This hangs on Staff Sgt. Wuterich’s door.  The final words to the pledge (on the banner) are “and justice for all.”  If Wuterich followed protocol and gets hung out to dry to appease the likes of the unhinged and loony John Murtha, then perhaps it should be “justice for some.”

Oh, by the way, before we get to the picture of the banner:  “Lord, may John Murtha’s picture be placed with the definition of buffoon in Wikipedia for a millennium.”

Thursday, June 15th, 2006, approximately 1900 hours (EST):

Ring tone: Dial 760.725.5044 (Media Relations at Camp Pendleton, California).

Camp Pendleton (CP): Hello, this is Camp Pendleton media relations.

Captain’s Journal (CJ): To whom am I speaking?

CP: This is Staff Sgt. Jesse Lora.

CJ: I am a Marine father and a concerned U.S. citizen.  Are the eight Marines involved with the alleged Hamdaniya incident in the brig at Camp Pendleton?

CP: Are you media, sir?

CJ: I am a Marine father and a concerned U.S. citizen.  Are the eight Marines involved with the alleged Hamdaniya incident in the brig?

CP: There are seven Marines and one Navy Corpsman.

CJ: In the brig?

CP: Yes sir.

CJ: Have they been charged?

CP: No sir.

CJ: Why are they in the brig if they have not been charged?

CP: Sir, the decision has been made that there is reason to believe that there has been court martial offense and so they are in the brig.

CJ: But there is an investigation underway.  How would you know if a court martial offense has occurred if the investigation has not yet been completed?  Isn’t it the very information you need to rely upon to make such a decision?

CP: Sir, the senior staff has made the decision …

CJ: [interrupting] … who?  Who has made this decision?

CP: Sir, the commanding officer has made the decision.

CJ: How did he make it?

CP: Sir, he has reason to believe …

CJ: [interrupting] … but if the investigation has not been completed yet, how could he have made the decision — he needs the investigative results in order to make the decision.

CP: Sir, the commanding officer has reason to believe that a court martial offense has occurred.

CJ: Uh huh.  Okay then (Editorial Remark: At this point it was obvious that the company line was well-rehearsed and we were getting nowhere with this line of questioning).

CJ: Well, I still don’t see why they are in the brig if they have not been charged?  Are they in shackles?

CP: Sir, they are able to get out, to have family visits on the weekends, and they are only in leg irons, not shackles, when they are out.

CJ: I understand that this is one hour per day that they are out.

CP: Sir, they are out during meals and other times.

CJ: (Editorial Remark: Meals?  Are they shackled during meals?  What kind of idiots do we have running the brigs?): I still don’t see why they are locked up if they have not been charged?

CP: Sir, I assure you that they are being treated with the utmost of respect.  The hand cuffs and leg irons are for our’s and their protection.

CJ: (Editorial Remark: If there is reason to believe that they have committed a court martial offense, why would you treat them with the utmost of respect?  Leg irons for their protection?  What kind of idiots do we have running the brigs?  What kind of idiot does Staff Sgt. Lora take me for?): Okay.  Tell me this.  Is this a show for the media?  Is this all a big show?

CP: Sir I could not comment on that.

CJ: Okay, thanks for the time.  But I still don’t understand why they are in the brig without charges being filed.

Elsewhere, using Phyllis Schlaffly, I wrote about crass politics and the Hispanic vote. Now, hat tip to Kathryn Jean Lopez over at the Corner (NRO), here is confirmation. Does this just make you sick, or what? Sigh … [the Captain’s head shakes sadly … he wonders how this could be happening in America … and what kind of country he is turning over to his children and grandchildren]

From an April 2, 2006, article in the Los Angeles Times (bold is mine):

During the 2000 election, Bush previewed a campaign video from ad-maker Lionel Sosa that used emotion-laden themes to woo Latinos.

As he watched, Sosa recalled, Bush’s face lighted up. “How much do you need for this?” Bush asked as the two men sat with Rove in the governor’s mansion in Texas, Sosa said.

Sosa replied that it would take $3 million. According to the ad-maker, Bush then turned to Rove, saying: “Give him five.”

Four years later, Sosa produced a variation of that video for the 2004 campaign that was mailed to Latino voters across the country.

The video includes images that would probably rile those who today are calling for the most restrictive immigration laws. At one point, Bush is shown waving a Mexican flag. The footage was shot, Sosa said, during a Mexican Independence Day parade in San Antonio in 1998, when Bush was running for reelection as governor.

The five-minute video, narrated by Bush, opens with an image of him fishing on his property near Crawford, Texas, as he essentially described millions of Americans who populate his home state as the true foreigners in someone else’s native land.

“About 15 years before the Civil War, much of the American West was northern Mexico,” Bush says in the video. “The people who lived there weren’t called Latinos or Hispanics. They were Mexican citizens, until all that land became part of the United States.

“After that, many of them were treated as foreigners in their own land,” Bush adds.

He says the “Latino spirit” was fueled by “strong conservative values” of family, a strong work ethic, faith in God, patriotism and personal responsibility. “These values are my values,” Bush says. “I live by them, and I lead by them.”

As Bush speaks in the video, the background music — a Latin beat — grows louder. The president is pictured waving the Mexican flag, hugging a Latino woman, and then holding a Latino baby.

Political strategists in both parties said the video illustrated how Bush, unlike other Republicans, had forged a personal relationship with Latino voters largely on his ability to convey empathy and invite them into his party.

I talked with a friend tonight about the Haditha incident.  His perspective (somewhat embellished here by me) is what I believe to be the perspective of most common men in America.

The common man tires of hearing the endless drum beat of anti-American slander and propaganda from the far left.  It is to him — well, let’s go ahead and say it — not manly.  To be sure, he is a part of or has a family, and asked in the abstract, would have no part of killing unarmed non-combatants just because of rage.  However, he doesn’t believe that this happened.  Not in Haditha, not anywhere in Iraq … not until proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.  The United States Marines are our finest, and they deserve not only our respect (which is easy), but our forbearance and patience.  They deserve grace.

See, in the abstract, we go to work, wrestle with our bosses and co-workers, stop at the grocery store on the way home, hug our wives, eat our meals, knock around the house for a while and then sleep until it is time to do it again.  Answers to moral questions are easy when we sleep in comfortable beds after eating tasty dinners in a protected home.  In reality, the Marines do not know if they will live or die tomorrow.  They do not know what awaits them around even the next corner.  They eat MREs out of disposable containers.  They go on patrols to find an enemy that may be among the very people they are trying to protect.  They know at any time, an IED might explode and turn over their Humvee, instantly killing the gunner and maiming some of their brothers.  Tomorrow they might face bullets coming their direction having left the muzzle of the enemy’s rifle at two thousand feet per second.  They might get to see their loved ones again, and they might not.

They do it all for us … because of love and service and protection and honor and courage and commitment and family and religion … and all the things that make America great and the U.S. Marines the very best of a great nation.  To say that we owe them a debt of gratitude is to make an understatement to the point of embarrassment.  It is because of the Marines that we are free.

Bad things happen in war.  Horrible things.  It sounds like something terrible happened that day in Haditha.  Families died who should otherwise be alive.  But based on what we know about the insurgents, and most importantly, based on what we know about the Marines, we strongly suspect that the America-hater’s account of things is just not quite right.  We suspect that there was a fight that day, and we suspect that the Marines defended themselves.  Further, we expect Marines to defend themselves.  We would not have it any other way.  When a Marine feels threatened, we do not expect him to act in any other way but to attack the enemy and defend his brothers.

When these Marines defended themselves, we strongly suspect that whatever collateral damage was done, was done by the insurgents.  We do not for a moment believe — especially without evidence — that the Marines wantonly created collateral damage.  And regardless of what happens tomorrow with this case, we believe that the Marines deserve grace.  After all, bullets were flying, explosions were happening, Marines were being hurt and killed, and tired, hungry and battle-weary Marines reacted as they are taught to.

At any rate, this is what we suspect.  And this is our perspective.  We are the common man in America.

I talked with a friend tonight about the Haditha incident.  His perspective (somewhat embellished here by me) is what I believe to be the perspective of most common men in America.

The common man tires of hearing the endless drum beat of anti-American slander and propaganda from the far left.  It is to him — well, let’s go ahead and say it — not manly.  To be sure, he is a part of or has a family, and asked in the abstract, would have no part of killing unarmed non-combatants just because of rage.  However, he doesn’t believe that this happened.  Not in Haditha, not anywhere in Iraq … not until proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.  The United States Marines are our finest, and they deserve not only our respect (which is easy), but our forbearance and patience.  They deserve grace.

See, in the abstract, we go to work, wrestle with our bosses and co-workers, stop at the grocery store on the way home, hug our wives, eat our meals, knock around the house for a while and then sleep until it is time to do it again.  Answers to moral questions are easy when we sleep in comfortable beds after eating tasty dinners in a protected home.  In reality, the Marines do not know if they will live or die tomorrow.  They do not know what awaits them around even the next corner.  They eat MREs out of disposable containers.  They go on patrols to find an enemy that may be among the very people they are trying to protect.  They know at any time, an IED might explode and turn over their Humvee, instantly killing the gunner and maiming some of their brothers.  Tomorrow they might face bullets coming their direction having left the muzzle of the enemy’s rifle at two thousand feet per second.  They might get to see their loved ones again, and they might not.

They do it all for us … because of love and service and protection and honor and courage and commitment and family and religion … and all the things that make America great and the U.S. Marines the very best of a great nation.  To say that we owe them a debt of gratitude is to make an understatement to the point of embarrassment.  It is because of the Marines that we are free.

Bad things happen in war.  Horrible things.  It sounds like something terrible happened that day in Haditha.  Families died who should otherwise be alive.  But based on what we know about the insurgents, and most importantly, based on what we know about the Marines, we strongly suspect that the America-hater’s account of things is just not quite right.  We suspect that there was a fight that day, and we suspect that the Marines defended themselves.  Further, we expect Marines to defend themselves.  We would not have it any other way.  When a Marine feels threatened, we do not expect him to act in any other way but to attack the enemy and defend his brothers.

When these Marines defended themselves, we strongly suspect that whatever collateral damage was done, was done by the insurgents.  We do not for a moment believe — especially without evidence — that the Marines wantonly created collateral damage.  And regardless of what happens tomorrow with this case, we believe that the Marines deserve grace.  After all, bullets were flying, explosions were happening, Marines were being hurt and killed, and tired, hungry and battle-weary Marines reacted as they are taught to.

At any rate, this is what we suspect.  And this is our perspective.  We are the common man in America.

I have been toying with the idea of writing a piece called “Ten Reasons why John McCain will Never be President of the United States,” but I am having a hard time culling the list down to ten.  For now, one will have to do.  See the informative piece “US Border Patrol Agents Angry with McCain.”  McCain will not win as an independent, he will merely draw away enough voters to make one of the two other parties lose who would not otherwise have lost.  He will certainly not run as a Democrat for President — he is too conservative.  Finally and most important, he will not win the Republican nomination because he is a RINO (Republican in Name Only).  His shameless trips to “rub shoulders” with the Christian right will not play well to the Christian right.  I know, I am the Christian right.

I have spoken on immigration before here, here, here and other places.  I have tried to point out how the financial burden for the poverty problem in Mexico will end up being shouldered by the American middle class (the employer gets the benefit, a form of corporate welfare).  Well, Phyllis Schlaffly’s piece over at Townhall on immigration makes the point better than I can.  She points out concerning the Senate bill that:

… the 795-page bill announces its “temporary guest worker” plan. Those words are lies because the fine print in the bill converts these workers, who are given H-2C visas, into permanent residents with the right to become citizens after five years.

The plan will start by importing 200,000 H-2C workers in the first year. The H-2Cers can immediately bring in their family members on H-4 visas, without any numeric limits and without being required to have a physical, and they will also get permanent legal residence and citizenship.

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that this bill would import 7.8 million immigrants, and convert another 11 million current immigrants, legal and illegal, into U.S. citizens over the next decade. The Heritage Foundation estimates that 66 million new citizens will be added to the current population over the next 20 years. The number would accelerate as the racket called family chain migration allows more new residents to bring in more and more relatives.

The bill gives these temporary workers some preferential rights that U.S. workers do not have. These new temporary workers can’t be fired from their jobs except for “just cause,” they must be paid the prevailing wage, and they can’t be arrested for other civil immigration offenses if they are stopped for traffic violations.

The bill assures the preference of in-state college tuition (something that is denied to U.S. citizens in 49 states), and certain types of college financial assistance will be available to illegals at the state’s option. As minorities, they might even get affirmative action preferences in jobs, government contracts, and college admissions.

After the so-called temporary workers and their spouses become citizens, they can bring in their parents as permanent residents on the path to citizenship. Although the parents have never paid into Social Security, they will be eligible for Supplemental Security Income benefits, and in 46 states they will be eligible for full Medicaid benefits after five years. Siblings and adult children (and their families) will be given preference in future admissions.

The demographics of the so-called temporary workers are expected to be similar to those of the illegal immigrants already in our country. More than half will be high school dropouts, they will work low-paid jobs that require payment of little or no income tax, they are 50 percent more likely to receive taxpayer-funded government benefits than natural-born households, and they have a 42 percent rate of out-of-wedlock births (all of whom, of course, will be granted automatic U.S. citizenship).

Estimates of the cost to the taxpayers of this gargantuan expansion of the welfare state are at least $50 billion a year over the long term. U.S. taxpayers will pay for entitlements to these tens of millions of low-income families, including Medicaid, Social Security, Supplemental Security Income, Earned Income Tax Credit (cash handouts of up to $4,400 a year to low-wage households), public schooling and lunches, the WIC program, food stamps, public housing, and Temporary Assistance to Needy Families.

In the beginning I could not decipher why Bush would spend his political capital on what I call his “loser” immigration policy.  Now I see why after reading Phyllis.  It is as naked, crass and unadulterated a political move as I think we have ever seen or experienced in America.  We have seen some crass moves by the pols, but the problem here is the enormous cost associated with this new class of people.  It is a class that the pols know will be the new “minority,” who will eventually have the vote — if the pols have their way — and who will be the recipient of endless give-away programs and subsidies and the subject of countless social engineering experiments.  In short, as long as the middle class is funding this whole endeavor, the votes will keep coming to the GOP.  Or so the thinking goes.

It might be a jaded and dark view of this administration (to whom I have given the benefit of the doubt), but it appears to me that this is all about the vote.  It is as simple as that.  As for the Democrats, they see it as all about the vote, make no apologies and just want to go faster.  It is a choice between dark and darker.

To make this vision even more bleak, since the middle class American will be shouldering the burden, we might be watching the beginning of the end of the middle class in America.  I know this sounds reactionary.  If you think so, go back and re-read Phyllis.

I discussed Staff Sgt. Wuterich’s claims that the Marines followed the rules of engagement, as reported in the Washington Post on Sunday, June 11.  I pointed out how absurd it is to believe that the Marines acted in the way they are portrayed as acting (this does not predispose anyone to take any position on the events other than to say that it is highly improbable that the events unfolded as we have heard):

Wuterich’s version contradicts that of the Iraqis, who described a massacre of men, women and children after a bomb killed a Marine. Haditha residents have said that innocent civilians were executed, that some begged for their lives before being shot and that children were killed indiscriminately.

Wuterich told his attorney in initial interviews over nearly 12 hours last week that the shootings were the unfortunate result of a methodical sweep for enemies in a firefight. Two attorneys for other Marines involved in the incident said Wuterich’s account is consistent with those they had heard from their clients.

Kevin B. McDermott, who is representing Capt. Lucas M. McConnell, the Kilo Company commander, said Wuterich and other Marines informed McConnell on the day of the incident that at least 15 civilians were killed by “a mixture of small-arms fire and shrapnel as a result of grenades” after the Marines responded to an attack from a house.

In my post I rely somewhat on experiences and discussions with my Marine son (recently graduated as a Boot and currently in SOI) about his training.

It has become apparent that two members of the clergy were ministering to the unit that was involved with Haditha that day: Rev. Ben Mathes, and Rev. Christopher Price.  Neither reported Marines telling them about any massacre.

I also discussed Time Magazine besmirching of the character of the Marines who were involved with absolutely no evidentiary support (and then printing a small retraction at the bottom of the article).

The Haditha story that the anti-American press so badly wants to exist (and is trying to create) seems to be evaporating.  It now appears that there was quite a fire fight going on in and around the area.  Captain James Kimber reports that this particular time was a period in which Marine units were encouraged to escalate their use of force in dealing with insurgents.  He further reports that:

Nov. 19 unfolded like many other days in Iraq, Kimber said, with reports of violence. A rocket-propelled grenade was launched toward the compound of Kimber’s unit, in a school in central Haqlaniyah, a few miles south of Haditha. Other nearby units also were taking mortar and small-arms fire.

On the radio, Kimber said, he heard the report from Haditha of the blast from a roadside improvised explosive device, or IED, and the death of one Marine there. He also could hear an unfolding gun battle.

Over at Townhall, Mary Katharine Ham reports (from her sources) that:

As the situation developed, the Marines at the initial ambush site were isolated for a period of time in this hostile city and they had every right to fear for their lives.  A group of about 15-20 foreign fighters were believed to be in Haditha that day, supplemented by local insurgents.  Knowing that 6 Marines had been surrounded and killed in Haditha before help could reach them just three months before, the isolated Marines had to fear the worst as they responded to the first attack.

One Marine’s father reports that:

after the car bomb exploded the Marines took a defensive position around his son’s battered vehicle. Insurgents immediately started shooting from nearby buildings, and the insurgents were using women and children as human shields

Brit Hume picked up a story on the suspect nature of the alleged Time magazine videotape of the aftermath of the Haditha incident.  It appears that the budding young journalism student is not quite what he seems, and has a “dog in this fight.”

As this story is studied, inconsistencies and problems become apparent.  CNN reported that:

Suspecting that the four students in the taxi either triggered the bomb or were acting as spotters, the Marines ordered the men and the driver, who by then had exited the taxi, to lie on the ground. Instead, they ran, and the Marines shot and killed them. 

But do “students” really take taxis to school in Haditha, Iraq?

With the mention of “students” who ride taxis to school, little has been said about the nature of the Haditha that the Marines have seen over the last months.  Here is a good primer on the city:

Hardly mentioned at all in the hysterical coverage of Haditha is the nature of this city hard by the Syrian border. If you think Fallujah was a hornet’s nest of insurgency, you should take a look at Haditha and what the Marines have been facing there.

There is good news coming from Haditha too, even as accidently reported on CNN:

There’s been a lot of progress in Haditha, and I’ve been going back there pretty much for a year and a half. My last trip was a month before this incident. And Haditha, at the beginning of 2005 was very violent. U.S. troops would not even enter the city. And little by little, after a series of operations, and finally the last operation was before the operation in Haditha, a certain amount of stability was brought to the area, of course, that is stability on the Iraq barometer of stability. But it’s all relative. And they have brought the city under control to a certain degree, and they have set up fixed bases, both Iraqi and U.S. Army fixed bases to try and build up this relationship with the civilians. They have started the process of trying to clean the city of these roadside bombs that were just about everywhere, and trying to do these sweeping operations to clear out the city of insurgents and bring a certain amount of stability to it. 

There is a good Marine Corps Times article on Staf Sgt. Wuterich (a more personal side).  On an editorial note, it seems to me that it is entirely consistent that unarmed non-combatants were begging for their lives, while at the same time Marines were shooting (with the Marines being innocent of murder).  The reports are consistent that the insurgents used the women and children as human shields.

The Washington Post reports from a lawyer of one of the Marines that:

“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. For example, he said, contrary to Murtha’s account, it will show that the Marines came under small-arms fire after the roadside explosion.

Finally, there is still something very wrong and inconsistent with this whole picture.  The Washington Post reported on May 27 that:

“A U.S. Marine and 15 civilians were killed yesterday from the blast of a roadside bomb in Haditha. Immediately following the bombing, gunmen attacked the convoy with small arms fire. Iraqi army soldiers and Marines returned fire, killing eight insurgents and wounding another.” 

Did you know that 15 civilians were also killed in this IED blast?  I have seen this reported only in the Washington Post.  Further, did you know that Iraqi soldiers were with the Marines?  Additionally, this story is consistent with the other reports of an intense fire fight.  Strangely inconsistent with this account is the statement of one Iraqi:

In the first minutes after the shock of the blast, residents said, silence reigned on the street of walled courtyards, brick homes and tiny palm groves. Marines appeared stunned, or purposeful, as they moved around the burning Humvee, witnesses said.

Then one of the Marines took charge and began shouting, said Fahmi, who was watching from his roof. Fahmi said he saw the Marine direct other Marines into the house closest to the blast, about 50 yards away.

Hmmm.  Either there was a fire fight or “silence reigned.”  Which is it?  Logic says that it cannot be both.

Are the editors at the Arizona Republic wife-beaters?  Do they also engage in sedition, extortion, drug-trafficking and and felony robbery?  But pehaps this post is merely humor masking as serious journalism.  And perhaps the ridiculous cartoon below is a lie based on innuendo and without any substantive support in fact.

Here at the Captain’s Journal, we may be a small blog, and we may not spell words correctly from time-to-time, and we may be charged with being jingoistic, but at least we are not liars.

PFC John Jodka III is in shackles for charges with respect to Hamandiya.  I will try to follow this story — for right now, Jodka says “I’ll walk out a free man.”