This past week has seen a confluence of events that are not to be believed in these United States. Prior to this every Leftist, every Peace Activist, every Transnational Progressivist has said that they are doing things that are in 'support of the troops and against the mission' in Iraq. They said that no one should ever 'question their patriotism'.
So let us look at some of what now calls them into question:
1) From Gateway Pundit - 29 JAN 2007 :
CPL Joshua Sparling, an Iraqi War veteran and amputee, talks about getting spit on, flipped off, and having cigarette butts thrown at him during a "peace" rally in Washington DC on Saturday January 27, 2007. (FOX News- Hannity & Colmes)Now, considering that the man has just suffered what the Peace Activists had said they would never do after doing this to returning Vietnam Veterans, I do, indeed, think one can question their patriotism. And their lack of civility. And their lack of honor to the MAN who has served them.
2) From Strategypage.com - 28 JAN 2007 - Top Ten Myths of the Iraq War. Answers to the following canards of the Left and Peace Activists: 1) No WMDS, 2) Illegal Invasion, 3) Sanctions were working, 4) Overthrowing Saddam only helped Iran, 5) The Invasion was a failure, 6) The Invasion helped al Qaeda, 7) Iraq is in a state of Civil War, 8) Iraqis were better off under Saddam, 9) The Iraq War Caused Islamic Terrorism to Increase in Europe, 10) The War in Iraq is Lost.
All of those are then ANSWERED, and succinctly. To put forth these things is defeatism at the very least.
3) From Powerline - 31 JAN 2007 - The waffling Democratic Senators who were FOR a surge before they were against it. Their link is to a Washington Times article addressing this. The names of Senator John Kerry and Senator Joe Biden are mentioned. Also Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Senator Chuck Hagel is seen as a waffler from the Washington Times article. Also note Senator John W. Warner and his 'non-binding resolution' of being irresolute.
4) The Corner at National Review Online - 16 JAN 2007 - Representative Nancy Pelosi was for the surge before she came to power and then flip-flops on it once in power. Representative Sylvester Reyes was for a surge in DEC 2006 but flipped on that a month later when put at the head of the House Intelligence Committee. Here was his interview at CBS on that subject in 2006.
5) Michelle Malkin - 30 JAN 2007 - CBS getting al Qaeda video footage from their reporter in Iraq. They do not air it but make it available on the internet where it is spotted as the same video as broadcast by al Qaeda.
6) From the Washington Post blog - 30 JAN 2007 - William Arkin calls US Volunteer Armed Forces 'mercenaries', then goes on to say that they are being elevated above society when they are, in fact, defending his right to pontificate. His thorough derision of those Volunteers he then purports to be not that at all in his follow up and that he does not like that those who volunteer are given so much... when their pay is abysmal, their housing is minimal and the medical care is the best that can be given to them by the Federal Bureaucracy. Apparently he has never actually been in housing for the families of volunteers and the fact that they often need to have a second or third income in the family to make ends meet. And that this is the most well educated set of Armed Forces ever on this planet and that they could ALL be making more outside of the military than inside of it.
Now, far be it for me to say that the following advertisers should actually hear about this, as their ads adorn the WaPo page for this article (thank you to Scott Malensek for doing the gumshoe work and having to turn off the anti-ad and blocking software to do this!):
The Windows Place - Contact Form
Office Depot- Media Relations email
Sports Authority - Customer Support email
Comp USA help page
Circuit City email
Linens-n-Things - Head of Marketing email
Rite Aid contact customer service - email Board of Directors
Staples contact form - Investor Relations for Staples email
Bray & Scarff - Service email
Best Buy - News Center email
CVS Customer Care email
JC Penny - Investor Relations
sprint-motorola (Red Razor) [Not Available]
Kmart - inquiry form
Don Pablo's - contact form
Kitchen Magic contact form
Kohls - Community Relations email
Havertys feedback form
Longhorn Steakhouse contact form
Radio Shack contact form
Now Don Surber has given a wrap up on Mr. Arkin's follies: Where Arkin Screwed Up.
Let me just say that Mr. Arkin's non-apology apology is not something that he nor the Washington Post should be proud of either in transparency of viewpoint or in the realm of ethical behavior for clarity in getting ideas across. If Mr. Arkin did not mean his slurs he should not apologize for 'misinterpretation' of his words but clarify his position and apologize for his previous words without condition.
Now some might want to say that this is just a minor problem at the Washington Post, but that is patently not the case. I, and many others, have pointed out that the WaPo as shown not only bias in their reporting, but have proven to be actually clueless on their knowledge of their 'home beat', which is the Federal Government. The case in point is my analysis on The Problem of Media Misreporting which is done in response to the Much Undone In Rebuilding Iraq story from them by Andy Mosher and Griff Witte. Their reporting was so bad, so slanted, so misleading and just plain *wrong* that Maj. General William H. McCoy Jr. who was heading up the US Army Corps of Engineers mission in Iraq had to post an open letter citing the problems with the WaPo report.
Not only did the reporters and editorial staff not present any of the past problems in context, they demonstrated a sheer inability to understand how the Federal budget and expenditure systems works and how it actually spends money. My analysis is based on having worked inside a component of the DoD in the area of Program and Project management for multi-year projects. The numbers that are presented in a bad light are not only NOT bad and NOT showing poor performance, but are showing a well run contract system under some of the very worst of circumstances that can be conceived of on the planet. It is hard enough getting US contractors to work on time, on budget and to specification in the US... getting Iraqi contractors to do that in Iraq is a damned *miracle*. But then the USACE has had to deal with Louisiana, so getting those not used to working on time or on budget is something they are past masters at. I explain and do the math. Apparently that is beyond the knowledge base of the entire editorial staff at the WaPo.
But it turns out that those problems were just the tip of the reportorial iceberg that the WaPo was grinding its hull against. It was later reported by multiple news organizations that an actual, *real* contractor problem was festering in Iraq that would lead to major problems on the rebuilding of the Baghdad Police College there. I reported on that in The Incapable Washington Post. It turns out that the two reporters sent by the WaPo for the above article were IN Iraq as this problem was brewing and they demonstrated NO competence at doing actual, real, investigative reporting. They were sent to Iraq to listen to 'dog and pony shows' that had actual, factual content that could have easily be gotten via email. While in Iraq they could not be bothered to talk to IRAQIS about the current state of projects, and I am quite sure that if they had sat down to take tea with a few local police officers or contract foremen or just nosed about asking questions, they could have BROKEN this story. Instead they regurgitated pap fed to them and then rearranged that already noxious mess into something totally worthless. It appears that the time when reporters were sent overseas to do this thing known as 'report news' or even 'find news' is gone.
I then collected other problems seen with the WaPo in The Factually Challenged Washington Post. At the National Review Online, Ramesh Ponnuru on 18 SEP 2006 responds to an article in the by Rajiv Chandrasekaran on the firings of some folks in Iraq and other places. According to Mr. Ponnuru not only are the facts about the individuals wrong but there are some items that are wholly invented because the individuals could not have bi-located to be in two places at one time to do the things they are cited as doing. And since record exists of their actual location at those times and dates, those that place them in other places must be wrong. Paul Mirengoff at Powerline in this 17 SEP 2006 article cites further problems with Mr. Chandrasekaran's characterization of people, activities and events based on his personal knowledge of same. In all of his attacks on people and 'Nation Building' one wonders why Mr. Chandrasekaran concentrates on Iraq, when the mess in Kosovo left by the Clinton Administration and totally mishandled by the UN is far worse than anything in that realm of operations in Iraq.
The Washington Post was taken off of my personal list of 'reliable sources' and has fallen into the 'must have two, independent sources to confirm' on ANY story in ANY realm. I will not trust them even on GOOD NEWS. Because they have become Volunteers for the Fifth Column.
7) ABC News 29 JAN 2007 - Senator Hillary Clinton:
"I am going to level with you, the president has said this is going to be left to his successor," Clinton said. "I think it is the height of irresponsibility and I really resent it."Now for the list of Wars and Unresolved Conflicts and Enemies left to the next President to clean-up when you left the CoPresidency with your husband one the 'buy one, get one free' deal you two ran on (and much thanks to MIPT Terror Knowledge Base!) and a short lead-in of what you had to deal with coming in:
President Bush (41):
Shining Path wounds US Embassy regional security officer in Peru,
Tupac Ameru members throw bombs into the homes of US Marines stationed in Peru,
Tupac Ameru attempts bombing of US Embassy in Peru,
New People's Army attacks US Information Service in Philippines,
The CNPZ attacked the U.S. Embassy Marine barracks in Bolivia,
FMLN shoot down US military helicopter, execute survivors in El Salvador,
VPT-20 and PLO attack US Embassy in Panama,
Bomb sent to US Embassy in China,
Bomb thrown at US Embassy in Ecuador,
Attempted firebombing of US Embassy in Israel,
Attempted firebombing of US Embassy in East Berlin,
Popular Army of National Liberation attacks US Embassy in Panama,
DHKP/C attacks US military depot in Turkey,
Bombing of Peruvian - US Institute in Peru,
Tupac Ameru attacks US Embassy in Peru,
Attempted assassination of US Ambassador in Uganda,
US Embassy fired upon in Uruguay,
Bombing outside US Consulate in Turkey,
DHKP/C attacks American Cultural Center in Turkey,
Tupac Ameru attempts bombing of US Cultural Center in Peru,
Gunman fires at residence of US Ambassador in Yemen,
Attempted attack on US Ambassador's residence stopped by police in Peru,
US Embassy attacked in Peru,
Tupac Ameru attempts bombing of US Embassy in Peru,
US Embassy guard wounded in attack in Malaysia,
Bus carrying wounded US Servicemen attacked in Saudi Arabia,
Car of US Military Attache torched in Jordan,
Red Army Faction fires at US Embassy in West Germany,
Manuel Rodriguez Patriotic Front attacks home of US Embassy Marine wounding him in Chile,
Attempted firebombing of Australian-American Association in Australia,
Chukakuha Middle Faction fires at Japanese base with US Personnel in Japan,
DHKP/C assailant shoots US Air Force Officer in the face in Turkey,
RO-N17 uses remote controlled bomb to kill US Air Force sergeant in Greece,
Shining Path launches bomb and US Embassy as part of attack wave in Peru,
CNPZ attacks US Consulate in Bolivia,
Gunman fires on US Servicemen in Panama,
Shining Path attacks U.S.-Peruvian Cultural Center in Peru,
Bomb explodes at U.S.-Peru Binational Cultural Center in Peru,
Join US-Peruvian anti-narcotics base attacked in Peru,
Shots fired at US Embassy in Peru,
FPMR bombs US Embassy in Chile,
US Serviceman killed in Panama,
1 May Organization and ELA attempt bombing of US American Legion post in Greece,
Kach bomb US library in Israel,
Turkish Islamic Jihad kills US Air Force sergeant in Turkey,
Abu Nidal Organization and Arab Revolutionary Cells attack US Embassy in Lebanon,
Arson attack at US Naval base in Japan,
Attempted Embassy staff quarters bombing in Japan,
Islamic Salvation Front attempts firebombing of US Embassy in Algeria,
Carbombing US Ambassador's residence in Peru,
Attempted bombing of US Chamber of Commerce in Venezuela,
Attack on US Consulate in Turkey,
New People's Army assassinate retired US Air Force sergeant in Philippines,
M-20 attack on USAF Air Station in Panama,
M-20 ambush US Servicemen killing one in Panama,
Attempted bombing of US Army fuel depot in Panama,
Bombing in park across from US Consulate in Chile,
DHKP/C attacks US Consulate in Turkey,
DHKP/C attempts carbombing of US education official in Turkey,
Attempted bombing of unoccupied US Embassy building in Jordan,
Bomb explodes outside US Embassy in Yemen,
Tupac Amaru attacks US Ambassador's Residence in Peru,
Bomb explodes outside US Embassy in Nicaragua,
Attempted bombing of US Embassy in Netherlands,
Bombings at hotels housing US Marines in Yemen,
EGTK attack USAID facility in Bolivia,
US Marine killed in Somalia,
Firebombing of US Consulate in West Germany,
Tupac Amaru attack Peruvian-American Cultural Institute in Peru.
Yes I have just 'skimmed' over the knowledge base for these, but concentrated in the last year or two to get as many terrorist activities that I could find so that a fair representation of what was going on before, during and after the Gulf War could be seen. Just to be clear, Bush 41 and Reagan do *not* get a free pass. They were part of the problem.
Did President Clinton 'regret' that he had all of this to handle?
Did President Clinton actually get to stopping this sort of thing?
Bomb explodes near US Ambassador's Residence in Columbia,
Carbomb explodes outside US Ambassador's Residence in Columbia,
Slayings of CIA personnel in Langely, VA,
Window smashing of US Cultural Center in Serbia,
Grenade attack on US Embassy in Serbia,
Guards at US Consulate attacked in Columbia,
ETA suspected of bombing near US Embassy in Spain,
Two US soldiers wounded by sniper fire in Somalia,
Kakurokyo attacks HQ of US forces in Japan,
Kakurokyo attacks US Camp Zuma in Japan,
Shining Path explodes carbomb outside US Embassy in Peru,
US diplomat killed in Tblisi, Georgia,
Forces of Gen. Aidid suspected in killing of four US soldiers in Somalia,
Red Brigades attack US-NATO airbase in Italy,
Three US soldiers killed when helicopter downed in Somalia,
US Embassy bombed in Estonia,
One US soldier killed in Somalia,
Shining Path attacks US-Peruvian Binational Cultural Center in Peru,
US diplomat kidnapped by Jahm tribesmen, headed by Mubarak Mashan, in Yemen,
US soldiers fired upon in Somalia,
Gunmen fire shots at US diplomat in Ethiopia,
'Southern California IRA' grenade attack on British property in US,
Lebanese man fires on van carrying rabbinical students in US,
Haitian exiles fired upon in US,
Shots fired at residence of US Ambassador in Uruguay,
Mozambique National Resistance Movement kidnaps US pilot working for UN in Mozambique,
Convoy carrying US Ambassador attacked in Somalia,
FARC kidnaps American in Columbia,
Shining Path bombs US Embassy in Peru,
Grenade attack as USAID offices in Ethiopia,
Two Americans working at US Consulate killed in Pakistan,
Oklahoma City Federal Office building bombing in US,
RPG attack on US Embassy in Russia,
US Army Captain fired at in Saudi Arabia,
GIA sets US Embassy warehouse on fire in Algeria,
Hezbollah and al Qaeda attack OPM/SANG complex in Saudi Arabia,
Chukakuha and Kakurokyoha bomb US base in Japan,
Attempted kidnapping of US human rights worker for UN in Guatemala,
Territorial Anti-Imperialist Nucleus firebombs US serviceman's car in Italy,
FARC kidnaps American Citizen in Columbia,
Guard at U.S. Government Binational Center disarmed and wounded in Columbia,
Revolutionary Struggle launches RPG attack at US Embassy in Greece,
Attack on US Consulate in China,
US Consulate attacked in Mexico,
Bombing of US Information Services compound in Pakistan,
Attempted firebombing of US Cultural Center in South Korea,
Firebombing of US military compound in South Korea,
Contras kidnap USAID election observer in Nicaragua,
Iranian Revolutionary Guards and Hezbollah bombing kill six US servicemen in Saudi Arabia,
US Defense Intelligence Agency employee stabbed in Egypt,
USAID vehicle torched outside US Embassy in Russia,
Nicaraguan Sandinista Liberation Front HQ set on fire in US,
Attempted firebombing of US Consulate in Indonesia,
Jamaat-e-Islami attack US Consulate in Pakistan,
FARC captures and kills US Citizen in Columbia,
Letterbombings of Saudi Arabian newspaper offices in US,
Letterbombs arrives at Ft. Leavenworth in US,
Letterbombs arrive at Saudi Arabian newspaper offices in US,
Two guards at US Embassy murdered in Tajikistan,
Palestinian kills one tourist, wounds others at Empire State Building in US,
Armed attack on US Ambassador's residence in Albania,
American Citizen kidnapped with others by tribesmen in Yemen,
US Citizen and child kidnapped in Guatemala,
Helicopter carrying US State Dept. official fired upon in Columbia,
Grenades launched at US Embassy in Lebanon,
FARC stages takeover of US Embassy public area in Columbia,
al Qaeda bombs US Embassy in Kenya,
al Qaeda bombs US Embassy in Tanzania,
Firebomb attack at US Information Center in Kosovo,
Bombing of US Embassy in Ecuador,
Two Americans taken as part of tourist kidnap plot by tribesmen in Yemen,
Bombing near US and UK Consulates in Russia,
DHKP/C assault US Consulate in Turkey,
US worker with UN mission injured by gunfire in East Timor,
Arson attack on vehicle parked outside US Information Services in Pakistan,
Attempted bombing of US Embassy in Indonesia,
FARC attempts assassination bombing of President Clinton in Columbia,
al Qaeda bombs USS Cole in Yemen.
Now your husband also had goings-on militarily in: Kosovo, Bosnia/Serbia, Somalia, and Haiti. Of which peace and light and good tidings are present in NONE of them. Would it be ok with you, Mrs. Clinton, if President Bush (43) was a bit.... resentful of that?
But above and beyond that is something else.
You are, perhaps, a bit cognizant of the term Casus belli? I went over how that operates in this post on Iran, which is yet ANOTHER of those things left over from a previous Administration, in this case the Carter Administration, which none of the succeeding Administrations has *ever* dealt with. It deals with unwarranted attacks upon a Nation. As it deals with Nation States it is very hard to make it deal with non-aligned Transnational Terrorist organizations. That said, an Act of War is a committing of warlike violence against a Nation, be it from another Nation or just a group of individuals or the lone, deranged individual seeking to be their very own Nation or taking up the tools of War in a cause and using them without civilized warrant granted to them via the Nation State structure.
So you get the Nation to Nation as being the best known case.
Groups representing themselves or some cause, while not falling into this, have *still* taken up the uncivilized path of determing to declare War or perform Warlike activities against Nations. In that a Nation has the absolute right, nay, the absolute REQUIREMENT to seek justice via Military means. That may mean a first bout with diplomacy to seek extradition of individuals to be tried before a military tribunal, but defaults upon harsher military means via embargo and finally armed conflict if the other State, Nation or group does *not* comply. They are not expressing mere civil criminal behavior: they have consciously taken up the tools of Warfare and are thusly liable to the Rules of War.
By applying civil, criminal procedures the very heart of National Sovereignty and Autonomy is undermined. I go over that in this post looking at the strange idea that Acts of War are merely civilian crimes. So, taking up the methods and devices of War and using them to attack a Nation is *also* a Casus belli. I have highlighted those in bold red. On some it is understood that actually finding the people involved may have been difficult, with anonymous attacks and such. But those were *not* mere civilian attacks but Acts of War against the Nation. Even more troubling are those by known and named groups that have acted in a manner intending to or actually attacking the Nation during your 'buy one, get one free' time with your husband in the White House.
A very quick and simple list might help:
1) al Qaeda
2) Iran via Hezbollah in Saudi Arabia and Lebanon
5) Shining Path
8) Red Brigades
These are the Enemies of the Nation during the Clinton Administration and I resent, bitterly *resent* that NOTHING was done to address them in a military fashion and that US Armed Forces were squandered on 'Peace Keeping' duties in Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo with no end in sight for THOSE problems. The Clinton Administration could not even GET civil government running in Kosovo and ran as fast as it could from Somalia. The Clinton Administration so overlooked the upkeep necessary for the troops on 'Peace Keeping' missions that it let two entire Army Divisions fall to the lowest readiness status that has been seen since the Vietnam war: 10th Mountain Division in Bosnia and the 1st Infantry Division in Kosovo.
And after 9/11 the US would desperately need the 10th Mountain Division because it is one of the few regular Army divisions that trains from high mountain combat. The Division that President Clinton let slip through the cracks by not getting it R&R, resupply, refit and some time *off*. So when one of the Enemies of the Nation that the Clinton Administration saw fit to leave unaddressed actually killed 3,000 in the Continental United States, the 10th could not be immediately sent for reprisals in Afghanistan.
I *resent* your CoPresidency and unwillingness to push your husband to defend the Nation during his time in office. By not urging action *then* the world is a worse place *now* because of the cowardice of your CoPresidency on the 'buy one, get one free' plan. By not confronting the back alley bullies of terrorism, you have joined the Volunteer Fifth Column to undermine National Sovereignty and to make the Nation less safe by encouraging the Enemies of Liberty and Freedom to attack the United States without fear of reprisal.
8) On 19 OCT 2006 CNN has decided to become the anti-American outlet of choice for Iraqi insurgents and terrorists. That is when they decided that to 'tell the other side of the story' in Iraq meant showing the murder of a US soldier via sniper fire. This was *not* a military assault, but a pre-planned and executed murder of a US soldier for propaganda video footage. CNN has refused to call it such or to even indicate that it is an evidentiary piece for war crimes as the showing of such is actually against the Geneva Conventions. In previous eras that would be considered activity worthy of a War Crimes tribunal for those involved. Strange how so many are ready to call for that for US soldiers in combat and *not* for those publicizing the murders of US soldiers.
Joining CNN in this category is the New York Times with its running of a video showing the death of Staff Sgt. Hector Leija as reported by Gateway Pundit on 03 FEB 2007 due to the uproar over the Stars & Stripes first report on this by the NYT. Not only did they not go via their own codes of conduct and respect for the family of a fallen serviceman. By doing neither and showing such video, the NYT is also liable for War Crimes prosecution by abrogating the Geneva Conventions on the treatment of the wounded and dead of lawful combatants.
Because of the lax attitude towards holding anyone accountable for any actions, I doubt that either organization will be brought up on charges. Specifically under the following:
Convention IVThe use and reporting of actual sniper fire to kill a lawful combatant by individuals not affiliated with the Armed Forces of the High Contracting Powers or of those that would be considered to be equivalent in a civil war from the opposing side are considered to be neutral unless they take part in activities AGAINST said lawful combatants. Thus, by using such coverage and not clearing it with the lawful Armed Forces command structure and publicizing it in a manner that is against any High Contracting Power or equivalent, the neutrality is abrogated and LOST.
Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, 12 August 1949.
Part I. General Provisions
Art. 5 Where in the territory of a Party to the conflict, the latter is satisfied that an individual protected person is definitely suspected of or engaged in activities hostile to the security of the State, such individual person shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges under the present Convention as would, if exercised in the favour of such individual person, be prejudicial to the security of such State.
Where in occupied territory an individual protected person is detained as a spy or saboteur, or as a person under definite suspicion of activity hostile to the security of the Occupying Power, such person shall, in those cases where absolute military security so requires, be regarded as having forfeited rights of communication under the present Convention.
In each case, such persons shall nevertheless be treated with humanity and, in case of trial, shall not be deprived of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed by the present Convention. They shall also be granted the full rights and privileges of a protected person under the present Convention at the earliest date consistent with the security of the State or Occupying Power, as the case may be.
Further in the same Convention:
Part III. Status and Treatment of Protected PersonsNow Iraq is not being occupied unless reporting is being done from a viewpoint of presenting "the other side's view" - which is that the US is 'occupying' Iraq. Promulgating that storyline can either be done in context of the US is helping a Free Iraq, and the sniping is an illegal activity that they are reporting upon and are, thusly, under all laws of Iraq that cover such reporting or that those doing the reporting for the presentation of such violence in the light of the insurgents agree that Iraq is 'occupied' and thus such reporting falls under that of 'occupied territory'. So the first case makes these news organizations liable to the civil criminal codes of Iraq for this, but this is also combat against an insurgent force. Mind you, if you push the 'Occupied Iraq' concept, then the folks doing this should be summarily charged and imprisoned under the UCMJ. But I suspect they wouldn't like being in Gitmo. In which case that brings us to the dead and wounded Geneva Convention. This brings us to:
Section III. Occupied territories
Art. 68. Protected persons who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, but which does not constitute an attempt on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces or administration, nor a grave collective danger, nor seriously damage the property of the occupying forces or administration or the installations used by them, shall be liable to internment or simple imprisonment, provided the duration of such internment or imprisonment is proportionate to the offence committed. Furthermore, internment or imprisonment shall, for such offences, be the only measure adopted for depriving protected persons of liberty. The courts provided for under Article 66 of the present Convention may at their discretion convert a sentence of imprisonment to one of internment for the same period.
The penal provisions promulgated by the Occupying Power in accordance with Articles 64 and 65 may impose the death penalty against a protected person only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons, provided that such offences were punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory in force before the occupation began.
The death penalty may not be pronounced against a protected person unless the attention of the court has been particularly called to the fact that since the accused is not a national of the Occupying Power, he is not bound to it by any duty of allegiance.
In any case, the death penalty may not be pronounced on a protected person who was under eighteen years of age at the time of the offence.
Convention IThus the wounded and dead due to sniper fire are to be treated honorably throughout the entire procedure from event to interment in the grave for the dead. Not going through proper military channels on any and all events of wounding and killing that are recorded and propagating them without military authorization is an act against the State or High Contracting Power or equivalent. That reporting removes all protection of the Geneva Conventions from those doing such reporting on the dead and wounded encountered against an insurgent force IN ADDITION to the local laws. I find such reporting to be absolutely reprehensible by ANY news organization and cannot see how they can ethically justify such as doing so puts them in contradiction of the honorable treatment of the dead and wounded. Both CNN and New York Times do not treat the dead and wounded honorably by their use of film to show partisan views of such events and are considered to be working outside of normal military channels against the Nation of those being wounded and killed, in this case the United States.
For the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, Geneva, 12 August 1949
Chapter II. Wounded and Sick
Art. 12. Members of the armed forces and other persons mentioned in the following Article, who are wounded or sick, shall be respected and protected in all circumstances.
They shall be treated humanely and cared for by the Party to the conflict in whose power they may be, without any adverse distinction founded on sex, race, nationality, religion, political opinions, or any other similar criteria. Any attempts upon their lives, or violence to their persons, shall be strictly prohibited; in particular, they shall not be murdered or exterminated, subjected to torture or to biological experiments; they shall not wilfully be left without medical assistance and care, nor shall conditions exposing them to contagion or infection be created.
[Parts applying to urgent medical treatment ommitted]
Art. 13. The present Convention shall apply to the wounded and sick belonging to the following categories:
(1) Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict, as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces. (2) Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions: (a) that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates; (b) that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance; (c) that of carrying arms openly; (d) that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war. (3) Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a Government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power. (4) Persons who accompany the armed forces without actually being members thereof, such as civil members of military aircraft crews, war correspondents, supply contractors, members of labour units or of services responsible for the welfare of the armed forces, provided that they have received authorization from the armed forces which they accompany. (5) Members of crews, including masters, pilots and apprentices, of the merchant marine and the crews of civil aircraft of the Parties to the conflict, who do not benefit by more favourable treatment under any other provisions in international law. (6) Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy, spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.
Art. 17. Parties to the conflict shall ensure that burial or cremation of the dead, carried out individually as far as circumstances permit, is preceded by a careful examination, if possible by a medical examination, of the bodies, with a view to confirming death, establishing identity and enabling a report to be made. One half of the double identity disc, or the identity disc itself if it is a single disc, should remain on the body.
Bodies shall not be cremated except for imperative reasons of hygiene or for motives based on the religion of the deceased. In case of cremation, the circumstances and reasons for cremation shall be stated in detail in the death certificate or on the authenticated list of the dead.
They shall further ensure that the dead are honourably interred, if possible according to the rites of the religion to which they belonged, that their graves are respected, grouped if possible according to the nationality of the deceased, properly maintained and marked so that they may always be found. For this purpose, they shall organize at the commencement of hostilities an Official Graves Registration Service, to allow subsequent exhumations and to ensure the identification of bodies, whatever the site of the graves, and the possible transportation to the home country. These provisions shall likewise apply to the ashes, which shall be kept by the Graves Registration Service until proper disposal thereof in accordance with the wishes of the home country.
Why they are not under indictment under the Geneva Conventions or treated as espionage agencies is beyond me. The use of such is a War Crime by any definition and doing so to harm a State is against the Geneva Conventions and makes one working for the enemy of the State that is being targeted for such coverage.
9) Reuters - Fauxtography - For this it is the coverage started by Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs and rounded up in his Link Compendium of coverage and events during the 2006 fighting between Hezbollah and Israel. Instead of owning up to the massive problems seen then and later, Reuters has remained deathly silent after initial denials. They have quietly fired the editor involved and given no public statement as to how such slanted images and lack of context came to grace their coverage of events. Suffice it to say that issuing 'Picture Kills' does nothing to ensure the integrity fo the organization itself nor hold itself to journalistic standards of conduct.
My coverage on this points out the disingenuous attitudes based on the simple fact that this has been a much talked about issue in the imagery and new media world since the mid 1990's and that the very problems that happened were known failures of a type addressed by the experts in the field at industry symposia. In an era of cheap digital storage and the ability to ensure that copyright is followed and that archival images can be made available for analysis, the entire still and motion visual image industry for news has means and methodology to demonstrate that the images captured at an event are not forged, doctored, hoaxed or staged. Some of that would require an actual review panel of acknowledged experts in publication and academia along with the visual sciences, but that is relatively inexpensive work that should get wide industry backing. The entire disingenuous attitude that was put forth during this and the attempts to find an unbiased individual to address this by Editor & Publisher indicts them as being unable to look to the overall goal and mission of the MSM to serve the public and *not* be ideologically biased without acknowledging that bias. Thus an organization that should be helping the media industry to police itself is now so in bed with that industry that it cannot find means to criticize and offer views on how the industry, as a whole, can perform its job in an era where digital tools are overwhelming the skills of editors. Further, by not actually getting verbal or written reporting from actual photojournalists, images are sent in a state-less, context-free form in which propaganda is attached to them. By not indicating the restrictions upon reporters and the coercion going on at such sites, the public is not given a full view of events and fabrication of events is allowed to go unquestioned. Until the images, themselves, point to the underlying fabrication.
Reuters, however, was not alone in this use of fraudulent images, faked events, staged disasters and outright reporting of propaganda as news. This list includes most of the global news reporting agencies like the BBC and Associated Press, especially in their Hezbollah 'Green Helmet Man' coverage and their intact car photo that had survived a missile attack when, for that type of missile, one is left with scattered debris. The Red Cross has also endangered their reputation by not coming clean on purported ambulance attacks, using wrecks from junkyards to assert recent damage to vehicles and then having problems on limbs still being attached to individuals that they had clearly identified as missing such limbs in an unfindable state.
Thus Reuters, BBC, Editor & Publisher and AP all join the Washington Post as sources of unreliable news and event coverage. Further, the ICRC needs to come absolutely clean and clear that they will *not* support any side in a conflict, they will *not* give partisan aid and comfort to any side in any conflict and that they will only report on atrocities and violations of human rights that come from multiple, verifiable, reliable witnesses that will go on the record and that all such will be given a thorough, international review by individuals skilled at reviewing such and without partisan bias in any ongoing conflict.
Until then all news, analysis, reports and other coverage of events by all of these organizations is considered, by me at least, as coming from the Volunteer Fifth Column.
10) The New York Times - National Security Leaks - The NYT seems set on compromising every single National Security program that ever comes to their attention. The editors at National Review Online do a quick summary of the SWIFT program and the NYT basically said that it could have, might have endangered someone's rights somewhere, although they couldn't figure out exactly who, beyond terrorists and their sympathizers, might have been harmed. Months later their Public Editor came out and let the world know that they might have gotten it wrong and the program actually is thoroughly legal as they were told it was by the President and bipartisan swath of Congressional leadership. They really do need to re-think this entire 'report it while everyone else is telling us not to including the Wall Street Journal' concept. They said there might have been a fire while there were, a bunch of ashtrays.
Gabriel Schoenfeld has an article at Commentary Magazine online from MAR 2006 Has the "New York Times" violated the espionage act?, which goes into the detail of the NSA problems, leaks of classified information, the laws surrounding such, and the clear and explicit guidance given by Congress on such things via the espionage act revisions post-WWII. The case demonstrated is that by leaking national security information that is classified, all of those in the chain of illegal disclosure are held accountable to the laws of the land covering this. The NYT's Public Editor's admission that they had been hasty, not heeded warnings by Congress and went ahead even knowing that other news organizations held similar information and were withholding it points to intent and forethought on damaging national security without regards to outcome.
Now if that were an isolated incident, beyond their GC violation above, it wouldn't be so much. That is, however, far from the actual story. Consider their airing of Joseph Wilson's report on his report to the CIA about his trip to Niger. When traveling under US Government funds, anything he finds is Government property, including his report. If his report had not been published then he must seek out authorization to release that information which may be held for other reasons beyond his cognizance. Further, his editorial is directly at odds with his written report to the Government and the records of his verbal interviews with the Senate Committee investigating this indicates that an Iraqi trade delegation did come to Niger in 1999. As refined uranium ore is one of the major outputs of Niger, the question of what could be of interest to Iraq, which had stated nuclear intentions could not be dismissed. Yet the NYT gave a full and open op-ed to Mr. Wilson while knowing that he was neither authorized to speak on the subject nor privy to the entire dataset for the conclusions drawn from his report.
By basing an editorial stance on this biased coverage, the NYT amongst others have asserted that Saddam Hussein had no WMDs nor programs to acquire same. Beyond the Strategypage article above, the White House had to issue its own rebuttal to these inaccurate and false statements.
The NYT also blithely reported on alleged CIA prison facilities in Eastern Europe which ended up with the firing of Judith Miller. In this case the NYT proved to be a dependable source of anti-administration reporting because this was a *sting* operation inside the CIA to identify individuals who were leaking information. By assiduously reporting on every anti-administration piece of gossip that crossed their paths, the NYT can now be depended upon to give *anyone* with an axe to grind an open forum without oversight or inquiry into the actual, factual information in what they are given.
There is also the problematical tip given to Global Relief Foundation and the Holy Land Foundation in the reporting by Judith Miller revealing that it was amongst 30 organizations being investigated in her column of 19 FEB 2000 as reported by the NY Sun on 30 SEP 2004. But, as the special prosecuter pointed out, that general knowledge of investigation and giving a specific date, as is alleged as happened, are two different things. The US Government had been citing this organization for some time about its activities and ties to terrorist groups, especially al Qaeda, so giving warning to them of a particular investigation is extremely troubling. The Supreme Court has blocked the motion to prevent the government from reviewing phone records on this on 27 NOV 2006. Do note that this is entirely separate and different from the Valerie Plame prosecution and that Judith Miller has left the NYT.
There is also the matter of the NYT reporting on 31 MAY 2005 the CIA use of 'charter flights' run by the Agency out of an airfield in North Carolina. The reporters on that were Scott Shane, Stephen Grey and Margot Williams. By giving exact place and aircraft type used for these operations, these reporters gave out information that could allow anyone to find, identify and track such aircraft and put at risk ongoing CIA operations. The actual covert status of this operation is unknown, but the public's "need to know" for such things is extremely limited if not absent beyond citing that the CIA does this out of a US airfield and uses various aircraft to do so. Giving exact place and aircraft type is not only not necessary, but unwise in this era of telecommunications.
For the uncovering of a classified program that had Congressional oversight and ignoring warnings *not* to publish on that, the NYT should be investigated and prosecuted if it falls within the statutory requirements of the Espionage Act, which it apparently does. So to should it be prosecuted for the revelations in the CIA overseas prisons, which, even as a ruse, indicates intent to violate US national security by publishing secret documents. Both the NYT and Judith Miller should be held to account for that and for tipping off the terrorist supporting Global Relief Foundation. Worse than that is the giving of vital intelligence on covert air transport out and allowing it to be uncovered so that anyone who wishes to find, identify and track air craft used on CIA and possibly other missions for the government may do so.
For all of that the New York Times, Judith Miller, Scott Shane, Stephen Grey and Margot Williams all can be seen as joining The Volunteer Fifth Column.
11) Associated Press - Will the real Jamil Hussein 'come on down'?!? The entire Jamil Hussein problem is more than just using a possibly fabricated source (have they ever found the guy? not as in: yes here is his name but as in photographed in front of reliable witnesses for the Ministry of the Interior in Iraq?) but in their inability to remain to their own code of ethics. I dealt with that first here and then a second time when Jamil might have been found... but wasn't. Here it is the entire problem of journalistic ethics in 'sole source reporting' that is ONLY on topics of violence that has a slant against US, MNF and Iraqi Army/Security/Police. At least 60 articles are called into question and from those one does not know how often they have been repeated or used as basis for actual estimates for casualties and violence by many groups. It is not a question of actual violence, almost entirely centered in Baghdad, but the levels and amount of it.
Here the target is to inflate violence and destruction by using sole source reporting and then never doing a 'follow-up' or actually correcting false stories. This is no longer reporting of facts, it is the reporting of rumors AS facts. And as those rumors are found to be without basis time and again, the object is solely to inflate casualty figures. There are many accounted for as dead by AP who have not, indeed, died and may never have even existed because of their reliance on sole source reporting. If you comb through the archives of AP, just how many MORE stories from Iraq based on one, single source for information are there? And why does AP go against their own journalistic code of ethics and report that this is what they are doing and will not be held accountable for it? By 'piling on' many false reports amongst the true, the entire view of what is actually going on in Iraq is tainted from the AP. No journalism school would ever teach this as acceptable behavior unless a reporter put up hard and substantive reasons to USE sole source reporting and then told their audience first and up front about that and those reasons.
By not doing so AP is effectively spreading defeatism by making a large mess look like a huge and insoluable catastrophe. That is working *against* the interests of the Public to be informed with real and substantive and reliable information. AP refuses to be held accountable as they have publicly published in their code of ethics. To do these things is to join The Volunteer Fifth Column, and they have already been placed there due to their reportage from Lebanon. Nothing from AP is to be trusted, at this point. As they know no difference between rumors and news, their analysis is now seen as worthless because they will no longer report facts so that the Public can hear those FIRST.
I will end this lengthy post on The Volunteer Fifth Column now.
I suspect it will be an ongoing topic.