Comments and e-mails are welcome, but all such communication is to be assumed to be 1) the original work of any who initiate said communication and 2) in the public domain, with free use granted for publication in electronic or written form. If you do NOT wish to have your message posted, write "CONFIDENTIAL" in the subject line of your email.
Original content copyright © 2006 - 2008 by the respective authors. Fair, not-for-profit use of said material by others is encouraged, as long as acknowledgement and credit is given, to include the url of the original source post. Other arrangements can be made as needed.
Site contact: greyhawk at mudvillegazette dot com
This is a furball of a story...
As the Military and Progressives panel came to an end, a young man in uniform stood up to argue that the surge was working, and cutting down on Iraqi casualties. The moderator largely freaked out. When other members of the panel tried to answer his question, he demanded they “stand down.” He demanded the questioner give his name, the name of his commander, and the name of his unit. And then he closed the panel, no answer offered or allowed, and stalked off the stage.
Wes Clark took the mic and tried to explain what had just occurred: The argument appears to be that you’re not allowed to participate in politics while wearing a uniform, or at least that you shouldn’t, and that the questioner was engaging in a sort of moral blackmail, not to mention a violation of the rules, by doing so. Knowing fairly little about the army, I can’t speak to any of that. But it was an uncomfortable few moments, and seemed fairly contrary to the spirit of the panel to roar down the member of the military who tried to speak with a contrary voice.
I know I would not decide to show up at yK in uniform...A.L., you want to take a stab at this?
Update: Yeah, when you spend all your time dancing on that line it looks a little weak when you complain about it, eh? If it's a standard in one political direction it should be a standard in both. It hasn't been since Kerry testified to Congress about all those "war crimes" in his raggedy looking half-uniform.
After a thorough investigation that lasted nearly a week the 4th Infantry Brigade Combat Team, 1st Infantry Division has concluded that the allegations made by Private Thomas Scott Beauchamp, the "Baghdad Diarist", have been "refuted by members of his platoon and proven to be false"
Authorities are questioning three men after pulling them from a submersible vessel in the East River in Brooklyn, N.Y., according to reports from ABC affiliate WABC.The linked article has a picture and a video of the craft.
The men were captured near the Brooklyn Cruise Terminal in downtown Brooklyn, near the massive cruise ship the Queen Mary 2, just after 11 a.m.
The intent of the three men being held by police remains unclear, but the initial indication is that it did not appear to be terror-related. They have not been identified by police and no charges have been filed.
The orblike vessel, with a circular hatch on the top for entering and exiting, remains moored in the East River in the Red Hook section of Brooklyn. It was equipped with oxygen tanks, WABC reported.
Normally, I'm not much of an alarmist, but this one doesn't smell kosher. I really can't think of any non-nefarious reasons someone would want to sail a vessel like that around New York, and drug-smuggling doesn't really make sense; you could just drive your load around the city. If they didn't find anything, maybe this was a dry run? I don't like to ethnically profile anyone, but if it turns out the "Sailors" have Middle Eastern names, I'm gonna say this could be the tip of something much bigger.
I'll be updating this story, if needed, over at my submarine blog The Stupid Shall Be Punished.
Update: Never mind. It was just guys being guys.
Most readers here are familiar with Vets For Freedom
Some respond to them with malicious, full of hate, tripe:
The troops do not deserve respect
RE: The troops do not deserve respect
Re: The troops do not deserve respect
And some are just evil, BUWAHAHA
RE: The troops do not deserve respect
If you'd like to be a part of Vets for Freedom, more information can be found here:
In September, General Petraeus will report to Congress on the status of the mission in Iraq. At that time, members of Congress will decide whether to continue the mission and defeat Al Qaeda, or abandon the mission and surrender to America’s enemies. The stakes could not be higher.
It is absolutely crucial that veterans have a voice in September's debate. And therefore we're asking every Iraq and Afghanistan veteran who believes in the mission - and supports our fellow soldiers and Marines still serving - to converge on Washington, DC on Tuesday, September 18th.
We plan to have hundreds of veterans on Capitol Hill ... and hope you'll be one of them.
The Commander of the Walter Reed Healthcare System has started a blog, which is a good thing. Let's hope posting is frequent and substantive.
H/T: @ Walter Reed.
What may be my last look at the News for quite some time. Korean hostages, Afghan blogging, tourism and jirga-mania.
OK not really.
Congressman David Dreier joined us in the first hour this morning, and touched base with Dennis on a few issues, including the possibility of reinstating the draft.
Thomas Lifson of AmericanThinker.com spoke with Dennis in the middle hour.
Robert "Buzz" Patterson was today's final guest; he elucidated the themes brought forth in his book War Crimes. He also highlighted military blogs such as the Mudville Gazette, and outlined the essence of what has been brought to bear under General Petraeus to improve the situation on the ground in Iraq.
A.L., the logic becomes internally consistent when the only important thing is opposition, right?
Error? Mistake? He was off by an entire country and something like nine months?
This is what TNR terms an "error," a "mistake"? And when they "fact-checked" this beforehand, how did their "rigorous editing and fact-checking" miss the fact this took place in another country, before actual deployment?
I'm reminded of Steven Wright's joke: "The other day I was... oh wait, that was someone else."
Could happen to anyone, really. Common mistake.
Best part about all this Beauchamp nonsense:
If Beauchamp is telling the truth, he's committed some serious (possibly criminal) misconduct.
If he's lying, ditto.
Guess it's a question of what preconceptions his supporters want to bolster when they defend him.
In related news, I found myself in the curious position of having to argue, on a lefty blog, just why mocking an IED victim, desecrating human remains and 'cornering' a Bradley to intentionally kill stray dogs might be a bad thing, possibly warranting some action.
There's an odd sort of disconnect here. The left feels the need to defend Beauchamp as one of their own because his stories do such a good job of dehumanizing even this thoughtful, literary, sensitive young man (so the theory goes). Damn them, Bush's war is so horrible that even this aspiring Hemmingway gets turned into a monster. Or at the very least, one that condones/fails to report monstrous behavior. So when people call into question the various facts of his claims--we'll they're just trying to put this poor soldier down.
So now instead of being able to "speak truth to power"--he is silenced. SILENCED!
And it's become a weird Bizarro world flipside where the milblogging community is arguing that Beauchamp's conduct is rather not nice and the left is arguing that "hey man, shit HAPPENS in war. WAR!"