Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditAs the Los Angeles Times reported on Saturday, this much is known to be true: On November 19, after a roadside bomb killed Lance Cpl. Miguel Terrazas, 15 Iraqi civilians – including seven women and three children – were allegedly shot and killed by a unit of US Marines operating in Haditha, Iraq. Then, this past Friday, a battalion commander and two company commanders from the same unit were relieved of their duties.
We also know that the Marine Corps initially claimed that the 15 Iraqi civilians were killed by a roadside bomb. But in January, after Time magazine presented the military with Iraqi accounts and video proof of the attack's aftermath, officials acknowledged that the civilians were killed by Marines but blamed insurgents nonetheless who had "placed noncombatants in the line of fire."
However, video evidence shows that women and children were shot in their homes while still wearing nightclothes. And while there are no bullet holes outside the houses to support the military's assertion of a firefight with insurgents, "inside the houses…the walls and ceilings are pockmarked with shrapnel and bullet holes as well as the telltale spray of blood."
The Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) has launched a criminal investigation to determine whether the civilians were intentionally massacred by Marines. A second investigation will explore the initial misleading explanations of the killings.
US media coverage of the Haditha allegations has been startlingly limited. In addition to the Time investigation, AP reporter Bassem Mroue has followed the case and Knight-Ridder reporter Nancy A. Youssef has written an article as well. That's it. Much has been written in the UK press and in English-language papers around the world.
And while the NCIS investigation is still pending, circumstances surrounding the events of November 19 are strikingly similar to an "atrocity-producing situation," as described by Pulitzer Prize-winning war reporter and Nation Institute Fellow, Chris Hedges.
In Yes! Magazine's Winter 2005 issue, Hedges describes, "You have an elusive enemy. You're not fighting a set organized force…So you very rarely see your attacker, and this builds up a great deal of frustration. This frustration is compounded by the fact that you live in an environment where you are almost universally despised. Everyone becomes the enemy. And… after, for instance, somebody in your unit is killed by a sniper who melts back into the slums where the shot was fired from--it becomes easy to carry out acts of revenge against people who are essentially innocent, but who you view as culpable in some way for the death of your comrades."
One hopes that the NCIS investigation will be thorough and will reveal the facts about what exactly happened on November 19. But judging from the scapegoating and inaction in torture cases, what are the chances of any real accountability?
As Hedges notes of his experiences, "One of the frustrating things for those of us who have spent so much time in war zones is to come back and see how those who are guiltiest--those who pushed the country into war, who told the lies that perpetuated the war--are never held accountable. And those who suffer the most, those who endure the trauma and have to live with the memories for the rest of their lives, are blamed unjustly."
Share this article
Katrina vanden Heuvel
Thoughts on politics, current affairs, riffs and reflections on what’s in the news and what’s not--but should be.
RSS
War is not murder. It appears that murder may have been committed; hopefully the NCIS will determine the truth.
Conversely, no higher ups were investigated for Abu Ghraib; therefore why should the Marines think differently than the Liar-in-Chief and Many-me?
Posted by oraibi1952 at 04/12/2006 @ 5:03pm
"many-me" should read "mini-me"
Posted by oraibi1952 at 04/12/2006 @ 5:04pm
since just about everything about this war is just plain horrible, my reaction is, "what do you expect?" U.S. forces are in a truly unenviable situation, to be sure, but not one they didn't ask for by volunteering. a lot of those guys' enthusiasm for "the mission" and unquestioning loyalty to the criminals who sent 'em makes for a pretty poisonous mixture. while we may be reminded from time to time about our "good" works and lofty deeds, when you're in the business of subjugating a people through use of extreme, almost incomprehensible use of force, things happen.
Posted by wpahnelas at 04/12/2006 @ 5:37pm
What incredible times we live in. Our country has been hijacked by ideological extremists who's main goal is to keep the status quo of Corporate monopolies and empirical rule. Those in the general public who support our current regime are contributing to the demise of democratic republic western civilization. Their fanatical support of these cowards have allowed the media to be controlled by a few government owned mega corporations with their right-wing political agenda, by supporting these cronies, they encourage the misinformation and deceit that prevails in this administration. The deaths of these innocent Iraqi civilians and many others on all sides, is the result of this. These monopolies suck off the government teat and will do anything to keep their corporate welfare coming and could care less about this country or it's people. That means you and I will never hear anything but lies and distraction from the MSM.
It's all about controlling the ignorant masses. If your thinking doesn't involve more than simple platitudes, then George Bush is your man, however if you think beyond the third grade level, you would realize that our President and his administration has some serious short comings to say the least. It also reflects the mentality of American citizens who choose not to think, and continue to vote their peers into office. I guess they can identify with him because he is at their level of intelligence. What a sad state of affairs, considering we have to compete in a global market for commerce and technology. If we don't turn things around soon, we will be like those destitute third world countries, begging for assistance from the more advanced nations as we wallow in our own ignorance and the indifference of our corrupt government. Better open your eyes America, or reality will come and give you a cold slap in the face. Because we won't be able to feed, cloth or employ our own people.
Those who have awaken from their 9/11 induced coma, and have the courage to face the truth, however painful and horrible it may be, will be this countries saviors, the true American patriots. Stand up to these authoritarian corrupt demigods, and demand answers to these questions.
1. Why are we to believe that there are no images from the Pentagon of the supposed plane that they say hit the building when they have surveillance camera's inside and out that would have caught many different angles of this plane or whatever it was that did the damage. You would think that pictures of the jet liner hitting the Pentagon would be a great tool to further their agenda, but the images that were caught on tape would show otherwise. They are liars if they say there are no other images, and your an ignorant fool if you believe them. Not to mention the confiscated security camera tapes that were immediately taken from the many locations outside the Pentagon building. The only conspiracy theory is the official government version of what happened on that day.
2. Why are we to believe that when tower 7 of the World Trade Centers collapsed only a few hours after the main towers came down the official statement was they had to blow the building because it was in danger of collapsing. Any one who has any thought process would realize that it is impossible to do such a controlled demolition without weeks of work before hand. Again, your an ignorant fool if you believe this government lie.
Those are only two of the most obvious questions. There are many other questions that do not have any reasonable answers from our government concerning 9/11, the elections, and Iraq. There will of course be the Bushies favorite minions who will poo-poo anything that might disturb their delusions. Not a single one of them can explain any of this disinformation other than to spew out the usual moronic responses, it's like a child who doesn't want to hear the things from a parent who is trying to correct their behavior, they put their hands over their ears and make a continuous noise to drown it all out. If it can't enter their brain, then they won't be forced to make a choice, they can keep believing the fairy tale and be safe in their little cocoon. I don't blame them though, the truth can be devastating to ones own belief system of what America stands for. This is the hard part, once your mind is unchained, you realize the horror that has been bestowed upon us by our own government, and it should make you mad as hell. So many lives lost and ruined for no other reason than elitist power and greed. Here is a quote from someone who new first hand how to manipulate weak minds and control civilian populations.
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State." Joseph Goebbels
Of course here is the simple mans version of the same.
"See in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda." George Bush
Never except the lie, demand the truth or you can be afraid and crawl back into your hole and think happy thoughts of how we Americans and our form of government are so great, honest and trustworthy, but your only lying to yourself.
The only way we can achieve those goals of a greater America, that the world can once again look up to, will be to face the monster straight on and say "You are evil and I will not let you destroy this great country". This is a fight that can be won if we all stare down this beast, stand up to fear, don't let them take away any more of our freedom that so many had fought and died for. It is time to stop the insanity and start steering us away from these false leaders and head us towards the potential that our people have in them for great things. Let us all come together on this our greatest battle yet. We the people of the United States of America.
Posted by ttwain at 04/12/2006 @ 7:16pm
This preemptive war for oil is propelling us forward at a dizzying pace. One simple act of resistance we can all easily engage in was shown to me earlier today. Here it is. Make your purchases of gasoline at companies other than Exxon or Mobil. They're the two biggest oil companies, and especially with Exxon still wriggling out of responsibility for the Exxon Valdez disaster, I'll be curious to see what a boycott of these two corporations will have both in the commodities markets and in the more reasonable "marketplace of ideas."
Posted by lewwelge at 04/12/2006 @ 8:15pm
This preemptive war for oil is propelling us forward at a dizzying pace. One simple act of resistance we can all easily engage in was shown to me earlier today. Here it is. Make your purchases of gasoline at companies other than Exxon or Mobil. They're the two biggest oil companies, and especially with Exxon still wriggling out of responsibility for the Exxon Valdez disaster, I'll be curious to see what a boycott of these two corporations will have both in the commodities markets and in the more reasonable "marketplace of ideas."
Posted by LEWWELGE 04/12/2006 @ 8:15pm | ignore this person
I'm with you, brother Lew! I have boycotted Exxon for as long as I have known of the Valdez negligence, along with other negative behaviors- though some conservative-types will find some reason to criticize a legitimate choice to allign our consumptive power with ethical considerations (I purchase my fuel at Citgo, as I am more comfortable with my funds being distributed for healthcare and job training for the poor in Venezuela, than being recycled back into the military industrial complex via the corrupt Middle Eastern sheikhdoms).
Posted by Oustbush at 04/12/2006 @ 9:30pm
This is how the liberal leftwing provides fierce support and rallies round our troops and the USA! Where is the speculation on the possible fabrication by those with the most to gain through false accusations and manipulation of evidence long after the fact? Bias and a political agenda derived principally of hate for our government and its leaders seem more likely to be the motivation for such an abberrant accuseatory spirit! What gall!
Posted by RIO BRAVO 04/13/2006 @ 12:21am
You might want to read the article again, because all KVH does is ask the question: 'what happened?' She hasn't used the word 'guilty' - only you have.
Speculation of fabrication? Dude, the US Army have already admitted those fifteen people were killed by Marines. We also know the Army has lied about the circumstances of their deaths (roadside bomb, civilians caught in the line of fire during gunbattle with insurgents). Yet you are willing to overlook all of this because facing facts would mean being unsupportive of the troops.
What gall! Indeed.
Posted by Amsterdam69 at 04/13/2006 @ 06:12am
Incredulously unsupportive journalism concerning insubstainable allegations! (Pictures of John Kerry and Hanoi Jane falsely testifying to congress just flood the memory!)
Posted by RIO BRAVO 04/13/2006 @ 12:21am
Ah the memories. But mine are a little sketchy Rio.
Maybe you could tap into that flood and enlighten us all about that false testimony Jane Fonda gave to the Congress.
You know, just too clear up any speculation that you might be the kind of guy who would make unsustainable allegations
Posted by Will C. at 04/13/2006 @ 06:45am
Rio Loco
Perhaps you can apologize now regarding the released DOD reports that Dubya had on them supposed "bioweapons trailers" (telling the WH they were in no way connected to WMD production) 3 days before he crowed on TV that "We found the WMDs". Lying yet again with great facility...
Posted by leftofcenter at 04/13/2006 @ 07:55am
Ms vanden Heuval's phraseology here is quite interesting...
"this much is known to be true: ..... were allegedly shot"
"known to be true" and "allegedly"??!?!?!!?
Posted by Mask at 04/13/2006 @ 08:51am
Posted by OUSTBUSH 04/12/2006 @ 9:30pm
I am so in that camp.
I have refused to purchase from Exxon (and later Mobil) since Valdez, and have begun trying to buy from Citgo whenever possible.
I know that with double-digit billions in annual profit, they could care less.
But I feel better.
Posted by drhammer at 04/13/2006 @ 09:00am
Citgo is Venezualan-owned, correct? An interesting option.
I noticed that the day after Katrina hit everyone but them jacked up prices immediately, although they did catch up pretty quickly. I think in the long run an oil company acts like an oil company, but at least this one marches to a slightly different drummer.
Posted by MyParadigm at 04/13/2006 @ 09:14am
Rio,
I'm surprised at your answer. I thought you'd give us the usual talking point of "this is old news it happened 5 months ago. Republican's are looking forward while Democrats are looking back". I guess that one doesn't work anymore, because all events from the last three years are negative up to current and future events.
You know Georgie, if this President thingymebob job is "very hard work" for you, you could always resign.
Posted by freedomplease at 04/13/2006 @ 09:26am
After reading Outsbush and My, among others,,I am somewhat taken back.
You support Chavez more than your own companys and country? People have predicted that many on the left would pick another country over the US, blame the US for all the problems and our companies for all things corrupt.
Buy from Citgo anytime you can? You know , Castro gave everyone a rice cooker...
It is true, you guys are drunk with Bush hate, US hate and believe we are the source of all evil.
This is why you have no support outside the blog and why Hillary will desert you.America will too. She has to and can't afford to be seen anywhere near your beliefs. The posts on Chavez alone will kill off any national support for you here and ANY DEM candidate.
I am appalled at you. It amazes me that you hate your own country so much that you would support another country who wants and espouses his hopes for your down fall. Why not buy Saudi or Iranian products? Areyou cheering for Bin Laden?
My god, I am so out of here..I pray you are never in a position to control anything. Are you raising children?
Posted by john maasch at 04/13/2006 @ 09:28am
John Maasch,
You are buying Saudi products. You do put gas in that BMW X5 no?
Anyway back to the actual topic: Haditha = Tillman X 15 (-NFL factor).
Posted by freedomplease at 04/13/2006 @ 09:32am
"known to be true" and "allegedly"??!?!?!!?
Posted by MASK 04/13/2006 @ 08:51am
That's how cops and news reporters talk
(but without all the question marks and exclamation points)
Posted by Will C. at 04/13/2006 @ 09:43am
First of all, the point of this article is not about oil consumption. By the way, if Exxon or Mobil had donated heating oil to the Northern states in their time of crisis last year instead of Citgo then maybe people would be more inclined to by from them. Also, aren't alot of the products we buy come from China? China isn't exactly a beacon of human rights now is it? Any way, I feel bad for the troops involved in this as well as the troops overall. They are the ones, besides the Iraqi civilians, whoa re the victims here. They enlisted out of patriotic duty for a war they they are slowly learning was started on false pretenses. Not to mention, when they return, they are put aside like yesterday's garbage. I have a friend who came back from Iraq. he also served in Afghanistan. He is so disgusted with the military. They promised to help him matriculate back into society when he returned from service and to date the military have been negligent in their promises. KVH is right. The higher ups who make these decisions affecting the soldiers' lives, at the end of the day, do not give a damn. If they did, the soldiers' families wouldn't have to be on public assistance, decreasing health benefits, or not have their loved ones' bodies honored upon return. It is even more sad and pathetic to think that they the people who are supposed to have their best interests at heart (Commander-in-Chief, Secretary of Defense) don't give damn while those who care (former generals, officers on the ground) are being ignored. For shame. But that's okay as long as we all feel safe from an attack that may or may not happen sometime in the future. Right?
Posted by k330k at 04/13/2006 @ 09:45am
i'm kind a curious maasch
what do Haditha and Chavez have on common other than they are an expression of all that red state hate bubbling to the surface?
Posted by Will C. at 04/13/2006 @ 09:45am
Katrina,
It is definitely time to start shining some light on the Phase II Investigation. As you know due to the damning nature of what would be revealed, apologist Senator Pat Roberts has stalled it in committee for years. In November he was shamed into actually doing some work on it. The report is now nowhere near complete, but is rumored to be near release. None of the contentions issued have been investigated, none of the key witnesses have been questioned. Pat Roberts desperately needs to be shamed into doing at least a halfway respectable job, and not releasing the equivalent of a third grade book report.
Posted by freedomplease at 04/13/2006 @ 09:47am
John Maasch! The words "an interesting option" do NOT equate to waving the flag for Hugo Chavez!
I am not "drunk on Bush hate." I wrote what I did because some readers may not know who owns Citgo. I'm afraid your response illustrates little but your own prejudices.
Posted by MyParadigm at 04/13/2006 @ 10:04am
We do buy Saudi products, but we get less than 15% of our oil form ME. I have been to Alaska and have seen the area. I am under the impression Exxon paid over 3 -5 billion..
"that red state hate bubbling to the surface?"
I have never seen more hate and rants anywhere else than here...I am done.
Posted by john maasch at 04/13/2006 @ 10:05am
"My god, I am so out of here."
"...I am done"
OK.
Posted by drhammer at 04/13/2006 @ 10:33am
Wow, Maasch is done with us. I thought he would have a comment on the growing frustration the soldiers have with fighting this war as well as the war in general. Oh well, moving on.....
Posted by k330k at 04/13/2006 @ 10:40am
(By the way, my Exxon boycott predates my "Bush hate" by over a decade.)
Posted by drhammer at 04/13/2006 @ 10:41am
By the way, what is "ME"?
Posted by k330k at 04/13/2006 @ 10:41am
I don't hate Bush. I pity the fool.
Posted by k330k at 04/13/2006 @ 10:42am
We do buy Saudi products, but we get less than 15% of our oil form ME. I have been to Alaska and have seen the area. I am under the impression Exxon paid over 3 -5 billion..
"that red state hate bubbling to the surface?"
I have never seen more hate and rants anywhere else than here...I am done.
Posted by JOHN MAASCH 04/13/2006 @ 10:05am
You sure are. I just put you on the ignore list. I'm tired of reading things like the above recycled and off-topic portrayal as "hate" and "ranting" of a condemnation of war crimes.
As to those unfortunate, right-wing, emotionally addicted denizens who can't seem to tear themselves away from this forum- sorry, but I'll take the testimony of a tearful 9-year-old girl who just saw all the men, women, and children in her family murdered, in cold blood, by the US Marine Corps over Donald Rumsfeld's Pentagon, any day.
Posted by fromredbird at 04/13/2006 @ 10:43am
Posted by WILL C. 04/13/2006 @ 09:43am | ignore this person
I just find it odd that Ms vanden Heuval starts off with "this much is known to be true"....and then proceeds to list off a serious of ALLEGATIONS.
Subtle endorsement for the allegations being true? What happened to "innocent until proven guilty"? Oh, right....doesn't apply to soldiers and cops....my bad!
Posted by Mask at 04/13/2006 @ 10:48am
Mask, you are the undisputed king of the distinction without a difference. The allegations are real, and are an ongoing problem for our military and our image abroad. If they are proven, it will become infinitely worse. The dismissals of two officers are real, and instantly make the allegations credible.
Our soldiers are in an impossible situation. It will not improve. Real Americans want them out as soon as possible.Mask, you are the undisputed king of the distinction without a difference. The allegations are real, and are an ongoing problem for our military and our image abroad. If they are proven, it will become infinitely worse. The dismissals of three officers are real, and instantly make the allegations credible.
Our soldiers are in an impossible situation. It will not improve. Real Americans want them out as soon as possible.
Posted by MyParadigm at 04/13/2006 @ 10:57am
Please don't go Maasch.
I am hoping to win a few more beers off you in the coming months.
Posted by Hman23 at 04/13/2006 @ 10:57am
If the soldiers were guilty of intentionally murdering innocents then the NCIS will find evidence to support that. I feel the real issue is that the blame will lie solely at the feet of the soldiers and it should not be so. I totally agree with Chris Hedges on this issue. If this was had been handled properly instead of bungled by Rumsfeld and cronies, whom failed to listened to officers and generals, then incidents of this magnitude could have been avoided. But when you send a message to your troops that it's okay to torture and fail to give adequate support to ground troops, what do you expect. I expect frustration and vigilantism due to ridiculously poor planning.
Posted by k330k at 04/13/2006 @ 11:05am
KVH
Ok you can lead with this article and of course prominently feature something like this when it makes us look bad, but you are loathe to do an article on the US Forces that saved the Missionaries who went to expose US atrocities?
I find that truly cowardly, which makes this article all the more reek with hypocrisey. Will any libnut acknowledge that? probably not, but you are ready to pounce on any PERCIEVED war crime, wow how disgustingly cowardice.
But lets look at the facts, it occurred at night? they took fire from a general direction.
Now try and imagine, i know its hard for the typical libby, but try and put yourself in that spot.
Nighttime, you are the Commander on the ground, you take fire from a general direction, what do you do.
The battle drill says when you take fire, immediately, as you are falling to the ground, return fire.
After all it is war, and there is no condemnation of the terrorists who use the buildings as cover, thusly committed war crimes by using civilians as shields, but those pesky facts dont concern so-called American loving liberals here.
But lets stay on track, what do you do? Wait, until you can visually ID the enemy, remember bombs going off, nightime, confusion reigns, fog of war. Any of this familiar
What do you do libby ground commander, wait some more until someone in YOUR charge is killed, or do you shoot first and worry about CNN later?
You know TWO UNDISPUTED FACTS, you are taking fire and its from this general direction. Answer you fire back, you are a Soldier, not some fucking lawyer, you fight back, you are not a spineless jellyfish, your mission is to find bad guys and ensure you arrange their meeting with Allah. And while of course tragic the deaths of civilians caught in the crossfire is a secondary concern.
You dont go out of your way to fire on civilians, no US servicemenber does, but you do not allow those who hide amongest them to take shots at you without you firing back, you send the message that no where is safe for them.
The article KATRINA VAN DE EVIL writes is wrought with BIAS and misleading statements. Katrina, what is your purpose in such an article? It is wrong, the way in which you protray us.
And people DARE accuse you of anti-americanism?
Posted by CPT at 04/13/2006 @ 11:17am
Oh, come on, Mask, get real. Part of the calculation of starting a pre-emptive war should be the realization that war-time atrocities will occur. Even if military courts prove the Marines involved to be innocent of any crimes, this incident is another recruiting tool for the Iraqi insurgency and anti-American terrorists. In other words, an example of how "fighting them over there" makes it more likely that the fight will be brought "over here".
Posted by nathanhale at 04/13/2006 @ 11:19am
K330k
I am forever curious, what plan would you have devised?
Remember, HINDSIGHT is not a strategy, tell me oh wise one, which 4-star would you have listened to? the 20 telling you one course of action or the 3 telling you this course of action.
All you accusers of poor planning or monday morning quarterbacks, hindsight generals, and easily dismissed as such.
Posted by CPT at 04/13/2006 @ 11:20am
CPT:
You still owe me some answers on KVH's previous blog.
Posted by Hman23 at 04/13/2006 @ 11:25am
are for or
Posted by CPT at 04/13/2006 @ 11:25am
HMAN
Thought i did, now i didnt check back for a response, i just assumed you got it
Posted by CPT at 04/13/2006 @ 11:26am
CPT:
You hardly answered my question with your last post re: Fitzgerald. Go back and review the dialogue.
Posted by Hman23 at 04/13/2006 @ 11:31am
CPT, did you read the last paragraph of KVH's article? Seems to me this article is indicting our civilian leadership.
Did you read the article in Time that she linked to? Here are some clips from that...
According to military officials, the inquiry acknowledged that, contrary to the military's initial report, the 15 civilians killed on Nov. 19 died at the hands of the Marines, not the insurgents.
Believing they were about to be ambushed, the Marines broke down the two doors simultaneously and fired their weapons. The officials say the military has confirmed that seven people were killed inside the house--including two women and a child. The Marines also reported seeing a man and a woman run out of the house; they gave chase and shot and killed the man. Relatives say the woman, Hiba Abdullah, escaped with her baby.
According to military officials, the Marines say they then started taking fire from the direction of a second house, prompting them to break down the door of that house and throw in a grenade, blowing up a propane tank in the kitchen. The Marines then began firing, killing eight residents--including the owner, his wife, the owner's sister, a 2-year-old son and three young daughters
CPT, re-read the article. You know and I know that unfortunate events like this occur in battle. But this Iraq adventure was and is a war of choice, chosen by Bush. As commander in chief he has ultimate responsibility for all actions of the military, whether it be building a school or killing non-combatants. And Osama bin Laden is still on the loose.
Posted by nathanhale at 04/13/2006 @ 11:38am
CPT, do you discount the comments of Chris Hedges as well? Do his commments hold no ground? In the midst of bullets firing all around, I don't expect perfection. I know there will be "collateral" damage but to kill women and children, in night clothes, smacks of vigilatism. But when I see former officers and generals talk of how better it could have gone if Rumsfeld had listened as well as quotes from officers on the ground who have made claims that their requests/suggestions have gone ignored, makes me wonder if Rumsfeld truly took advice from those who know from experience instead of from those who are just as far away from the action as he is. Besides, why should Rumsfeld seek/consider advice from decorated veterans? He's a decorated veteran himself, right?
Posted by k330k at 04/13/2006 @ 12:01pm
Let's say the soldiers involved were doing what they were supposed to. In fact, they almost certainly were. You can have the most carefully crafted rules of engagement, and still get civilian casualties.
Okay, if you read the snippets from Time above, it looks pretty damning. But I'm looking my post from 10:57 where I screwed up the message by doing one operation wrong. What if a soldier under fire makes one little mistake like that? Innocent people dead. And it really can be one little mistake. It's a chain reaction.
So this in not about, oh look what our terrible out of control soldiers are doing. This is about, why are we still in a situation where this kind of thing can happen?
Saddam Hussein is on trial. This is a trial of a former head of state - it will take a long time and there are many unusual legal problems. There are opportunities for distraction and propaganda every day. By allowing accidents to happen, we are feeding the enemy.
This is just one symptom of the unbelievably stupid strategic errors the civilian authorities have made. Why they are still calling the shots is beyond me.
Posted by MyParadigm at 04/13/2006 @ 12:27pm
There's no excuse for slaughtering the nearest handy Iraqi family because you took a roadside bomb. These Marines are cowards who have shamed America. They are no less guilty than the Bush administration.
Posted by fromredbird at 04/13/2006 @ 12:29pm
Make your purchases of gasoline at companies other than Exxon or Mobil. They're the two biggest oil companies, and especially with Exxon still wriggling out of responsibility for the Exxon Valdez disaster, I'll be curious to see what a boycott of these two corporations will have both in the commodities markets and in the more reasonable "marketplace of ideas."
Damn, that e-mail that I got the other day from a friend really got around. I'm really kinda surprised/impressed.
Posted by thejman at 04/13/2006 @ 1:31pm
K330K,
They enlisted out of patriotic duty for a war they they are slowly learning was started on false pretenses.
I doubt that they are sloly learning that the war was started on false pretenses. Have you forgotten that 90% of troops polled thought they were in Iraq because of Saddam's involvement in 9/11?
Posted by thejman at 04/13/2006 @ 1:41pm
Maasch
You support Chavez more than your own companys and country?
If there was a foreign owned bus company in Alabama in 1955 that was not segregating it's passengers & the American company was forcing all "non white" people to sit in the back of the bus & they refused and instead chose to ride the buses of the foreign owned company would you tell them that they were wrong for not supporting an American business?
Posted by thejman at 04/13/2006 @ 1:53pm
Once again we see that there are those who look to blame rather than explain. cpt has again failed to read the artical for debate and jumped to his anally retentive rationalizations to blame the "libbys" BS.
In war we find that justification is a split second decision, clear the area of all threats real or perceived is survival 1 if you stop to think you will probably not survive.
In the aftermath war has always been disastorious to those caught in the middle, to say anyone should be blamed is usually just an excuse to vindicate in hindsight one's own sence of justice.
Posted by dycel8r at 04/13/2006 @ 1:59pm
CPT,
Nighttime, you are the Commander on the ground, you take fire from a general direction, what do you do.
The battle drill says when you take fire, immediately, as you are falling to the ground, return fire.
Just curious. Do you know something that is not explained here in the article? I mean, when you state that it is the "battle drill" to "immediately, as your falling to the ground, return fire" when taking fire, do you mean to tell me that they were in fact under fire from inside the house? After all there were no bullet holes in any of the exterior walls, just the interior walls, along w/some shrapnel & the splattered blood of 15 innocent people. By your explanation they would have had to have been taking fire from within the house, but I haven't heard this anywhere else.
Posted by thejman at 04/13/2006 @ 2:06pm
After all it is war, and there is no condemnation of the terrorists who use the buildings as cover, thusly committed war crimes by using civilians as shields, but those pesky facts dont concern so-called American loving liberals here.
If you think that we don't condemn the actions of those who hide in buildings & mosques, that are housing innocent people, for cover I think you need to get your head checked.
Posted by thejman at 04/13/2006 @ 2:09pm
LeftofCenter-----"released DOD reports that Dubya had on them supposed "bioweapons trailers" (telling the WH they were in no way connected to WMD production) 3 days before he crowed on TV that "We found the WMDs"
Let's get it right---the report was sent to the DOD three days before Bush's statement not the White House. There is no evidence that this report was broght before the President prior to his statement. This seems to be an attempt by you to muddy the waters so that you can continue your efforts to destroy this President. I have some problems with this information, but not the same problems you seem to have. I am disappointed that such important information was not brought immediatley to the President's attention.
Posted by Len Mosse at 04/13/2006 @ 2:13pm
cpt, what do u think of anthony zinni? have u heard anything he has to say about this whole mess?
Posted by loveloki at 04/13/2006 @ 2:34pm
First Len Mosse writes this...
Let's get it right---the report was sent to the DOD three days before Bush's statement not the White House. There is no evidence that this report was broght before the President prior to his statement. This seems to be an attempt by you to muddy the waters so that you can continue your efforts to destroy this President.
Then he finishes with this...
I am disappointed that such important information was not brought immediatley to the President's attention.
Actuall LM, there is no evidence that the information was NOT brought immeidately to the pResident's attention. Making that final statement would seem to be the EXAT equivalent of "...an attempt by you to muddy the waters so that you can continue your efforts to" defend the pResident no matter what the facts indicate.
And, just to "get it straight", incompetance in this administration seems to be every bit as rampant as lying. One is an NOT excuse or expalination for the other.
Posted by Lillian at 04/13/2006 @ 2:38pm
sorry...messed up the italics a bit there.
Posted by Lillian at 04/13/2006 @ 2:38pm
To all the Bush aplogists. Please just stop! You will all have to face the shit sooner or later. If you want to know why liberals are biased against Bush, go back a few years and examine why Conservatives were biased agianst Clinton. This is how people are, and if you expect anything different, then you probably havn't reached puberty yet. Shocking, appalled, shut up!
And the defensive stand you take is so transparent. If any of you had a spine, you would just say how you truly feel and stop with this apologist garbage. If all you can say is "that's not true" over and over, and "you're only saying that cuz you hate bush", then you're like a boxer who's always on the defensive. You won't win unless you throw a punch, so stop hiding and come out with at least some kind of fight.
Just say it. You think Bush did the right thing. You don't care how many people die. On the principle of fighting "terror", you would send every American out to die before even uttering the word defeat. You feel what we are doing in Iraq is right because it will strengthen America globally no matter what. You think civil rights rank way below national security, and you don't think checks and balances should be upheld during times of war, and that thepresident should not be checked for any action if it concerns national security. You don't know the specifics of anything because they can't tell you. But you trust that they're doing the right thing. Also, you take the utmost importance in individual accountability, but societal and communal accountability is bullshit. And you think that no matter right or wrong, this philosophy will serve America best.
If you just say it like that, I could respect you and maybe engage in a fruitful and respectful disscussion. But stop with the "why do you hate America" shit. Dissent for your government is rooted in a deep love for your country and ideals. Why is this hard to understand? Did those conservatives who impeached Clinton hate America? How is it that you can understand one and not the other. You're insulting your own intelligence when you make that claim, how are you going to explain this to the next generation when they ask you how things got so fucked up. Oh, don't tell me, you're gonna blame it on the ignorance of other people, or better yet, just deny it. What you should do is take a picture of yourself and say "me! That's why! Because of people like me."
Your times running out, for god's sake, save yourselves!
Posted by song at 04/13/2006 @ 2:39pm
Len Mosse - Why would the president refrain from revealing this info to the American people once it was known to him? Why do we have to find out about discredited information months after the fact? Did the president just find this out himself? If Bush did not know about the DOD reports before his presentation to America, when did he find out?
Posted by k330k at 04/13/2006 @ 2:40pm
THEJMAN/K330k
The fact, if it indeed is proven to be a fact, that no entry bullet holes were on the exterior of the house walls means what?
Nothing. You infer that there had to be bullet holes on the exterior, no they dont, because even at night with the moonlight and illumination, you can still make out window and doors, you can attibute no bullets on the outside walls to marksmenship, or to the possibilty that they simply "closed with" the suspected enemy to avoid firing on innocents in neighboring houses.
We really dont know, the intent of the article is as always, to make the administration look inept. KVH, does this by siezing on these aberretions to make her larger point. But in so doing she uses an extremely rare example, to make her point. the effect paints all US Forces in a bad light. It is simple really.
You know KVH would have alot more credibility to me IF, she or the Nation would have found enough dingity and COURAGE to write an article PRASING the RESCUE of the Missionaries, who were rescued by US Forces, since they found fit to print an article detailing thier capture and pled for their release. And since their release was provided by US Forces, not a WORD of gratitude from the group, let alone the Nation. So that makes this article all the more callous and disingenuious.
I guess she has learned the lesson from REV Al, ie the Tywana Brawley case, where the black girl alleged she had been raped by a couple of white guys....later she admitted she lied....Sharpton did not care to learn the truth or to wait until judgement had been passed...he jumped on the accusation and rode it..
To this day Sharpton, refuses to apologize for demonizing that community or the accused men, his rationale was that he was starting a movement. So it is in that light that KVH article is pernicious and scummy.
Posted by CPT at 04/13/2006 @ 3:02pm
SONG
Thanks for admitting your BIAS. Thanks for admitting everything you utter is crap.
Posted by CPT at 04/13/2006 @ 3:03pm
LOVELOKI/K330K
You both speak of former officers, who have have been critical.
Allow me to quote from a Victor Hanson article it pretty much answers your questions for me:
Imagine that, as we crossed the Rhine, retired World War II officers were still harping, in March, 1945, about who was responsible months during Operation Cobra for the accidental B-17 bombing, killing, and wounding of hundreds of American soldiers and the death of Lt. Gen. Leslie McNair; or, in the midst of Matthew Ridgeway's Korean counteroffensives, we were still bickering over MacArthur's disastrous intelligence lapses about Chinese intervention that caused thousands of casualties. Did the opponents of daylight bombing over Europe in 1943 still damn the theories of old Billy Mitchell, or press on to find a way to hit Nazi Germany hard by late 1944?
So, for every argument offered by "experts," there was just as available a convincing counter-argument -- something usually lost on those eager to keep up with the 24-hour news cycle.
More troops might have brought a larger footprint that made peacekeeping easier -- but also raised a provocative Western profile in an Islamic country. More troops may have facilitated Iraqization -- or, in the style of Vietnam, created perpetual dependency. More troops might have shortened the war and occupation -- or made monthly dollar costs even higher, raised casualties, and ensured that eventual troop draw-downs would be more difficult. More troops might have bolstered U.S. prestige through a bold show of power -- or simply attenuated our forces elsewhere, in Japan, Okinawa, Korea, and Europe, and invited adventurism by our enemies. Too few troops were the fault of the present Administration -- or the chickens that came home to roost after the drastic cutbacks in the post-Cold war euphoria of the 1990s.
"Troop transformation" has become equally calcified. We know the script. Pensioned Army and Marine generals appear ever more ubiquitously to assure the public that we have near criminally shorted ground troops. They alone are now speaking for the silenced brave majors and dutiful colonels stuck on the ground in Afghanistan and Iraq with too few soldiers -- as their four-star Pentagon brass sold out to Mr. Rumsfeld's pie-in-the-skies theorists in Washington.
Maybe -- but then again, maybe not. The counterarguments are never offered. If hundreds of billions of dollars were invested in sophisticated smart shells and bombs, drones, and computers, to ensure far greater lethality per combatant, then must traditional troop levels always stay the same? How many artillery pieces is a bomber worth, with ordinance that for the first time in military history doesn't often miss? Has the world become more receptive to large American foreign bases? Or depots to housing tens of thousands of conventional troops and supplies? And did lessons of the Balkans and Afghanistan prove the need for far more ground troops and traditional armor and artillery units?
The point is simple: Somewhere between the impractical ideas that the U.S. military was to become mostly Special Forces on donkeys guiding bombs with laptops, or, instead, a collection of huge divisions with tanks and Crusader artillery platforms, there is a balance that the recent experience of war, from Panama to the Sunni Triangle, alone distills. And it isn't easy finding that center when we had enemies as diverse as Slobodan Milosevic, Mullah Omar, Osama bin Laden, and Saddam Hussein.
So we know the nature of these weary debates. Both sides offer reasonable arguments. Fine. But let us not fool ourselves any longer that each subsequent "exposé" and leak by some retired general, CIA agent, or State Department official -- inevitably right around publication date -- offers anything newer, smarter, or much more ethical in this dark era that began on September 11.
What we need, then, are not more self-appointed ethicists, but far more humility and recognition that in this war nothing is easy. Choices have been made, and remain to be made, between the not very good and the very, very bad. Most importantly, so far, none of our mistakes has been unprecedented, fatal to our cause, or impossible to correct.
So let us have far less self-serving second-guessing, and far more national confidence that we are winning -- and that radical Islamists and their fascist supporters in the Middle East are soon going to lament the day that they ever began this war.
-- Victor Davis Hanson is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution.
Also something that he does not mention, more troops argument can equally mean, MORE casualties, see Soviets in Afghan, 500,000 troops, over 170,000 casualties, 20,000 killed.
Bottomline, while these retired generals are certainly learned opinions, it is still hindsight, if they were in charge ACTUALLY running it, like Abizaid and Franks, Myers and Pace, then things might VERY well be the same.
Posted by CPT at 04/13/2006 @ 3:20pm
"We really dont know, the intent of the article is as always, to make the administration look inept."Posted by CPT 04/13/2006 @ 3:02pm
CPT, the adminstration is doing a wonderful job making it's own self look inept. Trust that the Nation had nothing at all to do with the ineptness of our government. Also, what the hell does Al Sharpton have to do with this article? I known he's one of your many whipping boys(sometimes deservedly so) but you don't have to bring him up when you are trying to make a point. It devalues your point dramatically. As for everything else, you believe what you want and I will do the same.
Posted by k330k at 04/13/2006 @ 3:53pm
In the words of John Maasch: "I'm done". See ya'll tomorrow.
Posted by k330k at 04/13/2006 @ 3:54pm
K330K
"As for everything else, you believe what you want and I will do the same."
ok, fine! i not going to play with you either. so there! lol
Posted by CPT at 04/13/2006 @ 4:04pm
K330K
Lighthearted joke, didnt mean anything by it
Posted by CPT at 04/13/2006 @ 4:04pm
Posted by NATHANHALE 04/13/2006 @ 11:19am | ignore this person
So you're saying that we can NEVER have another military intervention of any sort....for if an atrocity occurs (real or even alleged), that local insurgency will be boosted?
Okay, but as I've said before, the "new rules" for military use being established by the Left are going to come back and bite them on the ass the next time they start in with "We must do something in (insert genocidal war here)" and the "neo-cons" can come back with "Freedonia never attacked us", "Freedonia has no WMDs", "Freedonia's dictator may be a bad guy, but that's no reason to overthrow him in a pre-emptive war"...and now add "Our troops may be accused of shooting Freedonian civilians and that mere accusation will help the Freedonian Insurgency to gain new members!"
After Iraq, there can be no "Rwandan incursion" or "Darfur incursion", not likely any Haiti, and even Bosnia will become politically un-sellable because of the parameters being established now by the Anti-Iraq War Movement.
This is NOT an endorsement of the war, which I certainly see as bungled...but a WARNING as to what happens when "the other guys" get to run the Pentagon and want "their wars".
Posted by Mask at 04/13/2006 @ 4:11pm
K330K
One more thing, Al Sharpton is the paradigm for supporting an unproven assertion, as FACT and using THAT, to make a "movement" to spur other causes. KVH, makes use of this model to spur her larger "movement" to oust the Bush administration.
Posted by CPT at 04/13/2006 @ 4:16pm
Mask, "the other guys," does that mean the U.N? As the fiction of wmd in Iraq has been proved (as, indeed, it would have been proved if UNESCO inspections had not been pre-empted by Bush), we're left with "fighting them over there so they don't fight us here." Do you not agree that fighting them over there makes it more likely (rather than less likely) that "they" will want to bring the fight here?
As for Bosnia, Rwanda, Darfur (,etc., ad nauseum), I'm not sure what they have to do with Iraq? Are you feeding me the hotspots which have been (or should be) contained under the U.N.'s flag?
Posted by nathanhale at 04/13/2006 @ 5:03pm
Posted by CPT 04/13/2006 @ 4:16pm | ignore this person
CPT, since you were in a joking mood earlier, I can't resist telling you: when Al lied, no-one died (LOL)
Posted by nathanhale at 04/13/2006 @ 5:06pm
cpt,
from what i can gather from your answer, u refuse to read or listen to zinni. that's odd, cpt. u should give him a chance. he claims he is still speaking to high-up military people in iraq. he spoke a lot before the war. it wasn't hindsight then. and not much has changed in his message. he addresses many more issues than the number of troops we sent. he is no bleeding-heart liberal. u should check him out a little and see what u think.
Posted by loveloki at 04/13/2006 @ 5:08pm
LOVELOKI
I love Zinni, just think he is wrong, he is certainly knowledgeable.
Here is how to best describe it.
Patton in WW2 wanted to cross the channel at the Pa de Calis, the narrowest part.
Eisenhower wanted Normandy.
Patton wanted to go right into Germany with his Third Army from the south.
Eisenhower and Bradley stopped his advance so that Montegoermery could clear out his sector in the north, thus depirving Hitler of launching sites for his V2s. And wanted to advance on all fronts at the same time.
Not the best example, but it highlights the fact, that Generals of equal caliber, OFTEN disagree as to the big strategic picture and the best way to win. Everyone has strong arguments and credintials, but I will always give the benefit of the doubt to man who is ACTUALLY in charge. Why, because he is the man in the "arena" ala Teddy Roosevelt.
He knows the smell, sights, people, and ground of the area, he deals with it everyday, 7 days a week, 365 a year. Abizad and Casey are the men in the arena.
Posted by CPT at 04/13/2006 @ 6:37pm
"...but I will always give the benefit of the doubt to man who is ACTUALLY in charge."
Posted by CPT 04/13/2006 @ 6:37pm | ignore this person
So I take it you agree with Army Maj. Gen. John Batiste, who commanded the 1st Infantry Division in Iraq in 2004-2005 and Marine Lt. Gen. Gregory Newbold, who held the key post of director of operations on the staff of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 2000 to 2002 who have both called for the resignation of Donald Rumsfeld?
Posted by Lillian at 04/13/2006 @ 7:31pm
The fact, if it indeed is proven to be a fact, that no entry bullet holes were on the exterior of the house walls means what?
Posted by CPT 04/13/2006 @ 3:02pm | ignore this person
Originally, US troops said the Iraqi civilians had been killed in a crossfire between them and insurgent attackers. You stated earlier that US tropps are trained to immediately return fire in the direction of the incoming fire they are receiving. Clearly the "story" the "training" and "physical evidence" don't add up. That's why the NCIS AND the Marines have both initiated investigations into the matter.
Posted by Lillian at 04/13/2006 @ 7:54pm
Al Sharpton is the paradigm for supporting an unproven assertion, as FACT and using THAT, to make a "movement" to spur other causes...
Posted by CPT 04/13/2006 @ 4:16pm | ignore this person
CPT, My Lai is a much more appropriate paradigm, actually. Most in the military initially denied the "allegations" and condemned those who made them in the exact language you used..."cowardly", "reek with hypocrisey", "disgustingly cowardice", "KATRINA VAN DE EVIL".
There is much to honor in those who elect to defend our country and our freedoms. However, there are "causes" and "situations" which conspire to rob our military of that honor. The war in Iraq is just such a "cause" and what appears to have happened in this case in Haditha may indeed be one of those "situations".
Posted by Lillian at 04/13/2006 @ 8:09pm
K330k---"Why would the president refrain from revealing this info to the American people once it was known to him? Why do we have to find out about discredited information months after the fact? Did the president just find this out himself? If Bush did not know about the DOD reports before his presentation to America, when did he find out?"
We are not just now finding out about the trailers. Everyone, except you, has known about this for a very long time. It was eventually reported to the nation, after Bush's interview.
Lillian-"Actuall LM, there is no evidence that the information was NOT brought immeidately to the pResident's attention. Making that final statement would seem to be the EXAT equivalent of "...an attempt by you to muddy the waters so that you can continue your efforts to" defend the pResident no matter what the facts indicate.
Interesting assessment---lets see now--How would I prove that I did not read something. I know I will get witnesses who will testify that they followed me around every day and I did not read what ever it is that you say I must now prove that I did not read. Pure idocy==the President does not have to prove a negative. You and others have just made the automatic jump, without proof, that the President read that report and ignored it. And one more thing, when your done reading this post, prove to me that you haven't read the novel "Shoeless Joe". Sure you can deny it, but according to you there must be proof that you didn't read. Absurd logic, but par for the course.
Posted by Len Mosse at 04/13/2006 @ 8:13pm
I just find it odd that Ms vanden Heuval starts off with "this much is known to be true"....and then proceeds to list off a serious of ALLEGATIONS.
Subtle endorsement for the allegations being true? What happened to "innocent until proven guilty"? Oh, right....doesn't apply to soldiers and cops....my bad!
Posted by MASK 04/13/2006 @ 10:48am
I can't beleive I even have to explain this. They are allegations because you are presumed innocent.
Allegations however (unless screamed insanely by your average hamster) are generally based on facts.
Posted by Will C. at 04/13/2006 @ 9:15pm
ok mask, we know 15 civilians were shot. it is alleged they were shot by marines. we know one battallion commander and two company commanders from that unit were relieved of duty. we know the marine corps originally said the civilians were killed by a roadside bomb. then, in january, after time magazine presented their case, the marine corps changed their story. so, all of the above points are true right?
Posted by loveloki at 04/13/2006 @ 10:54pm
The problem I have with the arguments from CPT, LoatheLiberty and the like is that the current situation can NOT be compared to WWII. How do you wage war on a concept? We are not storming the beaches of Normandy here, as romantic as that idea may be.
What we are really doing is participating in imperial over-reach--the same thing that hastened the demise of the Soveit Union
Posted by rain man at 04/13/2006 @ 11:18pm
Absurd logic, but par for the course.
Posted by LEN MOSSE 04/13/2006 @ 8:13pm
prove to me that you disarmed
(wait... that was for saddam)
Posted by Will C. at 04/13/2006 @ 11:34pm
Will C----Allow inspectors a free hand to go where ever they want would have done the trick---he chose not to. No one will ever be able to explain what Saddam was thinking about when he made it look to all the world (all the world's intelligence services)that he indeed did have WMD.
Posted by Len Mosse at 04/14/2006 @ 07:52am
LM
Saddam has other enemies in his immediate vicinity. Do you really think he would admit before the world "I don't have anything much bigger than a few standard artillery shells"?
Its not so hard to fathom if you just think about the region he exists in and shed a bit of your own preconceptions.
Posted by leftofcenter at 04/14/2006 @ 10:59am
...ooops..."had" not has
Posted by leftofcenter at 04/14/2006 @ 10:59am
LEFTOFCENTER---It is not hard to fathom from the perspective of 20/20 hindsight. No one was saying that at the time.
Posted by Len Mosse at 04/14/2006 @ 11:13am
What you mean is, no one was listening to the people who were saying that at the time. It was what, maybe a year after 9/11? It was a very difficult environment to speak up about anything but whupping the bad guys.
Posted by MyParadigm at 04/14/2006 @ 11:58am
I personally was stunned at the disconnect between the rhetoric and the actual evidence. Particularly when Colin Powell was at the UN showing satellite pictures of trailers and holding up little bottles of poison. And the next day all the papers say the case for war has been made. And I thought, so this is how wars get started. With a few months of uninterrupted lying.
Posted by MyParadigm at 04/14/2006 @ 12:02pm
Will C----Allow inspectors a free hand to go where ever they want would have done the trick---he chose not to.
Posted by LEN MOSSE 04/14/2006 @ 07:52am
Excepting that... he chose too.
And the inspectors, finding nothing (because there was nothing) begged ol Gee Dubya to give them some of that double secret, unleakable, leakless, dripless dry Intel that ol gee Dubya had as to the diabolical lair that Saddam kept his WMD
Ol Gee Dubya... he chose not too.
Posted by Will C. at 04/14/2006 @ 12:55pm
The far right apologists here kinda reminds me of the commercial of the people talking at the water cooler and one of them actually has this head in the water cooler upside-down jug. Except here on the blogs, where the far right apologists' heads aren't-- is in a water cooler, they're in the BC BS regime's toilets. Every time the BC BS regime has another bomb evacuated, the far right apologists are right in there catching. As if that weren't enough, then they just have blog here showing off how well they eat that shit by then regurgitating it to us. DDdaaammmmn.
Posted by Bushfools at 04/14/2006 @ 1:36pm
Only slightly off topic:
http://www.solar.ifa.hawaii.edu/ARMaps/Today/latest.png
Are things lining up to go off-line? Why not plame it on sunspots... 'Ruinsfeild is doing a very fine job', remembering what happens when the W'ussy pays compliments-- I say DUCK for the next shoe is falling as we speak.
Posted by Bushfools at 04/14/2006 @ 2:32pm
Oh and apologists-- open wide.
Posted by Bushfools at 04/14/2006 @ 2:33pm
Ooops, 'EXACTLY WHAT IS NEEDED', Like we need this:
http://www.n3kl.org/sun/index.html
Posted by Bushfools at 04/14/2006 @ 2:40pm
LM
Maybe not you or I, but you'd think that perhaps the politicians in charge of the DC monkey-show might actually know a little something about politics perhaps?
Posted by leftofcenter at 04/14/2006 @ 2:43pm
the point being they SHOULD have been...
Posted by leftofcenter at 04/14/2006 @ 2:44pm