May 31, 2006
Haditha
Michelle Malkin writes:
This toddler? Or is it this one? What about this toddler? Then we have this toddler who died too.
The investigations are still ongoing. That's not an excuse to ignore or dismiss the extensive reporting on the story.
She's right, it's not an excuse. It's a reason to ignore or dismiss the extensive reporting on the story.
Yes, it's mostly one-sided at this point.
Not according to my blogroll. And I have a mighty big blogroll.
But if, if, even a fraction of it is true, it deserves the most vehement condemnation and most severe punishment.
A fraction? What's a fraction of the truth? A half truth? Which is a lie, according to most definitions.
Toddlers are dead.
This toddler? Or is it this one? What about this toddler? Then we have this toddler who died too.
As much as the Left's glee over this story distresses me, it doesn't compare to my dismay at the Right's attempts to cover it's ass before the fact.
By rushing to get ahead of the curve, relying on leaks from anonymous sources and various press accounts, the people saying "if this is true, and it seems it is, they should hang" are doing as much damage to the war effort as the Left.
But they'll celebrate, as I do, the Greatest Generation. The one that interned Japanese, nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki (toddlers are dead, people), firebombed Dresden and Tokyo, invented the flamethrower, Napalm, White Phosphorous, and various and sundry other horrific ways to kill people.
We correctly laud these things as having been necessary in order to protect our United States, but, the fact is, each of these killled many civilians. And we sanctioned it, and have accepted it for decades.
Such is war.
Yes, let's those of us who weren't there, and never will be, flagellate ourselves over this, without any charges, or Court Martials even being brought. Let's make sure we don't give the Left any excuse to criticize us for not speaking out against it.
Because that's what the Right is doing. Making sure they get in a fraction of condemnation before the Left has a chance to jump on them for not doing so. Because, see, we always have to take the high road. Show them how better we are than they are.
Screw 'em. I don't have to pillory the Marines preemptively to prove I'm better than the moonbats. They've pilloried themselves on this subject quite well already.
So until someone ponies up the fact that Iraqi men, women, and children were lined up against a wall and executed, I'll reserve my judgment on the issue.
Until the truth comes out, shut the hell up about Haditha. Somewhere, Khomeini is smiling.
Posted by: Vinnie at
01:41 AM
| Comments (59)
| Add Comment
Post contains 439 words, total size 4 kb.
1
Atrocities have occured in every war since the beginning of time. It's best when they happen during an election year. Apparently.
Posted by: REMF at May 31, 2006 02:30 AM (7RMSi)
2
Are atrocities committed by the other side just brushed aside? We see it in the news every day!!! I'm not justifying it. Just asking the old question. Where is the uproar for the other sides actions that are MUCH worse than ANYTHING we have done?
Posted by: REMF at May 31, 2006 02:38 AM (7RMSi)
3
As Victor Davis Hanson wrote in A War Like No Other:
"The wealth and very liberality of Athens also encouraged dissent and hyper-criticism at home and abroad. The Athenians' detractors expected a much higher level of fairness from them than they ever would have from the Spartans. Not until fourth century [bc] Sparta incurred comensurate jealousy and envy as the Hellenic world's only superpower, following its victory in the war, would the Greeks at last cease their distrust of imperial Athens."
The oligarchy that was Sparta fell soon thereafter, for what did they have to offer otherwise?
Why do so many feel it necessary that we air our dirty laundry in view of the world without applying the same standard to others? What if it turns out these soldiers were not so wrong? The damage is done. The damning eyes of the world are on these men. And why would we expect any different at this point? Who do you think the world is holding ultimately responsible for every atrocity committed, regardless of who committed it? If these soldiers are found to be innocent of any wrongdoing people will either refuse to believe it, calling it a coverup, or they'll fall back on the argument that even if they didn't do it, someone is.
Lose/lose.
Posted by: Oyster at May 31, 2006 03:59 AM (YudAC)
4
Great. Bad enough that my URL is banned, even my email address is banned now. yahoo[dot]com was "questionable content."
Posted by: Oyster at May 31, 2006 04:14 AM (YudAC)
5
If they want to investigate a Haditha, how about heading off to Darfur?
Taking the (highly) conservative estimate of 500,000 killed by Saddam's regime, than Saddam managed 20,000+ Haditha's during his rule, not includin the Iranians and Kuwaitis he managed to kill off.
Can the press sink any lower?
Posted by: Fred Fry at May 31, 2006 05:42 AM (JXdhy)
6
I can't thank you enough for this post. Thank you for the sanity. I was outraged after I read Malkin's post yesterday.
Posted by: Snowy at May 31, 2006 06:23 AM (wZLWV)
7
These Marines are innocent until proven guilty. This will not be determined for a year or more. Courts marshal are closed procedings and only the verdict and sentence are made public. The MSM needs to get all they can right now because very soon there won't be anything else to write about with which to stir the emotions.
Also I am conflicted over the attempted cover up. This smacks of Mi Lai, and I don't like this.
Posted by: Cmunk at May 31, 2006 07:16 AM (GImrl)
8
I do no think that it is entirely presumptive to either have or voice opinions before the final verdict is given in a case. A case in point might be the Saddam trial. When the Commandant of the Corps himself gives a briefing and 2 ret marine colonels Rep Kline (R) and Rep Murtha (D) both come away with the same conclusions and the republican is the one that utters the word "atrocity" I than I would consider this good evidence to base some idea as to the believability of that evidence. Vinnie as for accepting and lauding the internment of the Japanese Americans durring WW II I do not feelm that most Americans believe that this was either necessary or laudable.
Posted by: john ryan at May 31, 2006 07:45 AM (TcoRJ)
9
War is a nasty business. I don't know if this story is true or not but atrocities happen in all wars. The only way any troops can be 100% perfect is to never fight. That's the left's answer to this. Never fight. Then there are no atrocities. The "war is not the answer" crowd loves these stories. But in their zeal to display their moral superiority by condemning these soldiers, they're trampling on due process. Aren't these the same people who were crying about due process for Gitmo detainees?
Posted by: Richard at May 31, 2006 07:46 AM (7KF8r)
10
Great post, Vinnie. I tried myself to explain to the brainless fools that these things happen in every war, including WWII. I have a good friend who served in Europe who had a lot of guilt because he and others had raped and abused Germans as they moved through Germany. He and others had also stolen many items from the homes of Germans. And WWII was the so-called "good war".
These things happen. Those on the Left especially, and also the Right to a certain degree, need to step back and let the investigations proceed. But the anti-military and anti-Bush elements can't pass this one up, although they would be the first to speak up for a fair trial for one of their own. So be it. In the long run it is better for us to let the Left come across as hating the military. In that sense, they play into our hands.
Posted by: jesusland joe at May 31, 2006 07:49 AM (rUyw4)
11
I'll stand by my first response on this issue -- IF the allegations are true, the n they merit firing squads.
But only IF.
And we must wait for the investigations and any subsequent trials to be complete before asserting that the allegations are trie.
And even if true, the allegations in no way undercut the validity of the war effort or the general heroism of our men and women in uniform.
Posted by: Rhymes With Right at May 31, 2006 07:57 AM (1FljV)
12
Wow, bravo!
Posted by: Macktastick Wicked at May 31, 2006 07:57 AM (JQjhA)
13
That pretty much sums up why I haven't mentioned it.
Posted by: rightwingprof at May 31, 2006 09:15 AM (hj1Wx)
14
Michelle Malkin can kiss my ass at this point. She's taking the cautious route, and by which, not defending the soldiers involved.
My take:
1. The MSM and other assorted dick head leftists have been praying for another My Lai for a long time. Vietnam is widely believed to be their best moments. They're creaming their jeans hoping it's true.
2. Iraqi women and children or whoever the hell is serving as a witness are either being blackmailed into saying it, or are flat out liars. Is there evidence to support this?
Well it's certainly more believeable than American soldiers going on a murder rampage
3. Even if some dirty civilians died, I'm not convinced that my give a crap meter should be elevated. It's war. End of story.
Posted by: dan l at May 31, 2006 09:45 AM (CLW0q)
15
To be rational means to be able to weigh the significance of one set of tradeoffs against another, without demanding perfection (unless it's actually possible). But that being said the first impulse of Americans is pulled directly from the convictions of their Puritan forbears. We expect unalloyed goodness from ourselves, and we expect all our enemies to be Satan personified. Anything less than that and things get very painful.
It's therefore natural for Malkin and some others to attempt to "get ahead of the curve" in order to minimize the pain. And it's also something that our opponents don't do, so tends to weigh in on the side of God's angels rather than the other crowd. But we are responding to this appropriately, and not much more than that need be said until a verdict is rendered.
And by the way, I have to believe that people will adjust to a verdict of innocence if that's the way things turn out. The alternative is to believe that most people are irredeemable fools, in which case democracy isn't an appropriate form of government.
But seriously, I think most of the reaction to these events comes right out of our expection of perfection... which, although probably not totally realistic, is probably what holds us together.
Posted by: Demosophist at May 31, 2006 10:29 AM (Zcruy)
16
John Ryan is a liberal asshole who needs to make up his mind about reporting:
Today:
I do no think that it is entirely presumptive to either have or voice opinions before the final verdict is given in a case. A case in point might be the Saddam trial. When the Commandant of the Corps himself gives a briefing and 2 ret marine colonels Rep Kline (R) and Rep Murtha (D) both come away with the same conclusions and the republican is the one that utters the word "atrocity" I than I would consider this good evidence to base some idea as to the believability of that evidence. Vinnie as for accepting and lauding the internment of the Japanese Americans durring WW II I do not feelm that most Americans believe that this was either necessary or laudable.
29th May:
Another example of why would should be skepital of all news coming from that region, and most wary of accepting single source stories. The now discredited story on the supposed new law passed in Iran forcing Jews to wear the yellow star is another such story.
Hey john, is it too much to ask a unhinged moonbat to be consistent ? should we be skeptical of all stories from that region, or just the stories you cherrypick as being more valid that others?
wipe the froth from your chin.
Posted by: davec at May 31, 2006 10:46 AM (CcXvt)
17
Ey Demo, little rule of thumb for ya:
There are some individuals out there who are running around in the desert doing hand to hand with Tommy Taliban so your ass can sit there and take Philosophy 201 with Dr. Pony tail and wax bullshit like that over the internet.
Whether they're wrong or they're right, they're right, unless you want to identify yourself with the troop spitting libs. There's no 'curve' to get ahead of, unless you actually give a shit about popularity contests.
Posted by: dan l at May 31, 2006 10:54 AM (CLW0q)
18
Hey Dan,
You talk pretty friggin' big- why don't you have your ass over in the desert lookin' out for the bad guys? I have some friends over there on their second and third tours who would love to trade places with you
Using your poorly contructed logic, it must have been all right for Al Qaeda to kill our folks in the WTC on 9-11. After all, "it's war" and what are a few civilians?
I doubt the "leftists" are praying for another My Lai. Bush and Rummy have done enough already to turn the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan into abortions of epic proportion.
Richard
Former CPT, FA, US Army
Posted by: Redleg at May 31, 2006 11:10 AM (p+UT4)
19
Until the truth comes out, shut the hell up about Haditha. Somewhere, Khomeini is smiling.
No, you shut up. You and the rest of the Pants-Pissers are giving the entire world a migraine.
Haditha! Haditha! HADITHA!!!!
Posted by: AnonyGuy at May 31, 2006 11:29 AM (RAnnn)
20
There are some individuals out there who are running around in the desert doing hand to hand with Tommy Taliban so your ass can sit there and take Philosophy 201 with Dr. Pony tail and wax bullshit like that over the internet.
No, they're over there so you can act like a big tough guy on the Internet, claiming brotherhood with them whilst you munch on Cheetos and post to a blog called "The Jawa Report." Don't use the troops to prop up your sagging manliness. It is pathetic.
Posted by: JK47 at May 31, 2006 11:55 AM (rAciE)
21
>>>>Haditha! Haditha! HADITHA!!!!
You're so excited about it you're practically drooling, lol!
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at May 31, 2006 12:00 PM (8e/V4)
22
Those convinced their cause is righteous can justify any action in support that cause. Just ask a terrorist.
Posted by: mantis at May 31, 2006 12:35 PM (Qg9Yk)
23
Hey Richard!!! You talk pretty big for a guy on the internet. Do your friends overseas know that you apparently don't give a shit if they get run up for supposed 'war crimes'? Are they aware that you'd take the word of Iraqi young terrorists and terrorist producing women over that of God fearing US marines?
That's just it: You sit there and you bring up what went on on 9/11 as though it some how acts as an aggrivating circumstance for whatever went on at Haditha. The fact is, the terrorists have attacked American civilians, and for that reason, I have very little on the order of emmotional know how to give a shit over some story that attempts to indict Americans who most likely didn't do a damned thing.
As for your positively laughable assertion that the leftists aren't looking for another My Lai, why don't you utilize your opposable thumbs and google up "my lai" under google news and find out that leftists (clearly, like yourself) are just salivating over the thought that they'll get an 'American war crime' money shot.
Posted by: dan l at May 31, 2006 12:41 PM (CLW0q)
24
A sorry-ass Kansan redleg? Who killed Josy Wales' wife and child, and made a Missouri raider out of him. Damn you redlegs!
Posted by: jesusland joe at May 31, 2006 12:54 PM (rUyw4)
25
Hi Dan,
If you disregard the war crimes that deliberately slaughtering little children in cold blood is, you are tainting not only the criminals, but the entire US army.
Don't do that.
And Richard's right. Don't claim brotherhood with the soldiers overseas, when they would most likely find you repugnant.
Posted by: Jim at May 31, 2006 12:57 PM (sgF14)
26
Wow. This is amazing. A bunch of supposed conservatives who believe some hacked story that every dickhead baby boomer liberal is _praying_ for. It's amazing that you people neither see MASSIVE potential for bias in either the supposed witnesses (like, these hut dwellers even have the ability to be truthful about the American military) or the main stream media bias who was willing to turn what was roughly a frat hazing at abu gharib into a "human rights abuse disaster". It's just completely rediculous to me to see conservatives get into the knee jerk crap like they _expect_ this story to be true.
Posted by: dan l at May 31, 2006 01:08 PM (CLW0q)
27
He.ay dickhead: This conservative says the less muslims to fight later is OK with me. ALL MUSLIMS ARE NOT TERRORISTS BUT ALL TERRORISTS SEEM TO BE MUSLIM. So screw the muslims and those aiding and abetting them.
Posted by: greyrooster at May 31, 2006 01:27 PM (a7z59)
28
Apparently Rooster gets it.
But what about Former Army General Jesse Mcbeth? I'm sorry, I just scrolled up. His name was Richard.
Posted by: dan l at May 31, 2006 01:31 PM (CLW0q)
29
Fuck all those arab motherfuckers. If the Marines did kill women and children, it was probably because they were being used as shields or were part of the attack. Arabs don't play by the rules. They have known nothing but sorry ass dictatorships of one form or another going all the way back to Mohammed. They are beyond hope. We should have nuked them from the start. We should have started with mecca, then bagdad, then tehran (persian mfers) and then damascus.
Posted by: Mr. K at May 31, 2006 02:24 PM (O6cgz)
30
Wow! The MSM is reporting on an "incident" they found out pieces about because its been under military investigation! Since the MSM rarely "takes to the field" (they are Green Zone REMFs) isn't it nice that OUR MILITARY gives them the heads-up on things even potentially bad!
I've got very little details on this (a serious military investigation or ANY civilian/criminal investigation tends to be like that - something to do with constitutional rights and stuff like that ... unless of course some DA leaks info for polictical grandstanding or other reasons).
The bulk of what I've heard comes from the MSM - AND THEY ARE NOTORIOUSLY UNRELIABLE (and often biased).
Anyone notice what has been said by the MSM (very little detail of course) is stangely similar to one of the scenes in Stone's Platoon (the recon/ambush/village scene).
I'll wait for more info and completion of the investigation before forming an opinion and giving the MSM credibility.
Posted by: hondo at May 31, 2006 02:25 PM (el7nZ)
31
Watch out Hondo and Mr. K. Former US Army General Rich is here. He says it happened, and when a guy claiming to have been in the military says something happened, it did!
Posted by: dan l at May 31, 2006 02:28 PM (CLW0q)
32
Such is war.
Sadly, no!
I direct you all to GoArmy.com, although borderline psychosis and a willingness to commit genocide may still keep you out of Basic these days.
Posted by: ahem at May 31, 2006 03:48 PM (z7zAE)
33
So you can't defend the military without serving in the military?
Posted by: dan l at May 31, 2006 03:51 PM (CLW0q)
34
Haditha was a peaceful place with children playing jumprope and men in short-shorts playing tennis. That is until those evil Americans came!
THE REAL HADITHA:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1553781,00.html
Posted by: Billy at May 31, 2006 03:54 PM (1iJg7)
35
If you morons hate Arabs so much, why the hell do you support Bush's invasion of Iraq to "liberate" the Iraqis? Seems to me that your heads should explode from the contradiction. Get a clue, idiots- Americans are dying in Iraq for no good reason. But what do you care, you're not over there.
Posted by: Redleg at May 31, 2006 05:13 PM (p+UT4)
36
Dan,
Go screw yourself. You don't know crap about my military service. It's always amazing to me how you dinks talk about supporting the troops but don't extend common decency to "liberals" who served in uniform.
Dan, perhaps you should take a remedial reading course from Sylvan. You obviously have piss-poor reading comprehension since you mis-stated my earlier comments.
Now get back to your Cheetos and Xbox war games.
Posted by: Redleg at May 31, 2006 05:21 PM (p+UT4)
37
I have been trying to get actual info on this story ....
What I know and can verify is the following ....
a 12 (enlisted) man Marine mechanized patrol with a SSG as senior
an IED attack with 1 KIA and at least 1 WIA (probably more)
the IED alleged remote detonation with accompanying small arms fire (this is important but not yet verified - if so - action is an immediate "movement on contact" in a built-up area
the only "detailed" infomation the MSM has put out comes from a Lance Cpl who arrived hours!!! later as part of the clean-up/retrival/initial site investigation
he claims to have take photos of the bodies - but does not have them - he claims 23 KIA including women and at least 1 child - but doesn't provide any additional info on breakdown, location, attire, weapons etc.
he returned home - and got into some serious criminal problems after arriving
he only went public after his criminal problems - and PTS from the "military incident" is his only defense
That's all I know for now - nothing from the MSM is particularly insightful or informative at this time
Posted by: hondo at May 31, 2006 05:32 PM (el7nZ)
38
Man,
Y'all were right! We are the good guys. I just heard we are paying the 15 families involved a Total of 38,000 somolians. Don't it just make you prouderNshit to be an U-mare-kin.
Posted by: Greg at May 31, 2006 06:07 PM (q5wwn)
39
I'll tell you what all this attention on Haditha is about...
This stuff happens all the time. They want you to think that this is an isolated incident, that's why they are focusing on it.
It's called, "limited hangout". A circumcision is a hell of a lot better than a neutering.
Posted by: Greg at May 31, 2006 06:26 PM (q5wwn)
40
Dan,
Go screw yourself. You don't know crap about my military service. It's always amazing to me how you dinks talk about supporting the troops but don't extend common decency to "liberals" who served in uniform.
Here's what I do know about your military service, Richard Former CPT, in the US Army. You pushed paper for 6 years after you got out of ROTC. Your discharge had something to do with "don't ask, don't tell". You recieved 3 purple hearts for paper cuts recieved during your deployment to Texas.
Now, the reality is your military experience or friends in the military doesn't mean a fucking thing, as last time I checked in my internet service agreement, I don't have to have military experience to post an opinion. And last time I checked, being in being a General or whatever the hell you claim to be, doesn't make you an expert on the military. How many retired generals/arm chair quarterbacks have been anti-American/Pro-Democrat media activists?
What is of concern to me, is the fact that you even entertain the idea that a couple of 12 year old Children of Terrorists and some equally as fucked up Wives of Terrorists are telling the truth, whilst American soldiers (whom, lets face it: they probably vote republican, believe in Jesus, and are white - surely as a liberal you don't like them very much) you won't believe and are all about going for their throats and demanding punishment for crimes not committed.
Dan, perhaps you should take a remedial reading course from Sylvan. You obviously have piss-poor reading comprehension since you mis-stated my earlier comments.
Piss poor reading comprehension? Oh. Shall we?
Using your poorly contructed logic, it must have been all right for Al Qaeda to kill our folks in the WTC on 9-11. After all, "it's war" and what are a few civilians?
Hardly, fucktard. Vince went through this in the main post. But don't bother actually reading it. The fact of the matter is, if civilians die, it's a big fucking 'oh well'. Far better to have to off a few dozen Iraqi civilians than it is to have American civilians die.
Yes. I know liberals hate to hear something like that, but American life is worth about 80 billion times as much as your average Iraqi.
Now you (as a former soldier, right?) couldn't possibly disagree with that notion?
I doubt the "leftists" are praying for another My Lai.
Oh no? So liberal anti-American blogs weren't the first to jump up and yell My Lai? They didn't try to turn Abu Gharib Frat Pranks into My Lai? They didn't try to turn the white phosphorus story into My Lai? What are you? Fucking dense? Or do you just have a short memory?
Stomp your right hoof if it's just being dense. Your left, if you've got a bad memory.
The media couldn't WAIT for this story to break, so they ran out and got Jack Off Murtha and John Maverick Mccain to spit out some sound bites so they can spew some election year crap portraying guilt.
And then the liberal blogs LIT UP with glee. Go ahead and google news or technorait My Lai. See just how often you pukes are talking about it.
Posted by: dan l at May 31, 2006 06:49 PM (DdC+J)
41
With you all the way, Vinnie. I don't like the way Michelle and Allahpundit have dealt with this at all.
Posted by: Bill Faith at May 31, 2006 07:54 PM (n7SaI)
42
Mind explaining, Bill? Michelle and I have made two simple points:
1. If it's true, it's really bad.
2. We don't know if it's true.
I stand by both of those statements. I haven't pronounced anyone guilty; I haven't called for the death penalty, as some people -- including some vets -- have. Not sure what it is, precisely, that you're objecting to in the way we've "dealt" with it.
As for this bullshit from Vinnie:
Because that's what the Right is doing. Making sure they get in a fraction of condemnation before the Left has a chance to jump on them for not doing so. Because, see, we always have to take the high road. Show them how better we are than they are.
Yeah. Michelle is infamous for worrying about what the fucking left thinks of her. Why, this post could have been written by Kos -- or Khomeini -- himself!
Make no mistake, there are people on the right acting like jackasses here. But it isn't me and it isn't MM. I look forward to your telling Greyhawk what a crypto-leftist, Khomeini-pandering douchebag he is for having written this post in which he "pillories" the Marines. Good god.
Posted by: Allah at May 31, 2006 09:00 PM (CbBW/)
43
far better to have to off a few dozen Iraqi civilians than it is to have American civilians die.
Which means you'll be heading out there to help out, no? See, you miss the point, since you're a bit dumb: it's not that you have to serve in order to have an opinion; it's that if you're so enthusiastic about wiping out all those 3-year-old raghead jihadis, you should really be waiting outside the recruiter's office. I'm sure there are a few Marines who'd be happy to postpone their third tour for you.
Every day they must patrol kill boxes in cities that are full of snipers, IEDs, VIBEDs, and jehadis.
But I thought Iraq was no more dangerous than Washington D.C. -- or at least, that's what Rep. Steve King (R-IA) keeps telling us all. Do get your bullshit in order.
Posted by: ahem at June 01, 2006 03:11 AM (0BZdf)
44
Which means you'll be heading out there to help out, no? See, you miss the point, since you're a bit dumb: it's not that you have to serve in order to have an opinion; it's that if you're so enthusiastic about wiping out all those 3-year-old raghead jihadis, you should really be waiting outside the recruiter's office. I'm sure there are a few Marines who'd be happy to postpone their third tour for you.
LOL. That's great. Once again the "You have to be in the military to defend the military". Same logic.
Pretend like it isn't, ahem, but that's what it is. Face it, you McCain Moderates (or in your case, quite possibly worse) are all up in these marines shit, just hoping you'll get your new war crime.
Anybody on the home front who defends them (thus blocking you from being a troop spitter) should be dismissed simply because they're not serving.
And the person who cooked up this logic? Richard, the guy who claims to be a former 5 star general who's entire friend roster and family is currently over in Iraq. LOL. That's a lib argument if I've ever heard it.
I'm not enthusiastic about killing civilians. I say, if it happens, so be it. It's the nature of warfare. Don't like it? Leave.
Posted by: dan l at June 01, 2006 05:37 AM (DdC+J)
45
>>>I'll tell you what all this attention on Haditha is about...This stuff happens all the time
Greg,
even for you that's an ignorant moronic statement. You've been hanging with your traitorlib buddies for too long.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at June 01, 2006 07:31 AM (8e/V4)
46
Carlos, what other kind of statement do you expect from an ignorant moran?
Posted by: jesusland joe at June 01, 2006 08:33 AM (rUyw4)
47
Hmm. I definitely don't agree that you have to serve to have an opinion. But it does stand out that you do seem hypocritical. Why did you not enlist? Is it because you are scared, or are you simply unwilling to serve your country?
Posted by: Jim at June 01, 2006 10:38 AM (1UEK9)
48
Stupid comment Jim - ask the same about yourself - is there an answer?
Posted by: hondo at June 01, 2006 10:47 AM (el7nZ)
49
Carlos,
IÂ’ve called for the Jaws of Life because we need to extricate your head from your ass.
JJ,
I love your feeble attempts at put-downs. You use nonexistent words like “dumn” and “moran” when you mean moron and dumb.
You are illiterate and IÂ’m embarrassed for you.
Posted by: Greg at June 01, 2006 11:41 AM (q5wwn)
50
Great post, Vinnie.
A wise man once said "War is hell." And God save us all from the Warm And Fuzzy Army/Navy/Air Force/Marines.
Posted by: Margi at June 01, 2006 12:18 PM (BRtaN)
51
Greg,
Wow -- Bravo Sir! you have totally eviscerated JJ with your fearless attack on his spelling! Such mastery of comebacks! -- Do you sell some sort of self help book, where we mortals can learn to cut opponents down with razor sharp, cutting responses such as yours?
By the way, I would rather be in the company of people who spend all day dribbling and eating chunky Crayola crayons, than some gimp who thinks that the moon landing was fake, and the WTC were brought down with explosives.
Posted by: davec at June 01, 2006 12:33 PM (CcXvt)
52
Greg,
You used to love your country. But not anymore. Yes, you hate "Bush", and that's your God-given American right. I don't take that away from you. But that hatred combined with the neww company you keep is actually turning you into a traitorlib. Accusing your country of routinely massacring people without any proof is traitorous. You should repent of that and apologize to all the men and women who serve in the armed forces for that slanderous remark.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at June 01, 2006 12:46 PM (8e/V4)
53
I don't know why you guys even acknowledge him (greg). I simply ignore him completely - its quite easy actually.
Posted by: hondo at June 01, 2006 01:08 PM (el7nZ)
54
First off, let me begin by saying hi to everyone, so that we can start off on a good note. I usually don't comment on blogs but this particular post caught my eye. I'll give everyone a little background information on me because it relates to this whole discussion. My brother is in the US Army and served in Iraq for a year, he was stationed in Baghdad with the 3rd ID (Infantry Division). He saw fighting and death, but he also saw the happiness on the Iraqi's faces for finally being liberated. He lost a good friend while he was there and another when he came back. He also lost many Iraqi friends that he worked with. It's true, war isn't pretty, and the fight to secure Iraq's new government will have its obstacles, but in no way is there any justification for the purposeful killing of innocent civilians, which is what separates us from the terrorists in that we do not commend the killing of innocents.
That said, I'm not saying the Marines involved in the Haditha incident are guilty of the death of innocent civilians. That's why I would hope that the media would wait until the investigation is completely over with before they start pointing fingers. The main point is that if the Marines killed innocent people then they need to be dealt with justly, if they did not then that should be the end of the story. It's so frustrating that the only stories to come out of Iraq are almost always negative; our soldiers are doing extraordinary things for the Iraqi people. The Iraqi people themselves deserve praise for the steps they have taken towards a free nation. That is why it gets me so pissed off when people say that all Arabs or all Muslims are bad people, because they most certainly aren't, and with that kind of attitude people are basically saying that what our soldiers are doing for the Iraqi people is a waste of time.
Our soldiers (including the coalition forces), the Iraqi people, and the Afghani people need all the support we can give them, instead of telling them that they'll never succeed. It would be nice to see more Americans donating money or time to organizations helping our troops and the people of Iraq and Afghanistan. Americans can sit comfortably in their homes and have their opinions on the wars that are taking place, but the true heroes and the people who are making a difference in this world are the troops and the Iraqi and Afghani people who are preserving, defending, and fighting for freedom in the face of terrorism. Apparently many of us have forgotten that.
Posted by: Ashley Klein at June 01, 2006 07:11 PM (yiLQl)
55
Them damn Eye-Rackies, they killed their own kids and blamed the Marines so they could collect the $38,000.
This is all just a big scam.
Posted by: Greg at June 01, 2006 07:58 PM (q5wwn)
56
May I just thank you all for revealing the real face of the US nutcase right.
A thread for us all to remember the next time you lost spout about freedom and democracy.
Posted by: Sonic at June 01, 2006 10:20 PM (Gsn6c)
57
I'm not sure I see anything wrong in pre-qualifying your position that *IF* it turns out the allegations are true, the deserve what they get.
There doesn't even need to be an actual case to take up that position.
I think some clarification is in order on both sides as there seems to be some misunderstanding.
If this is a collateral damage issue, enemy combatant issue, human shields, whatever....I hope the investigation shows that an dno charges are brought.
If they, in effect, lined up some random household of people and gunned them down, then damn them.
I would like to hear what their version of the story is rather than getting it from MSM. We already know what Murthas version is....
Then I would like to know the outcome of the investigation and if an Article 32 hearing is to be held. I'd like to know what is presented at that hearing.
*If* there is then a Court Martial, I want to hear the arguments of both sides...
Knowing what the Marines version, and the blogoshpere delving into the story, let's those investigators know they better have some rock solid evidence to present. I see this as a way to prevent the miltary from steamrolling these guys in the name of "peace".
I hope and want them to be innocent. Until I see rock solid evidence, and not some ex-Marine blowhard with an agenda mouthing off disgracefully in the most Un-American of ways, I will assume they *are* innocent. Should it not turn out that way, screw them. They have dishonor themselves, the fighting men and women, and the people of the US...
I believe this is taking so long because the civilians story isn't adding up either....so Murtha can shove it. NCIS better get this right.
Posted by: Khepri at June 02, 2006 12:05 AM (/Eavv)
58
Khepri,
thank you for revealing the real face of the nutcase right.
/sarcasm off.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at June 02, 2006 06:48 AM (8e/V4)
59
All bullshit. Just bullshit. Just like the one the Marines were exonerated of this morning.
Posted by: greyrooster at June 03, 2006 05:48 AM (V+JAR)
May 25, 2006
Lay & Skilling Prepare to Become "Bitches"
So you think Kenneth Lay and Jeffrey Skilling are about to be sent to a minimum security prison with conjegul visits?
Conjugul visits? I don't know about that. Try federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison.
Hey Ken and Jeff. Watch out for your cornholes.
Posted by: Rusty at
07:51 PM
| Comments (24)
| Add Comment
Post contains 55 words, total size 1 kb.
1
They could perhaps have conjugal visits with each other. But that's about it.
Posted by: Michael Hampton at May 25, 2006 09:12 PM (FVbj6)
2
You guys have watched too many prison TV shows.
Posted by: john ryan at May 25, 2006 09:23 PM (TcoRJ)
3
why are they going to federal prison for fraud?
How does this help the people they've defrauded, exactly? I'm just wondering.
Posted by: MiB at May 25, 2006 09:30 PM (B9sDR)
4
It doesn't help them at all. Our criminal system isn't generally set up to provide restitution to the victims of criminals, but rather, to punish the criminals, something it does fairly well.
That's part of the reason I leave out the word "justice" when talking about the system.
Victims who want restitution have to pursue it themselves in the civil courts, and even when they win, it's the lawyers who really win.
Posted by: Michael Hampton at May 25, 2006 09:37 PM (FVbj6)
5
>>>How does this help the people they've defrauded, exactly? I'm just wondering.
They aren't going to jail in order to "help people." They're going to jail because they are criminals.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at May 25, 2006 09:40 PM (8e/V4)
6
So, instead of providing recompensation for the harmed in a way that also damages the two people who did the harming (like, say, garnishing their wages above what is necessary for a barebones living until the debt is paid back, plus interest,) we stick them in jail to rot and nobody gets any money back?
Slick, I love the US "justice" system at work.
Posted by: MiB at May 25, 2006 10:07 PM (B9sDR)
7
"garnishing their wages"
lol! So basically no worse than like deadbeats paying back their student loans. Boy, talk about cruel and unusual punishment.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at May 25, 2006 10:34 PM (8e/V4)
8
armed
Posted by: greyrooster at May 25, 2006 10:35 PM (pzM6K)
9
I don't see how living basically in prison conditions (2 x 4 cell + cot) until you've paid back the millions of dollars they stole is the same as "paying back a student loan."
Besides you don't want cruel an unusual punishment, you want justice. Justice is returning that which was stolen or, in this case, defrauded.
Posted by: MiB at May 26, 2006 12:36 AM (B9sDR)
10
So what do you want? These guys defrauded people and other institutions of billions, not millions. How will they pay it back? And if they earn anything at all, who gets the money? A dollar or two to each individual they took literally their whole retirement from? I'm sure these people will be tickled to get a check once a month for about 5 cents. Just what kind of work can they do in prison that will make any difference? Or should they get paid more because they stole more?
Now that a guilty verdict has been rendered, hopefully all the assets can be distributed.
Posted by: Oyster at May 26, 2006 05:37 AM (YudAC)
11
I don't see how living basically in prison conditions (2 x 4 cell + cot) until you've paid back the millions of dollars they stole is the same as "paying back a student loan.
I don't see how you can pay back the billions they owe when they're languishing in prison. Making license plates only pays about a buck o five an hour.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at May 26, 2006 05:40 AM (8e/V4)
12
Correction John Ryan. They watch too much Office Space which is one of my favorite movies by the way.
Posted by: Jack Miller at May 26, 2006 06:14 AM (CnDtU)
13
For argument's sake, we'll assume JC is right and they get "a buck o five an hour". And let's say they don't get to keep any of it. And let's assume a 40 hour week (which is not a bad assumption considering the bleeding hearts who would scream about the prisoner's rights should he be forced to work longer). So anyway, that's $42 a week. Times 52 weeks (no vacation time) equals $2,184 a year. Let's assume 2,184 people got screwed although, we know it's more. That's a dollar a year per person. That's justice? Just Ken Lay would have to work for nearly half a million years to pay back 1 billion.
Posted by: Oyster at May 26, 2006 06:15 AM (YudAC)
14
I can't believe so many people want Kenneth and Jeffrey to be free. They are criminals. They committed fraud. I agree with Jesusland Carlos on this one. They should be in prison for a long time.
Posted by: Jack Miller at May 26, 2006 06:19 AM (CnDtU)
15
So, its not justice for everyone to get a dollar (assuming the numbers JC pulled from places best left unexplored are correct), but it is for them to get nothing.
I'm not seeing it. Why not put them to work at something that makes more than "a buck oh five an hour," like medical testing?
Posted by: MiB at May 26, 2006 06:25 AM (B9sDR)
16
They should never get out.
Posted by: Oyster at May 26, 2006 06:30 AM (YudAC)
17
>>>"medical testing"
MiB,
I prefer the American justice system, thank you. The best way for folks to get restitution is a civil lawsuit for damages. I'm sure Lay and Skilling have a few million tucked away a la O.J.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at May 26, 2006 06:35 AM (8e/V4)
18
Torture !! How about that. Torture them until they tell where their money is.
Posted by: john ryan at May 26, 2006 08:20 AM (TcoRJ)
19
Yes! Torture! We'll make a compilation of all of john's posts and make them read them over and over.
Posted by: Oyster at May 26, 2006 11:18 AM (8S4yo)
20
It helps people to send these fraudsters to prison. It is a positive good for our society to punish them severely, not necessarily on account of how their sentences affect their victims. But punishing these guys is necessary to deter future fraud crimes by others.
It's not an option not to punish them; if you want to deter others, if you believe, like me, that the line of people in this world who are willing to commit fraud does not end with these two men, you must punish them. Hard.
Posted by: cobalt blue at May 26, 2006 11:36 AM (REXOp)
21
No Oyster! No! No! Noooooooo!
Posted by: hondo at May 26, 2006 03:00 PM (k/PLS)
22
Typical John Ryan. Call for torture of US prisoners but not of terrorist prisoners.
Friggin leftard.
Posted by: greyrooster at May 26, 2006 09:37 PM (pfOwp)
23
After raping all of their employees by stealing their pensions, I think they deserve something a little more fitting than the Office Space - pound me in the ass federal prison. They should get Hitler's punishment from the Adam Sandler movie "Little Nicky".
Posted by: memphis761 at May 30, 2006 09:58 AM (D3+20)
May 06, 2006
Kennedy Crash Police Report
Images from the police report on Patrick Kennedy's crash near the Capital. Full documents here.
Posted by: Rusty at
09:54 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 23 words, total size 1 kb.
1
If you look at the first page of the police report, they were kind enough to give us his home address (25 Independence Ave. SE, D.C.) and phone. Perhaps someone would be kind enough to send him an AA pamphlet and some breathmints to mask his boozer breath for his next run-in with the law.
Posted by: Ansar al-kufir at May 06, 2006 05:31 PM (y7gpG)
2
Another drunken kennedy in a car i mean this is the same idiot who said that oppsing gun control is insane what a jerk
Posted by: sandpiper at May 07, 2006 02:35 PM (XGDTE)
May 05, 2006
Patrick Kennedy DUI Photo Found
UPDATE: with commentary by Senator Edward Kennedy.
Posted by: Rusty at
12:01 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 17 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Bah! That picture is obviously fake; there isn't a dead girl hanging out of the trunk.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 05, 2006 06:27 PM (0yYS2)
2
I checked the ol' mypetjawa.blogspot.com for updates Rusty!
Posted by: davec at May 05, 2006 06:31 PM (CcXvt)
3
That pic needs more Clay Aiken.
Posted by: Leopold Stotch at May 05, 2006 06:48 PM (KYkYB)
4
Clay Aiken my ass; it needs MORE COWBELL!!!
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 05, 2006 09:45 PM (0yYS2)
5
This guy drives drunk at least fortnightly.
Posted by: cindy at May 05, 2006 09:59 PM (y6n8O)
6
1. But, but, it's a MEDICAL problem..........
2. I spilled my drink all over the dash, and while I was licking it up this happened.......
3. I slipped myself a mickey at the Boar and Whore........
4. I was really on my way to a crack house.........
5. My father made me do it........
6. I was depressed because I couldn't get wasted...
Posted by: n.a. palm at May 06, 2006 07:24 AM (q3B/i)
Justice Ginsberg Jumps the Shark
Many on both the Left & Right misunderstand the Madisonian system of checks and balances. Those misunderstandings are only amplified when an otherwise rational person goes to law school and is taught that seperation of powers somehow means that each branch of government is fully independent of the others.
If you want to get stupid real fast, go to law school. So it doesn't really surprise me that one our nation's top jurists opens her trap and lets the stupid come out. Newsmax:
Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said Tuesday that a Republican proposal in Congress to set up a watchdog over the federal courts is a "really scary idea." ....Imagine that, Congress limiting the scope of courts. Those jack-booted thugs in Congress! Art. I, Sec. 8 of the Constitution:"My sense now is that the judiciary is under assault in a way that I haven't seen before," she said.
As an example, she mentioned proposals by senior Republicans who want an inspector general to police judges' acceptance of free trips or their possible financial interests with groups that could appear before them.
"It sounds to me very much like the Soviet Union was .... That's a really scary idea," said Ginsburg, who was put on the court by President Clinton and is one of its liberal members. ...
Ginsburg said her concerns were about the legislative branch setting up a so-called guardian for the judicial branch. She also said there have been discussions in Congress about limiting the scope of courts.
The Congress shall have power to....To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court.So Congress has the power to set up courts, but not to oversee them? Brilliant thinking justice Ginsberg!
My favorite part of her statement is the notion that supervising judges for malfeasance is somehow akin to the Soviet Union's political model of the courts. And while were ruminating on the depths of Justice Ginsberg's intellectual capacity, try to wrap your mind around this one: Hitler was a vegetarian, and so is that guy who played the farmer on Babe. Think about it.
Stop the ACLU has more along with some statements from that other judge who the Left is afraid of. You know, Justice Scalia, who wants more democracy. Scary thought, that.
Posted by: Rusty at
07:54 AM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
Post contains 386 words, total size 3 kb.
1
If you want to get stupid real fast, go to law school
Hey, why the cheap shot?
Posted by: KG at May 05, 2006 10:02 AM (hyH5v)
2
I'll be surprised if many conservative judges support this. Separation of powers has meant, for the legislative and judicial branches, that they are largely self-policing. The major check on judicial self-government has been impeachment. They even get to decide, entirely on their own, whether to recuse themselves (Scalia is a firm believer in that privilege). For the legislative branch, each body enforces its own ethics standards, and reserves the right of expulsion. It is true that members of both branches have to follow generally applicable laws about corruption etc, and that's why we get an abscam, or the investigation of Alcee Hastings, both by the executive branch. But Ginsberg is right--an IG for the judiciary, particularly if it reported to one of the other branches, would be a revolutionary alteration in the fabric of our system of checks and balances. If there were huge amounts of judicial corruption that were not being caught by fear off impeachment, and self-regulation, I might favor it. I'm not convinced that is the case.
Posted by: jd at May 05, 2006 11:22 AM (Ff/ID)
3
Wow, she didn't trot out Hitler, but instead used the Evil Empire as a comparison. It's a small but significant indicator that she knows which way the wind is blowing, though she still thinks she can sail against it.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 05, 2006 06:32 PM (0yYS2)
4
keep the checks and balances they have worked well for a long time. Only 2 on the SCOTUS were appoinred by democrats.What extra powers would you want to grant to the next administration ?
Posted by: john Ryan at May 05, 2006 10:34 PM (TcoRJ)
5
John, as usual you have no idea what you're talking about, and make no sense whatsoever.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 06, 2006 06:14 AM (0yYS2)
6
I am thrilled to know where Bush's 32% approval rating are hiding. Dumbshit usually hides under rocks, there is your exit strategy Fool.
Posted by: D Allen at May 07, 2006 03:38 PM (grb7Y)
7
I think the 32% are right here under this this blog, D Allen! All 32% except for me. I am an avid Bush mocker! Think he pushes a few buttons ( war button included ), sets the auto-pilot, wipes his hands and says job well done ...
Posted by: Last gasp Larry at May 09, 2006 12:36 AM (FCC6c)
8
I don't like how Bush is running things either, because he seems stuck in a pattern of half-measures, and is trying to placate everyone at the same time instead of doing what he was elected to do, i.e. lead the nation in accord with the Constitution, which is generally isn't doing. He needs to kick out the muslims and illegals, pursue our enemies wherever they hide, and punish treason. Instead, he continues to straddle the fence while it's falling down.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 10, 2006 08:17 AM (0yYS2)
9
update: 31%
Posted by: Last gasp Larry at May 11, 2006 08:21 PM (FCC6c)
10
How about some Congressional oversight of the executive branch? You know, the people who cherry-picked intel to justify the trillion dollar Iraq quagmire? How about oversight of war profiteering? I guess that would upset the Washington lobbyists. No, they would rather spend your tax dollar strong arming the courts. Great.
Send all of these Congressional nitwits packing in November.
Posted by: bdf at May 17, 2006 04:49 PM (/JA8O)
<< Page 1 of 1 >>
82kb generated in CPU 0.0274, elapsed 0.1161 seconds.
121 queries taking 0.0984 seconds, 341 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
121 queries taking 0.0984 seconds, 341 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
