ!
Comment 5 by ke34htgf9y21 at 13-Jul-07 06:24 AM
Maybe he's worried about influencing the investigation for his own trial.
Comment 6 by ArmyLawyer at 13-Jul-07 07:39 AM
Couple points of correction.
The Article 32 hearing is not a trial. It is an investigation. It is conducted much like a mini-trial. But the Article 32 officer's recommendations to the convening authority are just that, recommendations.
The convening authority may decide to reject the 32 officer's recommendations and we still go to trial and determine just how credible/incredible the gov't theory is.
Charges have not been withdrawn yet and while I am no fan of Murtha, but his people are basically correct when they say that the investigation is still ongoing.
And to suggest that public comments, however odious, by one who has no ability or authority over the case violated LCpl Sharratt's due process rights or right to a fair trial is just silly.
Again, he's a douche for what he said, but for political, not legal reasons.
Comment 7 by Gary Gross at 13-Jul-07 08:09 AM
ArmyLawyer, Fair point. The bigger point I tried making about Murtha's spokeswoman saying that he wouldn't have a comment because the investigation was to point out Murtha's hypocrisy. It didn't bother him in the least to declare on national TV that these marines were guilty of cold-blooded murder with the original investigation still ongoing.
Comment 8 by David W at 13-Jul-07 04:55 PM
Nothing will happen to Murtha. Even though he is a disgusting and disgraceful man, he will just walk on by wistling and skipping along the way. I can't wait to read and hear about his long over due appointment for retirement. I only hope that he moves down to God's waiting room(Florida) and starts blowing wind there!
Comment 9 by Jonathan Collins at 13-Jul-07 11:26 PM
Murtha should be punished for his actions and if the Democrats are silent on this issue than they are just as amoral as Murtha is. This is further proof that the Democrats want to lose this war for political purposes.
Washington Post Weighs In on Murtha Scandal
Rep. Murtha is about to feel alot more heat now that the Washington Post weighed in with this article. Here's the most important section from the article's first few paragraphs:
Ware's 18-page report, released by Sharratt's lawyers, has gone to Lt. Gen. James Mattis, commander of the I Marine Expeditionary Force, who now will decide how to proceed in the case. Mattis could deviate from the recommendation and order either an administrative punishment or a court martial, but in doing so he would be going against Ware's strongly worded conclusion that Sharratt did nothing wrong.If Gen. Mattis recommends Cpl. Sharratt for court martial, he should be investigated for corruption. I simply don't see a good faith basis for further action. I can see a political basis for further action but Justin Sharratt, Frank Wuterich and the rest of these Marines deserve better treatment than that.
This section points out another hurdle that NCIS would have to overcome:
Sharratt, 22, of Canonsburg, Pa., was never linked to any significant role in the first group of houses and has all along acknowledged that he shot and killed three or four men in another home later on Nov. 19, saying he believed the men were threatening him with weapons. Sharratt told investigators that he used a 9mm pistol to shoot the men when his rifle jammed as he and Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich were searching the house.It seems to me that Col. Ware's direct statements are categorical in nature and that they're based on "all available evidence", not theory. Based on the Constitution, that usually means that a person can't be found guilty by a jury examining the evidence.
Ware said all available evidence shows that Sharratt perceived a threat and reacted appropriately.
"Using his training, he responded instinctively, assaulting into the room and emptying his pistol," Ware wrote. "Whether this was a brave act of combat against the enemy or tragedy of misperception born out of conducting combat with an enemy that hides among innocents, LCpl Sharratt's actions were in accord with the rules of engagement and use of force."
Furthermore, Col. Ware's statement that "Sharratt's actions were in accord with the rules of engagement and use of force" says that the government's case is weak at best and non-existent at worst.
Based on this information, it's easy to see that the potential ramifications to Rep. Murtha's career are profound and troubling. Rep. Murtha repeatedly said that Cpl. Sharratt, Sgt. Wuterich and others had killed innocent civilians in cold blood. Here's something else that Rep. Murtha said:
GIBSON: I heard you tell George Stephanopoulos on Sunday that you believe this is murder, followed by a cover-up and I've heard you also say that what happened is well-known in Marine circles. Why are you so sure it was murder?Why did Murtha automatically assume that "Marines would do this"? Furthermore, why would he jump to saying "Hopefully, this is an isolated incident" while the investigation was still ongoing? (Remember that Murtha's office said that he wouldn't comment because the investigation is ongoing.)
MURTHA: Charles, I started hearing about this probably right before the Time Magazine article and then I heard officially about it about two months ago. And there's no question in my mind, when they pay people, as they did right after the incident, a team went into to investigate this immediately afterward. I mean it breaks my heart to think that Marines would do this. Hopefully, this is an isolated incident. But, you know, we're supposed to be selling ideas of America, ideals of America, and we're losing that war.
Furthermore, what's Murtha's source in saying that the Pentagon (or is he talking about the Marines?) paid people off? What evidence did Murtha base this statement off of? Here's another exchange that should make Murtha nervous:
GIBSON: Jonathan just mentioned, there's no charges yet filed against any of the Marines that were in this outfit, but Jonathan mentioned a moment ago, defense lawyers are already saying, well, there's drone video and there is actual radio traffic to higher-ups that will give a different picture than you have been talking about of this incident. What do you know about that?That's important because Rep. Murtha said that the "Commandant of the Marine Corps was in my office just last week." The Commandant at that time was Gen. Hagee. What's significant about that is that this transcript was posted on May 30, 2006 on the Think Progress blog. Earlier I posted that Rep. Murtha made those incendiary accusations on May 17, 2006.
MURTHA: I can only tell you this, Charles. This is what the Marine Corps told me at the highest level. The Commandant of the Marine Corps was in my office just last week , so you know, I know there was a cover-up someplace. They knew about this a few days afterwards and there's no question the chain of command tried to stifle the story. I can understand why, but that doesn't excuse it. Something like this has to be brought out to the public, and the people have to be punished.
What's significant with that transcript is that Rep. Murtha just admitted that Gen. Hagee briefed him a week after making those accusations. That's Murtha admitting, directly, that Hagee told him about this incident approximately a week after Rep. Murtha first accused (a) the Marines of cold-blooded murder and (b) the Marines of covering the incident up.
In other words, Rep. Murtha has just painted himself into a proverbial corner. He didn't leave himself any wiggle room, either. That isn't all, though:
By clearing Sharratt in the specific shootings of Jasib Aiad Ahmed, Kahtan Aiad Ahmed and Jamal Aiad Ahmed, Ware also appeared to clear Wuterich in the same attack, concluding that the Marines' version of events was more credible than the claims of local residents who said the deaths were executions. Ware found that physical evidence showed that the shots, all facing forward and from a distance, were "inconsistent with an execution or persons reacting to an execution."That's exactly what Col. Ware just did. This is significant because Sgt. Wuterich filed a defamation lawsuit against Rep. Murtha:
A Marine Corps staff sergeant who led the squad accused of killing two dozen civilians in Haditha, Iraq, will file a lawsuit today in federal court in Washington claiming that Rep. John P. Murtha (D-PA) defamed him when the congressman made public comments about the incident earlier this year.Col. Ware's recommendations would seemingly bolster Sgt. Wuterich's defamation lawsuit against Rep. Murtha, too.
Attorneys for Frank D. Wuterich, 26, argue in court papers that Murtha tarnished the Marine's reputation by telling news organizations in May that the Marine unit cracked after a roadside bomb killed one of its members and that the troops "killed innocent civilians in cold blood." Murtha also said repeatedly that the incident was covered up.
The potential political ramifications of this can't be overstated. If these charges are dropped, then serious journalists will press Murtha on what he based his statements on. They'll also press Speaker Pelosi about why she didn't investigate the accusations by Sgt. Wuterich against Rep. Murtha. If it's shown that Murtha lied about the Haditha Marines, his diatribes about civil war in Iraq and the war being unwinnable won't be taken seriously.
There's one last thing that must be noted:
GIBSON: In terms of a cover-up, do you think this ever would have come to light if Time Magazine hadn't pursued this so relentlessly using the video form this human rights organization?While Rep. Murtha 'bemoans' an imaginary coverup, the facts say otherwise. There are people with a different opinion of that night's incidents:
MURTHA: No, I do not think it would have come out , and it's unfortunate because this is how you lose the Iraqi people. If you're going to win a war like this, you got to promote the ideals and ideas of American democracy, and there's no question in my mind that we're losing it.
The battalion S2 officer made a full and complete report based on his monitoring of the day's events and the intelligence he and others had amassed then and previous days. As we wrote at the time, the PowerPoint after-action report he sent up the command ladder proved to all the higher officers that the incident warranted no further investigation.I'm curious why Rep. Murtha would say that it's "unfortunate" that the Marine Corps covered this incident up. Why would he say that when sworn testimony by the S2 intel officer who gathered all this information, put it into a PowerPoint report and sent it up the chain of command totally refutes his charges of a coverup?
Is Rep. Murtha lying? Or is Rep. Murtha 'just' accusing the S2 intel officer? Or is Rep. Murtha accusing the S2 officer and the S2's superiors of lying, too?
We the People demand an answer. If Rep. Murtha isn't willing to talk about it freely, then our next remedy is to petition the House leadership to hold hearings to get to the truth of the matter.
Originally posted Wednesday, July 11, 2007, revised 14-Jul 4:04 PM
Comment 1 by bill at 12-Jul-07 07:19 AM
Strange when you consider the fact than when Murtha convicted the marines without a hearing or trial and when others said hey maybe we should wait for the evidence, Murtha said no need we know what happened.
I hope this Murtha clown goes face down in the dirt.
Some leader he is, I guess when you act like he did during ABSCAM, the character of the man eventually surfaces.
Truth From Iraq
(H/T Powerline )
Posted Wednesday, July 11, 2007 11:17 PM
No comments.
