May 31, 2006

This, Too, Could Be Yours

Now, does any one need to be reminded why mass immigration without assimilation a bad idea?


Small gangs of youths pelted riot police with rocks and set cars and garbage bins ablaze late Tuesday in a second night of unrest in the Paris suburbs, raising fears of a return of the disturbances that inflamed 300 French towns and suburbs last fall.

The violence of the last two nights -- in which youths attacked police cars, government buildings and riot police -- was sparked in part by mounting resentment toward the mayor of the northeastern Paris suburb of Montfermeil, who in recent weeks imposed a law prohibiting 15- to 18-year-olds from gathering in groups of more than three and requiring anyone under 16 to be accompanied by an adult on city streets after 8 p.m.

The French government last fall promised to improve living conditions and job opportunities in suburbs heavily populated by immigrant families and where unemployment is rampant, but little has been done and the government's main initiative -- a youth jobs bill -- ended with this spring's politically disastrous student demonstrations.

This is Paris, France, but it could just as easily be Paris, Texas.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again and again: importing poverty is never going to solve a nation's problems and instead, can only add to them.

If you think nearly unchecked immigration is a problem now, wait until 40 million more arrive with little or no education, little or no job skills, and little or no English language skills.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 10:02 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 268 words, total size 2 kb.

John Murtha: My Lai-r

Perhaps it is simply my perception, but it seems to me that the intent of some to turn the killing of approximately 24 Iraqi civilians by Marines into this war's My Lai has failed thus far, and I somewhat doubt that meme will have chance of growing beyond the far left. The differences between the incidents far outweigh the similarities.

For those of you unfamiliar with it, My Lai (note: the following is summarized from the Wikipedia entry on the subject) was a massacre of hundreds of unarmed Vietnamese civilians by a Charlie Company, 11th Brigade, Americal Division of the U. S. Army. Ostensibly, U.S. intelligence pinpointed the 48th Battalion of the Vietcong as hiding in Son My village, specifically in areas labeled My Lai 1-4. Lt. William Calley led a platoon into the area, and after finding no Vietcong, they killed between 347-504 civilians, some after being raped or tortured. The date was March 16, 1968.

A cover-up of the incident was almost immediate, with the 11th Light Infantry Brigade's Commanding Officer, Colonel Oran Henderson running a cursory investigation that found just 22 civilians had died inadvertently while 128 Vietcong had been killed. Letters from several soldiers finally got the attention of Congress approximately a year later. They story broke publicly in November of 1969, and some reports indicate that thoughts of a cover-up (read the Wikipedia entry, take it for what it is worth) ran through many levels of the Army Officer Corps, all the way to the National Security Advisor and the Secretary of Defense.

The incident is major note not only for the brutality and scale of the massacre, but for the light punishment given to those who perpetrated it (Calley served just 3 1/2 years years as the only conviction), and the huge shift in perception it brought, bolstering and providing fuel for the anti-war movement.

But Haditha is not My Lai.

I will tread very carefully in discussing the Haditha incident as it is still under investigation, but we do know certain things that are beyond doubt. We know that on November 19, 2005, one Marine was killed and two more were injured when an IED went off near a convoy from Kilo Company, 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines. We know that immediately after the event other Marines in the convoy dismounted and approximately 24 Iraqis were killed, some of them women and children. Everything else at this point is speculation.

My Lai started without any recognizable provocation, and seems to be a blatant small-scale genocide. Haditha had a real and quantifiable trigger; the death of one Marine and the injury of two others by an IED detonation. Right or wrong, Haitha had a discernible triggering event.

Unlike My Lai, there is no evidence of an attempt at a high level cover-up whatsoever with Haditha. Three officers—two Captains and a Lt. Colonel have been relieved of command, and at least two separate and apparently quite thorough investigations by the NCIS were launched months ago.

The Haditha investigations will also be far more thorough and accurate than the investigations at My Lai for several reasons.

First, the investigation in the Haditha has same-day evidence collection, including digital photos obtained by another Marine unit that responded to the area. It may also have some real-time evidence collected, as there is some indication that drone surveillance aircraft and radio communications may have also captured details of the events of that day. Forensic science has also progressed phenomenally in the near 40 years since My Lai, and the likelihood of investigations obtaining a far more detailed forensic record of events is all but assured. It seems most of these events happened indoors where evidence such as bullet holes in walls, fragmentation patterns, and firing lanes are precisely known.

No, Haditha is not like My Lai, but that has not stopped some from trying to inflate it to that level.

Chief among them is ex-Marine and current Democratic congressman John Murtha, who has alleged that the Haditha incident was cold-blooded murder, that this incident is indicative of the policy of our troops and now, that the incident is being covered up by the highest authority in the Marine Corps, citing Marine Corps General and Joint Chief of Staff Peter Pace by position, if not by name.

All of these charges by Murtha are unproven hyperbole, set forth with but one goal in mind: "redeploying" all American soldiers out of Iraq. The Haditha incident may be Murtha's last, best hope of purposefully losing a war he first began trying to undermine in 2004. John Murtha is willfully attempting to smear the entire Marine Corps chain of command (and by the extension, the Corps itself) down the river to advance his political agenda.

Always Faithful?

Hardly.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 10:31 AM | Comments (67) | Add Comment
Post contains 802 words, total size 5 kb.

May 30, 2006

Letter From a Wannabe God

"Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong"

--Dire Straits, "Industrial Disease"

This morning I got email from Jesus himself. Actually, I got email from a liberal blogger who styles himself "Gen. JC Christian, patriot." The email, addressed to others and myself, ran as follows:


Hugh Hewitt, Hugh Hewitt Show

Bob Owens, Confederate Yankee

Gary Gross, California Conservative

Biggus Dickus, Blue Crab Boulevard

Dear Mr. Hewitt, Mr Owens, Mr. Gross, and Mr. Dickus,

About a week and a half ago, each of you published scathing posts attacking Rep. John Murtha for his comments about war crimes at Al Haditha, Iraq. Mr Owens called for Murtha's censure; Mr. Dickus demanded his resignation; Mr. Gross wants him frog marched off the Hill.

What seemed to enrage you the most about Murtha's comments was that he had made them before it has been established by the Marine Corps that a crime had been committed. I couldn't agree more. I mean we aren't talking about a goatherd at Gitmo here, we can't jump to any conclusions until Our Leader and Sean Hannity tell us it's acceptable to do so.

Maybe it wasn't a war crime at all. The final report might show that the victims were all terrorists. Who knows? Perhaps the 6 year old was shouldering an RPG and the 3 and 4 year olds were manning a .50 cal machine gun. We won't know until the final report is issued.

But as much grief as you gave Murtha for his remarks, you haven't written a word about remarks attributed to Rep. John Kline:

"I was saddened, surprised and outraged that this could happen," Kline said. He said he thought the incident would be regarded as "a horrific aberration" for the Marines.
Why have you been silent? Isn't he jumping to the same conclusion as Murtha? An official report hasn't been issued. He can't be certain that a war crime was committed, can he.

Worse yet, like Murtha, Kline is a retired Marine. Why is it that these ex-leathernecks seem to be the angriest about what happened at Haditha? Does leaving the Marine Corps cause you to hate America? Maybe you should look into that.

Oh wait. I just realized that Kline is a Republican and one of Our Leader's most loyal servants.

Never mind.

Heterosexually yours,

Gen. JC Christian, patriot

While the others will presumably ignore this email (not the least reason of which is that he didn't bother to send it to everyone he addressed) and with good reason, I personally have no problem at all answering "General Christian."

It is a fair question to ask why I chose to call for Murtha's censure, while ignoring Kline's comments thus far, though I thought the answer would be quite obvious to any reasonable person, much less our Lord and Savior.

Kline, himself a former Marine, stated in the Washington Post (side note to General Christian: a link to a quote is good email etiquette, which is something even a false deity should know):


"I was saddened, surprised and outraged that this could happen," Kline said. He said he thought the incident would be regarded as "a horrific aberration" for the Marines.

He was further quoted three days later in the NY Times, "This was a small number of Marines who fired directly on civilians and killed them," adding "This is going to be an ugly story."

Does anyone have a difficulty spotting the difference between Kline's comments about the deaths in Haditha, and these from Murtha?


Rep. John Murtha, an influential Pennsylvania lawmaker and outspoken critic of the war in Iraq, said today Marines had “killed innocent civilians in cold blood” after allegedly responding to a roadside bomb ambush that killed a Marine during a patrol in Haditha, Iraq, Nov. 19.

[snip]

Murtha said combat stress prompted the Marines' alleged rampage.
“It's a very serious incident, unfortunately. It shows the tremendous pressure that these guys are under every day when they're out in combat,” he said. “One man was killed with an [improvised explosive device] and after that they actually went into the houses and killed women and children.”

Kline notes the undisputed facts that the killing of 24 civilians was conducted by Marines, that this was going to be an "ugly story" and that in his opinion, such killing by Marines were "an aberration." At no point in his commentary did he attempt to assign motive, nor guilt, nor innocence. He merely commented on what most of us already knew from the Times and ABC News follow-up reports in mid-March.

John Murtha, however, has apparently declared himself prosecutor, judge and jury in this case. He pointedly accuses the Marines of killing civilians "in cold blood," and even attempts to ascribe a motive and a mindset, more than six weeks before the report of the investigation is even ready for release.

Perhaps in his omnipotence General JC Christian can look into the hearts of men and know what is in their souls, but John Murtha does not have that capability, nor do other mortal men.

It is for that very reason we have a criminal justice system, so on this mortal plane we can attempt to determine (as best we can) guilt or innocence by collecting evidence of a crime, filing charges against the accused, holding a trial where evidence is shown by both sides, prosecution and defense, before finally rendering a verdict of guilt or innocence.

I called for Murtha's censure because he attempted to short circuit the military criminal justice system, prejudging these Marines guilty without the benefit of due process, and potentially compromising the integrity of the criminal proceedings. I made no complaint against Kline, because Kline never even approached improperly interfering in this case.

A deity, particularly an omnipotent one, would presumably know such things. But as well all know, "General JC Christian, patriot" isn't a deity, but merely another poor player as the Bard noted, strutting and fretting his hour upon the stage before he, too, will be heard from no more.

I wish the good General all the best in his blogging endeavors, and hope that the real Jesus is as amused by his antics as I have been.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 10:28 AM | Comments (110) | Add Comment
Post contains 1042 words, total size 7 kb.

May 26, 2006

Indefensible Acts

When the story first broke in March that on November 19, 2005, a Marine unit in the Iraqi city of Haditha may have killed nearby civilians after an IED killed one Marine and injured two others, I made a simple statement.


Someone who truly supports the troops, even if they do not support the war, would want this incident fully investigated to uncover the truth. They would want to know the facts.

They would want to know if the Marines fired out of blind rage at the loss of their friends, and they would be equally interested in finding out if the Marines assaulted that location because someone inside fired upon them, as they claimed. Was it a slaughter of innocents, or were insurgents firing from within civilian homes? Were those that triggered the IED among the dead? We do not yet know, and some are already passing judgment.

If a just-published New York Times article on the investigation is true, then the incident was far worse than we dared suspect:


A military investigation into the deaths of two dozen Iraqis last November is expected to find that a small number of marines in western Iraq carried out extensive, unprovoked killings of civilians, Congressional, military and Pentagon officials said Thursday.

Two lawyers involved in discussions about individual marines' defenses said they thought the investigation could result in charges of murder, a capital offense. That possibility and the emerging details of the killings have raised fears that the incident could be the gravest case involving misconduct by American ground forces in Iraq.

[snip]

Evidence indicates that the civilians were killed during a sustained sweep by a small group of marines that lasted three to five hours and included shootings of five men standing near a taxi at a checkpoint, and killings inside at least two homes that included women and children, officials said.

That evidence, described by Congressional, Pentagon and military officials briefed on the inquiry, suggested to one Congressional official that the killings were "methodical in nature."

Congressional and military officials say the Naval Criminal Investigative Service inquiry is focusing on the actions of a Marine Corps staff sergeant serving as squad leader at the time, but that Marine officials have told members of Congress that up to a dozen other marines in the unit are also under investigation. Officials briefed on the inquiry said that most of the bullets that killed the civilians were now thought to have been "fired by a couple of rifles," as one of them put it.

I'm not sure how to address this. I'd braced myself for the worst from the very first reporting of this story, steeling myself to the possibility that U. S. Marines, distraught over the death of one of their own, went on an anguished, emotional rampage in the immediate wake of the event, lashing out in a blind rage against the first possible targets that crossed their paths. This, of course, would still be a crime, but one that could be understood, if not tolerated.

But if sometimes truth is sometimes stranger than fiction, sometimes reality is worse than our darkest nightmares. If the Times article is correct, a staff sergeant led a squad on a methodical, multi-hour killing spree.

Why was this allowed to occur? Why was this sergeant not relieved of his command, and this unit immediately forced to stand down by other Marines? This event could not have occurred in a vacuum, and other Marines watched these murders occur, presumably without making any serious attempts to intervene.

I grew up on Guadalcanal Diary and the Sands of Iwo Jima, and have always had a fondness in my heart for the Marines that I saw from nearby MCAS Cherry Point and Camp Lejeune. The apparent fact that Marines stood by and let one or more of their brethren massacre civilians, and then apparently tried to cover up the crime (which will be the target of a separate investigation) are black stains on the long and storied honor of the Corps, and that sickens my heart.

If the Times reporting of this incident is correct, there does seem to be the possibility of capital crimes. Let the investigation proceed, let the trial be fair and unambiguous, and let justice be swift.

* * *

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:


Â…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.

Note: It is important to remember that the investigation is still on-going and that the final NCIS report is not expected for another 30 days. No Marines have yet been officially charged.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 11:31 AM | Comments (45) | Add Comment
Post contains 1069 words, total size 8 kb.

May 24, 2006

The Nerve of This Guy

Would somebody have the decency to tell this man that he is losing the war?


Iraqi troops will be able to handle security in all 18 of the country's provinces by the end of 2007 with additional training and equipment, the country's new prime minister said Wednesday.

[snip]

It is the second time in a week that al-Maliki has discussed a timeline for the handover of security responsibilities to Iraqi troops -- a development that President Bush has said would enable U.S. troops to leave.

With more training and better equipment, "Our security forces will be capable of taking over the security portfolio in all Iraqi provinces within one year and a half,"...

[snip]

During a joint appearance with British Prime Minister Tony Blair on Monday, al-Maliki said his government could take over security for 16 of Iraq's 18 provinces by the end of this year.

Obviously, Prime Minister al-Maliki has not asked permission to win the war from "liberal hawk" John Murtha, who said Iraq was unwinnable. He has not heeded the common wisdom of the New York Times, that Iraq was, is, and always will be a quagmire.

This Prime Minister Nouri Kamel al-Maliki ignores the pundits and the fatalists that long ago consigned his nation to the status of a lost cause.

Just who does he think he is to win?

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 06:40 PM | Comments (18) | Add Comment
Post contains 232 words, total size 2 kb.

May 22, 2006

Is Hezbollah's Preemptive Surrender a Tip-Off?

It looks liked Iran's hoped for "second front" in the event of U.S. military intervention into the future of its nuclear program development has just signaled a preemptive surrender:


Lebanon's Hizbollah, a close ally of Iran, would not jump to Tehran's defence if the U.S. launched a strike against its nuclear programme but would step in if the conflict spread to Lebanon, its deputy chief said on Monday.

Sheikh Naim Kassem told Reuters that the guerrilla group, which was established by Iran in the early 1980s but has since grown into a political party with 14 seats in parliament, had no plans to get involved in regional battles.

"Hizbollah is not a tool of Iran, it is a Lebanese project that implements the demands of Lebanese," Kassem said in an interview in the Hizbollah-controlled southern suburb of Beirut.

"Iran is a big country with real capabilities and can defend itself if it is exposed to American danger."

Kassem's message is more circumstantial evidence for those of us who feel that Iran is likely to be a nuclear provocateur if allowed to continue uranium enrichment unmolested. His statement of Hezbollah's military neutrality and defensive posture in the event of an Israel-Iran conflagration would seem to indicate that:

  1. Hezbollah has reason to believe that a conflict between Iran and Israel is a near term possibility.
  2. Hezbollah believes that the conflict will be of sufficient magnitude that a potentially debilitating counterstrike would pose a serious threat to their operations.

But what magnitude or retaliation could be so sufficient as to threaten a decentralized organization such as Hezbollah? The final graph of the article seems to indicate the expected conflict could be a region killer:


"If we assume the worst possible scenario, that Iran was completely cut off, Hizbollah would continue because it is based on faith. We are a political, ideological and jihadist party...," Kassem said. "This is a religion we believe in whether Iran is there or not."

Sheikh Naim Kassem, friend of Iran, speaks of a worst possible scenario that envisions his ally no longer existing.

Determing why he might feel this way, and why he might feel this way now is of the utmost importance.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 07:33 PM | Comments (15) | Add Comment
Post contains 376 words, total size 2 kb.

May 19, 2006

Completing the Circle

Update: Claims that religious minorities inside Iran would be forced to wear identifying colored badges are now being challenged and appear to be false.

Something old is new again:


Human rights groups are raising alarms over a new law passed by the Iranian parliament that would require the country's Jews and Christians to wear coloured badges to identify them and other religious minorities as non-Muslims.
"This is reminiscent of the Holocaust," said Rabbi Marvin Hier, the dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles. "Iran is moving closer and closer to the ideology of the Nazis."

Au contraire, my good Rabbi. Iranians are not acting like Nazis. As Michael Rubin
points out, they simply are acting more like Iranians:


The Nazi practice of forcing Jews to wear a yellow star had its origins in what is now Iran and Iraq when a ninth century caliph forced his Jewish subjects to wear yellow patches. From time to time, subsequent rulers revived the practice. Shiite clerics long deemed any food touched by Jews to be unclean. While blood libel only took root in Iranian society after the sixteenth-century arrival of European ambassadors, as Iranian society wrestled with modernity, violent anti-Semitism grew. Pogroms wiped out the Jewish community in some towns and villages in Iranian Azerbaijan in the mid-nineteenth century, and serious pogroms also swept through Mashhad, a Shiite shrine city in northeastern Iran in which the current supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, was born and raised. It was also in Mashhad that, despite the oft-cited mantra that there is no compulsion in Islam, Shiite clerics forcibly converted the remaining Jews to Islam under threat of death.

Hitler's SS learned much from Iran, as Rubin notes above. It is reasonable, based upon history, to assume that Iranian President Ahmadinejad is once again moving his country in the direction of another pogrom, another Holocaust, though one created not by sword and fire, but fission.

As Jeff Goldstein noted yesterday, Ahmadinejad has taken steps that a pious member of his sect would before unleashing war, including the issuing of a da'wa:


In last week's post, "An Islamic Declaration of War?", I (and a number of other bedwetters and paste-eaters) tried to divine (sorry) the intent behind Iranian President Ahmadinejad's letter to President Bush—a letter that Robert Spencer noted at the time was curiously like a da'waan Mohammedan mandate required before waging war against unbelievers.

Today, we're again confronted with the prospects of a letter from Ahmadinejad, this one to be addressed to the Pope...

Jeff then links to Hot Air's Bryan Preston, who reminds us:


These letters are hardly unprecedented, as al-Reuters says. Their origins go all the way back to Mohammed, who often issued letters to the kings of lands he was about to attack to invite them to accept Islam before Mohammed would invade to convert them by the sword. Thus, the religion of peace spread far and wide. This, now second letter from the hand of Ahmadinejad is a da'wa—a call to Islam. It follows Mohammed's traditional letters. Implicit in such letters is the threat that if the recipient doesn't accept Islam voluntarily, he and his land will accept it by force. Or die resisting.

In Crazy Mahmoud's mind, he has now written to the chief of the world's top secular superpower and is writing to the chief of the world's unbelieving (vis a vis Islam) religious superpower (there being no equivalent of the pope in Islam). He is inviting them both to accept Islam, both personally and on behalf of their nation and church. Unless I miss my guess, in the letter to Benedict he will be, in essence, calling upon the Catholic Church to accept Islam–or die.

These letters are not well-wishes for the holidays or get-to-know-you cultural exchanges. They are threats. Mahmoud has something planned, and it would seem to me to be in the latter stages of finalization before it goes forward.

While I must admit that I'd earlier missed the significance of the da'wa letters, their historical precedence cannot be ignored. Every note played by Ahmadinejad so far has been played before, if via a different instrument, and this time, the Iranian instrument of choice is all but certain to be a MIRV.

Where would that lead?

I wrote two weeks ago in "Recalling the Twelfth Imam:


Recently, Iranian government officials went far enough to state that they could destroy Israel with nuclear weapons and absorb an expected Israeli nuclear counterstrike.

Tens of millions of people throughout southwest Asia would be likely to die in such an exchange.

[snip]

Israel would be gone. The Palestinians would be gone. Iran would be gone. Jordan, Syria and Lebanon would suffer millions of casualties from the blast and intense fallout from the Iranian strike, and the Israeli counterstrike would likely blanket most of the "–stans," as well as China and India with a plume of radioactive fallout, exposing close to a billion people both indirectly and directly to airborne fallout and food-borne consumption of the same for many years to come.

As you may expect, a glowing Middle East wasteland would destroy the global energy market, collapsing economies around the world, including our own. No human on this planet would be untouched by the effects, which could take decades to recover from, if ever. It would also make Muslims hunted around the globe, setting the stage for a crusade the likes of which the world has never imagined. Islam, and what remains of 1 billion Muslims, would be targets for an entirely different kind of genocide born of fear.

Wow.
Yeah, "wow."

Most of the punditry that has discussed the building nuclear crisis with Iran has discussed it in terms of asking when would we attack them, but as these da'wa letters indicate, it seems like it is Iran that is preparing to take the offensive. Considering that some think that Iran may already have nuclear weapons and that traces of uranium have been discovered in Iran that are close to or above the level used to make nuclear warheads, this seems like it should be a contingency we should be preparing for.

Indeed, it may very well be something we are planning for, as strategic planning contractors working for the Pentagon have already delivered presentations predicting an Iranian offensive.

VII, Inc is one of these contractors with apparently deep ties in the Gulf Region. They compiled a 42-page presention in January titled "Iranian President-Islamic Eschatology Near Term Implications" which was presented to the U.S. military.

Eschatology is defined in the presentation as "a part of theology concerned with the final events in the history of the world or the ultimate destiny of human kind, commonly phrased as the end of the world or end of the age." The document explored the religious psychology of Iranian President Ahmadinejad and the Iranian mullahcracy, as well as historical, political, economic, and military influences.

VII saw just two possible scenarios as a result of their studies if Iran is left to function unimpeded, and both of those involve preemptive Iranian military strikes. One of these saw the possibility of the possible use of nuclear weapons in an Israeli response to a massive Iranian/Syrian rocket attack supported by Russia. This use of nuclear weapons was predicted well before recent developments that suggest the possibility that the Iranian nuclear program may be much more advanced than we first thought. It seems quite probable that Iran will use any nuclear weapons it may acquire or develop preemptively in an attack against Israel.

Should we wait, and allow them to make that rash choice instead of taking that option away from them, we will have but little choice in response.



Hitler's maniacal vision of how to unite the world under his power on the mid-twentieth century cost roughly 62 million lives before it was snuffed out in 1945. I'd prefer to see us act preemptively before things really do come full circle again.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 01:37 PM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 1332 words, total size 10 kb.

The Elephant

A thoughtful letter about "seeing the elephant" from a 101st Airborne Division soldier in Iraq to his blogger dad, at Blue Crab Boulevard.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 07:48 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 27 words, total size 1 kb.

May 18, 2006

Dishonorable John

Ex-Marine John Murtha has taken the extraordinary step of accusing U.S. Marines of war crimes before a joint NCIS/Multi-National Forces investigation has been completed of an incident that occurred on November 19, 2005.

On that date, a U.S. Marine convoy in Haditha, Iraq was hit by an IED, killing Lance Cpl. Miguel Terrazas and wounding two others. After the explosion, the Marines stormed nearby building and killed 15 people inside, three of them children.

Army Times provides Murtha's exact charges:


Rep. John Murtha, an influential Pennsylvania lawmaker and outspoken critic of the war in Iraq, said today Marines had “killed innocent civilians in cold blood” after allegedly responding to a roadside bomb ambush that killed a Marine during a patrol in Haditha, Iraq, Nov. 19.

[snip]

“It's much worse than was reported in Time magazine,” Murtha, a Democrat, former Marine colonel and Vietnam war veteran, told reporters on Capitol Hill.

“There was no firefight. There was no [bomb] that killed those innocent people,” Murtha explained, adding there were “about twice as many” Iraqis killed than Time had reported.

No official investigation report has been released by the Pentagon and a spokesman for Murtha was unable to add to the congressman's remarks.

[snip]

Murtha said combat stress prompted the Marines' alleged rampage.

“It's a very serious incident, unfortunately. It shows the tremendous pressure that these guys are under every day when they're out in combat,” he said. “One man was killed with an [improvised explosive device] and after that they actually went into the houses and killed women and children.”

Let's take a step back for a second, and take a deep breath before we proceed.

. . .

First off, 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.

To make such strong charges while our soldiers are in that combat theater of operations is to unnecessarily inflame Iraqi public opinion against our soldiers and place the lives of U.S. servicemen and women in danger of reprisal attacks based upon Murtha's claims, which to date, are unsupported.

John Murtha makes claims that the civilians were killed by the Marines "in cold blood." This is an inflammatory charge that does not seem in the least possible by the undisputed events of the case.

"In cold blood" is defined as "Deliberately, coldly, and dispassionately." It is also generally referred to in legal terms as premeditated murder whereby the accused is said to have planned out his homicide beforehand. In this event, an IED killed an American Marine and injured two others, at which point the surviving Marines stormed a nearby house and killed the occupants. Whether or not these deaths were justified or not is for the investigation to determine, but no credible individual could ever make the claim that these deaths were preordained.

Murtha also makes a claim that I've heard nowhere else, where he alleges that "about twice as many" people died in that house that day, putting the number of civilians killed at or near 30. This claim is not supported by the original Time article, nor can I find support for anything approaching this number from any other sources. Murtha does not even even attempt to provide support for these extra charges, he simple ascribes roughly 30 premeditated murders to U.S. Marines as casually as if he was ordering a cappuccino.

He does so before they have even been so much as charged with a crime. Murtha seeks to leave no doubt that this was anything other than a massacre of innocents. But is that actually what occurred?

I first came across this story on March 20th of this year, and at the time I wrote:


There is the possibility that the Marines did gun down innocent civilians as local Iraqis claim.
But it is equally as possible that one or more people inside the house opened fire upon the Marines in an ambush after the IED went off. It has happened that way frequently, and that exact scenario left ABC anchor Bob Woodruff and cameraman Doug Vogt seriously wounded, when the IED attack that wounded them was followed by small arms fire from nearby buildings. The attack was broken when coalition forces counterattacked.

Someone who truly supports the troops, even if they do not support the war, would want this incident fully investigated to uncover the truth. They would want to know the facts.

They would want to know if the Marines fired out of blind rage at the loss of their friends, and they would be equally interested in finding out if the Marines assaulted that location because someone inside fired upon them, as they claimed. Was it a slaughter of innocents, or were insurgents firing from within civilian homes? Were those that triggered the IED among the dead? We do not yet know, and some are already passing judgment.

"We do not yet know, and some are already passing judgment."

I had no idea just how accurate those words would prove to be. Congressman John Murtha has now gone so far as to accuse American Marines of cold-blooded murder before an investigation has been completed, and roughly doubled the number of dead without any support for his charges, with the sole apparent goal of inflaming outrage at the expense of our military's safety.

It would seem appropriate that the United States House of Representatives should at the very least censure Congressman Murtha, who has gone so far out of his way to initiate such inflammatory and potentially dangerous rhetoric. He has dishonored his seat, the military criminal justice system, the Marine Corps and the United States of America.

How a man can make such vicious, unsupported claims and still claim to love the Marine Corps and America is beyond my understanding.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 12:54 AM | Comments (109) | Add Comment
Post contains 1067 words, total size 7 kb.

May 17, 2006

FISA Judges Were In The Loop

I can only imagine how the Left will try to spin the revelation that FISA judges were briefed about the NSA's controversial surveillance programs the entire time:


Two judges on the secretive court that approves warrants for intelligence surveillance were told of the broad monitoring programs that have raised recent controversy, a Republican senator said Tuesday, connecting a court to knowledge of the collecting of millions of phone records for the first time.

[snip]

Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said that at least two of the chief judges on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court had been informed since 2001 of White House-approved National Security Agency monitoring operations.

"None raised any objections, as far as I know," said Hatch, a member of a special Intelligence Committee panel appointed to oversee the NSA's work.

Hatch made the comment in answering a question in an interview about recent reports of the government compiling lists of Americans' phone calls. When pressed later, Hatch suggested he was also speaking broadly of the administration's terror-related monitoring.

Asked if the judges somehow approved the operations, Hatch said, "That is not their position, but they were informed."

If Hatch's comments are correct, it would seem to throw a considerably large wrench in the theories of those who are calling these programs an illegal conspiracy by the Bush Adminstration. It seems rather difficult to have a "conspiracy" if everyone was in on it.

The White House Counsel cleared these programs. The National Security Agency's lawyers—who specialize in this area of law—cleared these programs. The programs were also cleared by not one, but two Attorneys General and a cadre of lawyers from the Justice Department, as well.

We also know that members of the House and Senate from both parties were in the loop since 2001 and apparently not one ever batted and eyelash until the NY Times went public with information about the programs with information gathered from anonymous sources, including one who has been diagnosed with psychotic paranoia.

If two FISA judges were also in the loop about these programs, it won't keep conspiracy theorists like Glenn Greenwald quiet, but it might just make their shrill cries a bit easier to ignore.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 01:14 AM | Comments (55) | Add Comment
Post contains 373 words, total size 3 kb.

May 05, 2006

Recalling the Twelfth Imam

Unless you have been under a rock or in New York City public schools, you are probably aware that Iran has engaged in the development of a nuclear program.

Iran has publicly stated that this is so that Iran can create nuclear power plants, a claim viewed with great suspicion by most of the world, as Iran sits upon vast petroleum reserves that will meets the nation's energy needs far into the future. Iran's parallel development of indigenous long-range intercontinental ballistic missiles and purchase of similar systems, as well as their claims of developing multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles (MIRVs) that are used only to deliver nuclear warheads, show that Iran's uranium enrichment program has the ultimate goal of obtaining multiple nuclear weapons.

Why do we care?
Consider that Iran is a major state-sponsor of Islamic terrorism, and successive Iranian leaders have repeatedly threatened to exterminate Israel. Recently, Iranian government officials went far enough to state that they could destroy Israel with nuclear weapons and absorb an expected Israeli nuclear counterstrike.

Tens of millions of people throughout southwest Asia would be likely to die in such an exchange.

No, why do WE care?
Other than being philosophically opposed to genocide and nuclear war on a scale never before imagined?

Try:

  • years of nuclear fallout carried around the world on prevailing winds;
  • a nearly complete an long-term disruption in international oil supplies, resulting in major economic upheaval;
  • increasing the possibility of international conflicts over reduced oil supplies;
  • the dehumanization of all Muslims as a result of this mass genocide, perhaps leading to retaliatory strikes, mass internment, and deportation campaigns to eradicate the religion, particularly in western Europe and China.

There is also the possibility that Iran may even provide nuclear weapons to a terrorist group, such as the Iranian-funded Hezbollah.

Don't they know if they use nukes, they might get nuked back?
"Might" doesn't come into the picture. They will be nuked back if they launch a first strike. Iran's population is concentrated very heavily (60%) in urban areas (Tehran: 7.1 M, Mashad: 2.8M, Tabriz: 1.5 M, Karaj: 1.4 M, Shiraz: 1.3, etc), and even a partial nuclear response by either Israel or the United States would cause Iran to cease to exist.

It would be incredibly stupid for them to launch a nuclear attack, then.
You're thinking like a westerner. In many Islamic countries, there is no separation of church and state. Church is state to varying degrees, with Islamic theology making laws and defining policy, again, to varying degrees. A sub-sect of Shia Islam rules the Islamic Republic of Iran, and this sect's eschatology believes that the near-term messianic return of the 12th Imam can be brought about by an apocalyptic event.

What is more apocalyptic than a nuclear war?

So they think that by getting nuked, they'll go to heaven?
You might call it nuts, and I might agree, but good prosecutor would call it "motive." more...

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 11:39 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 2168 words, total size 13 kb.

May 04, 2006

Blooper Troopers

It appears the video released of al Qaeda action hero Musab al-Zarqawi left quite a bit on the cutting room floor, including footage edited out from his "Rambo" scene, where Zarqawi is seen in firing long bursts from a 5.56mm light machine gun used by the U.S. military.

What the version of the video posted to the internet does not show says quite a lot. The unedited footage was captured near Youssifiyah, presumably by Task Force 145, shows that al Zarqawi is unable to clear a simple "stovepipe" jam from the M249 squad automatic weapon he uses. He requires the assistance of a follower, who with one deft motion of his hand, racked the bolt to clear the malfunction.

Just seconds after Zarqawi fired dozens of rounds through the gun, he puts one of his men at extreme risk as he sweeps the machine gun's barrel around, momentarily pointing at the terrorist's chest without apparently activating the weapon's safety, or even taking his finger off the trigger. Shortly after that display of stupidity, another terrorist is shown grabbing the machine gun by the still-smoking barrel, burning his hand.

The unintentionally comic elements of this footage does not, of course, minimize the lethal threat Zarqawi and his minions pose to the Iraqi people, but it does humanize him and diffuse a bit of the mythology surrounding him. He is not invincible, and at moments, he is all but helpless.

Update: As I noted in a comment at Hot Air:


If he [Zarqawi] is that unfamiliar with a common weapons malfunction, I wonder just how many combat actions he has actually participated in.

Is Musab al-Zarqawi a paper tiger? We don't have enough data to answer that question, but with this film, we now have enough to bring it up.


Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 01:34 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 301 words, total size 2 kb.

May 03, 2006

Moussaoui Gets Life... Or Does He?

Part of me thinks Rusty is probably right: if Zacarias Moussaoui gets life in prison for his part in the 9/11 terrorist attacks, how can we really justify putting to death any other terrorists we may capture? That is a rather disturbing question.

At the same time, life is prison, even in what is likely to be solitary confinement, is perhaps more likely to result in his dying within this next decade. Jeffrey Dahmer, a cannibalistic serial killer of 17 men, was sentenced to 15 consecutive life sentences in February of 2002, but was murdered by another inmate in 2004. Child molester John Geoghan was also sentenced to life in 2002 and murdered by another inmate two years later.

It is quite possible that Moussaoui will create enough hatred among the inmate population that his life sentence will end up being a very short stay.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 04:49 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 157 words, total size 1 kb.

May 02, 2006

Jeep Jihadi Charged

Mohammed Taheri-Azar, the Iranian-American jihadi wannabe that tried to run down UNC-Chapel Hill students, was charged with nine counts of attempted murder. In addition:


Mohammed Taheri-Azar, a UNC-Chapel Hill graduate, also was indicted on four counts of assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill and five counts of assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill inflicting serious injury.

Taheri-Azar is accused of driving through the gathering spot, known as the Pit, on March 3, hitting nine people. He has said his actions were in retaliation for the deaths of Muslims throughout the world caused by the United States.

I can only wonder if Chapel Hill (motto: "Left of Center, Right at Home") will raise monies for his defense fund. Some people have already thought about doing just that.

Other Iranian-Americans (or more accurately, Iranian-North Americans) aren't among them.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 07:44 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 148 words, total size 1 kb.

May 01, 2006

"The Dumbest Man in the U.S. Senate"

When I lived in New York, I used to drive home from my job in Westchester listening to Mark Levin, who often referred to Democratic Senator Joe Biden (Del.) as "the dumbest man in the U.S. Senate."

It appears now that Biden's intelligence was overestimated:


The senior Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee proposed Monday that Iraq be divided into three separate regions — Kurdish, Shiite and Sunni — with a central government in Baghdad.

In an op-ed essay in Monday's edition of The New York Times, Sen. Joseph Biden D-Del., wrote that the idea "is to maintain a united Iraq by decentralizing it, giving each ethno-religious group ... room to run its own affairs, while leaving the central government in charge of common interests."

The new Iraqi constitution allows for establishment of self-governing regions. But that was one of the reasons the Sunnis opposed the constitution and why they demanded and won an agreement to review it this year.

Biden and co-writer Leslie H. Gelb, former president of the Council on Foreign Relations, acknowledged the opposition, and said the Sunnis "have to be given money to make their oil-poor region viable. The Constitution must be amended to guarantee Sunni areas 20 percent (approximately their proportion of the population) of all revenues."

Biden and Gelb also wrote that President Bush "must direct the military to design a plan for withdrawing and redeploying our troops from Iraq by 2008 (while providing for a small but effective residual force to combat terrorists and keep the neighbors honest)."

How are Biden and Gelb, two reputed political experts, so blatantly incompetent that they don't realize that a divided Iraq would create far more problems than what we see in the current situation?

At the very least, partitioning off the nation along ethnic lines would encourage even more balkanization, and the attendant Sunni vs. Shia fighting would almost certainly intensify instead of abating. This of course would trigger an almost certain exodus of refugees of minority populations from one region into another. Choas is the best result we could hope for in such a fouled design.

In addition, neither Biden nor Gelb touch upon the fact that such a division is likely to inflame an already tense situation between Turkey and the Kurdish-controlled areas in the west, and Iran and the Kurdish region in the east. Both nations fear that a partitioned Kurdish region would be the trigger for Turkish and Iranian Kurds to fight to bring their regions in to a larger Kurdistan based in Iraq. Turkey has already made clear that they view an independent Kurdistan as a threat, and they have already made cross-border attacks, as have the Iranians.

Joseph Biden's idiotic attempt at ethnic segregation would expand Iraq's current sectarian violence into an almost certain regional conflict, encouraging both Turkey and Iran to invade. An invasion by either of these countries would almost certainly create situations where American military forces in the area might be forced into tense situations and possible open combat, either against our NATO ally which s bad enough, or potentially more seriously, a conflict that could easily flash into an ever-expanding, full-on conventional war with Iran.

Such a conflict could see thousands of U.S casualties and perhaps hundreds of U.S dead, but that isn't the worst of it. Coalition forces, with unquestionable air superiority, would send tens of thousands of Iranian conscripts to their graves in such a conflict as well. Through sheer stupidity, Joe Biden would create a situation potentially more deadly than all of the battles of the Iraq and Afghan wars so far, combined.

Is Joe Biden the dumbest man in the United States Senate as Levin contends?

I'd hate to see who could top him.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 03:47 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 637 words, total size 4 kb.

<< Page 1 of 1 >>
502kb generated in CPU 0.0617, elapsed 0.1476 seconds.
65 queries taking 0.0978 seconds, 631 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.

Search Thingy



Recent Comments

  • penis advantage reviews Yet, the best male enhancement method acting that is proved to be the mastering the items infra good... entry
  • tubal reversal The simplest way to evade being disliked is to mind your own business and keep from giving goo... entry
  • mia clarisonic mia coupon Absolutely no person is really worth the cry, and then the an individual who is going to be gotâ€... entry
  • clarisonic mia best price Sale Under no circumstances lour, even when you happen to be sorry, for those who can't say for sure who ... entry
  • Jim BAGHDAD, Iraq — The United States launched its opening attack against Iraq Thursday morning, a... entry
  • Michael Smith Jim - Your argument is so specious that I don't know where to start. The US did not specific... entry
  • Jim You have it completely backwards as usual Brando. A better analogy for what I actually wrote abo... entry
  • brando Jim believes that the Nanking Massacre wasn't murder because it was part of War. Jim, all good ... entry
  • megapotamus I think the pushback on Jim is a bit gratuitous. But there is a third designation of less than ancie... entry
  • Jim Neo, Nuremberg is tricky for a number of reasons, the court was a mix of civilian and military, the ... entry

Categories

Archives

Blogroll

Sample link

Monthly Traffic

  • Pages: 207
  • Files: 10
  • Bytes: 4.4M
  • CPU Time: 12.88s
  • Queries: 11536

Content

  • Posts: 3653
  • Comments: 35960

Feeds


RSS 2.0 Atom 1.0