Thursday, March 31, 2005
Terri's end
30 MAR 05 1200 (late entry)
Long night in the ER. No tubes available to discontinue. Discussed Karen Ann Quinlan and Jack Kevorkian with colleagues. Had a long discussion with the on-coming MD about the ethics of the Schiavo case. Stumbled home by way of the local Class III dealer, just to window-shop. Changed clothes and went to my part-time mechanical job. Figured out that I've been awake since Mon AM, with about 3 hours out for combat naps. But hey, I'm above ground.
31 MAR 05 1020EST
Woke up after 10 1/2 hours much needed sleep. Apparently Terri Schiavo died minutes ago. Starved to death over a span of two weeks not because she was dying, not because she was unloved, but because she was inconvenient. 'Schiavo' will now enter the language.
Another gomer dead...... nothin' to see here, folks......now move along.
Rest in peace, Terri.
Previous FASTAC 6 posts on Terri Schiavo:
donuts-and-terri
terri-picking-up-speed-on-slippery
because-terris-case-is-too-important
observation-about-terri-schiavos-case
terris-death
jpfo-weighs-in
Long night in the ER. No tubes available to discontinue. Discussed Karen Ann Quinlan and Jack Kevorkian with colleagues. Had a long discussion with the on-coming MD about the ethics of the Schiavo case. Stumbled home by way of the local Class III dealer, just to window-shop. Changed clothes and went to my part-time mechanical job. Figured out that I've been awake since Mon AM, with about 3 hours out for combat naps. But hey, I'm above ground.
31 MAR 05 1020EST
Woke up after 10 1/2 hours much needed sleep. Apparently Terri Schiavo died minutes ago. Starved to death over a span of two weeks not because she was dying, not because she was unloved, but because she was inconvenient. 'Schiavo' will now enter the language.
Another gomer dead...... nothin' to see here, folks......now move along.
Rest in peace, Terri.
Previous FASTAC 6 posts on Terri Schiavo:
donuts-and-terri
terri-picking-up-speed-on-slippery
because-terris-case-is-too-important
observation-about-terri-schiavos-case
terris-death
jpfo-weighs-in
Tuesday, March 29, 2005
Donuts and Terri
Spent the night on a Geri unit. The morning wake-up-and-feed-the-helpless routine was quite the zoo. Yet no one suggested that we park these people in a corner for a couple of weeks to quietly, or noisily, starve. I admit that I was a little surprised to find that no one had euthanized some of our patients while I was away. When I left the hospital I first went to use a free Dunkin' Donuts coupon given to me by the day RN (thanks again, A.)
On the way home I got into some interesting discussions. One was with a somewhat brain-damaged (2° MVA) but very functional friend who assured me that he is going to get 'DNR' tattooed over his sternum. That's my kind of Advanced Directive! Another talk was with a colleague who reminded me that this sort of thing goes on all the time without the fanfare.
Once home I brunched on the last of the leftover Kroger's rotisserie chicken (2 1/2 meals!), Diet Coke, salad, and some Purim goodies I missed yesterday. Even went out on the front step and smoked a cigar. Much more of a meal and a morning than Terri Schiavo's having.
I've looked at a bunch of the verbiage, imagery, and law surrounding this murder. I'm no slouch when it comes to patient assessment, chart reviews, and medico-legal matters. My friends, and my enemies, we have crossed the divide. We now have a precedent leading to overt euthanasia. Not 'assisted suicide'. Not 'enthusiastic over-administration' of narcotics. Not 'end-of-life' care. Euthanasia. When the day comes that a judge may declare your life valueless, when they bring your 'hot-shot' of morphine or phenobarb, it will be too late for you to say much. On that day, you may even discover that your Living Will/AD doesn't carry the weight that you thought it would.
Previous FASTAC 6 posts on Terri Schiavo:
terri-picking-up-speed-on-slippery
because-terris-case-is-too-important
observation-about-terri-schiavos-case
terris-death
On the way home I got into some interesting discussions. One was with a somewhat brain-damaged (2° MVA) but very functional friend who assured me that he is going to get 'DNR' tattooed over his sternum. That's my kind of Advanced Directive! Another talk was with a colleague who reminded me that this sort of thing goes on all the time without the fanfare.
Once home I brunched on the last of the leftover Kroger's rotisserie chicken (2 1/2 meals!), Diet Coke, salad, and some Purim goodies I missed yesterday. Even went out on the front step and smoked a cigar. Much more of a meal and a morning than Terri Schiavo's having.
I've looked at a bunch of the verbiage, imagery, and law surrounding this murder. I'm no slouch when it comes to patient assessment, chart reviews, and medico-legal matters. My friends, and my enemies, we have crossed the divide. We now have a precedent leading to overt euthanasia. Not 'assisted suicide'. Not 'enthusiastic over-administration' of narcotics. Not 'end-of-life' care. Euthanasia. When the day comes that a judge may declare your life valueless, when they bring your 'hot-shot' of morphine or phenobarb, it will be too late for you to say much. On that day, you may even discover that your Living Will/AD doesn't carry the weight that you thought it would.
Previous FASTAC 6 posts on Terri Schiavo:
terri-picking-up-speed-on-slippery
because-terris-case-is-too-important
observation-about-terri-schiavos-case
terris-death
Monday, March 28, 2005
Terri: picking up speed on the slippery slope.
I just finished breakfasting on leftover Kroger's rotisserie chicken, Diet Coke, and the remains of some Purim goodies. The parrot was unhappy about the chicken, but he'll be fed, too. Fresh water, even. More than Terri Schiavo will have today. She's got one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel, as we say.* Reminds me of days when even gritty, tepid, tasting-of-purification-tabs water in a plastic canteen is a good thing.
Zuukie, on an LGF thread, A Little Less Certainty , posted a relevant and interesting anecdote: #965 . Yep, lots of people going hungry, thirsty, or gasping for air. But I believe Terri's will be the ★LANDMARK★ case for us.
Today I'll give some thought to a new Healthcare POA. Number 1 Son is waay too eager to inherit the Winchester.
*We use a lot of what seems heartless humor in medicine. It keeps us from sitting in corners, gibbering. So chill out.
Previous FASTAC 6 posts on Terri Schiavo:
because-terris-case-is-too-important
observation-about-terri-schiavos-case
terris-death
Zuukie, on an LGF thread, A Little Less Certainty , posted a relevant and interesting anecdote: #965 . Yep, lots of people going hungry, thirsty, or gasping for air. But I believe Terri's will be the ★LANDMARK★ case for us.
Today I'll give some thought to a new Healthcare POA. Number 1 Son is waay too eager to inherit the Winchester.
*We use a lot of what seems heartless humor in medicine. It keeps us from sitting in corners, gibbering. So chill out.
Previous FASTAC 6 posts on Terri Schiavo:
because-terris-case-is-too-important
observation-about-terri-schiavos-case
terris-death
Sunday, March 27, 2005
Because Terri's case is too important to ignore:
Just got home from a longish day on the cancer unit. I saw a lot of tears, heard a lot of prayers, said a few myself. Got through the day without kicking out any plugs or yanking out any tubes. When I last walked by the staff lounge TV, Fox News was on and Terri was still alive. Haven't yet checked again. On the way home, I celebrated my relative good health by taking advantage of Kroger's sale on treif meat. Before I made it into the house, I had to evaluate a neighbor kid's jammed finger and my son's self-inflicted finger abrasion. All in all not too atypical a day for me.
But the whole day was colored by the plight of Terri Schiavo, and its relation to the terminally ill I was caring for. Every nurse I spoke with had the same reaction to the Schiavo case. As a group, there was an understanding of the path we're now on. We can all see the horrible potential for the legalized murder of people no longer able to speak cogently for themselves.
Our culture until now has taught, 'when in doubt, err on the side of life'. This has guided Western medicine for some time. I wrote earlier, "In hospitals, we make hard decisions about life and death frequently. They are often agonizing decisions, for both the families involved and the professionals who implement them. They are made with as much input as can be gathered. Where they are known, the wishes of the patient involved are given the most weight." Though we have learned to cease our efforts when there is truly no hope, there is a world of difference between ending medical therapies that are no longer efficacious, and ending therapies that sustain life.
Today I cared for people no longer able to carry on a conversation. Their charts carried "Do Not Resuscitate" orders. But no one dared suggest that we end measures to keep them in as much comfort as possible, or to provide hydration and nourishment. A week from now, a year from now, that may not be the case. A court, aided by helpful physicians and lawyers, might find that one's 'quality of life' was insufficient, and order therapies terminated, or allow such termination, which may amount to the same idea. As this idea is carried to its extreme, a court might order euthanasia.
I also wrote, "There was in recent history a nation that institutionalized such murder. They began with the mentally ill, the nursing home vegetables, then the social undesirables. They ended with Europe in flames and rubble. We have now started down that same slope." I've been accused of hyperbole in the above statements. That such things can't happen here. That same statement was made in Germany in the 1930s. Well, guess what- we've a legal system that places strong reliance on precedent. My sailing master taught me that all 'accidents' at sea are the culmination of a series of mistakes and/or careless acts. That applies to bad law and judicial decisions as well. You embark on a slippery legal slope with one or two spectacularly bad decisions- and go downhill from there. We've had the idea of abortion as contraception. Now we have the idea of withholding basic care from those unable to ask for it.
If you can tell me, 10 years from now, that my fears were misplaced, I'll be a very happy camper. And a humble one.
But the whole day was colored by the plight of Terri Schiavo, and its relation to the terminally ill I was caring for. Every nurse I spoke with had the same reaction to the Schiavo case. As a group, there was an understanding of the path we're now on. We can all see the horrible potential for the legalized murder of people no longer able to speak cogently for themselves.
Our culture until now has taught, 'when in doubt, err on the side of life'. This has guided Western medicine for some time. I wrote earlier, "In hospitals, we make hard decisions about life and death frequently. They are often agonizing decisions, for both the families involved and the professionals who implement them. They are made with as much input as can be gathered. Where they are known, the wishes of the patient involved are given the most weight." Though we have learned to cease our efforts when there is truly no hope, there is a world of difference between ending medical therapies that are no longer efficacious, and ending therapies that sustain life.
Today I cared for people no longer able to carry on a conversation. Their charts carried "Do Not Resuscitate" orders. But no one dared suggest that we end measures to keep them in as much comfort as possible, or to provide hydration and nourishment. A week from now, a year from now, that may not be the case. A court, aided by helpful physicians and lawyers, might find that one's 'quality of life' was insufficient, and order therapies terminated, or allow such termination, which may amount to the same idea. As this idea is carried to its extreme, a court might order euthanasia.
I also wrote, "There was in recent history a nation that institutionalized such murder. They began with the mentally ill, the nursing home vegetables, then the social undesirables. They ended with Europe in flames and rubble. We have now started down that same slope." I've been accused of hyperbole in the above statements. That such things can't happen here. That same statement was made in Germany in the 1930s. Well, guess what- we've a legal system that places strong reliance on precedent. My sailing master taught me that all 'accidents' at sea are the culmination of a series of mistakes and/or careless acts. That applies to bad law and judicial decisions as well. You embark on a slippery legal slope with one or two spectacularly bad decisions- and go downhill from there. We've had the idea of abortion as contraception. Now we have the idea of withholding basic care from those unable to ask for it.
If you can tell me, 10 years from now, that my fears were misplaced, I'll be a very happy camper. And a humble one.
Friday, March 25, 2005
The Laws of Patrolling (Force Recon)
1) Always look cool.
2) Never get lost.
3) If you get lost, remember to look cool.
Just to lighten the mood. Semper Fi! to all of Uncle Sam's Misguided Children.
Adapted from Black Storm, © 2002, by CPT David Poyer, USN(ret).
2) Never get lost.
3) If you get lost, remember to look cool.
Just to lighten the mood. Semper Fi! to all of Uncle Sam's Misguided Children.
Adapted from Black Storm, © 2002, by CPT David Poyer, USN(ret).
Wednesday, March 23, 2005
Run for the Border
Heinlein wrote something to the effect that 'a nation that can't control its borders is no longer a nation'.
Interesting read on illegals & the border: http://www.azanderson.org/anderson_report_border_issues.htm
(hat tip to American Dinosaurhttp://americandinosaur.blogspot.com/ )
She fits the role well--welcoming, confident, polite. Think of June Cleaver with close-cropped silver hair. But Cowan is no shrinking violet; a few years ago, she organized the first concealed-carry gun class for women of Cochise County, drawing a crowd of 28 to the Benson firehouse. And at most public meetings she attends, Cowan stands to give a rousing recital of a poem she wrote called "Ode to the Vigilante":
If I haul them to town, I'm trafficking.
If I take them in, I'm harboring.
If I feed them all, I go broke.
If I deny them, they steal.
If I'm vulnerable, they take advantage.
If my dog bites them, I have to pay their medical bills.
If I haul off a known trafficking vehicle, I face auto theft.
If I carry a gun because I'm afraid, I'm a vigilante.
"The media always twist everything we say, making us out to be these terrible vigilantes," says Cowan. "But we're just vigilant Americans."
Update 25MAR05:
Here's some people doing something about the problem (no endorsement given)-
http://www.minutemanproject.com/index.html
Monday, March 21, 2005
An Observation About Terri Schiavo's Case
The case of Terri Schiavo is being debated in detail in many other venues. I won't rehash it all here. One observation I have regards advanced directives. Advanced directives (http://cis.nci.nih.gov/fact/8_12.htm) provide us with direction for care when a patient is unable to speak for themselves.
We currently require hospital patients on admission to sign a statement regarding advanced directives- do they have one, are they informed about them, do they want information on these. Whatever the outcome of Terri's plight- whether we allow her to be slowly murdered, or prolong her life into her uncertain future- I see one likely result from the debate. There will soon come a day when you'll not be allowed any hospital admission without a signed and exhaustively detailed A.D. for file, duly witnessed and notarized. "Please have your papers ready before you approach the border". And do try to find loved ones you can really trust.
ADDENDUM: My older boy is always telling me to be nice to him- he's going to be the one picking my nursing home.
We currently require hospital patients on admission to sign a statement regarding advanced directives- do they have one, are they informed about them, do they want information on these. Whatever the outcome of Terri's plight- whether we allow her to be slowly murdered, or prolong her life into her uncertain future- I see one likely result from the debate. There will soon come a day when you'll not be allowed any hospital admission without a signed and exhaustively detailed A.D. for file, duly witnessed and notarized. "Please have your papers ready before you approach the border". And do try to find loved ones you can really trust.
ADDENDUM: My older boy is always telling me to be nice to him- he's going to be the one picking my nursing home.
FYI: the phrase "Sic vis pacem, para bellum"
| Found at: http://www.able2know.com/forums/about37163.html (quote info not verified by me) | ||||||
| tillmanj Just Hatched Joined: 05 Dec 2004 Posts: 1  |
| |||||
Posted: Sun Dec 05, 2004 8:47 am 
Post: 1049498 - Re: Cool Latin Quotes
Friday, March 18, 2005
VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT OF NOTES TAKEN BY FASTAC 6 WHILE HEDGES SPEAKING
Anonymous, in comments on Ben's last post, doesn't care for the term rant. O.K., we'll try reasoned discourse, though difficult to do with this topic. I'm off to weekend drill as a staff weenie, and will post more on this in the next week or so. For those who wish to read Hedges- go to the library. No reason to put any more money in this guy's pocket. Here's some notes to chew on while I'm out.
(Personal to Anonymous: You and your veteran friend could have come up and talked with me. I couldn't have been more conspicuous.)
VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT OF NOTES TAKEN BY FASTAC 6 WHILE HEDGES SPEAKING:
1
Continues to denigrate warriors
“Balance” between “killers” & victims- What about victims of 9/11?
“Shameful cheerleading”
Comparison Israel/USA as imperialist power
Sharon as killer
9/11
↑↑ inflated #’s of civilian dead
War as “power trip”
Impugning reportage from soldier sources
Basically reading of his book- Anti-war rant
War as “fantasy life”
States comradeship not genuine “love” for fellows
-“opposite of friendship”
-“Suppression of self-awareness”
-comradeship as core of lowest common denom.
-comradeship as evasion of respons.
HEDGES SUFFERS PTSD-
FOCUSED AS ANTI-WAR RHETORIC
“Manufactured heroes” from Iraq
Anthony Swafford ref.- “no such thing as anti-war Vietnam” film
“Films are porno for military man”
“Drank away the fear…I was hooked”
“Freud…Eros vs. Thanatos”
’73 war 33% casualties psych??!!
From Ben: Smacks of Ambrose BofB- sudden blindness incident
2
“Platitudes of duty & comradeship”
“What is done in our name…is painful”
“Wrote to explain poison of war”
“…against demonization of the other”
“Problem with the term war on terror”
“Squander…& resurrect terrorists in their own
cultures…absolutely unnecessary”
“Indiscriminate firepower” “killing 100’s, 10’s of
thousands of (civilians)”
“War would end…& we would fall into
deep depression”
“Sins that I bear”
SOME NOTES FROM BOOK (skimming while at work the night before):
P.3 Central thesis- war gives us purpose
is an addiction, a drug
P.9 Promotes killers & racists
P.10 black & white
P.13 Citations of casualties-
mostly internecine warfare
P.15 Blind to enemies?
P.17 Humbled…humility
(Personal to Anonymous: You and your veteran friend could have come up and talked with me. I couldn't have been more conspicuous.)
VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT OF NOTES TAKEN BY FASTAC 6 WHILE HEDGES SPEAKING:
1
Continues to denigrate warriors
“Balance” between “killers” & victims- What about victims of 9/11?
“Shameful cheerleading”
Comparison Israel/USA as imperialist power
Sharon as killer
9/11
↑↑ inflated #’s of civilian dead
War as “power trip”
Impugning reportage from soldier sources
Basically reading of his book- Anti-war rant
War as “fantasy life”
States comradeship not genuine “love” for fellows
-“opposite of friendship”
-“Suppression of self-awareness”
-comradeship as core of lowest common denom.
-comradeship as evasion of respons.
HEDGES SUFFERS PTSD-
FOCUSED AS ANTI-WAR RHETORIC
“Manufactured heroes” from Iraq
Anthony Swafford ref.- “no such thing as anti-war Vietnam” film
“Films are porno for military man”
“Drank away the fear…I was hooked”
“Freud…Eros vs. Thanatos”
’73 war 33% casualties psych??!!
From Ben: Smacks of Ambrose BofB- sudden blindness incident
2
“Platitudes of duty & comradeship”
“What is done in our name…is painful”
“Wrote to explain poison of war”
“…against demonization of the other”
“Problem with the term war on terror”
“Squander…& resurrect terrorists in their own
cultures…absolutely unnecessary”
“Indiscriminate firepower” “killing 100’s, 10’s of
thousands of (civilians)”
“War would end…& we would fall into
deep depression”
“Sins that I bear”
SOME NOTES FROM BOOK (skimming while at work the night before):
P.3 Central thesis- war gives us purpose
is an addiction, a drug
P.9 Promotes killers & racists
P.10 black & white
P.13 Citations of casualties-
mostly internecine warfare
P.15 Blind to enemies?
P.17 Humbled…humility
Sic Vis Pacem, Para Bellum
Beaten to the punch- I was waiting for the Hedges talk to be done with before I posted the following, and the NYT (as reported on LGF) ran this article. Timesly indeed: US Report Lists Possibilities for Terrorist Attacks and Likely Toll
"Sic Vis Pacem, Para Bellum". Saw that as a new tattoo on a squid's arm yesterday. Those are words to live by while a World War is going on around us. Disaster plans, like military ones, do not survive contact with the reality of the moment. Some of the plans are WAAAYY too public, accessible even to those who would cause disaster.
In October, I went to a county-wide disaster drill that was just that, a disaster. "Had this been an actual emergency, you would have been instructed to.....die". The only "survivors" were the gaggle of walking wounded that we sent out in the first few minutes. At the end of the drill, there was the proud announcement to the press that 70 simulated casualties were successfully handled. Got news for you, Bucko. If you had a real disaster on your hands, there'd be an awful lot of bodies laying around. Think Bhopal. Think Indonesia after the tsunami. Think Hiroshima. Then you're thinking on the proper scale. If your disaster engulfs your resources, you're really screwed. Think about the tragic loss of rescue workers and apparatus in New York City on 9/11. Think about damage to hospitals in the hurricanes that trashed Pensacola not long ago.
The problem with local authorities is that they tend to think like, well, civilians. They are ruled by budgets, politicians, and limited resources; and tend to tailor their expectations of disaster to fit the resources available. There is also a prevalent tendency to think that there is no World War in progress, or that such a thing would REALLY come to the American Heartland. That thought process was very much in force when war came to Manhattan, Pennsylvania, and Virginia (repeat after me, "WAR, not 'terrorism'"). While this thinking is not unknown in military circles, there is a tendency to look at the Bigger Picture, and wider resources to draw on.
Full-up-dress drills are expensive, time-consuming, and tedious. So is reality.
8MAR05
"Sic Vis Pacem, Para Bellum". Saw that as a new tattoo on a squid's arm yesterday. Those are words to live by while a World War is going on around us. Disaster plans, like military ones, do not survive contact with the reality of the moment. Some of the plans are WAAAYY too public, accessible even to those who would cause disaster.
In October, I went to a county-wide disaster drill that was just that, a disaster. "Had this been an actual emergency, you would have been instructed to.....die". The only "survivors" were the gaggle of walking wounded that we sent out in the first few minutes. At the end of the drill, there was the proud announcement to the press that 70 simulated casualties were successfully handled. Got news for you, Bucko. If you had a real disaster on your hands, there'd be an awful lot of bodies laying around. Think Bhopal. Think Indonesia after the tsunami. Think Hiroshima. Then you're thinking on the proper scale. If your disaster engulfs your resources, you're really screwed. Think about the tragic loss of rescue workers and apparatus in New York City on 9/11. Think about damage to hospitals in the hurricanes that trashed Pensacola not long ago.
The problem with local authorities is that they tend to think like, well, civilians. They are ruled by budgets, politicians, and limited resources; and tend to tailor their expectations of disaster to fit the resources available. There is also a prevalent tendency to think that there is no World War in progress, or that such a thing would REALLY come to the American Heartland. That thought process was very much in force when war came to Manhattan, Pennsylvania, and Virginia (repeat after me, "WAR, not 'terrorism'"). While this thinking is not unknown in military circles, there is a tendency to look at the Bigger Picture, and wider resources to draw on.
Full-up-dress drills are expensive, time-consuming, and tedious. So is reality.
8MAR05
Wednesday, March 16, 2005
Finally, A talk with Chris Hedges
Well, I guess there's not much to say about my talk with Chris Hedges. I asked him about Khafji, and I can sum it up as "Sound and Fury signifying nothing."
He says he was on those rooftops watching Marines retake the city, WITH Marines of the 1st Battalion of the 1st Regiment out of Camp Pendleton. I would love to hear from anyone who can verify this information.
He says he watched Marine units retake the city, that there were few Arabs involved in the operation. When I pointed out that Morris's well documented book indicates just the opposite, he professed to enjoy retrospective studies and blamed it on the fog of war i.e. limited perspective. No satisfactory answer arose when I asked him why he didn't bother to verify his information before publishing his book.
I would have gotten this all on tape, but the event form stipulated no photos or recordings. However, the scans from afterwards are worth looking at. Check out the priceless signature I got before I asked him about Khafji. It reads "For Benjamin Blatt All the Best - Chris Hedges. Neat.
I guess I'm done with Hedges, though I'd like to look into Khafji in more depth. It's quite clear he isn't going to easily admit any wrong-doing. FASTAC 6, on the other hand, is just getting started. He spent most of the time taking furious notes about Hedges statements, and nearly had a stroke in the process, if his skin coloration was anything to go by.
BTW, Hedges did say that US troops were "necropheliacs" and "professional killers." Given that US troops are trained to kill, but reservists and guardsman do their service mostly part-time, I think the second part is inaccurate. The first part of his statement is, of course, just grossly vile.
Anyway, expect some neat ranting from FASTAC 6 later.
He says he was on those rooftops watching Marines retake the city, WITH Marines of the 1st Battalion of the 1st Regiment out of Camp Pendleton. I would love to hear from anyone who can verify this information.
He says he watched Marine units retake the city, that there were few Arabs involved in the operation. When I pointed out that Morris's well documented book indicates just the opposite, he professed to enjoy retrospective studies and blamed it on the fog of war i.e. limited perspective. No satisfactory answer arose when I asked him why he didn't bother to verify his information before publishing his book.
I would have gotten this all on tape, but the event form stipulated no photos or recordings. However, the scans from afterwards are worth looking at. Check out the priceless signature I got before I asked him about Khafji. It reads "For Benjamin Blatt All the Best - Chris Hedges. Neat.
I guess I'm done with Hedges, though I'd like to look into Khafji in more depth. It's quite clear he isn't going to easily admit any wrong-doing. FASTAC 6, on the other hand, is just getting started. He spent most of the time taking furious notes about Hedges statements, and nearly had a stroke in the process, if his skin coloration was anything to go by.
BTW, Hedges did say that US troops were "necropheliacs" and "professional killers." Given that US troops are trained to kill, but reservists and guardsman do their service mostly part-time, I think the second part is inaccurate. The first part of his statement is, of course, just grossly vile.
Anyway, expect some neat ranting from FASTAC 6 later.
Monday, March 14, 2005
I Get Mail From David Morris (Still Nothing From Chris Hedges)
Dear Benjamin,
This is Dave Morris, author of STORM ON THE HORIZON: KHAFJI-THE BATTLE THATCHANGED THE COURSE OF THE GULF WAR. First off, let me thank you for giving mybook such a close textual reading. It's always pleasing to see. Recently, I hadthe occasion to re-read Hedges' book and noted again the apparentinconsistencies in the narrative in regards to the battle for Khafji. Hisaccount piqued my interest because virtually no journalists were given accessto the battle due to the CENTCOM's media "pooling" policy in effect at thattime. All this stands in marked contrast to the Pentagon's current policy ofembedding reporters.In response to your essay, let me say that I consider Chris Hedges' book WAR IS A FORCE THAT GIVES US MEANING to be an unusually insightful, morally-rigorousif occasionally sanctimonious memoir. I think the recent accusations to theeffect of "Hedges' book is a work of fiction" that have appeared on severalwebsites are somewhat overheated and rash. Hedges discusses Khafji for a singlepage and while his recollection of being present with Marines on a rooftopwhile they are calling in airstrikes certainly seems suspect, it does notnecesarily mean that he is a liar, a cheat and a pedophile with bad credit assome are implying. There were literally DOZENS of US military teams working inthe Khafji area during the recapture effort and it's entirely possible that heWAS on a rooftop where US Marines were calling in airstrikes. Nevertheless, Ihave interviewed scores of Marines who fought at Khafji (including nearly allof the cut-off reconnaissance Marines) and no one has confirmed that Hedges wasat Khafji.
This, of course, proves nothing. In your heady indictment of Hedges, you argue "If Hedges was not in Khafjion those rooftops with the Marines, then he MUST have been carrying on thegrand tradition of those who covered Vietnam from the Caravelle’s bar"[capitals mine]. This is a classic example of what logicians refer to as "theblack-white fallacy," e.g. "Either you play football or you are not a man.There is no middle ground." In this post-Watergate, post-Jayson Blair, post-Rather time of ours, it iseasy to assume that errors committed by journalists are the work of nefarious,syphilitic, Smeagol-esque characters habitually fingering their Pulitzers (Mypreciousss...). Sadly, the truth is usually much more boring. Working underintense deadlines and with a slew on contradictory eyewitness accounts,lamentable errors pass into print. While working on my own book, a fewdecorated, active-duty US Marines lied through their teeth to me about theiractions at Khafji. It was only through exhaustive interviewing that theirfabrications were eventually uncovered. Still, an error is an error and whilebloggers are, perhaps unfairly, not held to the same standard as those they so frequently accuse, authors and journalists should be held accountable for what they write.
Best,
Dave
This is Dave Morris, author of STORM ON THE HORIZON: KHAFJI-THE BATTLE THATCHANGED THE COURSE OF THE GULF WAR. First off, let me thank you for giving mybook such a close textual reading. It's always pleasing to see. Recently, I hadthe occasion to re-read Hedges' book and noted again the apparentinconsistencies in the narrative in regards to the battle for Khafji. Hisaccount piqued my interest because virtually no journalists were given accessto the battle due to the CENTCOM's media "pooling" policy in effect at thattime. All this stands in marked contrast to the Pentagon's current policy ofembedding reporters.In response to your essay, let me say that I consider Chris Hedges' book WAR IS A FORCE THAT GIVES US MEANING to be an unusually insightful, morally-rigorousif occasionally sanctimonious memoir. I think the recent accusations to theeffect of "Hedges' book is a work of fiction" that have appeared on severalwebsites are somewhat overheated and rash. Hedges discusses Khafji for a singlepage and while his recollection of being present with Marines on a rooftopwhile they are calling in airstrikes certainly seems suspect, it does notnecesarily mean that he is a liar, a cheat and a pedophile with bad credit assome are implying. There were literally DOZENS of US military teams working inthe Khafji area during the recapture effort and it's entirely possible that heWAS on a rooftop where US Marines were calling in airstrikes. Nevertheless, Ihave interviewed scores of Marines who fought at Khafji (including nearly allof the cut-off reconnaissance Marines) and no one has confirmed that Hedges wasat Khafji.
This, of course, proves nothing. In your heady indictment of Hedges, you argue "If Hedges was not in Khafjion those rooftops with the Marines, then he MUST have been carrying on thegrand tradition of those who covered Vietnam from the Caravelle’s bar"[capitals mine]. This is a classic example of what logicians refer to as "theblack-white fallacy," e.g. "Either you play football or you are not a man.There is no middle ground." In this post-Watergate, post-Jayson Blair, post-Rather time of ours, it iseasy to assume that errors committed by journalists are the work of nefarious,syphilitic, Smeagol-esque characters habitually fingering their Pulitzers (Mypreciousss...). Sadly, the truth is usually much more boring. Working underintense deadlines and with a slew on contradictory eyewitness accounts,lamentable errors pass into print. While working on my own book, a fewdecorated, active-duty US Marines lied through their teeth to me about theiractions at Khafji. It was only through exhaustive interviewing that theirfabrications were eventually uncovered. Still, an error is an error and whilebloggers are, perhaps unfairly, not held to the same standard as those they so frequently accuse, authors and journalists should be held accountable for what they write.
Best,
Dave
Friday, March 11, 2005
The New York Times Responds
I guess the NY Times is learning from CBS. The text of an email I recieved from the NY Times:
Subj:
Re: Open Letter to Chris Hedges
Date:
3/11/2005 12:48:06 AM US Eastern Standard Time
From:
public@nytimes.com
To:
bblatt11@aol.com
Dear Mr. Blatt,
As a matter of policy this office does not address issues that arose before Daniel Okrent's tenure began, except insofar as they relate to the paper's actions from December 1, 2003, forward. I am sure you will understand that, were we to do this any other fashion, we would disappear into an endless tunnel. We also don't address readers' issues with books by Times reporters' and columnists, rather we address issues with Times coverage; as you might imagine these concerns certainly keep us busy enough. I can assure you however that I will share your observations with corporate communications and with senior Times editors.
Thanks for writing.
Sincerely,
Arthur Bovino
Office of the Public Editor
The New York Times
Subj:
Re: Open Letter to Chris Hedges
Date:
3/11/2005 12:48:06 AM US Eastern Standard Time
From:
public@nytimes.com
To:
bblatt11@aol.com
Dear Mr. Blatt,
As a matter of policy this office does not address issues that arose before Daniel Okrent's tenure began, except insofar as they relate to the paper's actions from December 1, 2003, forward. I am sure you will understand that, were we to do this any other fashion, we would disappear into an endless tunnel. We also don't address readers' issues with books by Times reporters' and columnists, rather we address issues with Times coverage; as you might imagine these concerns certainly keep us busy enough. I can assure you however that I will share your observations with corporate communications and with senior Times editors.
Thanks for writing.
Sincerely,
Arthur Bovino
Office of the Public Editor
The New York Times
Tuesday, March 08, 2005
An Open Letter to Chris Hedges
Update: Chris Hedges will be at Indiana University South Bend on Tuesday, March 15 at 7:00 PM in the Student Activities Center not March 16 as listed before.
Update 2: The companion essay can be found here: http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=14991_Chris_Hedges_and_the_Battle_of_Khafji#comments
© Benjamin Blatt 2005
An Open Letter to Chris Hedges
Having just finished War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning; I must say that Chris Hedges provides a good read, if you enjoy fiction. In particular Chris, I found your tale of the Battle of Khafji during Desert Storm on page 23 of your book to be particularly entertaining, seeing as how it is spun of whole cloth. Sadly, although your version of events in 2002 has you standing “on rooftops with young Marine radio operators who called in air strikes” watching the Marines who “were called in to push the Iraqis (out of Khafji),” your story just does not pan out. You see, in 2004 a book that may very well become known as the definitive study of Khafji was published. The author of Storm on the Horizon, David J. Morris, researched the battle extensively and interviewed the Marines (all thirteen of them) who had called in the air strikes. And yet, none of those Marines remembered you, the French photographers who were with you, or circumstances in which the presence of Journalists by their positions wouldn’t have gotten them killed. Did you really think that the story would never come out? That carrying on the grand tradition of those who covered Vietnam from the Caravelle’s bar would drown out the voices of the Marines whose story you have dishonored with your lies? But please, don’t take my word alone, let the evidence speak for itself.
In the past Mr. Hedges, you have crowed loudly about having fled the Pentagon’s Gulf War press pool, choosing instead to cover a shooting war on your own. But even though in Morris’s book there is a brief mention of the presence of “Unilateral” or “Pool breaker” journalists being around the area of Khafji during the battle, these journalists are mentioned as being British and French, and no mention is made of them having interacted with the two trapped and hidden Marine recon teams in Khafji. But I’m sure the presence of these journalists provided you excellent cover when you started to make your claims years later. Speaking of Morris, I was surprised to discover he had referenced three of your Gulf War articles (written for the New York Times) for his book. So I took the liberty of reading those articles along with your report on the Gulf War in the May/June 1991 Columbia Journalism Review. Now, I think, would be a good point to congratulate you on your wonderful fiction writing. Have you ever considered writing mystery novels? For it is certainly a mystery as to how the New York Times could employ you for so long, and accept so many articles from you based on interviews and encounters in which the only witnesses are you and people who can’t be found later. A good chunk of your book is about your experience in the Balkans. Can you produce any of the people you claim to have talked to there? Or were they all visiting Indonesia last Christmas?
Getting back to the articles which Morris referenced for his book, I am struck by the second-hand nature of your then-current reports on the Battle of Khafji. “In a Ghost Town, a Deadly Skirmish,” published in the New York Times on January 31, 1991, is full of examples of you obtaining information from other people who were there, but is curiously lacking in first-hand information, although, again, in your 2002 book you claim to have been in an excellent position to provide first-hand information on the battle. Instead, this article relies on information from pool reporters (NYT A11 1/31/91) and the statements of military officers not involved in the fighting. In addition, your article mentions the deaths of twelve marines in the fighting, which at the time may have been the assumed fate of what were actually thirteen military personnel in two teams trapped in the city. If you were there with them, wouldn’t you have reported them alive? This curious second-hand reporting is further emphasized in your next article, “Town Regained, Morale of Arab Allies Is Lifted.” As a wrap-up to the battle, you report that the twelve marines were actually alive (without mentioning the previous report of their deaths) while still missing the fact that there were actually thirteen Marines present (although to be fair, the two medics present were only detached to the Marines and were actually Navy enlisted men). What I found really interesting about this article, in light of your spurious claims in 2002, was the use of the phrase “stationed on a rooftop to help direct fire (NYT 5 2/2/91)” in reference to the Marine recon teams. Even there, with the battle still fresh, you couldn’t get the facts right. The Marines were in two separate locations (rooftops, not rooftop, an error you corrected for your tale later) and were not stationed to support the battle but rather found themselves good positions to call down air strikes and artillery while hiding from the surrounding Iraqi forces.
But wait, there’s more. While Morris states that the only Marines in a mostly Arab fight were liaison teams and units tasked to rescue their trapped brethren, a statement backed up by official documents, studies of the battle from the nineties, and interviews with most of the key Marine participants at Khafji, you, Chris Hedges, claim that it was Marine units that pushed the Iraqis out of Khafji. So why the discrepancy, if you were there and observed a Marine-led effort, why are you the only one to have commented on it? I think the answer may lie in your 1991 report for the Columbia Journalism Review. In “What We Saw, What We Learned,” you basically discuss going rogue from the Pentagon press poll shortly after arriving in Saudi Arabia, and describe your actions as a unilateral journalist on the run from the MPs. In paragraph 15 (14 if you discount the sloppy editing) of your article, you mention that an AP reporter, tagging along behind the advancing forces in Khafji, was the first to report American forces being heavily involved in the fighting to retake the city. But if your report on American forces in Khafji is actually based on that of another reporter, then how could you have watched the Marines who “were called in to push the Iraqis (out of Khafji),” on a rooftop with Marines calling in air strikes who don’t remember you? In hindsight, it seems obvious that the AP reporter encountered a liaison or rescue team in the city and misinterpreted what he saw in his reports. Had you actually been there, or even seriously researched the foundation upon which your fiction rests, you might have known that.
Finally, while you may very well have been near Khafji and witnessed Saudi Arabian forces retreating pell-mell, with a little effort you would have found out that they were elements of a poorly trained handful of battalions of the Saudi Arabian National Guard, an organization of tribesman whose sole purpose is to essentially counter-balance the regular army. In fact, the regular army units performed quite well with the assistance of American air support and liaison teams, despite being set upon by one of the best divisions in the Iraqi army. Of course, had you been better informed, you probably wouldn’t have been running around dressed as an American soldier sans unit and rank markings in the middle of a combat zone. For if you had considered that any soldier in the area, regardless of nationality, could have shot you with cause, you might have reconsidered and chosen to dress like your peers in the region.
Well Chris, your version of the events in Khafji doesn’t appear to correspond with objective reality. It makes me wonder about the content of the rest of your book.
Awaiting your response,
Benjamin Blatt - An Objective Historian
© Benjamin Blatt 2005
Works Cited
Hedges, Chris. “In a Ghost Town, a Deadly Skirmish.” New York Times, January 31, 1991, A11 (1991).
---. “Town Regained, Morale of Arab Allies Is Lifted.” New York Times, February 2, 1991, 5 (1991).
---. War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning. New York: Anchor Books, 2002.
---. “What We Saw, What We Learned.” Columbia Journalism Review May/June 1991 (1991).(accessed January 3, 2005)
Morris, David J. Storm on the Horizon: Khafji – The Battle that Changed the Course of the Gulf War. New York: Free Press, 2004.
Update 2: The companion essay can be found here: http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=14991_Chris_Hedges_and_the_Battle_of_Khafji#comments
© Benjamin Blatt 2005
An Open Letter to Chris Hedges
Having just finished War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning; I must say that Chris Hedges provides a good read, if you enjoy fiction. In particular Chris, I found your tale of the Battle of Khafji during Desert Storm on page 23 of your book to be particularly entertaining, seeing as how it is spun of whole cloth. Sadly, although your version of events in 2002 has you standing “on rooftops with young Marine radio operators who called in air strikes” watching the Marines who “were called in to push the Iraqis (out of Khafji),” your story just does not pan out. You see, in 2004 a book that may very well become known as the definitive study of Khafji was published. The author of Storm on the Horizon, David J. Morris, researched the battle extensively and interviewed the Marines (all thirteen of them) who had called in the air strikes. And yet, none of those Marines remembered you, the French photographers who were with you, or circumstances in which the presence of Journalists by their positions wouldn’t have gotten them killed. Did you really think that the story would never come out? That carrying on the grand tradition of those who covered Vietnam from the Caravelle’s bar would drown out the voices of the Marines whose story you have dishonored with your lies? But please, don’t take my word alone, let the evidence speak for itself.
In the past Mr. Hedges, you have crowed loudly about having fled the Pentagon’s Gulf War press pool, choosing instead to cover a shooting war on your own. But even though in Morris’s book there is a brief mention of the presence of “Unilateral” or “Pool breaker” journalists being around the area of Khafji during the battle, these journalists are mentioned as being British and French, and no mention is made of them having interacted with the two trapped and hidden Marine recon teams in Khafji. But I’m sure the presence of these journalists provided you excellent cover when you started to make your claims years later. Speaking of Morris, I was surprised to discover he had referenced three of your Gulf War articles (written for the New York Times) for his book. So I took the liberty of reading those articles along with your report on the Gulf War in the May/June 1991 Columbia Journalism Review. Now, I think, would be a good point to congratulate you on your wonderful fiction writing. Have you ever considered writing mystery novels? For it is certainly a mystery as to how the New York Times could employ you for so long, and accept so many articles from you based on interviews and encounters in which the only witnesses are you and people who can’t be found later. A good chunk of your book is about your experience in the Balkans. Can you produce any of the people you claim to have talked to there? Or were they all visiting Indonesia last Christmas?
Getting back to the articles which Morris referenced for his book, I am struck by the second-hand nature of your then-current reports on the Battle of Khafji. “In a Ghost Town, a Deadly Skirmish,” published in the New York Times on January 31, 1991, is full of examples of you obtaining information from other people who were there, but is curiously lacking in first-hand information, although, again, in your 2002 book you claim to have been in an excellent position to provide first-hand information on the battle. Instead, this article relies on information from pool reporters (NYT A11 1/31/91) and the statements of military officers not involved in the fighting. In addition, your article mentions the deaths of twelve marines in the fighting, which at the time may have been the assumed fate of what were actually thirteen military personnel in two teams trapped in the city. If you were there with them, wouldn’t you have reported them alive? This curious second-hand reporting is further emphasized in your next article, “Town Regained, Morale of Arab Allies Is Lifted.” As a wrap-up to the battle, you report that the twelve marines were actually alive (without mentioning the previous report of their deaths) while still missing the fact that there were actually thirteen Marines present (although to be fair, the two medics present were only detached to the Marines and were actually Navy enlisted men). What I found really interesting about this article, in light of your spurious claims in 2002, was the use of the phrase “stationed on a rooftop to help direct fire (NYT 5 2/2/91)” in reference to the Marine recon teams. Even there, with the battle still fresh, you couldn’t get the facts right. The Marines were in two separate locations (rooftops, not rooftop, an error you corrected for your tale later) and were not stationed to support the battle but rather found themselves good positions to call down air strikes and artillery while hiding from the surrounding Iraqi forces.
But wait, there’s more. While Morris states that the only Marines in a mostly Arab fight were liaison teams and units tasked to rescue their trapped brethren, a statement backed up by official documents, studies of the battle from the nineties, and interviews with most of the key Marine participants at Khafji, you, Chris Hedges, claim that it was Marine units that pushed the Iraqis out of Khafji. So why the discrepancy, if you were there and observed a Marine-led effort, why are you the only one to have commented on it? I think the answer may lie in your 1991 report for the Columbia Journalism Review. In “What We Saw, What We Learned,” you basically discuss going rogue from the Pentagon press poll shortly after arriving in Saudi Arabia, and describe your actions as a unilateral journalist on the run from the MPs. In paragraph 15 (14 if you discount the sloppy editing) of your article, you mention that an AP reporter, tagging along behind the advancing forces in Khafji, was the first to report American forces being heavily involved in the fighting to retake the city. But if your report on American forces in Khafji is actually based on that of another reporter, then how could you have watched the Marines who “were called in to push the Iraqis (out of Khafji),” on a rooftop with Marines calling in air strikes who don’t remember you? In hindsight, it seems obvious that the AP reporter encountered a liaison or rescue team in the city and misinterpreted what he saw in his reports. Had you actually been there, or even seriously researched the foundation upon which your fiction rests, you might have known that.
Finally, while you may very well have been near Khafji and witnessed Saudi Arabian forces retreating pell-mell, with a little effort you would have found out that they were elements of a poorly trained handful of battalions of the Saudi Arabian National Guard, an organization of tribesman whose sole purpose is to essentially counter-balance the regular army. In fact, the regular army units performed quite well with the assistance of American air support and liaison teams, despite being set upon by one of the best divisions in the Iraqi army. Of course, had you been better informed, you probably wouldn’t have been running around dressed as an American soldier sans unit and rank markings in the middle of a combat zone. For if you had considered that any soldier in the area, regardless of nationality, could have shot you with cause, you might have reconsidered and chosen to dress like your peers in the region.
Well Chris, your version of the events in Khafji doesn’t appear to correspond with objective reality. It makes me wonder about the content of the rest of your book.
Awaiting your response,
Benjamin Blatt - An Objective Historian
© Benjamin Blatt 2005
Works Cited
Hedges, Chris. “In a Ghost Town, a Deadly Skirmish.” New York Times, January 31, 1991, A11 (1991).
---. “Town Regained, Morale of Arab Allies Is Lifted.” New York Times, February 2, 1991, 5 (1991).
---. War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning. New York: Anchor Books, 2002.
---. “What We Saw, What We Learned.” Columbia Journalism Review May/June 1991 (1991).
Morris, David J. Storm on the Horizon: Khafji – The Battle that Changed the Course of the Gulf War. New York: Free Press, 2004.
Monday, March 07, 2005
Mardi Gras in Iraq
In January I saw photos of this event in the collection of an Air Guard NCO. I got the impression that he was passing through on TDY at the time. That LAARNG gang sure knows how to party.
Good Milblog photo site. Thanks and a hearty "HOOAH!" to SPC Lainey:
http://www.armychic256bde.com/id42.html
Good Milblog photo site. Thanks and a hearty "HOOAH!" to SPC Lainey:
http://www.armychic256bde.com/id42.html
Saturday, March 05, 2005
Update on Chicago Judge
Update: News out of Wisconsin indicates the Lefkow shootings might have been the work of a genuine nut job. I still won't apologize to Matt Hale.
Now I'm hearing that there were several shots fired in the house. I guess that means the killers missed a couple while cleaning up the brass. I take back my earlier analysis. This screams incompetent, hate-numbed, idiots who have seen Law and Order one too many times. Idiots pissed off FBI, Marshals, and CPD, which, of course, calls for a variation on the old joke.
Attorney General wants to test the abilities of various law enforcement agencies to rack suspects, so he releases a rabbit into a Federal forest reserve and tasks teams from the Marshals, FBI, and Chicago PD to find it. The FBI team goes in first, searches up and down the forest, isn't heard from for two weeks. Finally they re-emerge and tell the Attorney General that they found the rabbit, interrogated the rabbit, decided the rabbit didn't know anything worth holding him for, and let him go. Attorney General says, "Bullsh**. You didn't find the rabbit, your just covering your ***es. The Marshal team goes in next, vanishing into the forest for two days. When they re-emerge, the head Marshal tells the Attorney that the rabbit agreed to turn state's witness and has been enrolled in the Witness Protection Program, location: classified. Attorney General says "Bullsh**. You didn't find the rabbit, get out of my sight. Finally, Chicago PD goes into the forest. After 45 minutes a bear comes stumbling out. The bear is bleeding from several wounds, missing patches of hair, bruised all over, and has an eye swollen shut. The bear sees the Attorney General and screams "alright, alright I'm a f*cking Rabbit!!!"
Anyway, I hope the two bastards are caught and brought to justice quickly. People gotta learn you don't f*ck with the Feds. Are you listening Mr. Matt Hale?? Because this sure sounds like the work of a couple of your Krazy, Kooky, Klowns.
Now I'm hearing that there were several shots fired in the house. I guess that means the killers missed a couple while cleaning up the brass. I take back my earlier analysis. This screams incompetent, hate-numbed, idiots who have seen Law and Order one too many times. Idiots pissed off FBI, Marshals, and CPD, which, of course, calls for a variation on the old joke.
Attorney General wants to test the abilities of various law enforcement agencies to rack suspects, so he releases a rabbit into a Federal forest reserve and tasks teams from the Marshals, FBI, and Chicago PD to find it. The FBI team goes in first, searches up and down the forest, isn't heard from for two weeks. Finally they re-emerge and tell the Attorney General that they found the rabbit, interrogated the rabbit, decided the rabbit didn't know anything worth holding him for, and let him go. Attorney General says, "Bullsh**. You didn't find the rabbit, your just covering your ***es. The Marshal team goes in next, vanishing into the forest for two days. When they re-emerge, the head Marshal tells the Attorney that the rabbit agreed to turn state's witness and has been enrolled in the Witness Protection Program, location: classified. Attorney General says "Bullsh**. You didn't find the rabbit, get out of my sight. Finally, Chicago PD goes into the forest. After 45 minutes a bear comes stumbling out. The bear is bleeding from several wounds, missing patches of hair, bruised all over, and has an eye swollen shut. The bear sees the Attorney General and screams "alright, alright I'm a f*cking Rabbit!!!"
Anyway, I hope the two bastards are caught and brought to justice quickly. People gotta learn you don't f*ck with the Feds. Are you listening Mr. Matt Hale?? Because this sure sounds like the work of a couple of your Krazy, Kooky, Klowns.
Wednesday, March 02, 2005
Federal Judge Intimidation in Chicago
Monday evening Judge Joan Lefkow's Husband and Mother were found dead in the judges basement. The details, shots to the back of the head, in the basement, small-caliber weapon, and the fact that shell casings were found, indicating the owner of the semiautomatic didn't care about identification of the weapon (probably at the bottom of the river or Lake Michigan at this point, all scream "professional hit," assuming that professional can be used to describe a murderous thug. Although authorities are stressing that the judge had many enemies, my money is on White supremacist Matt Hale, currently in prison for soliciting the judge's murder on a previous occasion. The scary question is, will this have any effect, will the US spiral into the political atmosphere of fearful, easily controlled, authorities, or will a Federal Judge in Chicago find the will to go on and give a hearty FU to the bastard(s) who did this?
Tuesday, March 01, 2005
Ward Churchill as Scholar
Remind me to not be found prevaricating when this lady's around:
http://www.pirateballerina.com/index.php
http://www.pirateballerina.com/index.php
Why We Fight- a personal view
The other night I worked with another veteran of the U.S. Army. She expressed disdain for our presence in Iraq, and implied that we somehow brought this war upon ourselves. I'm afraid that sort of statement sets me off, and I treated her to a toned-down version of one of my rants; for which I did apologize.
The fact is, we are facing an enemy who doesn't think like us. Our enemy is part of a death cult that easily justifies killing its own adherents. The enemy certainly doesn't care for us or anyone who isn't them. Our enemy seems determined to destroy America, Western civilization, and any religion other than Islam. The enemy's preferred method of killing is bombing, a mass slaughter of innocents. No stand-up courage from these dogs.....
When they stop killing Americans, innocent bystanders in other countries, and their own innocent civilians- then I am willing to stop being a soldier.
At the risk of being labeled a bigot (those who know me know this is not correct) or "politically incorrect" (THAT'S for sure!), I end with some comments I'd posted on LGF:
1]
I've been saying this since 9/11. When America interned Japanese in WWII, their sons, almost to a man, demanded the right to go to the Pacific and kill Japanese in defense of this country (They got sent to Italy, instead. Go figure).
You have not seen lines of American Moslems lining up at recruiters, demanding the right to head East and kill ragheads in defense of America. You have not seen the American mullahs standing up and saying to their Middle Eastern brethren, "stop! enough!" You do not see American mosques holding care package drives for American troops.
2]
The dirty little truths that you'll never hear from MSM & the rest of the PC crowd-
1. Iraq is just one campaign in a much larger war.
2. This war IS a World War.
3. This war IS a religious war.
I sometimes think that this war will end when they're all dead or we're all dead.
Update 9MAR05:
Response to Red A-
Part of my work the last 3 years has been working with the Army's MOB/DEMOB effort. I've met thousands of troops, mostly ARNG/Reserve, few of them Moslems.
There are Moslems serving in the U.S. Military, in combat zones, many with distinction, I am sure. These are my fellow American soldiers. There are others who are taking the provided out of serving in posts elswhere in the world. I can understand a certain degree of conflict, especially if you are a recent immigrant who might have to face relatives over open sights.
Then there is the one accused of fragging an HQ tent.*
What I said was, "You have not seen lines of American Moslems lining up at recruiters, demanding the right to head East and kill ragheads in defense of America". I stand by that.
*-Footnote:
The fact is, we are facing an enemy who doesn't think like us. Our enemy is part of a death cult that easily justifies killing its own adherents. The enemy certainly doesn't care for us or anyone who isn't them. Our enemy seems determined to destroy America, Western civilization, and any religion other than Islam. The enemy's preferred method of killing is bombing, a mass slaughter of innocents. No stand-up courage from these dogs.....
When they stop killing Americans, innocent bystanders in other countries, and their own innocent civilians- then I am willing to stop being a soldier.
At the risk of being labeled a bigot (those who know me know this is not correct) or "politically incorrect" (THAT'S for sure!), I end with some comments I'd posted on LGF:
1]
I've been saying this since 9/11. When America interned Japanese in WWII, their sons, almost to a man, demanded the right to go to the Pacific and kill Japanese in defense of this country (They got sent to Italy, instead. Go figure).
You have not seen lines of American Moslems lining up at recruiters, demanding the right to head East and kill ragheads in defense of America. You have not seen the American mullahs standing up and saying to their Middle Eastern brethren, "stop! enough!" You do not see American mosques holding care package drives for American troops.
2]
The dirty little truths that you'll never hear from MSM & the rest of the PC crowd-
1. Iraq is just one campaign in a much larger war.
2. This war IS a World War.
3. This war IS a religious war.
I sometimes think that this war will end when they're all dead or we're all dead.
Update 9MAR05:
Response to Red A-
Part of my work the last 3 years has been working with the Army's MOB/DEMOB effort. I've met thousands of troops, mostly ARNG/Reserve, few of them Moslems.
There are Moslems serving in the U.S. Military, in combat zones, many with distinction, I am sure. These are my fellow American soldiers. There are others who are taking the provided out of serving in posts elswhere in the world. I can understand a certain degree of conflict, especially if you are a recent immigrant who might have to face relatives over open sights.
Then there is the one accused of fragging an HQ tent.*
What I said was, "You have not seen lines of American Moslems lining up at recruiters, demanding the right to head East and kill ragheads in defense of America". I stand by that.
*-Footnote:
Akbar Gets Death Sentence
Associated Press
April 29, 2005
FORT BRAGG, N.C. - A military jury sentenced a soldier to death Thursday for a grenade and rifle attack on his own comrades during the opening days of the Iraq invasion, a barrage that killed two officers and that prosecutors said was driven by religious extremism.
Sgt. Hasan Akbar....
