As much as i would like to see Murtha get nailed for his ignorant comments about our Marines, unfortunately the Democrats will circle the wagons, the media will circle the wagons and i don't think anything will come of it. The only places i hear about Murtha and the Haditha comments are on blogs and on the occasional talk radio show...

I hope i'm wrong though and that he does get nailed to the wall on this one.

There is precedent for a civil suit against a sitting member of Congress. SCOTUS case Hutchinson v. Proxmire established solid grounds for LTC Chessani to go after Murtha.

http://crotchetyoldbastard.com/blog/2007/08/murtha_to_face_a_civil_suit.html

You're right Dave W. Murtha attacking and slandering our brave troops is not news and will not be reported. Now if Murtha was Republican and turned out to be not 100% heterosexual, that would lead the news broadcasts for a month at least.

But will this jibe with the MSM "narrative?"

No, it won't, but at least we know the truth despite them.

"...it's about time someone got some justice over one of these slanders."

Amen brother.

They're gonna sue the bejesus out of Murtha.
=======================

He flat out said there had been a cover-up and it was a lie. The troopers were damaged, and Murtha's tortious dereliction of his duty was the direct cause of their damages. It's a slam dunk. Won't even get to court.
==============================

Woman and children were murdered. There were lies and cover-ups. Not slander if it's true. The country has an unfortunate history of military injustice.

So where are the moonbats and trolls, badmouthing the falsely-accused Marines. I expected one by at least comment 5.

Right on schedule . . . jp2

With yet another content-free comment.

Perhaps we should keep in mind this...
"what to think of the young enlisted marines who, illegally or not, clearly killed unarmed people in a combat zone."

It is not in dispute that Iraqi men, women and children were shot and killed there. Maybe this was deemed necessary to "clear" an area that was hostile.
This is after all an occupation in which every troop serving in Iraq is a target.
I doubt that few here have had the military experience in which you caused the death of someone who was not trying to kill you...but at the time took action you felt was necessary...

But hey...as you are not over there...continue to ask our troops to find themselves in that situation...and for what?
What is your benchmark for Victory?
Has the death of 81 troops this month brought us closer?

jp2:

Woman and children were murdered. There were lies and cover-ups. Not slander if it's true. The country has an unfortunate history of military injustice

Well thank you for your insight, can we call you "Murtha-Lite" now?

P.S. nogo - you can pack about 10 pounds of rare roast beast in your pocket and jump in Sealand's shark tank.

You can call me anything you like - and get creative, because I've heard quite a bit of name calling here.

Defending the murder of women and children - how do you do it?

jp2, oh maybe by actually having a command of the english language and thereby knowing the actual definition of the word "murder" - at least that would be a start for you.

jp2:

Defending the murder of women and children - how do you do it?

First of all take SPQR's advice and learn the definition of murder.

Secondly I don't see you providing any evidence of your charges of a cover-up or murder.

Got any or just talking points from Rep[rehensible] Murtha's Senate office.

marc: (#12) 10 to 1 that he got spit back out.

Well
...
lets say...you are in you home...you are shot and killed at close range...you are a child who has not fired a gun or detonated an IED..
What do You call it....
when you say you see no evidence...
please give some sources that refute this

"The 24 Iraqi civilians killed on Nov. 19 included children and the women who were trying to shield them, witnesses told a Washington Post special correspondent in Haditha this week and U.S. investigators said in Washington. The girls killed inside Khafif's house were ages 14, 10, 5, 3 and 1, according to death certificates."

I did not say....these troops were not following procedure for clearing an area...
All I am saying....is simple...

Those of you that clamor for putting troops... not related to you... in this sort of position...
Please visit your Local V.A. Hospital...inquire how you can volunteer to assist our brave troops returning with PTSD

Naturally, if the Marines' attorneys come a-callin', we will gladly provide them with the IP locations on the spineless weasels who throw out false and vicious accusations, libeling the Marines, while thinking they can hide behind "anonymity" . . . ain't no sech animule, people . . .

Why can't you libs just say, "Marines, sorry for Murtha denegrating your character. Regardless of what we think about the war, you were wronged". But naw, just the usual unsupported smears (as was the subject of the post) by JP2, and Nogo lecturing us about death in combat.

btw Nogo, there's a bunch of us here that know it first-hand. Save your pseudo-lectures for your pals down at the coffee house. These troops are professionals highly trained to operate in hostile environments, not the poor sods you people perceive them as. As much as many of you dislike it, their rules of engagement can't cover every scenario. Be advised if there had been ANY hint of improper use of deadly force the JAG ambulance chasers who initially brought these marines up on charges would have nailed there asses.

But I see Nogo already has figured out something went wrong. He just believes the marines are at fault, regardless of the facts. How tolerant of you.

"Naturally, if the Marines' attorneys come a-callin', we will gladly provide them with the IP locations on the spineless weasels..."

Tattling and name calling. Be prideful.

"Secondly I don't see you providing any evidence of your charges of a cover-up or murder."

Have you read ANY of the testimonies? They themselves said it was murder. Actually read the report from Dela Cruz. They were lined up and shot.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/05/AR2007010502248_pf.html

-24 people killed, including woman and children

-Investigation delayed until Time magazine report.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/05/AR2007010502248_pf.html

-Investigating Col. states: "The reporting of the incident up the chain of command was inaccurate and untimely."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5033648.stm

-More investigations launched. Soldiers testify:
-"Dela Cruz told investigators that he pumped bullets into the bodies of the Iraqi men after they were on the ground and later urinated on one of them."
-5 Iraqis shot attempting to surrender

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/05/AR2007010502248_pf.html

Sheesh.

jp2, so you are just ignoring all of the more recent stories that reveal the collapse of the supposed evidence, that the prosecution has been unable to get past preliminary hearings and instead rely on a six month old story?

That is pretty lame.

It's really very simple SPQR. It's not about the marines, it's about them. What they think, believe and feel, regardless of the facts. Their supposed superior intellect and gracious tolerance allow for them to rise above. Of course attacking the president, his administration, and the military is all completely justified and hence these attributes need not apply. The end result is they feel good and it's all about them.

Lets start here jp2:

-24 people killed, including woman and children

What the WaPo fails to note, and what you fail to know or care, of the "24"... eight of the dead, including four of the five occupants in the white car were known insurgents and the dead civilians therefore numbered 16, not 24.

As far as Dela Cruz goes you do know he admited he desecrated a body and shot at some of the Iraqi civilians killed in Haditha?

You do know he was granted immunity in exchange for his testimony against co-defendants right?

Do you think that may have, shall we say, "colored" his testimony? Given his evidence was obviously countered by many other witnesses and believed by those sitting in judgement seems to answer that question.

But that's where you slip in the "cover-up" charge isn't it jp2?

Oops... more later... I got a couple rug rats needing my undivided attention.

BTW, you need to read the timeline of how Rep[rehensible] Murtha's "story" changed over time in relation to news events.

Again... more later.

SPQR, that's our jp2. If it doesn't fit his preconceived notions, he disregards it.

"jp2, so you are just ignoring all of the more recent stories"

I gave 3 quality links. Why don't you do the same? Show me where I am mistaken.

marc: "Do you think that may have, shall we say, "colored" his testimony?"

So you are calling Dela Cruz, an American soldier, a liar? Yes or no? If so, please provide evidence.

jp2 - back for a hot second:

I gave 3 quality links. Why don't you do the same? Show me where I am mistaken.

You call a report that doesn't mention 8 of the 24 deaths were IN FACT terrorists "quality?"

So you are calling Dela Cruz, an American soldier, a liar? Yes or no? If so, please provide evidence.

I don't have to provide anything, it's provided in the testimony given by others and... oh yeah, he's been discounted by these cases being dropped faster than a hot rock.

Those hearing the cases didn't believe him... go ahead, insert your cover-up canard here______.

Hold the phone.

jp2, who earlier in this thread insinuated that our soldiers are murderers, recoils when it is suggested that one might stretch the truth a bit?

Does anyone besides me see something wrong with this picture?

Picture... what picture?

All I see from jp2 is lens flare.

C-C-G ~ jp2 did not "insinuate" any such thing. He flat out said it.

It does no good whatever to ask he read the reports, or consider the value of uncorroborated statements of an alleged accomplice under indictment for other serious crimes himself. He will believe the worst of the US military, just as he believes the worst of America in other respects.

His ilk will never be recruited to our side with mere facts. You've already noticed how he treats them.

Jim, I was attempting to be generous to jp2.

As for noticing how jp2 treats those he disagrees with, I've been on the receiving end of what he considers his rapier wit before, and come away unscathed.

marc:"You call a report that doesn't mention 8 of the 24 deaths were IN FACT terrorists "quality?""

I know, I shouldn't rely on newspapers and magazines, but "reports" from "Letfreedomringblog.com" instead. Laugh.

Okay, so you think the guy is a liar. A very easy assumption and accusation to make, but fine.

But what are these new reports you keep mentioning but failing to source?

And no one has addressed the point of the cover-up as charged by the investigating officer. Crickets.

Jim A

It does no good whatever to ask he read the reports,

True, if that were the case he would know the "witnesses" that were in the house were all under the age of 14 and their stories changed dependent on which news outlet "interviewed" them and faster than a Shamal blows.

In addition to that he makes the assertion I think Dela Cruz is a liar,(and demands I say so) when he obviously firmly believes all those that gave opposing testimony are liars.

That conundrum apparently flies straight over his head.

Or worse... it doesn't.

That's our jp2. Always assume the armed forces are guilty, even after proven innocent.

"Inaccurate and untimely" does not necessarily equal "deliberate cover-up." It could just as easily have been human error. Marines are still human, you know, jp2, and they still make mistakes.

Of course, it's clear that you think Marines are below human. Cro-magnon, perhaps?

Changing the target again, jp2?

You were labeling the Marines as "murderers" up to now. Suddenly it's the "cover-up" which concerns you?

Or is it just that the murder charges are falling apart?

Try to focus.