Amid a damaging scandal in which United States Marines in November 2005 may have killed Iraqi civilians in Haditha, Iraq, in retaliation for the death of a Marine by an insurgent’s IED (Improvised Explosive Device), a little Iraqi girl’s candid testimony of the events may shed some light on what actually happened. 

The girl is 9 year old Eman Waleed, and she lost almost her entire immediate family in the killings.

THE BACKGROUND:

March 27, 2006 edition of Time Magazine reported in the article One Morning in Haditha:

Here’s what all participants agree on: At around 7:15 a.m. on Nov. 19, a U.S. humvee was struck by a powerful improvised explosive device (IED) attached to a large propane canister, triggered by remote control. The bomb killed Terrazas, who was driving, and injured two other Marines. For U.S. troops, Haditha, set among date-palm groves along the Euphrates River, was inhospitable territory; every day the Marines found scores of bombs buried in the dirt roads near their base.

Eman Waleed, 9, lived in a house 150 yards from the site of the blast, which was strong enough to shatter all the windows in her home. "We heard a big noise that woke us all up," she recalls two months later. "Then we did what we always do when there’s an explosion: my father goes into his room with the Koran and prays that the family will be spared any harm." Eman says the rest of the family–her mother, grandfather, grandmother, two brothers, two aunts and two uncles–gathered in the living room.

Eman says she "heard a lot of shooting, so none of us went outside. Besides, it was very early, and we were all wearing our nightclothes." When the Marines entered the house, they were shouting in English. "First, they went into my father’s room, where he was reading the Koran," she claims, "and we heard shots." According to Eman, the Marines then entered the living room. "I couldn’t see their faces very well–only their guns sticking into the doorway. I watched them shoot my grandfather, first in the chest and then in the head. Then they killed my granny." She claims the troops started firing toward the corner of the room where she and her younger brother Abdul Rahman, 8, were hiding; the other adults shielded the children from the bullets but died in the process. Eman says her leg was hit by a piece of metal and Abdul Rahman was shot near his shoulder. "We were lying there, bleeding, and it hurt so much. Afterward, some Iraqi soldiers came. They carried us in their arms. I was crying, shouting ‘Why did you do this to our family?’ And one Iraqi soldier tells me, ‘We didn’t do it. The Americans did.’"

CNN ran footage of an interview with Eman Waleed that gives this surprising insight: (continue reading post »)

That’s what John Murtha statements sounded like. The conviction in his voice made it sound like there could be no doubt about what happened in Haditha nor what should happen to the guilty Marines. But as I suspected, there’s more than one side to this story. As Paul Harvey says “Now you’re going to hear the rest of the story.” Or at least another side to the story than we’ve heard from Jihad Johnnie Murtha.

Military investigators piecing together what happened in the Iraqi town of Haditha on Nov. 19, when Marines allegedly killed two dozen civilians, have access to video shot by an unmanned drone aircraft that was circling overhead for at least part of that day, military defense lawyers familiar with the case said in interviews.

I’ve read that UAV’s aren’t a military asset that get used on anything except high priority operations. That tells me that if UAV’s were being used, the military conducting operations thought there was something of substantial value in Haditha.

In addition to video from the drone, investigators have records of radio message traffic between the Marines and a command center, said military defense lawyers who have discussed the investigation with Marines who were at Haditha but who have not yet been formally retained by them.
“There’s a ton of information that isn’t out there yet,” said one lawyer, who, like the others, would speak only on the condition of anonymity because a potential client has not been charged. The radio message traffic, he said, will provide a different view of the incident than has been presented by Rep. John P. Murtha (D-PA) and other members of Congress. (continue reading post »)

If you are a pedophile, the ACLU is looking out for you.

The argument is old hat for the ACLU, who believe not only that pedophiles and sex offenders should have the right to live next to playgrounds and elementary schools, but that they even have the right to instruct their perverted buddies on how to rape little boys. These positions are quite disturbing to most Americans, especially those of us with children. It is even scarier when there are loony judges out there that actually rule in favor of these twisted views. Luckily, the Supreme Court shot the ACLU down this time.

The American Civil Liberties Union-Indiana, suing initially on behalf of a female inmate, had filed a class-action lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the policy.

The Indiana Department of Correction imposed the policy in 2001, stating that inmates with a record of sex offenses involving children “shall not be permitted to receive visits from minors.” The agency amended the rule a year later to allow some visits under certain conditions, including one that the intended visitor had not been a victim of the offender.

The DOC justified the restrictions by arguing that sex offenders are at high risk of repeating the crime and often know their victims.

According to court records, visitations occur in areas with 25 to 30 tables and as many as 100 people often supervised by a single guard. The agency knew of past incidents when children were sexually abused in visiting areas.
(continue reading post »)

AP reports: “Venezuela is buying helicopters, boats and military transport planes in defense deals worth about $2.7 billion, modernizing its military as tensions grow between leftist President Hugo Chavez and the United States.”

“Flush with oil profits but blocked from buying U.S. arms, Chavez is increasingly looking to countries like Russia and Spain as suppliers.

A cargo ship carrying 30,000 Russian-made Kalashnikov assault rifles is headed to Venezuela with the first shipment of an order totaling 100,000 guns to arrive by year’s end. The military is looking to buy more submarines, and Chavez is planning an even bigger deal for Russian fighter jets.

“The United States is failing in its attempt to blockade us, to disarm us,” Chavez said after announcing the first shipment of Kalashnikovs.

Comrade Cindy Sheehan gives this news a big thumbs-up. Evidently, being an “anti-war, peace-loving activist” doesn’t mean you can’t be friends with the leader of a hostile nation.

Some critics complain the defense money could be better spent on fighting crime.

“Where are the government’s priorities?” presidential candidate Julio Borges asked. “What the government invests in the military is much larger than what it invests in security in the entire country.”

Who cares about domestic crime when you’re building an arsenal against the United States. Besides, if you dissent with Chavez, they’ll simply kill you. Problem solved.

Viva Venezuala!

RELATED:
“Down With The U.S. Empire”: Cindy Sheehan
And The Company She Keeps

Technorati Tags: Cindy Sheehan, Hugo Chavez, Venezuela, Terrorism

If only we could find more honest assessments like this one.

The Examiner’s Ken Garcia reports:

“There is a word that adequately sums up the propositions on the San Francisco ballot this June. Misguided, supercilious and ill-advised would all apply. But the simple description that works best is ‘no.’

If ever local ballot measures deserve to be thrown out, they’re the ones city voters will see on June 6, when they’ll be asked to throw good money after bad and weigh in on initiatives based on silly ideology. Of course, that doesn’t mean they won’t pass. After all, anything is possible in a city that has Chris Daly on its Board of Supervisors.” [Read the full story]

And that’s what we’re dealing with here.

A City run by socialist zealots. An uninformed, liberal activist electorate. A very dangerous combination.

UPDATE: (VIDEO)
Michelle Malkin: “S.F. living in an intergalactic zip code”

RELATED:
City overtime costs soar to $122 million
(over budget by nearly $40 million)

And it ain’t for examplary service, we can assure you.

But what else would you expect from a city like San Francisco?
(We’ve got the stories to give you some ideas)

What happened in a day? After all, the AP ran a story titled “Democrats Eye November Landslide”. Of course, it was filled with caveats how this landslide might not even take Republicans out of power in the House. (Question: If they’re talking landslide, how is it that they might screw it up and not even retake the House? After all, landslides are pretty overwhelming events, characterized with lots of proof beforehand.) That headline is refuted by the Washington Times’ Donald Lambro’s article this morning. His article is titled “Takeover of House, Senate not likely”.

“The 2006 midterm elections are a political analyst’s nightmare. The national climate seems to portend big changes, yet race-by-race analyses reveal formidable odds against a Democratic takeover of either the House or the Senate,” veteran elections tracker Charlie Cook says in his latest National Journal election preview.

Charlie, there’s a reason for that. The generic ballot is worthless in predicting the outcomes of elections. It’s the equivalent of the right track/wrong track numbers. Secondly, there’s an anti-incumbent mood but it’s mostly people not liking other peoples’ incumbents.

It’s kinda like when people are asked about the economy and they say the outlook’s gloomy. Then they’re asked if they’ve got a job. The person says that he’s got a job and isn’t worried about losing it but he’s worried that other neighbors might lose their jobs. The gloom is based on the perception that the media is portraying, not reality.

Let’s admit something else here, too, Charlie. The generic Democrat is always more appealing than the reality Democrat. The generic Democrat is filled with all the things that that voter likes and doesn’t carry the baggage that a real Democrat will.

Finally, let’s remind ourselves of something hugely important in all this, namely that campaigns matter. Here in Minnesota, Amy Klobuchar hasn’t been an effective campaigner thus far. Can she turn it around? Possibly, though I doubt it. She talks too much in ‘bureaucratspeak’. On the other hand, Mark Kennedy talks in what might be best titled ‘mainstreetspeak’.
(continue reading post »)

The AP’s Douglass Daniel has written two articles on the Haditha incident. Here’s a glimpse into both articles:

Said Pace: “This investigation is ongoing. It would be premature for me to judge the outcome.” Asked how such a thing could have happened, he replied, “Fortunately, it does not happen very frequently, so there’s no way to say historically why something like this might have happened. We’ll find out.”

Though Gen. Pace didn’t think commenting was appropriate, that didn’t keep Murtha from playing judge, jury and executioner on ABC’s This Week.

“I will not excuse murder, and this is what happened,” he said. “This investigation should have been over two or three weeks afterward and it should have been made public and people should have been held responsible for it.”

Forgive me but isn’t that statement proof that Murtha’s ‘case’ is falling apart? When he first talked about Haditha, he told everyone that “Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them, and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood.” How can they be overwhelmed by the pressure of being deployed too long and still be able to intentionally kill someone? Murder carries with it the highest evidentiary hurdle and with good reason.

But that legal hurdle apparently means nothing to Murtha. Is it because he’s out to destroy a presidency and win control of Congress? Or is it that he’s labored in anonymity all this time in the lower chamber of Congress and now he wants his 15 minutes of fame? Is it because he doesn’t care if innocent peoples’ reputations are destroyed in his quest for the Chairmanship of the House Armed Services Committee? Is it all of the above? (continue reading post »)

“For the Republican Party, 1994 is the year that was,” writes Salena Zito.

The “Republican Revolution” that year gave the GOP its first taste in more than 40 years of being the majority party in both houses of Congress. On that one election day, Republicans gained 54 seats in the House, 8 in the Senate and 12 in governors’ mansions around the country.

Now, 12 years later, Republican power — majorities of 10 seats in the Senate and 20 in the House — could unravel, or at least begin to, with this year’s elections. Already, Pennsylvania’s primary showed an anti-Republican incumbent mood. Of 17 incumbent state legislators who lost, 13 were Republicans, including the party’s two top state senators.

Polls show that for the first time since 1994, Americans have more faith in Democrats than in Republicans to govern and to guarantee national security. If that attitude persists through the November general elections, Republican power could decline.

“If everything goes bad, Republicans could lose three or four Senate seats and 10 to 20 House seats,” said former GOP House Speaker Newt Gingrich. [Read the full story]

Is anybody listening? Memo: shape up, or get shipped out.

Being soft on immigration in order to not “offend” Hispanic voters and illegals from Mexico in this country is a perfect example of Republicans losing their way.

Listen to the public on this one, and act upon the majority will — not special interests. As we told John McCain last week, they’re not going to vote for you anyway.

NewsMax reports: “New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced over the Memorial Day weekend that he supports gay marriage. And he vowed that city officials will begin marrying same sex couples as soon as he can get state courts to legalize the practice.”

“I believe New Yorkers should have the right to marry whomever they choose, regardless of sexual orientation,” Bloomberg said in a Saturday radio address. “If [the Court of Appeals] rules that same-sex marriages are legal, then we’ll perform them.
. . .

The life-long Democrat - who switched to the GOP in 2001 in order to run for mayor - said he was “firmly opposed” to a Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage…” [Read the full story]

We await the first New Yorker who wants to marry his golden retriever. By the same argument, what right does government have to determine what is acceptable? Love has no bounds, so they say.

Mikey likes it. Guess he’s trying to curry favor with gay activists, and following in the footsteps of San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, best-known for breaking the law to promote and preside over homosexual marriages.

But why wait until goverment comes around? Start molding opinions in the schools. Everywhere.

UPDATE: (6/3)
Bush backs federal marriage amendment

RELATED:
The “Battle Over Gay Vows”
GayPatriot “Luvs The Guv”
Governor Schwarzenegger Vetoes Gay Marriage Bill

Technorati Tags: President Bush, Same-Sex Marriage, Culture

Representative Nancy Pelosi must be very confused. While she continues to harp about the few Republicans caught in scandals, those of her own party keep getting caught. First it was William Jefferson, now it’s the most powerful Democrat in the Senate, Minority Leader Harry Reid. CNN.com has the story, claiming that Harry Reid accepted ring-side tickets to three Boxing matches in Nevada, provided by officials from the Nevada Athletic Commission. These gifts were provided while Sen. Reid was pushing legislation to increase boxing oversight, something that would undoubtedly hurt the Nevada Athletic Commission.

Senate ethics rules generally allow lawmakers to accept gifts from federal, state or local governments, but specifically warn against taking such gifts — particularly on multiple occasions — when they might be connected to efforts to influence official actions

Nonetheless, Sen. Reid defended the gifts, claiming that it was “research”. Research led him to accept the gift, and research required him to go on multiple occassions.

Two senators who joined Reid for fights with the complimentary tickets took markedly differently steps.

Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, insisted on paying $1,400 for his ticket when he joined Reid for a 2004 championship fight. Sen. John Ensign, R-Nevada, accepted free tickets to another fight with Reid but had abstained from taking any votes or actions on the boxing bill because his father was an executive for a Las Vegas hotel that hosts fights. (continue reading post »)