Posted on 06/22/2008 3:00:00 PM PDT by smoothsailing
![]() |
||
|
Haditha: A media-made ‘atrocity’?
The New York Times referred to the deaths of as many as 24 Iraqi civilians in the town of Haditha as the “defining atrocity” of the Iraq War. If so, then the Iraq War must be particularly unatrocious. After all, of the eight people charged in the Haditha case, seven have seen the charges dropped for insufficient evidence or actually been found innocent, and the one remaining case is no more likely to produce a conviction than the first seven. Yet there WAS a Haditha atrocity. And perhaps it even was defining of this war and its larger meaning. But the atrocity was not committed by soldiers in Iraq; it was committed in Washington, D.C., by Rep. John Murtha, and by his friends at the New York Times, Time magazine and MSNBC. Murtha, the Pennsylvania congressman who became a media darling for opposing the war in Iraq despite his own record of military service in Vietnam, is now even more famous for calling American soldiers cold-blooded killers. In a press conference on May 17, 2006, Murtha said that U.S. Marines had deliberately killed unarmed Iraqi civilians during an encounter in Haditha on Nov. 19, 2005. “Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them, and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood,” Murtha said before anyone had been convicted of anything, before any charges had been filed, and indeed before the investigation was even completed. Time magazine ran a story on “The Shame of Kilo Company”; the New York Times ran front-page exposes of alleged abuse and coverup; and MSNBC and other cable outlets hyped the story for weeks in an effort to pump their ratings on the adrenalin-spiked news of Marines gone bad. When it was pointed out to Murtha that he was violating the basic principle of “innocent before proven guilty,” he didn’t back down. “This is what the Marine Corps told me at the highest level,” he insisted to ABC’s Charlie Gibson. “There’s no question the chain of command tried to stifle the story.” Except that Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani, the highest ranking officer charged with covering up the incident, was cleared by a military judge on June 17 of this year, as three other people charged with “covering up” the “massacre” were cleared previously. But yet there has been no apology from Murtha, and there probably never will be. Turns out that it is a lot harder to admit you were wrong than it is to label American Marines “cold-blooded killers” on national TV. Chessani plans to file a libel lawsuit against Murtha, and staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich has already done so. Murtha’s lawyers claim that Murtha can say whatever he wants because he is a congressman and thus has immunity from lawsuits, whether he tells the truth or not. Hmmm, maybe that explains a lot about why people don’t trust Congress. But it still doesn’t explain why Murtha’s conscience doesn’t work as well as his mouth. Fortunately U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer has ordered Murtha to testify in the libel case, despite his lawyers arguing that he had constitutional protection under the “speech and debate” clause. “You’re writing a very wide road for members of Congress to go to their home districts and say anything they choose about private persons and be able to do so without any liability. Are you sure you want to do that?” Collyer asked. “How far can a congressman go and still be protected?” Apparently quite far, according to Murtha’s lawyers, and there’s no reason to think that Murtha will ever be held accountable. Nor that the New York Times and Time magazine will pay a price for sensationalizing the story of Haditha when it looked like American soldiers were “cold-blooded killers” but back-paging the story when they were exonerated. The lesson? Don’t believe everything you hear from the mainstream media about how bad America is, and don’t get too stirred up when politicians make sensational statements about the evils of the American military. They may just be telling you what they hope is true. In the wake of the Haditha incident being made public, for instance, CNN’s John Vause said, “There is a perception that U.S. forces are brutal and are, at times, trigger happy.” Gee, do you think? Do CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times and John Murtha realize that they are the ones who are creating that perception? Or that their constant drumbeat of anti-American propaganda plays right into the hands of Osama bin Laden, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and their allies who want to destroy us? If they do realize it, they should be tried for sedition, and if they don’t realize it, maybe they should be tried anyway. Ignorance, after all, is no excuse for betraying your country. Frank Miele is managing editor of the Daily Inter Lake and writes a weekly column. E-mail responses may be sent to edit@dailyinterlake.com |
||
yet there has been no apology from Murtha, and there probably never will be. Turns out that it is a lot harder to admit you were wrong than it is to label American Marines cold-blooded killers on national TV.
Murthas lawyers claim that Murtha can say whatever he wants because he is a congressman and thus has immunity from lawsuits, whether he tells the truth or not. Hmmm, maybe that explains a lot about why people dont trust Congress. But it still doesnt explain why Murthas conscience doesnt work as well as his mouth.
it [the atrocity] was committed in Washington, D.C., by Rep. John Murtha, and by his friends at the New York Times, Time magazine and MSNBC.
Exactly! Frank Miele is spot on.

To be added to the Murtha Watch ping list please notify myself or RedRover.

Murtha. Big boy. Big mouth. No brains. No conscience. No heart. Who keeps electing that into office and why?
Everyone who votes for that POS shares his guilt.
“Murtha. Big boy. Big mouth. No brains. No conscience. No heart. Who keeps electing that into office and why?”
Follow the money.
Red and Jaz can supply you with links for donations. Thank You for your interest!


BUMP!
Hmmmm ..?? I'm not so sure about that .. I think that rule only applies to any statements made on the House floor - but Murtha also made those statements in public on the public airwaves. My question is .. where and when did Murtha first make that statement - and if it was in public - he's surely open to a lawsuit. I do think a test of this will be good .. as one of the Marines is suing Murtha.
BUMP!
Nice to see people catching up to where we were a year and a half ago.
Better late than never, I guess.
Media made? Probably not. Muslim made, media abetted. At least our boys got a fair hearing and the charges dismissed.
When the Muslims made up atrocities committed by the Serbs who were fighting to keep their country together, the media (with the noble exceptions of the LA Times and Agence France Presse) took the lies hook line and sinker and became cheerleaders for the bombing and dismemberment of Serbia and the creation of a Muslim terror state in Europe.
That is correct. The so-called "speech and debate" clause of the Constitution only shields members of Congress from prosecution for their words and actions on the floor of the House or Senate. It does not confer a blanket immunity for comments made elsewhere, e.g. on national television.
These is another aspect of legal liability here as well. Murtha not only pronounced these men guilty of cold-blooded murder on national TV, he specifically said he was personally told this by some Marine generals.
Now, if Murtha was indeed told this, any general or other officer who would tell Murtha this is guilty of a violation of the UCMJ and has committed a crime themselves. Murtha's failure to report this as a crime to the proper military legal authorities constitutes another crime on his part (sort of like "misprision of a felony").
Therefore, there's a brutally simple logic of guilt here: either Murtha was lying about what the alleged Marine generals told him, and must make a public retraction and apology for his slanderous, prejudicial remarks, or else he is covering-up, aiding and abetting their crimes himself, and must immediately name them so they can be prosecuted and punished.
Of course, none of this matters when you have a President and Commander-in-Chief who lacks the courage and integrity to stand up and publicly defend both his troops and the rule of law in these ongoing propaganda battles/components of the Long War...
Frank Miele gets it. 4th or 5th good editorial!
Thanks for keeping the faith during this whole travesty...and for keeping us up to date.
Especially Frank Wuterich. The scum are going to come after him with everything they got.
So true! Thank you A&V and all FReepers who have supported these Marines and others, there have been many here at FR.

Wish I could remember who I stole it from!
: )
Hopefully, they'll get a big chunk of his multi-million tax free retirement.
Thanks for the Ping guys and thanks for a terrific editorial Mr. Miele....
Just hope that Murtha gets what is coming to him from the lawsuits..Hope the other 6 Marines join in on the lawsuit..
Conditions have changed for our troops in the field- tougher training, more careful attention to the rules of war..It is time that the rules were tightened against scurrilous politicians like Murtha and the free-wheeling liberal Media that spreads the lies and rumors with impunity...
Thanks for putting it up.
Gosh, how farfetched. I mean, it’s not as if the media had any role in the fake story about a “massacre” during the Korean War, for example...
Revellie comes early, Men, and I'm sleepin' in........
That Revellie brings backs memories, just glad I don’t have to hear it at 4 or 5 A.M. ;-)
G’Night, Smooth
>> but back-paging the story when they were exonerated.
Given the front page is reserved for BS and fabrication, what are we to expect.
I think if you look into it, you'll find this is exactly why Lt. Col. Chesani’s charges were dismissed. “Undue Command Influence.”
Personally, I want Murtha to tell US who told him they were guilty, and I want that individual (or individuals) prosecuted. I'm not even a Marine.
“Murthaâs lawyers claim that Murtha can say whatever he wants because he is a congressman and thus has immunity from lawsuits, whether he tells the truth or not.”
My understanding is that the speech and debate clause does give absolute immunity for anything a Congressman or Senator says ON THE FLOOR OF THE HOUSE OR SENATE. I did not think the protection extended to other forums such as interviews with the press. Actually, I believe this is fairly settled law.
Anyone know for sure? Any legal eagles want to comment?
YEAH!
Thanks for the ping! That was great!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.