Wednesday, November 17, 2004

The Shooting by Marine in Fallujah

Of course, we all knew this would become a big item.

Two things: a. We don't have all the facts yet. b. It's "Rodney King" all over again. I can only shake my head.

I was quite pleasantly surprised by the balanced coverage of this at earthlink news (via AP). AP has surprised me. But I remain wary. Nonetheless....Shooting in Iraq Mosque Angers Muslims this coverage shows some balance.

But so does this one at American Spectator: By Their Fruits Ye Shall Know Them.

Years ago when CNN continually blasted the Rodney King beatings -- I was horrified. I was shocked. I was angered. And THEN I learned the facts. I'll be politically incorrect here for the moment: Once I learned the facts, I saw the police side of events - not just Rodney King's. I saw a man who resisted arrest, foolishly. Rodney King wasn't just some innocent the Police dragged to an alley and beat up. But by the time these facts emerged -- it was too late -- public opinion was thoroughly in Rodney King's court. It was all very unfair to the full story. And I think it made the trials far more costly.. and of course, it inspired thugs to burn and pillage large portions of Los Angeles. The press followed up with: "Understand the Rage".

Oh bullpuckey.

No one has the facts YET about what went on in Fallujah in the mosque except the players. We are not France where the law posits one to be guilty until proven innocent. Although there are some who should just move to France, and stop pretending to be American.


Bob Clarke said...

Combat is brutal and war is hell. City fighting is even more so. An enemy that observes no conventions of warfare and is determined to kill you and your fellow marines with his dying gasp makes your survival a problem of particularly exacting procedures.
Do we remember the case of the fortress-prison in the opening days of the Afghan war? When hundreds of taliban prisoners broke into the weapons cache and freed themselves to fight again? How disappointing that our soldiers, elite CIA paramilitary troops, fell prey to such a dastardly deed. The Iraq war, indeed all of our dealings in the Arab world, is a litany of determined duplicious struggle from the enemy.

If it was me. There would be no live enemy combatants in places I had been. No prisoners, except for special cases demanded by higher authority. In this place and time, the only good terrorist is a dead one, and the dead pose no threat to us and our fellows.
God bless those marines and soldiers. They are fighting our fight, and doing it well. If it was me in charge, we would have used nukes already and on to the next important thing.

MataHarley said...

Perhaps the most interesting observation is that, simultaneously, Islamo-militants executed Margaret Hassan, the British aid worker and long time Iraqi resident.

Such a contrast. An American soldier on the battlefield killing a known enemy combatant vs the senseless murder of a woman dedicated to humanitarian aid. Yet which gets more attention from the "blame America first" MSM?

Their choice of perspective never ceases to amaze me.

Obviously the MSM has learned something, albeit little, from the 2004 Presidential elections. While they still attempt to bash the US with their focus, they recognize they are less relevant than they thought. So they temper their flogging of the US military actions with a possibility that the soldier's act *could* have been self-defense instead of a war crime.

Well the misguided talking heads aren't fooling me. I can still tell, by their news coverage, that they think America is wrong, and the terrorists are right in saying we shouldn't be there.

BTW, I was surfing talk radio and heard that Michael Savage was planning on putting together a drive to fund any defense for the soldier. As usual, it will have to be the American public to put the media in it's place by leaping to the soldier's defense.

Rastus said...

I can't begin to describe how utterly furious I am over the rush by NBC to broadcast and publicize this video. We all know how biased the MSM is, but such a ready willingness to destroy a soldier's life just to take a cheap shot at the military....well, that's just plain evil.

As I've heard it, the soldier who did the shooting is one who, just the day before, saw a fellow soldier killed and was himself wounded in the face by a similarly wounded insurgent. That he would now view all such insurgents as a threat to his own life is not only completely understandable, but frankly, ought to be part of the rules of engagement in such battles.

What's about to happen to the Marine who was filmed is a totally predictable tragedy. This will be handled by the Navy, a branch of the service that shed its balls at Tailhook, and isn't likely to grow new ones any time soon. They will play it perfectly PC, and hang this poor soldier out to dry -- a man who has voluntarily placed his life at risk to defend this nation and its interests, and who has been made into a scapegoat for the MSM's hatred of America and its institutions.

He doesn't deserve that. No one does.

Alia said...

You are right, Rastus -- this Marine doesn't deserve this. You probably already caught the "data" that Sites (the photo-journalist) is clearly anti-war. Here's my thoughts: I don't want the Marine to catch flak; and this Marine did the RIGHT THING. What he did, kinda stirs me up, ya'know? :)

Alia said...

As to Bob's comments: I'm with you! Nuke the suckers! (said in my most casual way). Good thing I'm not there with a weapon. But then, if I were, I'd be having to follow orders, and given how these low-life scum, lying, bastard, murderous pig-snot so-called "insurgents" play.. Well. ahem. Takes an awfully disciplined soldier to not start cutting off the heads and limbs of these rats who love being called "freedom fighters" by the clueless in America, UK, and elsewhere around the world. I think our Marine is going to be okay. He did the right thing. And it appears he played by the rules of engagement.

Rastus said...

I note that now that some time has passed, this story seems to have died a quick and quiet death. Must have been the groundswell of public support for the Marine that shut 'em up. Or possibly just that the New Media did a good job of getting the facts of the situation out in front of the public very quickly, making any serious condemnation of the soldier appear as mean-spirited as it really was. In any case, I can't imagine that the MSM would let it go of their own accord. They don't abandon politics or profit so easily.

I'm reminded of a comment I made about the MSM a few years back. I'd be interested to know if others see it the same way:

"I have a theory about the media, especially the TV media. It goes something like: The media's interest is best served, in their perception, by a maximum degree of discord and strife. The more there is, the more they have to report on, and the higher their ratings as people tune in to learn what the brouhaha is all about and lament the human condition and the state of their lives. The media therefore becomes the instigator, the fomenter, of most of the discord and strife that exists, like lawyers, actively seeking every opportunity to pit one person or group against another, because doing so ensures their continued prosperity. I firmly believe that the media, if they had the opportunity, would instigate another World War if they saw a buck in it, and they'd happily report on it right up to the destruction of the last vestiges of civilization. And never in the process would they acknowledge that they played an active part in causing that destruction."

Let us pray they haven't already destroyed that young Marine. His ordeal will not likely end so easily as the news coverage.

Alia said...

Well, Rastus... I note occasionally rumbles... but nothing more on this case. On another note, today, I read that the usual "cast of characters" is trying to sue the US via Germany over Abu Ghraib. Riiiight. Like Germany has some real clout, huh?