Murtha becoming a loathsome individual
Even some of John Murtha's supporters will certainly get a retching feeling in their stomach to hear him assume the guilt of US Marines prior to a completed investigation and without even reading the initial report. There is a report that some Marines entered civilian houses in Iraq and purposefully opened fire on the innocent inhabitants. The commanders have been relieved of command until the investigation is complete.
While most loyal Americans would give their soldiers the benefit of the doubt until the investigation is complete, John Murtha was willing to assume their guilt on national television. According to a partial transcript posted on Michellemalkin.com from Exposetheleft.com:
While most loyal Americans would give their soldiers the benefit of the doubt until the investigation is complete, John Murtha was willing to assume their guilt on national television. According to a partial transcript posted on Michellemalkin.com from Exposetheleft.com:
CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: Let me ask you Mr. Murtha to give us some details about that. Draw us a picture of what happened at Haditha.Even if these marines are found guilty, such disloyalty to such a historically honorable group as the US Marine Corp (who Murtha once was part of) prior to actually knowing is absolutely disgusting. It shows a reluctance on the part of Murtha to stand by his country and those who put their life on the line. It shows a willingness to leap at any opportunity to be critical of our armed forces. I have seen no denouncement by members of his party, so we can assume they are in agreement until such denouncement surfaces.REP. JOHN “JACK” MURTHA: Well, I’ll tell you exactly what happened. One Marine was killed and the Marines just said we’re going to take care – we don’t know who the enemy is, the pressure was too much on them, so they went into houses and they actually killed civilians. And, and –
MATTHEWS:—was this My Lai? Was this a case of – when you say cold blood Congressman, a lot of people think you’re basically saying you got some civilians sitting in a room around a field and they’re executed.
MURTHA: That’s exactly it.
posted by All_I_Can_Stands @ 10:09 PM
18 Comments:
At 9:46 AM,
Malott said…
The Left stands up for the creeps and criminals in society, but the military is always guilty unless proven innocent.
At 12:10 PM,
Joe Smoe: American Citizen said…
The military is not guilty as they merely follow orders. The real Criminals are the slimebags ie Politicians that use them for their own devious ends...kinda like this flawed war of Choice that Bush and the Neo COns took us into.
So R2W why are we there this week? Enlighten us since you have "ALL" the right answers??? Kinda like Rumsfeld and 5 DEFERMENT Dick Cheney back at the beginning of this Mess.
At 3:21 PM,
Anonymous said…
What I consistently see in the critics of Murtha is ignoring what actually happened. For those paying attention, the story has been in the public domain since Time's report in January. Video of the bodies - including children - being carried out of homes has been available from ITV News since March. The DOD has acknowledged the incident, relieved three officers of duty and Duncan Hunter has confirmed the gist of what Murtha said. Now my question to you is where is there not a story when the field commander says 15 civilians were collateral damage in a roadside bomb when video shows dead victims as young as a three year old girl? A suggestion would be to stop attacking and do a little bit of your own investigation.
At 3:41 PM,
All_I_Can_Stands said…
wieland, you failed to address the main point: that Murtha is presuming guilt of US Marines prior to a finding of guilt.
At 12:49 AM,
Anonymous said…
all_i_can_stands - I don't see how Murtha's statement was any different than the Time or ITV coverage. Go to my blog and see his exact statement. It was in the context of our troops being put in the position where these things could happen. I think the facts clearly are that killings occurred and that the collateral damage claim was a coverup no one in the gov't is denying that. If the news media reports that a gang member killed your neighbor, does that mean that the unnamed suspect has lost the presumption of innocence? No, its just reporting what is known at the time.
To me this whole "presumed innocent" argument is a smoke screen and everyone is simply parroting Sean Hannity from last Thursday and an avoidance of the painful truth. BTW, Duncan Hunter has confirmed Murtha's statement of where the DOD investigation has led. Final thought, since Murtha didn't name names, no one's presumption of innocence was impacted, and I'm quite sure that a military board will not be prejudiced.
At 8:12 AM,
All_I_Can_Stands said…
wieland, I looked at the Fox story on your blog. The difference between the Fox story and what Murtha said to Chris Matthews (quoted in my blog) is huge. Every claim in the Fox story is couched with words such as "residents said" and "Rsayev said". This underlines a careful avoidance of presumption of guilt.
Murtha on the other hand states "Well, I'll tell you exactly what happened..."
How are you missing this? If Time and ITV reported it as fact instead of reporting what is being claimed then they are as guilty as Murtha.
I have stated clearly that I don't know what happened here. Yes people died, but after the investigation is complete we may know who did it, how and maybe why. Until then our Marines deserve the benefit of the doubt. Murtha is free to proclaim their guilt without a completed investigation, but he is also worthy of grave criticism by doing so.
At 1:58 PM,
Anonymous said…
Murtha supports our troops far more than any of his critics. He mentions their valiance and sings their praises all the time. He constantly advocates for their being given reasonable tour assignments and for vets' rights and healthcare. His assessment is that our troops are being abused by the Bush Administration and so he is speaking up in their defense. He's said that a lot of times too. What's loathsome are chickenhawks who've never seen combat in person jumping down the neck of a 37 year veteran.
The Malkin transcript is not totally accurate, nor is the one on MSNBC but it is far more accurate than Malkin's. You need to listen to the broadcast, and in it you will hear a lot of rapid crosstalk and Matthews leads with a question about My Lai which apparently Murtha missed in his rapid fire response of "That's exactly what happened" because you hear Murtha going back repeatedly to his assessment that the event in Haditha is a result of battlefield shell shock, of troops over-stressed, overworked, pushed to an edge and snapping. Do you refute the idea that killing 20 unarmed civilian women and children could be considered killing in cold blood? It's dramatic language, but it's a dramatic situation.
Murtha's statements are a direct indictment of the way the Bush Administration has bungled this war.
"Listen, I don‘t excuse it, but I understand what‘s happening. And the responsibility goes right to the top" says Murtha to Matthews. That's the heart of Murtha's complaint, and he says it over and over again. How are you missing this?
There is some kind of unwritten protocol to give troops the benefit of the doubt beyond anything that would be reasonable for anyone else. If anyone in the US were a suspect in 20 homicides under investigation, it’s a pretty good bet they’d be in custody. It’s also a pretty good bet that these Marines are not in custody now. Still, I haven't heard Murtha calling for these Marines to be imprisoned, which would be the case if Murtha was the bad guy out only to sack our troops as you accuse him of being.
"This report is going to be ugly," one commander said, adding that it appears the Marines did not follow the rules of engagement...
Senior commanders said Murtha is "coming from a position of knowledge." from FOX News.
That's what's out there now. Murtha has no desire to tear down the Marines. He is a Marine. One of the codes of Marines is integrity and he is directly accusing the Bush Administration of having no integrity on the Iraq war, of abusing our troops with endless redployments and stop loss, overstretching them. Murtha's beef is entirely with the Bush Administration, not with the troops.
At 2:26 PM,
All_I_Can_Stands said…
I cannot recall too many times in the last few years where Murtha has praised or stuck up for the military where such rhetoric is not couched smack in the middle of a pot-shot at Bush and Iraq. This is Murtha's continuing MO and he uses the military like a prop to score cheap points.
Do you refute the idea that killing 20 unarmed civilian women and children could be considered killing in cold blood?
The word "could" proves my point. Wait until the investigation is done, then make a judgement. And yes our troops deserve a higher benefit of the doubt than the average joe suspected of committing a crime. On the field of any war they will face:
- faulty intelligence
- misread circumstances
- propoganda and lies from both enemy military and local civilian groups
If Murtha was so sure that these guys will be found guilty of what he claimed, then he could wait and keep his mouth shut until the investigation is complete. Of course that means his cheap political points would have to wait.
At 6:06 PM,
Anonymous said…
You "cannot recall" because you have no desire to know and the only ones trying to score cheap points are you and the Malkin hordes. You're willfully missing that Murtha's beef is squarely with Bush and his bungling of this war, and that this tragic episode is a symptom of that bungling. I'll let Murtha respond.
"I like guys who've never been there to criticize us who've been there. I like that. I like guys who got five deferments and never been there, and send people to war, and then don't like to hear suggestions about what needs to be done."
"When I was in Vietnam, you [Tom Delay] were killing bugs."
Ever spend any time in the military? No, I didn't think so.
Free speech is one thing but you and every other non-serving chickenhawk from Bush on down have no moral authority to judge Murtha or anyone else who's served in combat when they speak about combat, let alone an ardently pro-military 37 year Marine vet.
Killing 20 unarmed civilian women and children, some shot in the back, is killing in cold blood. Anyone who doesn't think so is sick in the mind and soul.
At 6:34 PM,
All_I_Can_Stands said…
I said:
"I cannot recall too many times in the last few years where Murtha has praised or stuck up for the military where such rhetoric is not couched smack in the middle of a pot-shot at Bush and Iraq."
You said:
"Murtha's beef is squarely with Bush and his bungling of this war"
Even you are making my point. Murtha's comments are solely for targeting Bush. Yet you act like we are saying something completely different.
As for bungling the war I truly doubt if more mistakes were made in Iraq, than in the Revolution, the Civil War, WWI, WWII, Korean or Vietnam war. I have seen the newspaper clips post WWII criticizing the handling of Germany after their surrender. There are mistakes in every war and only somebody with a preconceived bias against Iraq and Bush would say Iraq has more mistakes than any other war. The standard going into the war seems to be perfection. Ok, I agree that has not been met. To claim that Iraq has a higher mistakes rate than other wars is a farce.
At 4:30 PM,
Anonymous said…
You and Murtha are saying very different things, trust me. "Murtha's comments are solely for targeting Bush" you say. I disagree and nothing I've said is remotely supports that idea. Saying that Murtha's beef rests squarely with how the Bush Administration has handled this war does not make his comments solely for targeting Bush to the exclusion of all else. To think so is vain.
Murtha's 22 year Congressional career has been spent doggedly supporting the military. Don't believe me. Check the history. He's spent many years speaking highly of the military without couching it in criticism of the Administration in power at the time.
But "in the last few years" we have had nothing but the war in Iraq. To expect him to say nothing about the failed policy these soldiers are forced to follow is ridiculous. Murtha first spoke out about Abu Ghraib in 2004 and in November 2005 calling for aggressively redploying of our forces in the region.
Murtha is a 37 year Marine vet who is standing up for his troops. Semper Fi. He sees his fellow Marines and soldiers being horribly mistreated by the Bush Administration on the ground in Iraq and at home at the VA, so he speaks up for them. Look at the first paragraph of his 2005 statement. See what is foremost in his mind. "Our military is suffering." That is the driving sentiment behind his statements he made to Matthews on Hardball. How you continue to willfully miss this is incredible.
As for bungling the war I truly doubt if more mistakes were made in Iraq, than in the Revolution, the Civil War, WWI, WWII, Korean or Vietnam war.
The number of mistakes is irrelevant compared to the scope and impact of mistakes. Make 100 procedural mistakes on the shooting range, but when you make that one mistake that kills someone, all those other 100 aren't so damn relevant anymore. We have spent hundreds of billions of dollars throwing our country into unprecedented debt, almost no National Guard at home for emergencies, mangled tens of thousands of lives and destroyed our national reputation in this war.
At 10:32 AM,
All_I_Can_Stands said…
right wing agenda - I have said in this post that there may be truth to it. I deplore the claim that it is definitively true prior to a complete investigation. There does indeed seem to be more fire appearing, but I will stand by these marines until proven otherwise.
As for blaming Bush if it ends up being true, I suppose you also blame Lyndon Johnson for the My Lai Massacre? I give these soldiers every benefit of the doubt, but there is still accountability for actions on the field once proven. This new phenomenon exhibited by Murtha and now you to virtually give a full pass on field accountability and lay it at the feet of Bush strikes at the heart of what this is all about. Get Bush. Get Bush. Get Bush. No matter what the circumstances. No matter what the details are. Just get Bush. I don't even think you or Murtha realize how you look on this. It is a rabid willingness to cast aside reason, reputation, credibility and any pretense of fairness just to strike the political jugular vein of a man you hate with a passion. I really feel sorry for Murtha because I don't think he realizes how this obsession is transforming him.
At 1:53 PM,
Joe Smoe: American Citizen said…
It is a rabid willingness to cast aside reason, reputation, credibility and any pretense of fairness just to strike the political jugular vein of a man you hate with a passion.
Pally, that is Rovian/GOP politics that Bush and co. have been playing for the last 6 years at it's best,they don't call it the Republican Attack machine for nothing. So now that the other side has learned how to play the game the Right starts to cry foul???
At 5:07 PM,
All_I_Can_Stands said…
RWA, I think you are setting yourself up for a big disappointment. Political hatred is not a very effective force.
I wish the psychiatrists were in the stock market. I would be investing in them as the left is going to need a lot of them after the election. I don't think it will be a banner year for the GOP, but I think even close to status quo will drive the left over the edge.
At 5:50 PM,
Anonymous said…
Reason, reputation and credibility are exactly what will lead a 37 year Marine vet to do everything in his power to protect his fellow Marines. He understands them because he is one of them. He's worn their uniform. He's carried their weapons. He's fought along side them and he will be forever far more protective of them than anyone else who has never worn a uniform.
It is naked vanity that assumes Murtha's sole purpose is to "just get Bush." He knows that these specific Marines may face trial, but he also knows that they may face trial because they have been thrown into a chaotic mess resulting from a failed policy that Bush has not had the courage to change. Murtha above all else wants to stop seeing our men and women being abused in a wargame that has no plan. He wants to stop seeing them be pushed to these limits and snapping, whether it's in Iraq or back home. He wants to restore reason, reputation and credibility to America, which is why he's put forth a specific, well-reasoned plan for redployment. Shinseki was ditched because he made the "unreasonable" claim that the Administration was trying to fight the war on the cheap with too few soldiers. Murtha now addresses the soldiers' stop-loss and multiple tours of duty which lead to stress.
The ones most lacking reason, reputation and credibility are those who told us they knew where WMDs were when they didn't, those who insist on "staying the course" which means who knows what, and those who are blind to the ongoing chaos and ask us to believe that everything is going great in Iraq.
Fairness? That's rich.
At 6:54 PM,
Anonymous said…
Stop-loss and multiple tours of duty which lead to stress? Our soldiers can't handle the "pressure" they're under? Are we talking about those in the armed forces or people working in a flower shop around Mother's Day? Our soldiers are being asked to do what soldiers do, what they are trained to do, and what they are the best in the world at doing. We've been in Iraq for 3 years. We've almost never fought a war in the history of our country that didn't last longer, and many soldiers in these other wars fought throughout the entire war - start to finish. It's time we stop feminizing our armed forces like we've feminized most aspects of our society. They're soldiers. They're trained to conduct war, which includes surviving grueling conditions and killing enemies. Murtha knows this, but he wants to play on the emotions of soccer moms, and dads who act like soccer moms. After all, if he can get Americans to feel our soldiers are under too much stress and unfair working conditions, we just might blame the Commander-in-Chief. Mission Accomplished!
At 2:27 PM,
Anonymous said…
Our soldiers can't handle the "pressure" they're under?
No, sometimes they can't, and they snap.
Does the name Timothy McVeigh mean anything to you?
Why don't you click on that link I posted about those not doing so well with the stress they've had to endure? Despite what you imply, neither Murtha nor anyone here is calling them panty-wastes. Troops are tough characters and trained to be that, but you seem to take sadistic glee in dismissing that they're also human beings that can and will snap if pushed too far. You're so cavalier about stop-loss and multiple tours. You should go try it out and see how it fits you. You also forget that a lot of troops over there are National Guard, regular people not regular Army.
There are more Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (the over-psychoanalyzed term for shell shock) cases than ever, and the best the Bush Tax Cut Crew can offer is some empty rhetoric about supporting our troops and ongoing cuts to the VA.
At 9:57 AM,
Anonymous said…
Sometimes employees of the U.S. Postal Service snap, too. I guess we need to pull out of the mail delivery business.
Post a Comment
<< Home