From YouTube:

Cpl Chris Mason recorded a video message for the Democratic Party Leadership before he was killed in action in Iraq. Chris was killed by Al Qaeda terrorist. He produced this video on November 12th 2006 at FOB Summerall. This video just recently worked its way to me (his dad) on March 23rd 2007, now I am posting it to the internet for him. It reflects his beliefs about the war in Iraq, the people of Iraq, freedom, why he joined the US military, what he expected after joining the military, and if the warriors lost in the war will be lives wasted.

Cpl Mason was killed on November 28th, 2006 by Al-Qaeda Terrorist forces operating in Iraq.

He was laid to rest December 12th 2006, exactly thirty days after making this video statement to the Democratic Party Leadership.

From Chris Mason's memorial web site:

He was killed in "The War on Terrorism" by Al-Qaeda terrorist forces in a small town "Siniyah, Iraq." Chris was ambushed and killed by Al-Qaeda terrorist while he was moving into position to provide fire support for his fellow paratroopers. They had come under heavy small arms fire from Al-Qaeda forces and could not disengage. He died soon after being hit by an IED, but DOD has him being killed by small arms fire, during a firefight with Al-Qaeda at the same location. Bottom line is he was doing what needed to be done for his country..

The President of the United States, George W. Bush, authorized on Feb 1, 2007 that the following quote be placed on Chris's headstone.... "We Will Not Tire, We Will Not Falter, And We Will Not Fail" with the president's signature affixed there after.

There are few men who will pick up a weapon and fight for this country, and my son was one of the few. He died standing toe to toe with Al-Qaeda.

Strength and Honor son, I stand proud for you. Airborne.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 11:38 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 341 words, total size 3 kb.

And the Iranian dominoes in Iraq continue to fall:

U.S. and Iraqi forces detained a suspect linked to networks bringing sophisticated roadside bombs into Iraq during a raid Friday in the main Shiite district in Baghdad.

[snip]

The suspect, who was detained by U.S. and Iraqi forces during a raid in the Shiite militia stronghold of Sadr City, was believed to be tied to networks bringing the weapons known as explosively formed projectiles, or EFPs, into Iraq, the military said.

It did not name the suspect or the groups he was accused of having ties to, but the U.S. military has asserted in recent months that Iran's Revolutionary Guards and Quds force have been providing Shiite militias with weapons and parts for sophisticated armor-piercing bombs. The EFPs are responsible for the deaths of more than 170 American and coalition soldiers since mid-2004, the military says.

The most important "nugget" to be gleaned from these three short paragraphs is that the man who was apprehended was part of a network importing explosively-formed penetrators into Iraq.

There are those on the political left here in the United States who have attempted to provide Iran with a figleaf for their involvement, implying that the EFPs used against American forces were indigenous weapons because some captured EFPs were made using some components—primarily the short sections of pipe used to form the canister containing the copper disk and explosive charge—that came from various parts of Iraq and other countries in the region. The man captured was part of a network smuggling in completed munitions, not components.

I'd also note that Judi was wrong in his the terminology he used to describe the weapons the network was smuggling in to Iraq. Sadly, this is a consistent problem among Associated Press reporters. I'll give Judi the same advice I gave his superior, Kim Gamel: Learn the Tech, or Take up Baking.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 12:33 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 319 words, total size 2 kb.

I can fully appreciate the fact that our ideological opposites don't support the war in Iraq and would prefer that our military be recalled. I can even accept some of their rationalizations, even though I think they are purposefully downplaying the full-on genocide that would be the likely result of their retreat-at-any-cost mentality, of what they view as a Republican war in Iraq. To be fair, the Iraq War isn't the only thing liberals see as a "Republican war." They seem to think everything is the result of one Republican War or another, except, perhaps, their own War on Hyperbole. more...

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 09:44 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 1519 words, total size 10 kb.

In many ways, this is simply an unremarkable picture.

Scenes like the one above, with smiling Iraqi children clamoring for the attention of U.S soldiers, are commonplace throughout Iraq. There is absolutely nothing special about them at all.

Today, Democrats in the United States Senate passed a war spending bill that would mandate U.S. military forces begin withdrawing troops within 120 days of passage, with a goal of ending combat operations by March 31, 2008.

New York Times Baghdad bureau chief John Burns noted this morning that if the U.S withdraws, "there's no doubt that the conflict could get a great deal worse very quickly, and we'd see levels of suffering and of casualties amongst Iraqis that potentially could dwarf the ones we've seen to this point."

If Burns is right and Democrats succeed in instigating a genocide, I wonder who will carry the Iraqi children... and how busy those pallbearers will be.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 03:01 PM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 157 words, total size 1 kb.

If you are a journalist or blogger who wants to embed in Iraq, good luck making it through the PAO system. As a pair of prominent bloggers tell us on the record, getting into Iraq can be all but impossible thanks to obstacles put in place by the U.S. military's Pubic Affairs Office, and once there, the PAO seems to delight in making the life of an embed a living hell. more...

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 09:43 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 1891 words, total size 12 kb.

RIA Novosti (Russia) reports that American forces seem to be preparing for a combined air and land assault on Iran:

Russian military intelligence services are reporting a flurry of activity by U.S. Armed Forces near Iran's borders, a high-ranking security source said Tuesday.

"The latest military intelligence data point to heightened U.S. military preparations for both an air and ground operation against Iran," the official said, adding that the Pentagon has probably not yet made a final decision as to when an attack will be launched.

He said the Pentagon is looking for a way to deliver a strike against Iran "that would enable the Americans to bring the country to its knees at minimal cost."

Feh.

I strongly doubt that there is anything to this account, with the possible exception that we might be positioning forces in a bluff. I don't claim to know the dispostion or concentration of American ground forces within striking distance of Iran, but I don't think that a force sufficient to stage an invasion of Iran could be drawn up without any word leaking out.

Then again, these accounts sound a little ominous, and make my crystal ball sound pretty accurate, even though I question the timing.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 10:51 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 209 words, total size 2 kb.

Simply awful:

Off-duty Shiite policemen enraged by massive bombings in the northern town of Tal Afar went on a revenge spree against Sunni residents there on Wednesday, killing at least 45 men, police and hospital officials said.

The policemen began roaming the town's Sunni neighborhoods on foot early in the morning, shooting at Sunni residents and homes

A senior hospital official in Tal Afar said at least 45 men ages 15 to 60 were killed and four others were wounded.

Police said dozens of Sunnis were killed or wounded, but they had no precise figures. The shooting continued for more than two hours, the officials said.

Army troops later moved into the Sunni areas to stop the violence and a curfew was slapped on the entire town, according to Wathiq al-Hamdani, the provincial police chief and his head of operations, Brig. Abdul-Karim al-Jibouri.

Tal Afar is a city of 220,000, and unlike their neighbors, the residents are nearly all Turkmen. the city's population is roughly 60-percent Shia, and the city is divided into 18 neighborhoods along tribal lines. Middle East Online reports that the dead were found handcuffed and blindfolded, shot in the back of the head, execution style. The revenge killings took place shortly after the truck bombings, in the Sunni neighborhood of Wahada. It is not yet known why this particular Sunni neighborhood was targeted.

The rampage ended with the arrival of an Iraqi Army unit.

Time reports that the Iraqi Army has already arrested 18 Tal Afar policemen for the killings based on eyewitness accounts from the victim's family, and also stated that Shia militiamen participated in the attacks.

The Tal Afar police have been confined to barracks and that police from Mosul (30 miles to the east of Tal Afar) were moving in to provide security. Brig. Abdul-Karim al-Jibouri is moving in to take control of the operations on the ground, and to presumably start an investigation.

The massacre--there is no other way to describe it--was in response to two truck bombings carried out by Sunni militants yesterday that killed 63 and wounded 150.

The Sunnis already distrust the Shia-dominated police forces, and the two-hour revenge attack is sure to sour relations even more.

How much relations will sour depends in large part on how the Iraqi police forces themselves respond to the attack. Confining the local police to their barracks is the first step, but it is necessary for an investigation to immediately begin, and for those responsible for the attacks to be arrested (if there are more than the 18 captured so far) and tried for their crimes.

If there is any good news at all to report from this massacre, it is that the Shia-dominated Iraqi Army was able to move in and arrest many if not all of those responsible for the attacks and restore order without U.S. involvement.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 07:50 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 485 words, total size 3 kb.

Via Instapundit, Frank Warner notes that public opinion on the progress of the Iraq War is slightly more optimistic:

One little-publicized finding of the new Pew poll is that, compared to last month, Americans now are slightly more optimistic about the Iraq war.

The portion of Americans who believe the war is going "very well" or "fairly well" for the United States increased from the all-time low of 30 percent in February to 40 percent this month.

This bump in support comes just as E.J. Dionne calls the battle for a free Iraq "a conflict that grows more unpopular by the day." Which day in March?

In the last month, the percent of Americans saying the war is going "not too well" or "not well at all" dropped from 67 to 56.

I'd caution that the influx of American soldiers into the Baghdad security plan is just beginning, with the full force of the "surge" arriving in June, even as Democrats futily push forward with their plan to lose the war.

It will be intersting to see if this change in the Pew poll of those who think the war is going "very well" or "fairly well" continues to grow as more soldiers enter Iraq, and if the number of those who think the war is going "not too well" or "nor well at all" drops further. This, of course, will be dictated largely by how the war progresses on the ground.

If definitive progress is made in coming months, it will be very interesting to see how that affects the polls, and the actions of House and Senate Democrats. Bills to lose the war by setting artificial and arbitrary deadlines are being set up for a Presidential veto, and it will be very interesting to see if Pelosi, Murtha, etc will continue to attempt to lose the war if measurable progress is made in the coming months.

I doubt that the most strident anti-war critics will be silenced by any hope of victory, and it could be interesting to see how Democrats attempt to placate their radical base if further progress occurs.

Update: Brian attempts to answer the question, "How's that surge going?"

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 10:10 AM | Comments (26) | Add Comment
Post contains 372 words, total size 3 kb.

A witness claims it was hit by a SAM during its ascent. Details are still sketchy right now, and there doesn't seem to be any word on how many people were on the plane, or if anyone on the ground was killed or wounded as a result of the plane coming down.

As of yet it doesn't look like anyone has taken claim for the attack, but the obvious suspects are Somali Islamists.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 11:41 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 87 words, total size 1 kb.

I'm not familar with Mike Gudgell of ABC News, but his "Reporter's Notebook" article about what he is seeing in Iraq is a must read.

A taste of Gudgell's article, starting on page 3:

According to the U.S. military, a group of al Qaeda in Iraq fighters recently entered a small village east of Baghdad and announced they would be back and would take several houses for their base. When they returned two days later, their convoy was attacked by villagers. The military found out when the villagers told them to come out and pick up bodies and prisoners.

The numbers of civilian deaths are down a little but that's only a small part of the story. It's the little things together that make the difference. It might be too early to tell if this is a tipping point in the war, but it does appear as though the momentum has changed.

There's a long way to go, but there is room for some hope. It depends on your perspective; those snapshots and keyhole views of the broad landscape of what is a living war.

I strongly urge you to read the entire article. Gudgell is matter of fact, and pulls no punches.

More, please.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 10:49 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 211 words, total size 1 kb.

Two brothers with ties to Muqtada al-Sadr have been arrested for their role in the killing of five American soldiers in Karbala two months ago.

From CNN:

"Over the past several days, coalition forces in Basra and Hilla captured Qais Khazali, his brother Laith Khazali and several other members of the Khazali network," the U.S. military said in a statement.

Qais Khazali has been known to reporters as a spokesman for al-Sadr's political movement, and Reuters news agency reported that Khazali is a senior aide to the anti-American cleric.

Al-Sadr's Mehdi Army, a Shiite militia, is suspected of being involved in Iraq's sectarian violence.

The U.S. military said the Khazali network is "directly connected" to the January killings in Karbala, the Shiite holy city south of Baghdad.

On Wednesday, a U.S. official said the brothers were suspected of being part of a network using weapons known as explosively formed projectiles or penetrators. Bush administration officials have alleged that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard's Quds Force have provided these munitions to Shiite groups in Iraq.

Those grains of salt I spoke of yesterday? They just got smaller, especially when considered with other developments, all of which are providing more evidence that the Iranian role in the Iraq War may be larger than we were previously aware, and potentially growing.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 09:28 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 231 words, total size 2 kb.

It's based upon unconfirmed reports from unknown informants, but the allegations made in this story could be interesting if corroborated by another source:

Iraqi insurgents, guerrilla fighters and death squads are being trained in secret camps in Iran with the blessing of top Tehran leaders and at least three senior Iraqi political figures, an Iranian opposition figure said Tuesday.

Would-be Iraqi fighters are smuggled into Iran, schooled in everything from sniper techniques to explosive devices and sent back to Iraq to wage war on U.S.-led coalition forces, Alireza Jafarzadeh said at a news conference.

It is important to note that Jafarzadeh has worked for the Mujahedin al-Khalq, an anti-Iranian terrorist group, and presently leads the Washington-based Strategic Policy Consulting think tank.

Perhaps the most interesting part of his claim is his specificity of those named as being among the Iranian leaders involved in the plot.

Jafarzadeh said Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and its president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, are closely connected to the training. He said Abu Ahmad Al-Ramisi, governor of southern Iraq's Al-Muthanna province, and two members of Iraq's National Assembly are also involved.

He identified one as Hadi Al-Ameri, who he said is chairman of the legislature's security committee and head of the Badr Corps, the Iran-based military wing of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq. The other is an assembly member known in Iraq as Abu Mehdi Mohandas, he said.

Before the day is out, I expect that a fevered left-wing blogger (or ten) will state that the Bush Administration is behind Jafarzadeh's comments, and that these comments will be used to justify a military attack on Iran.

I don't think that is the case.

If there is any Administration involvement behind Jafarzadeh's charges, it seems that the goal of such specific charges would be to embarrass the Iranian government to stop or restrict their involvement in funding and supplying violence in Iraq.

It is known fact that Iran is supplying anti-government forces within Iraq with weapons—the confiscation of more than 100 Iranian Styer HS50 sniper rifles proves that beyond any reasonable doubt—but blaming Iran the nation is far easier for the mullacracy to dodge than are charges levied against individual Iranian officials.

Will specifically alleging the involvement of key senior Iranian government officials have any impact in slowing the flow of weapons, funding, or training from Iran to Iraq's anti-government forces? I somewhat doubt it, but at this point, it may be the only option on the table.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 12:02 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 433 words, total size 3 kb.

Yesterday in his Chicago Tribune blog "Change of Subject", Eric Zorn wrote about a two-page letter written to President Bush by Richard Landeck, father of Captain Kevin Landeck. Captain Landeck and Staff Sgt. Terrance D. Dunn were soldiers of the Tenth Mountain Division killed by a roadside bomb on February 6, south of Baghdad.

Richard Landeck said he mailed his letter to the President a little more than six weeks ago, and has yet to receive a response.

The letter, written two days after his son's death, is printed in full on Zorn's blog, but I'll replicate it here as well.

Feb 4, 2007

Dear Mr. Bush:

This will be the only time I will refer to you with any type of respect.

My son was killed in Iraq on February 2, 2007. His name is Captain Kevin Landeck.

He served with the Tenth Mountain Division. He was killed while riding in a Humvee by a roadside bomb just south of Baghdad. He has a loving mother, a loving father and loving sister.

You took him away from us. He celebrated his 26th birthday January 30th and was married for 17 months. He graduated from Purdue University and went through the ROTC program. That is where he met his future wife. He was proud to be a part of the military and took exceptional pride in becoming a leader of men. He accepted his role as a platoon leader with exceptional enthusiasm and was proud to serve his country.

I had many conversations with Kevin before he left to serve as well as during his deployment. The message he continued to send to me was that of incompetence. Incompetence by you, (Vice President Richard) Cheney and (former Secretary of Defense Donald) Rumsfeld. Incompetence by some of his commanders as well as the overall strategy of your decisions.

When I asked him about what he thought about your decision to "surge" more troops to Baghdad, he told me, "until the Iraqis pick up the ball, we are going to get cut to shreds. It doesnÂ’t matter how many troops Bush sends, nothing has been addressed to solve the problem he started."

Answer me this: How in the world can you justify invading Iraq when the problem began and continues to lie in Afghanistan? I donÂ’t want your idiotic standard answer about keeping America safe. What did Sadaam Hussein have to do with 9/11? We all know it had to do with the first Iraq war where your father failed to take Sadaam down.

Well George, you have succeeded in taking down over 3,100 of our best young men, my son being one of them. Kevin told me many times we are not fighting terrorism in Iraq and they could not do their jobs as soldiers. He said they are trained to be on the offensive and to fight but all they are doing is acting like policemen.

Well George, you or some "genius" like you who have never fought in a war but enjoy all the perks your positions afford you are making life and death decisions. In the case of my son, you made a death decision.

Let me explain a few other points he and I discussed. He said when he and his men were riding down the road in their Humvees, roadside bombs would explode and they would hear bullets bouncing off their vehicle. He said they were scared. He thought "why should we be the ones who are scared?" He asked permission to take some of his men out at night with their night vision glasses because as he said "we own the night" and watch for the people who are setting roadside bombs and "take them out." He said, "I want them to be the ones that are scared." He was denied permission. Why? It made perfect sense to me and other people who I told about this.

When he was at a checkpoint he was told that if a vehicle was coming at them even at a high rate of speed he could not arbitrarily use his weapon. He had to wave his arms and, if the vehicle did not stop, he could fire a warning shot over the vehicle. If the vehicle did not stop then, he could shoot at the tires. If the vehicle did not yet stop he could take a shot at the driver. Who in their right mind made that kind of decision?

How would you like to be at a check point with a vehicle coming at you that won't stop and go through all those motions? You will never know!

You or Cheney or Rumsfeld will never know the anguish, the worry, the sleepless nights, the waiting for the loved one who may never return. If the soldiers were able to do their jobs and the ego's of politicians like you, your "cronies" and some commanders had their heads on straight, we would be out of this mess which we should not be involved with in the first place.

My family and I deserve and explanation directly from you... not some assistant who will likely read this and toss it. This war is wrong.

I want you to look me and my wife and daughter directly in the eye and tell me why my son died. We should not be there, but because of your ineptness and lack of correct information I have lost my son, my pride and joy, my hero!

Again, you, Cheney and Rumsfeld will never understand what the families of soldiers are going through and don't try to tell me you do. My wife, my daughter and I cannot believe we have lost our only son and brother to a ridiculous political war that you seem to want to maintain. I hope you and Cheney and Rumsfeld and all the other people on your band wagon sleep well at night... we certainly don't.

Richard Landeck

Proud father of a fallen soldier

Eric Zorn's position on the war is abundantly clear and permeates his blog entry like grease on a paper bag, and so I'll skip his unseemly attempt to hijack Richard Landeck's grief, and focus on the letter itself.

I first read Mr. Landeck's letter on Zorn's blog last night. The anger, anguish, and loss he feels over what he sees as the needless death of his son has to wash through all but the hardest of hearts. Richard Landeck clearly loved a son he will never see again, never watch mature, raise children, and grandchildren...

I could not easily come to terms with the hurt and rage behind Landeck's letter, the loss of his son, framed by what both the grieving father and the lost son thought of the Iraq War. I still can't.

I cannot imagine sending a child to fight a war in which neither my child nor I believed, nor the pain that Mr. Landeck, his wife, daughter, and widowed daughter-in-law must now endure as the result of Captain Landeck's death. There is a huge void now in their lives that will never be filled, one that cannot be expressed. Others will see the pain and sense the loss, but they be unable to address it, and they will feel shame. There simply are no words to sooth a wound to the soul.

My own response, couched in that same embarrassed shame of not knowing what to say, is unfulfilling, and inadequate.

I somewhat suspect that President Bush has not personally seen Mr. Landeck's letter. Even if he has, what precisely would he say? What should he say? How do you respond to a grieving father that hold's you personally responsible for his son's death?

Would Richard Landeck have felt any less rage, anger, or loss if his son had been killed by an IED in Khandahar, Afghanistan? Would Kevin's death have been "better" if he had died fighting another war started by this same President? Somehow, I doubt the suffering of the Landeck family would have been much less.

We cannot fill that part of our lives where a fallen loved one once stood.

Mr. Landeck has exercised the option to feel that his son's mission and death were not worthwhile. He has every right to feel that way, to question the competence of the leaders that placed his son in combat, the commanders on the ground that declined Captain Landeck's requests for a certain specific type of mission, and the rules of engagement.

Mr. Landeck has that right, but is doesn't mean he is right.

Neither Bush, nor Cheney, nor Rumsfeld, nor the generals, nor the colonels, are responsible for the deaths of Captain Landeck and Staff Sgt. Dunn on February 6. The names of the man or men who planted and triggered the roadside bomb that took the lives of these soldiers may never be known.

What is known is that these men, and others like them, will continue to plant roadside bombs, detonate VBIEDs in markets or in front of police stations, killing and wounding scores of soldiers, policemen, and civilians until men like Captain Landeck stop them.

Sixty-three years and seventeen days before Kevin Landeck died, correspondent Ernie Pyle wrote about the death of another U.S. Army Captain highly regarded by his men.

The unburdened mules moved off to their olive orchard. The men in the road seemed reluctant to leave. They stood around, and gradually one by one I could sense them moving close to Capt. Waskow's body. Not so much to look, I think, as to say something in finality to him, and to themselves. I stood close by and I could hear.

One soldier came and looked down, and he said out loud, "God damn it." That's all he said, and then he walked away. Another one came. He said, "God damn it to hell anyway." He looked down for a few last moments, and then he turned and left.

Another man came; I think he was an officer. It was hard to tell officers from men in the half light, for all were bearded and grimy dirty. The man looked down into the dead captain's face, and then he spoke directly to him, as though he were alive. He said: "I'm sorry, old man."

Then a soldier came and stood beside the officer, and bent over, and he too spoke to his dead captain, not in a whisper but awfully tenderly, and he said:

"I sure am sorry, sir."

Then the first man squatted down, and he reached down and took the dead hand, and he sat there for a full five minutes, holding the dead hand in his own and looking intently into the dead face, and he never uttered a sound all the time he sat there.

And finally he put the hand down, and then reached up and gently straightened the points of the captain's shirt collar, and then he sort of rearranged the tattered edges of his uniform around the wound. And then he got up and walked away down the road in the moonlight, all alone.

I sure am sorry, Mr. Landeck.

It is an inadequate response to a grieving father, but it is all I have to give.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 09:54 AM | Comments (55) | Add Comment
Post contains 1887 words, total size 10 kb.

I missed the 60 Minutes interview of Marine Frank Wuterich that Allah discussed on Hot Air yesterday, and therefore can't dispute nor affirm the Neil Boortz claim that the interview was, "one of the most outrageous displays of media bias ever."

What I will comment on briefly, however, is the screen capture Allah was able to grab of a photo showing the bodies of the five Iraqis that Wuterich said he suspected of planting the IED, and then shot as they were running away.

The picture is grainy and not of great quality, and I don't have the detail I would generally like to have, but I'll make an observation all the same:

I don't think these men were running, from anyone.

The bodies are closely clustered together within steps of the car in which they were traveling. A person standing still, if shot with a killing wound or multiple wounds, often falls in place. They may get up and move locations, but based upon what I interpret as pooled blood in the admittedly sub-par photo, I don't think that occurred.

It is highly unlikely, if this men had decided to run, that:

• they would have taken off in unison;
• that Wuterich would have been able to react, fire, and fatally hit five running men within feet of the vehicle.
• that they would have fallen in unison if on the move when shot.

It isn't impossible that this occurred, but I think it is very unlikely.

Now, we don't know if the bodies of the men have been touched. I think that if they had been moved (dragged) that blood trails would have been in evidence, even in a picture with quality this poor. I think that if they have been touched, they might have been rolled over to see if they were still alive, but I don't think they would have been turned to face the opposite direction.

In general, I'd expect someone shot during the first few steps while attempting to flee (which would almost have to be the case if the Wuterich account can be correlated in any way to the photo) would fall headfirst in the direction that momentum would take them. I'd also find it unlikely that a person taking just a few steps would generate enough momentum to somersault.

All that said, look at the orientation of the bodies in the photo.

Two bodies (labeled 1 and 2) are oriented clearly with their heads generally toward the car, which makes it doubtful they could have been moving away from the vehicle, at least at any speed approaching a run. The body closest to the camera, labeled 3, is roughly in the position you might expect of someone standing still when shot, then falling backward. The black box I drew, merely for illustrative purposes, gives a very rough idea of where the shots appear to have come from, based upon a number of guestimates, factoring in the position of the white car, and the object in the top right that would have likely screened these men from view of anyone much further back down the road.

The photo, bad as it may be, seems to validate the Dela Cruz version of events, and based upon Dela Cruz's own description of what he did to one of the bodies, might even explain why the stain near the head of the body labeled 2 appears to be lighter in color than the other dark stains around the bodies in the photo.

This, of course, does nothing to establish the guilt or innocence of Wuterich, nor any of the other Marines. It does nothing to establish a state of mind, nor a motive.

What is does suggest, at the very least, is that Wuterich does not recall events as the photo seems to suggest they took place.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 02:39 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 652 words, total size 4 kb.

The Gathering of Eagles is today in Washington, DC. It is a gathering of military veterans and proud Americans that will be ther to protect the Vietnam Veterans Memorial ("The Wall") from an anti-war protest sponsered by radical Muslim groups, anarchists, leftover 60s radicals, Marxists, and others invested in an American defeat.

Michelle Malkin and Bryan Preston will be there, as will Melanie Morgan and what we expect to be a substantial number of veterans groups and the families and friends of active duty soldiers.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 09:29 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 93 words, total size 1 kb.

Yeah, this is comforting:

Members of extremist groups have signed up as school bus drivers in the United States, counterterror officials said Friday, in a cautionary bulletin to police. An FBI spokesman said "parents and children have nothing to fear."

Asked about the alert notice, the FBI's Rich Kolko said "there are no threats, no plots and no history leading us to believe there is any reason for concern," although law enforcement agencies around the country were asked to watch out for kids' safety.

The bulletin, parts of which were read to The Associated Press, did not say how often foreign extremists have sought to acquire licenses to drive school buses, or where. It was sent Friday as part of what officials said was a routine FBI and Homeland Security Department advisory to local law enforcement.

Look, either extremists are a threat--hence the advisory--or they aren't. Informing law enforcement to watch out for known members of extremist groups driving school buses--I'll read this as terrorists until someone gives me good reason not to--and then telling parents not to worry is asinine.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 03:11 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 209 words, total size 1 kb.

Ali Reza Asghari, the former Iranian deputy defense minister and General who is thought to have defected after years of spying on the Iranian government, is one of six Iranians cited in an international arrest warrant that may be issued by Interpol later this month for the 1994 bombing of a Buenos Aires Jewish Center that took 85 lives.

The six concerned are Imad Fayez Mughniyah, Ali Fallahijan, Mohsen Rabbani, Ahmad Reza Asghari, Ahmad Vahidi and Mohsen Rezai.

Applications for the arrest of Ali Akbar Velayati and Hadi Soleimanpour, as well as Mr Rafsanjani, were rejected.

No-one has ever been convicted of the 1994 bombing - the worst terror attack in Argentine history - and the government has admitted failures in its initial investigation.

Last year it said it believed Iran ordered the attack, and militant group Hezbollah carried it out.

Asghari is though to have been instrumental in founding Hezbollah in the 1980s, and was a key liasion between Hezbollah and the Iranian government.

The "Mr Rafsanjani" referenced in the article is former Iranian President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 01:12 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 198 words, total size 2 kb.

I have very little to add to what has already been said about Mohammed's confession, and think Jules Crittenden covers my disgust with Mohammed's self-aggrandizing quite well:

ItÂ’s all a matter of language and perspective. WeÂ’re really just the same. Until you remember that virtually all his intended targets in the Twin Towers were civilians. Every one of his intended targets in Bali and Mombasa was an innocent vacationer. All his targets on all those airplanes. It is inequivocably murder carried out not to achieve any military objective, rather for whatever political or symply psychological advantage and economic damage might be achieved by terror and chaos. He did it to impress people. He wraps himself in history and distortion and calls it war. It is revolting, and it is bullshit, but it is his right. He is allowed to speak and say whatever he wants in advance of the judgments that await him. And we can look at this vile filth, and consider it for what it is worth.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 08:33 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 177 words, total size 1 kb.

Now, if they can only capture the three of them that are still on the run, they might be able to carry out the sentence:

Jordan's military court on Thursday sentenced to death four Iraqi al-Qaida militants charged with terror attacks on Jordanians in Iraq. Of the four, only one is in custody while the other three remain at large and were tried in absentia.

The court also handed down sentences to 10 others in the case also at large and believed to be in hiding in Iraq ranging from 15 years in jail with hard labor to life imprisonment.

The group's alleged mastermind, Ziad Khalaf Raja al-Karbouly, was charged with leading the group of 14 in plotting attacks on trucks with Jordanian license plates on Iraqi roads to murder those on board.

As things continue to fall apart for al Qaeda in Iraq, I find that the execution of these death sentences are quite likely, whether or not these men ever see a Jordanian jail first.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 07:45 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 181 words, total size 1 kb.

This won't endear her to the netroots, but then, what could? For those Democrats that have a toe in reality, however, Hillary just showed that she may be the first grown-up running for the Democratic Presidential nomination. Well, almost:

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton foresees a “remaining military as well as political mission” in Iraq, and says that if elected president, she would keep a reduced but significant military force there to fight Al Qaeda, deter Iranian aggression, protect the Kurds and possibly support the Iraqi military.

In a half-hour interview on Tuesday in her Senate office, Mrs. Clinton said the scaled-down American military force that she would maintain in Iraq after taking office would stay off the streets in Baghdad and would no longer try to protect Iraqis from sectarian violence — even if it descended into ethnic cleansing.

It is good to see that Hillary recognized the need to help support the Iraqi government, but her statement about not protecting Iraqis from sectarian violence, "even if it descended into ethnic cleansing," is troubling.

If "President Hillary" is serious that she would take no action in the event of an attempted genocide, then her behavior would verge upon criminal. If, however, Clinton is merely issuing "tough love" to encourage Sunni, Shia, and Kurd to work together, then her pronouncement makes far more practical sense.

It will be interesting to see how or if the other Democratic candidates will try to shift their positions as they watch Hilliary outmanuver them to the electable middle.

Update: Captain Ed critiques Clinton's statement more harshly.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 10:19 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 271 words, total size 2 kb.