Murder at Thar Thar
Moncks Corner native Corey Clagett is serving 18 years at Fort Leavenworth for the murder of Iraqis he says a sergeant ordered him to commit
By Bo Petersen
Courts-martial in the killings
--Army Pvt. Corey Clagett, pleaded guilty to murder, attempted murder, conspiracy and obstruction of justice, 18 years.
--Pvt. William Hunsaker, pleaded guilty to murder, attempted murder, conspiracy and obstruction of justice, 18 years.
--Sgt. Raymond Girouard, convicted of negligent homicide, obstruction of justice and conspiracy to obstruct justice, 10 years.
--Spc. Juston Graber, pleaded guilty to aggravated assault, nine months.
Clagett's words
Corey Clagett, in his courts martial testimony:
"(Sgt. Girouard) said we were going to kill the detainees, cut the zip ties off, and make it look like they ran, and he said Hunsaker and Clagett were going to do it. I didn't say anything. Hunsaker didn't say anything."
"I pulled the blindfold up on one guy, down on the other. Hunsaker took his off (a detainee). Hunsaker told them to 'Run.' I told them 'Yalla' to get them to run faster. They didn't run faster, so I raised my weapon. Hunsaker raised his. He shot, then I shot."
"The way Sgt. G ran his squad, I thought it was basically like an initiation, if I wanted to be in 3rd squad."
"(Girouard) shut the (Humvee) door, locked it, booby-trap locked it, then double booby-trap locked it and said if I ever say anything — he put his weapon to me and he said, if I say anything that he will kill me."
"That is what the Army is, is a big gang."
The Post and Courier
Corey Clagett's mother, Melanie Dianiska (center), and his grandparents, Janice and Ken Miller of Moncks Corner, show a sign they distributed to defend Clagett, who later pleaded guilty to the slayings of two Iraqi captives.
Editor's Note: The account of the Thar Thar Canal incident below was compiled from interviews and testimony given at the courts-martial of Pvt. Corey Clagett, Sgt. Raymond Girouard and Pvt. William Hunsaker.
The voice crackling on the radio demanded to know why three Iraqi captives were alive. Minutes later, the three lay dying on the ground and a light machine gun vibrated in Army Pvt. Corey Clagett's hands.
He had dropped from a helicopter and stumbled onto the searing desert floor near the dry bed of Thar Thar Canal, his ammo belt spilling as he hit the ground. He was on his first mission with his second combat platoon after getting kicked out of his first.
He was told to shoot to kill.
It was May 9, 2006. Clagett was 21. He'd grown up scrapping in Moncks Corner, "a wild child," in the words of a relative. He was a smart aleck who liked being the center of attention. He tinkered with cars. He would take things apart just to put them back together.
He was a mess of contradictions in a third-generation military family, the child of a broken marriage. He stuck up for his mother and was beaten with her when the men she dated or lived with beat her. He sent his Army paychecks home to her rather than to the wife he left behind. His mother wore a gold necklace engraved with a ring of hearts he gave her.
"He's a little full of himself, but he has this gentleness to him. I can't see him going out and hurting someone unless it was self- defense," Ericka Tucker, a family friend, said after Clagett was charged in the killing.
"He grew up in turmoil, physically abused, mentally abused, emotionally scarred," said an attorney who defended him.
Clagett considered himself a good soldier who followed orders. He pleaded guilty in January 2007 to the murders of two of the Iraqi captives in a plea bargain to avoid a possible life sentence.
Today, Clagett is in the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., serving an 18-year sentence.
What happened to Corey Clagett?
Blistering hot
Thar Thar is a lake region northwest of Baghdad toward Tikrit, Saddam Hussein's hometown, and in 2006 a hotbed of the Sunni insurgency. In February of that year, the golden-dome mosque in the nearby city of Samarra was blown up, igniting rioting and killings.
The area is home to the Muthanna Chemical Complex, where Saddam's Baath Party manufactured chemical and biological weapons.
In May 2006, two informants told the Army there were 20 known insurgents on a small island in a canal there. Clagett's squad was ordered in. The attack was part of a larger assault, Operation Iron Triangle, involving more than 400 U.S. troops over about 50 square miles. Troops went house to house for two days and captured more than 200 suspected insurgents, the Army Times reported. It is unclear how many prisoners were taken during the island attack. But at least four Iraqis were killed.
"We're going to hit the ground shooting and kill all the al-Qaeda and Iraqi insurgents," Lt. Justin Wehrheim testified in the trials. "We were to positively identify and kill any military-age male on the island."
But in Iraq's countryside, telling an insurgent from a farmer wasn't easy. Nearly everyone had a gun or two at home to protect his family. Americans were not necessarily considered the good guys.
Squad members testified that they were told to expect a "hot" landing with enemy fire. They went in at dawn on May 9, with the desert heat already blistering.
Fighting back
Clagett never really knew his father. He was raised by his granddad, Kenneth Miller, who took custody of him for a time when he was young. His father was in the Army, serving at the Panama Canal.
"(His father) was never at the house unless he was on vacation for a week, and then he'd get his wife pregnant again and he would leave," Miller testified at Clagett's sentencing hearing.
Clagett's mother, Melanie Dianiska, had three children in diapers by the time she was 18. When the boys were older, Joseph, the younger son, used to say, "I have no dad." Corey stuck up for Joseph at school, pushing off the bullies. He'd say they didn't need a dad.
Clagett struggled in school. He fought back if somebody said the wrong thing about him or his family. He was moved to an alternative school, a trade school, and at 16 began a work program in heating and air conditioning.
He married the same day as his older brother Jamie. They joined the Army and went to boot camp together. The family tells the story of how, when Jamie fell behind on a 30-mile hike with badly blistered feet, Corey picked him up and carried him until the sergeants stopped him.
Three months after Corey joined the Army, he was sent to Iraq. Eight months later, the order came to attack Thar Thar. Just that week, he had been reassigned to Sgt. Raymond Girouard's squad.
Clagett felt he had something to prove.
Notching a kill
Clagett picked up his dropped ammo belt off the burning sand and ran from the helicopter toward a farmhouse along the dry bed of Thar Thar Canal, chasing other squad members who already had opened fire.
"We all bail off the chopper, and as we are coming off, Sergeant Girouard, he's the first in the lead and he lays down suppressive fire," Pvt. William Hunsaker testified during Girouard's trial. "As we are running by the house we are firing rounds through the window and at the house itself."
In eight months, Clagett had not notched a kill, and in the 3rd Brigade, that counted against you. The commander of the 3rd Brigade of the 187th Infantry of the 101st Airborne Division was Col. Michael Steele. He was awarded a Bronze Star with Valor in 1993 for captaining 120 Army Rangers who were pinned down for 15 hours after their helicopters were shot down during a raid in Mogadishu, Somalia — the raid portrayed in the movie, "Black Hawk Down."
His force had a reputation.
"It's been alleged that Colonel Steele gave commemorative knives and coins in exchange for kills of Iraqis," Clagett's attorney told the military judge during the court-martial. The attorney was trying to get a copy of a reprimand given to Steele for his actions regarding Operation Iron Triangle, the attack during which the Thar Thar Canal raid took place.
In August 2006, the Los Angeles Times reported that investigators were trying to determine if Steele created a "kill count" expectation among troops, essentially a running competition to kill Iraqis.
Cpl. Brandon Helton testified that commanders told soldiers to rack up enemy kills. A message board at the headquarters had a phrase on the bottom that read, "Let the bodies hit the floor." Kill scores were posted on company boards.
One soldier testified that after kills, Girouard told his troops, "That's another terrorist down. Good job."
None of this is all that egregious or unusual among combat troops; it's kill or be killed, and an aggressive mind-set can make the difference between life and death. But in a speech before the raid, Steele ordered his troops to kill all military-age males, according to testimony in the trial. Clagett's prosecutor described it as "a little hoo-hah speech." His defense described it as the rules of engagement — orders given the soldiers.
Steele invoked a military privilege given commanding officers not to be required to testify at the four squad members' courts-martial.
After the raid, Brig. Gen. Thomas Maffey said that Steele told soldiers it wasn't necessary to distinguish noncombatants during the mission, The New York Times reported. The Times, attributing the information to Army sources, said Steele was reprimanded; the reprimand never was made public.
But the mind-set was there.
'An initiation'
Clagett was in a tough spot. He had moved to Girouard's squad with Girouard's help because he couldn't get along with a new sergeant assigned to his old squad.
Prosecutors called the move a rehab assignment. Clagett testified in Girouard's trial that he felt he needed to do something to impress the squad.
Then he hit the desert sand and dropped his ammo.
Meanwhile, Girouard raced toward the first house, leading the squad and firing as he ran. A man appeared in the window, and the gunfire cut him down. The squad went through the door with rifles raised and found two women holding up their hands in surrender while three men cowered behind them. The man shot in the window turned out to be an unarmed older man. He was dead.
Clagett, meanwhile, moved on top of a berm to keep watch and shouted, "I've got another house." Girouard yelled at him to give the direction and distance according to training, then took some of the squad over to that house. The rest of them handcuffed the three men with "zip ties," plastic handcuffs that can be pulled apart if enough force is used. They took them outside and laid them on their bellies in the sand.
In the house, they found kitchenware, two AK-47 rifles, a pistol and ammunition.
When the rest of the squad reached the second house, a man came out holding a baby in front of him. Angered by his cowardice, the squad roughed him up. Girouard told them to take him back inside, away from the combat photographer.
Returning to the first house, Girouard heard the radio transmission from 1st Sgt. Eric Geressy: "Why do we have three (expletive) that should be dead?"
At the house, Girouard called a meeting, according to testimony of his squad members. He huddled them up and told them Hunsaker and Clagett were going to shoot the prisoners. Hunsaker testified that Girouard said, "First sergeant is pretty pissed that these guys ain't dead and he wants to know how come they're not dead. Make it look good." Girouard testified that Hunsaker wanted to kill the prisoners.
One of the soldiers, Sgt. Leonel Lemus, shook his head no and walked to the door, where he and Girouard stared each other down, Lemus said. During his trial, Girouard denied ordering the killing. Lemus wavered under cross-examination whether the order was to kill or just to rough them up. The others testified that the order was to kill.
"The way Sgt. G ran his squad, I thought it was basically like an initiation, if I wanted to be in 3rd squad," Clagett testified. Girouard cut Hunsaker with a knife to make it look like Hunsaker was attacked by the prisoners, according to testimony. Girouard asked who wanted to get cut, and Clagett said, "Not me."
Girouard then left to meet up with another sergeant. Clagett said Hunsaker told him, "I want to kill these (expletive) because they're terrorists."
"I pulled the blindfold up on one guy, down on the other," Clagett testified at his trial, and Hunsaker took the blindfold off the third man. "Hunsaker told them to run. I told them 'Yalla,' to get them to run faster. They didn't run faster, so I raised my weapon. Hunsaker raised his. He shot, then I shot."
Hunsaker testified that he was upset with Clagett because he sprayed fire, slinging the machine gun back and forth, rather than trying to shoot as accurately as possible. Clagett said he had his eyes closed.
"As soon as they fell, I took off my K-pot (helmet) and dropped my weapon," Clagett testified.
Apart at the seams
Clagett was about to wrestle with the devil.
Lemus testified at the later trial that when the shooting stopped, Hunsaker said, "Oh, s---."
Girouard, the squad leader, came running back to the house. He sucker-punched Clagett to make it look like the private had been attacked by the men, Clagett testified, just like he had cut Hunsaker earlier. Lemus ran up and asked Girouard what happened. "But he (Girouard) couldn't answer. He just looked at the bodies and had this frozen look on his face," Lemus testified.
Spc. Juston Graber rushed up to the shot Iraqis. One was vomiting blood and struggling to breathe. Graber later testified that Girouard told him to "put him out of his misery." He had to fire twice at point-blank range to hit the man's head.
By May 11, Army criminal investigators were on base asking questions. Two weeks later, the squad was filling out sworn statements on the incident, saying the Iraqis were terrorists trying to escape. And Clagett was coming apart.
He had boasted around the camp, soldiers testified, telling people he had gotten punched, spun in a circle and just sprayed bullets. The word was going around that Hunsaker had used the bodies for target practice throwing "stars," a piercing weapon. Sgt. Brian Hensley testified that Clagett told him he had gotten his first kill and "the beebs" (Iraqis) could do "the Harlem shake." Clagett demonstrated the dance by slinging his machine gun, waving his arms and shaking his hips like a man quivering as he fell, Hensley said.
But a few other soldiers said Clagett told them what happened and was visibly disturbed. Lemus testified that the story was going around base: "Yeah, you know, 3rd squad went in and executed everybody and these guys were like Johnny Rambo out there." Lemus said one of them was having nightmares and couldn't stop talking about it.
Girouard brought the squad together again and told them "to be loyal and not to go bragging or spreading rumors," Lemus testified. "If he found out who told anything about it he would find that person after he got out of jail and kill him."
'Did as I was told'
The Thar Thar incident was one in a series of allegations that came to light that year of U.S. soldiers raping and killing Iraqis. In the wake of the Abu Ghraib prisoner torture scandal, the accusations lit an already smoldering outrage among Americans, as well as Iraqis.
The heat was on, and the investigators were turning up the burner. Wehrheim, the lieutenant, told Girouard to tell the squad to get their stories straight, Girouard testified.
Investigators pressed the squad, hauling them in one by one for 12-hour "overnights" of interrogation when the soldiers returned from a rotation of three days on combat patrol and three days guarding outposts. They threatened Lemus, saying he could be charged with manslaughter in the death of the old man in the window.
On June 15, they broke Spc. Bradley Mason, a 19-year-old. As a result, Graber admitted to the "mercy" killing. The others were brought in and arrested.
Clagett was put in solitary confinement. He, Girouard and Hunsaker continued to insist the Iraqis broke free and were shot trying to escape. At trial, Clagett's attorney said Clagett was having problems sleeping, nightmares, crying spells and trouble eating.
"He has had to live in a cage. He has had to live in segregation. He has had to live in 24-hour lockup. He has had to live with people spitting in his food and accusing him of being a criminal and calling him an animal and a criminal," the attorney said.
Hunsaker broke next and pleaded guilty in an agreement to testify against the other men. "I got tired of lying to everybody," he said, "and I didn't want to spend the rest of my life in prison for, in my eyes, three dead terrorists."
With Hunsaker's testimony against him, Clagett almost certainly would be found guilty, his attorney told him. He could face life in prison. Clagett pleaded guilty in January 2008. At Clagett's sentencing, he read a poem he had written. In part it said:
Only God knows my heart and the hatred of men,
I can try to explain it, but I can't start or begin.
To the families of Iraq I pray to end this war,
I only did as I was told to complete my tour.
Epilogue
Clagett's cell at Fort Leavenworth is taller than it is wide. It contains a cot, table, sink and toilet. The military "barracks" is the only maximum-security prison in the Department of Defense.
A bid for clemency failed. His appeal failed.
In a letter, Clagett described his life as tedium, doing the same thing over and over and eating the same food over and over. He said his morale is low. He will be eligible for parole consideration in 2 1/2 years.
Reach Bo Petersen at bpetersen@postandcourier.com or 937-5744.
E-mail this story
Printer-friendly version
Comments
sardis12 (anonymous) says...
What a shame. How many lives have been ruined for a war based on lies that should never have been waged? George Bush should burn in hell...
June 21, 2009 at 2:18 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sunblister (anonymous) says...
Your feelings about the legality of this war aside, what these soldiers did was murder. In addition to basic training of rifleman skills and marching and other basic military skills, they are also taught about the wrongful orders and the difference between killing the enemy and murder. It is actions like theirs that have endangered and possibly led to the death of their fellow servicemembers because it does more to recruit insurgents than the insurgent groups do.
June 21, 2009 at 3:17 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
oslo59 (anonymous) says...
I agree with you Sunblister. These renegade psuedo-soldiers have NO EXUSE for what they did! Being retired military and yet I have no "body-count" to look back on, thank God!
These boys have alot to think about as they rot in jail, day after day!
June 21, 2009 at 6:13 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lillycollette (anonymous) says...
It is indeed-interesting-that the editor says (editor's note) that this article was based on interviews and a military tribunal record and goes on to disclose that this article originated in a series of "allegations" and "accusations":
The Thar Thar incident was one in a series of allegations that came to light that year of
U.S. soldiers raping and killing Iraqis. In the wake of the Abu Ghraib prisoner torture
scandal, the accusations lit an already smoldering outrage among Americans, as well as
Iraqis.
My open question to this paper is why are you NOT demonstrating the same diligence in exposing misconduct / criminal offenses by officers of the Charleston County family court?
You can address the U.S. Army but you can't touch a local family court ... hmm, what's wrong with this picture gentlemen?
June 21, 2009 at 6:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Chicago_Thug (anonymous) says...
cannonfodder & sardis12
Sure,this is all Bush and Cheney's fault. Such narrow, weak-minded thinking, and driven by pure hate.
Since, obama is CINC now, this is his and Biden's fault;
Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, the 23-year-old accused of killing a U.S. soldier and injuring another in the attack Monday in Little Rock, was born in Tennessee as Carlos Leon Bledsoe.
Makes a lot of sense.
But, as much as I disagree with obama on almost every issue, I cant find it in myself to have the hate in my heart to say he should 'burn in hell'. Such sick hearts you have.
June 21, 2009 at 7:15 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Chicago_Thug (anonymous) says...
On the topic, this is a tragic result of what can happen in the fog of war. But it has happened in every war. It is sad what has happen to this family, and the first two clown posters want to use it as a hate filled rant against Bush and Cheney. Weak.
June 21, 2009 at 7:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
pirate42 (anonymous) says...
you are taught between what is right what is wrong... what this solider did was wrong. what will be will be in this case. you do not KILL unless you are being threatend with bodily harm etc .. dont just kill people who are giving up... what is wrong with our sociey today no respect for life....
June 21, 2009 at 8:30 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
YendorNella (anonymous) says...
I realy like how they went for the Jr. enlisted guys and not the Officers that promoted the killing. Give the order, then stand back and let the little guy take the fall. And the General used a rule that Commanding Officers don't have to testify, How nice for him. A compleate miscarry of Justice.
June 21, 2009 at 8:46 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Grinder (anonymous) says...
Anyone who has served knows the military concept of boot camp is to break the man down and rebuild him - a major component of that training is to create a soldier who immediately obeys orders... questioning those orders is theoretically an option, but action comes before reaction.... you do what you're told. C'mon people, most of those with rifles in their hands aren't even 21 yet.
June 21, 2009 at 8:56 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
spengler (anonymous) says...
Hey, at least Bush and Cheney retaliated against the enemy. Oboy and Uncle Joe would be supplying the 9-11 guys with box cutters. Reds and Islamofascists stick together.Keep the change, chumps.
June 21, 2009 at 9:02 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
realamerican (anonymous) says...
Hey spunkler, even Bush and Cheney are smart enough and have admitted that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. You must not have gotten the memo. If you would listen to something beside Rush Limbaugh you might know this.
I am so sick of you brainwashed ignorant neocon bootlickers considering anybody with a different religion or a different skin color the enemy. It is sad that you have apparently failed to evolve beyond the knuckle dragging stage. It is voters like you who allow murderous thugs like Bush and Cheney to hold office.
Get a clue dude, your ignorant comments along with Reems are embarrassing.
June 21, 2009 at 9:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
statusquo (anonymous) says...
Soliders are trained to be professionals even under extreme duress Trust me, no officer or NCO can authorize you or make you murder someone inferred or otherwise. This kid was a screw up from the very begining this is how he ended up where he is. Stop making him the victim. The sergeant led the assault why didn't he pull the trigger? You have to know combat to answer that question. This is not how the Army does business.
June 21, 2009 at 9:34 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
TRODI (anonymous) says...
Bad stuff happens in wars.why dont they report on what happens to our soldiers when they get captured{pert much anything in the Geneva convention is ignored}.one way media.the first people to be shot in any new wars should be the embedded reporters.
June 21, 2009 at 9:36 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
moonpie (anonymous) says...
Thanks Harold for sorting the talking points out for those that can't! I would have to agree it was a war that was un-necessary in my view and never agreed with GWB on entering Iraq. This has played out as I saw it would.
I agree with some of the post that these are 21 yr olds being told what to do, so they do it. I also believe that the intelligence and reasoning level of these kids is reflective of their upbringing, education, and what type influence they receive in the military. As in this young mans case none of it was very good.
Take these factors in to consideration and being thrown in a place and war that you can't tell enemy from friend too, recipe for disaster.
June 21, 2009 at 10:06 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Deborrah (anonymous) says...
Why are we used as pawns? The military has depended on soldiers with broken lives. My question: Did Colonel Steele get life or the death penalty? He probably is a white supremacist. There will always be war because the Steele of the world.They can not exist with peace because their spirit can not stand it.
I must start a new hobby. Where is Colonel Steele?
June 21, 2009 at 10:32 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
UnoCubanito (anonymous) says...
My best friend is a Senior NCO (Air Force Combat Controller) Special Op....I don't know much about conventional verse special ops terms of when it's okay to shot when trying to survive or when to do direct actions. Anyhow, I do feel sorry for this young man, and those who are into a war with guerrilla type people and style. I feel that because we have those in ELITE form they do well, but to send conventional into areas where sometimes your basic infantry style of training doesn't cut the mole when dealing with those with history of guerrilla training. I know all about collateral damage, but if we plan to send our men/women into these areas basic just won't cut it. I know for my best friend 13yrs in military takes 2 yrs to get through pipleline 1 year learning everything, and 1 year in fields testing everything before they send you into areas. I am not saying that we should push all the work to them, as they are already stretch thing among SOCOM..Just believe that incidents as this and many other may not occur. Just my two cents
June 21, 2009 at 10:41 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
armymom (anonymous) says...
oslo59, zero body count...were you ever in combat? Just curious. It's not easy to be a soldier on the front line and leave with a zero body count.
I can't even comment on this article, too many warring emotions. I can see too many sides...it's not just black and white tho some refuse to make room for that.
June 21, 2009 at 10:42 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
statusquo (anonymous) says...
Armymom, shooting an unarmed, blindfolded, civilian in he back is not combat. Trust me, have you ever been in combat if you did you would no that your comments are offensive to those who serve honorably and with dignity we are not murderers but soldiers doing an extrememly difficult job under the most difficult conditions please do not minimize the sacrifices that soldiers and their families make everyday by aligning them with poeple like this. It is insulting and yes it is black and white you do not kill people for trinkets or glory.
June 21, 2009 at 11:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
armymom (anonymous) says...
I have never served, but my son does. I only know a little, I admit, of life over there. I was not minimizing anything or anybody. Are you saying that "body count" only refers to murder, and not anyone who was killed by you in the line of duty, because that's what I was asking. And I was not condoning what was done here.
There's a whole lot more going on over there than meets the eye and it's not just black and white. That would be a "normal" war. [If you could ever call war normal]
June 21, 2009 at 11:43 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
UnoCubanito (anonymous) says...
If this person was blindfolded and unable to do harm, it's not consider combat. This young man and others did wrong, and yes there are many who do leave with a zero body count. Rules of Engagement, in all you have to use your better judgment. Plenty guys on the front line in regardless if they are special op or conventional where killing someone is the last options especially if they aren't a threat and blindfolded. Besides do you think they would have ran because they let them go NO.. It's like walking into death they knew if they ran would be killed. So stay
June 21, 2009 at 11:49 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
charlestonnative1963 (anonymous) says...
That war has been about lies from the time Bush and Cheney thought it up...Bush and Cheney should be UNDER the jail. Go to the Internet and read the accounts of torture. The Bush adm. has gotten away with Murder. It will be a LONG LONG time before any of the mis deeds of that Adm. begin to heal. My guess is a whole new generation of middle easterners will be out for our blood because of the lies told by the Bush adm. Put two and two together...The photos of torture, the command to kill and you get 4. I have close friends who were in the military and its very sad to hear them talk now. A large majority of them talk about the good days when it was all up and above board. Many have gotten out... I'm not talking enlisted guys either. A lot of Citadel guys are coming home with stories that will make you sick.
June 21, 2009 at 12:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
oslo59 (anonymous) says...
Armymom, What I meany by "zero bodycount" is that I never killed anyone while in the military. I was never in any of the "wars" that America became a party to while I was in from 83'-04.
I hope your son never has to take another person's life while serving his Country, although it may be bound to happen since America has become a Banana Republic with nukes and a better warmonger than Germany will ever have the reputation to be. What is his MOS? I was a medic and I loved it.
Killing people won't make him a man. Saving people will!
June 21, 2009 at 1:59 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
yird (anonymous) says...
I was in the military from 55-65 and tried my damnedest to get into action but the "critical" field I worked in was always thrown up as the reason for denying me what I now am thankful I never got.
This young soldier is a victim himself. A piece of equipment is given more training and testing than he had before being shoved into a situation that was beyond his ability to cope with.
Now in Iraq, as in the Viet Nam conflict, the difficulty of differentiating between friend and foe coupled with moronic "rules of engagement" (rules the enemy ignores) can easily result in the death of US servicemen.
In situations like these warriors are in, a take no prisoners policy may not be politically correct but it does a lot to insure that they'll live to fight another day.
I cannot condone or condemn what PVT Clagett did. I was not there, nor do I have any idea how much hatred his superiors had developed for the enemy because of seeing their fellow Americans blown apart by remotely detonated roadside bombs or everyday looking "civilian" suicide bombers. I can see where it would be real easy to look at all Iraqis with the same mindset people demonstrate when they see a harmless garter snake. I's a snake, kill it!
According to the Obamatron and his 16 months and out campaign rhetoric, there will be no chance of this happening after next April.
Now for Afghanistan!
June 21, 2009 at 3:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
armymom (anonymous) says...
Oslo, thanks. My son is a soldier and was in Iraq for 15 months. He still hasn't been very forthcoming about what he did and/or saw while there, he thinks he's protecting me from ugly. He already has tentative dates for redeployment, I could just keel over at the thought of his going back.
I'm glad at least you understood my question. I have a nephew that just returned who is a medic, I agree with you.
Tho I am ashamed at this war, I will never be ashamed of my son, or any other military man or woman. I thank God my son does not glory in the death of anyone.
Sometimes what I think and feel is contradicting, but having a child serve will stretch and test your views.
June 21, 2009 at 3:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Rocks66 (anonymous) says...
RealAmerican,
Always a treat to read one of your articulate, reasoned commentaries. However, don't you think it's time you moved beyond your typical fare? (i.e., "knuckledraggers, morons, etc.) Perhaps you could invest in a thesaurus, or, better yet, do a little reading.
I do find the thrust of your postings and others of your ilk quite boring, though, in that you merely parrot the talking points of such reputable MSM sources as MSNBC and liberal anchorettes like Katie Couric in a feeble attempt to present your argument. Though I'm aware that you, like many of your fellow posters, are still suffering from BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome), couldn't you move beyond that now that he's out of office and devise something a little more original?
As to "Sardis12" and "Cannonfodder", love your scholarly condemnations of Bush and Cheney. Tell me again, for I seem to have forgotten, how many times have we suffered a domestic terrorist attack in the last eight years? I'm sorry, could you speak up... I can't hear you.
Oh, and "Charlestonnative1963": Why don't you do a little historical research before you expound with typical Liberal naivete about those "...good days when it was all above board..."? In World War II, in one of many examples, a U.S. submarine skipper ordered his crew to machinegun over 60 Japanese survivors of a troopship he had just torpedoed. In Vietnam, it was widely known that interrogations of captured VC were often conducted in the open cabin of a Huey at 4,000 feet, during which "detainees" who failed to comply were promptly ejected from the aircraft. In other words, please spare us your sappy, "Rodney King" view of the world and how wars should be conducted.
BTW, I'm sure the insurgents who decapitated Daniel Perl (a journalist, for those of you Monday-morning "war quarterbacks" who don't read), hung the four American civilians from a bridge in Iraq and burned their bodies, and have yet to return the bodies of the American GIs they have captured during the war, will no doubt be shocked at the behavior of an American kid who showed no regard for some of their compatriots.
I don't condone this soldier's behavior, but until you've slept and ate in the desert dirt for weeks on end, getting by on four or five hours of sleep a night, with the constant fear of having your life snuffed out in a heartbeat by a sniper who's half a mile away, you are hardly in a position to condemn this guy.
PS Prediction for all the tea sippers and handwringers who continue to fault the "War on Terror", now euphemistically referred to as a "Man-Made Disaster": When this country is once again the victim of a terrorist attack, as it almost certainly will be, you will be the first folks to whine that the government didn't do enough to protect you.
June 21, 2009 at 3:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
charleston1960 (anonymous) says...
Harold, Obama is not pushing Carter aside to take over the position as the worst President, Obama is shoving him aside.
Obama has replaced the leaders in charge of these wars. The wars are now his and any future misconduct means he should be held responsible in the same way you ask for Bush. If the deaths of American service men and women increase, because intelligence can no longer be obtained from captives, then the blood is on Obama's and the loons that want informational gathering sessions banned.
Why do think they are not charging anyone with crimes of torture? Why not fulfill Cheney's wish show the American people the techniques used so everyone can see the full truth? Is it perhaps the truths in life saving measures outweigh the fiction drafted by anti-torture faction?
June 21, 2009 at 3:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
charleston1960 (anonymous) says...
Harold only the first line was meant for you. THe rst was for the comments that Bush and Cheny should be tried for this war.
Rock: well said
June 21, 2009 at 3:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
shellsfrfl (anonymous) says...
I am writing in regards to the article published today in your newspaper, "Murder at Thar Thar" by Bo Petersen, published on Sunday, June 21, also known as "Father's Day".
The printing of this article on Father's Day only adds to the despair of the Clagett family, who have been overwhelmed by a system corrupted with injustice.
My hope is that the callous agenda of this article will be recognized by those numerous people who know the truths, and that, in the future, consideration and tact will be used as a prerequisite prior to publishing articles of this nature.
June 21, 2009 at 3:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sardis12 (anonymous) says...
Why anyone thinks Bush is the reason we haven't had a terrorist attack in the last eight years is clueless...
Any president in office after a tragedy like 9/11 would do everything possible to make sure that never again happened under his watch. It shouldn't have happened then, but unfortunately your hero was too busy chopping wood on the ranch to be bothered by an intelligence brief given to him in early August (confirmed by Condi Rice, look it up) warning that Bin Laden was planning on using airplanes for terror attacks in the US. So what happened 7 weeks later? Four airplanes were hijacked within minutes of each other, thousands of lives were lost, and you want me to give Georgie boy a pat on the back for keeping us safe? I don't think so.
So then W decides to attack a country that had nothing to do with 9/11, eight years later Bin Laden is still on the loose, the cost of this unnecessary war has helped drive us to the poor house, and you still defend him? You must be sharing drugs with Rush Limbaugh. You're an idiot.
June 21, 2009 at 4:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Chicago_Thug (anonymous) says...
sardis12, you are the one that is clueless, you think binb laden, just woke up after Jan 20th 2001, and sadi, het lets hijack some jets and fly em into the WTC?
Get a clue, the first WTC bombing was in 93. Clinton did NOTHING to stop Bin Laden.
Even old Bill said he had wished he had done more. You were what in 93, 12?
The story of the years leading up to 9/11 is the story of what might have been, and also serves as a call to the defense of America's future. Since 9/11, one important question has persisted: What was really going on behind the scenes with intelligence services and government leaders during the time preceding the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks?
After an eighteen-month investigation that uncovered explosive new evidence through interviews and in classified documents, Gerald Posner reveals much previously undisclosed information:
• the identity of two countries that might have had foreknowledge that a terrorist attack was scheduled for September 11 on U.S. soil
• a startling account of the interrogation of a leading al Qaeda captive
• facts about a series of deaths that point to an ongoing conspiracy by some governments to hide the extent of their earlier relationships with al Qaeda
• details about a secret deal between Saudi Arabia and Osama bin Laden
• how the U.S. government missed several chances to kill or capture bin Laden
• evidence that German intelligence may have protected an informant who was involved with many of the 9/11 plotters
• how the CIA tracked-and then lost-two of the hijackers when they entered the United States more than twenty months before the attacks
• the devastating consequences of the crippling rivalry between the CIA and FBI as the United States moved unwittingly toward 9/11
In a dramatic narrative, Why America Slept exposes the frequent mistakes made by law enforcement and government agencies, and demonstrates how the failures to prevent 9/11 were tragically not an exception but typical. Along the way, by delving into terror financing, the links between far-flung terror organizations, and how the United States responded over the years to other attacks, Posner also makes a damning case that 9/11 could have been prevented.
http://www.posner.com/why_america_sle...
"President Clinton and his national security team ignored several opportunities to capture Osama bin Laden and his terrorist associates, including one as late as last year" -Mansoor Ijaz, L.A. Times, December 5, 2001
The Smoking Gun. An audio of Bill Clinton admitting clearly that he rejected his own Administration's preparation for an attack in 1999 or 2000.
http://clintoncrimes.tripod.com/siteb...
http://clintoncrimes.tripod.com//site...
The terrorist trained and went to flight school under
June 21, 2009 at 6:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Chicago_Thug (anonymous) says...
RIGHT UNDER THE NOSE OF THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION's INS and CIA, & FBI.
Preparations for the mission seem to have been extensive. Officials later concluded that the tactical leader for the entire September 11 operation was an Egyptian named Mohammed Atta, who was apparently at the controls of one of the planes flown into the World Trade Center towers. He and the others who were to receive flight training arrived in the United States in 1999. In addition to learning to fly, the men are believed to have scouted potential routes and flights and traveled extensively around the country. Investigators later determined that large sums of money were transferred to the hijackers in installments at different points in 2000 and 2001. The accomplices for the operation arrived later. These men, who would be responsible for physically subduing crew members in the first moments of the hijackings, spent much of their time during the months preceding the hijackings working out in gyms.
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_7...
09/13/2001 - Updated 03:57 AM ET
Clinton passed on chance to attack bin Laden
WASHINGTON - In the waning days of the Clinton presidency, senior officials received specific intelligence about the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden and weighed a military plan to strike the suspected terrorist mastermind's location. The administration ultimately opted against an attack. The information spurred a high-level debate inside the White House in December 2000 about whether the classified information provided the last best chance for President Clinton to punish bin Laden before he left office, the officials said.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2...
THANK GOD Bush acted and kept this nation safe for his entire term.
Clinton's Dereliction Of Duty
Media Monitor | By Reed Irvine and Cliff Kincaid | December 30, 2002
"Nobody pays attention to the intelligence community until it screws up."
Senator Bob Graham and his colleagues have pinned blame for the September 11 tragedy on policies started under the Clinton administration that have continued under Bush. The Democratic senator from Florida has released the results of the first investigation into why nine-eleven happened. The report documented a staggering number of government mistakes, many attributable to the Clinton administration. President Bush is not immune from criticism; he held over many of Clinton's appointees especially at CIA and the FBI.
http://www.aim.org/media-monitor/clin...
THIS WAS Bush's mistake - 'President Bush is not immune from criticism; he held over many of Clinton's appointees especially at CIA and the FBI.'
Of course Al Gore and his whining about losing didnt help with a smooth transition of power. But than again, thats the democrats for you, cry like little girls when they dont get their way. Just look at Obama and his whining.
June 21, 2009 at 6:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Chicago_Thug (anonymous) says...
Political correctness - Ever see the tape of Atta buying a one way ticket, with cash with a Florida DL? Even the ticket counter guy said, he was suspicious, but didnt want to get accused of racial profiling.
"The report was just as critical of the FBI for failing to aggressively pursue Al Qaeda and Islamic terrorists inside the country. Political correctness, bureaucratic inertia, and sheer incompetence were among the sources of the bureau's failures. Yet former FBI director Louis Freeh continues to escape the criticisms aimed at Tenet. Shelby cited Freeh for his management of the bureau during this "disastrous" period, but he was quick to add how much he "loves and respects" the former director.
Clinton bore the brunt of the criticism. He lacked the will to act, Graham charged, even when we knew that Al Qaeda was turning out new terrorists monthly at camps in Afghanistan. Graham said that we had the capability to strike Al Qaeda and its camps in Afghanistan and could have disrupted preparations for nine-eleven."
June 21, 2009 at 6:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Chicago_Thug (anonymous) says...
So sardis12, besides your empty minded MSNBC talking points, what FACTS do you have?
June 21, 2009 at 6:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Chicago_Thug (anonymous) says...
I know all about that skirt chasing clown, Clinton, I served 8 years in the military watching him make us look and become weak; paper tiger I think the term was that OBL used about us.
June 21, 2009 at 6:35 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
realamerican (anonymous) says...
Better a skirt chaser than a murderous lying thug.
You really are one dense SOB to say Bush kept the nation safe. In case you forgot it was under his watch that the attacks occurred. Thousands of Americans dead because of his administrations incompetence. He was warned an attack was imminent and failed to act. How can you compare this in importance to Clinton getting a BJ from some tramp?
You are so brainwashed you would excuse them if they murdered your own mother. You make me SICK with your ignorant excuses for murderers and war criminals.
June 21, 2009 at 7:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Chicago_Thug (anonymous) says...
Great rebuttal (emphasis on butt) realamericanloser, what a complete waste you are. Filled with so much hate and lies.
You are the epitome, of a dead brained leftist. You are a seriously emotionally disturbed, person.
Tens of thousands of Americans dead with the lefts war on poverty. You are blinded by your empty soul. Many mothers dead by drive bys in the inner cities, and you do nothing more than blame everyone else but your leftist agenda, you make me SICK, you make everyone sick with your hate filled poison.
Victimhood is what you and the rest of your ilk are passing on.
You are nothing more than the crap that one would try to scrape from their shoes after stepping in it. Your drivel is weak minded and cowardly.
You sit there and complain about all the ills the right have delivered, yet you ignore the serfdom that the left has burden millions with.
And the lefts weakness begs our enemies to treat us as they did with Carter & Clinton.
June 21, 2009 at 7:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Chicago_Thug (anonymous) says...
In his testimony, John Ashcroft explained that the FBI wasn't even told Almihdhar and Alhazmi were in the country until weeks before the 9-11 attack because of Justice Department guidelines put into place in 1995. The FBI wasn't allowed to put al-Qaida specialists on the hunt for Almihdhar and Alhazmi because of Justice Department guidelines put into place in 1995. Indeed, the FBI couldn't get a warrant to search Zacarias Moussaoui's computer because of Justice Department guidelines put into place in 1995.
The famed 1995 guidelines were set forth in a classified memorandum written by the then-deputy attorney general titled "Instructions for Separation of Certain Foreign Counterintelligence and Criminal Investigations," which imposed a "draconian" wall between counterintelligence and criminal investigations.
What Ashcroft said next was breathtaking. Prohibited from mounting a serious search for Almihdhar and Alhazmi, an irritated FBI investigator wrote to FBI headquarters, warning that someone would die because of these policies "since the biggest threat to us, OBL (Osama bin Laden), is getting the most protection."
FBI headquarters responded: "We're all frustrated with this issue. These are the rules. NSLU (National Security Law Unit) does not make them up. But somebody did make these rules. Somebody built this wall."
The person who built that wall described in the infamous 1995 memo, Ashcroft said, "is a member of the commission." If this were an episode of "Matlock," the camera would slowly pan away from Ashcroft's face at this point and then quickly jump to an extreme close-up of Jamie Gorelick's horrified expression. Armed marshals would then escort the kicking, screaming Gorelick away in leg irons as the closing credits rolled. Gorelick was the deputy attorney general in 1995.
June 21, 2009 at 8:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sardis12 (anonymous) says...
In case you don't remember, Clinton had been in office less that one month when the first WTC bombing took place. As I recall, and maybe you can cut and paste something to correct me if I'm wrong, George H.W. Bush was president prior to 1993, and he did nothing to stop this attack, even though the FBI had an informant who revealed more than a year before Bush #1 left office that a terroist bombing at the WTC was in the works.
It's pretty obvious that Bush #2 and Cheney pushed for the Iraq war using phony intelligence (it's hard to use that word in the same sentence with W)about WMDs that didn't exist. They were salivating for that war. It helped make their oil buddies rich, helped make daddy Bush happy by unseating Saddam, and helped Georgie play cowboy by being the "war president" he so wanted to be.
Bush #2 had the report in his hand that should have prompted him to act to prevent 9/11, and he did nothing. Ineptness seems to run in the Bush family, and look at the damage it has caused this country and the world. So don't try to blame Clinton for this. At least he is man enough to admit that he regrets not trying to do more afterward. George W. Bush is no hero, and as I said before, he should burn in hell...
June 21, 2009 at 8:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
armymom (anonymous) says...
The chicago thug said >>Filled with so much hate and lies.
That post had the most hate in it of all the posts so far. Why does a subject like this [and others] make people hiss and snarl at one another? It's eerie. And scary.
Maybe we're all being played.
June 21, 2009 at 9:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lillycollette (anonymous) says...
"Maybe we're all being played."
AND YOUR POINT?
(Of course we are.)
June 22, 2009 at 6:18 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Chicago_Thug (anonymous) says...
Posted by sardis12 "It's pretty obvious that Bush #2 and Cheney pushed for the Iraq war using phony intelligence (it's hard to use that word in the same sentence with W)about WMDs that didn't exist."
Yes, Bush and Cheney, and Bill & Hillary, and many democrats BEFORE Bush was in office said and believed that there were WMDs in Iraq.
Check the dates;
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." --President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." --President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." --Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." --Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton, signed by: -- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." -- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." Letter to President Bush, Signed by: -- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001
Sardis, really, I suppose Bush and Cheney planned the first WTC bombing too. Moron.
June 22, 2009 at 7:27 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Chicago_Thug (anonymous) says...
Some of my favorites;
We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." -- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." -- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" -- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." -- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
----------
June 22, 2009 at 7:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Chicago_Thug (anonymous) says...
"I'm the one who presented it on behalf of the United States to the world, and (it) will always be a part of my record. It was painful. It's painful now," he said.
Mr Powell spent five days at the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) headquarters ahead of the speech studying intelligence reports, many of which turned out to be false.
He said he felt "terrible" at being misinformed.
However, he did not blame CIA director George Tenet.
Mr Tenet "did not sit there for five days with me misleading me," he said.
"He believed what he was giving to me was accurate."
Some members of the US intelligence community "knew at that time that some of these sources were not good, and shouldn't be relied upon, and they didn't speak up," Mr Powell said.
"These are not senior people, but these are people who were aware that some of these resources should not be considered reliable," he said.
"I was enormously disappointed."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/...
Get a grip, sardis. Bush had to act on what he saw was a danger. Especialy after 9-11, unlike weak wristed leftists, Bush did what he had to do.
"Its about oil' bull crap, is really old.
During 2007, our five biggest suppliers of crude oil and petroleum products were:
Canada (18.2%)
Mexico (11.4%)
Saudi Arabia (11.0%)
Venezuela (10.1%)
Nigeria (8.4%)
Did you see Obama bow to the Saudi king? LOL
June 22, 2009 at 7:37 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Chicago_Thug (anonymous) says...
Speaking of Bush doing what he had to do, he pushed through a missle defense system that works and is ready to go, DESPITE, the democrats, including Obama, opposing him on missle defense, and trying to defund it every chance they got. All the little leftist drones try to ridicule and bash Bush over missle defense, but Bush had one concern, defending this nation, not political poll numbers.
And now, like a typical democrat, he wants to blame Bush for all his problems, but take credit for something he had nothing to do with.
WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama said the United States is "prepared for any contingencies" involving North Korea -- including the regime's reported threat to launch a long-range missile toward Hawaii.
Japanese media have reported the North Koreans appear to be preparing for a long-range test near July 4. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has ordered additional protections for Hawaii in case a missile is launched over the Pacific Ocean.
"This administration -- and our military is fully prepared for any contingencies," Obama said Friday during an interview with CBS News' Harry Smith, to be broadcast Monday on "The Early Show."
--------------------------
THANK YOU PRESIDENT BUSH!
June 22, 2009 at 7:49 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Chicago_Thug (anonymous) says...
I know, I spelled missile wrong...
WSJ on the Taep'o-dong Democrats' Opposition to Missile Defense
July 21, 2006 :: The Wall Street Journal :: Analysis
Today's lead editorial in the Wall Street Journal lambastes "Taep'o-dong Democrats" for their continued opposition to missile defense, even after North Korea's test launch of its long-range Taep'o-dong 2 ballistic missile. The editorial provides a succinct history of Democratic opposition to missile defense, dating back to 1983 when Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) dismissed President Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative as a fanciful "Star Wars" program.
Senator Joe Biden (D-DW) predicted that dropping out of the treaty to build missile defenses would turn the U.S. into "a kind of bully nation"; and Senator John Kerry (D-MA) warned that "we must not set aside the logic of deterrence that has kept us safe for 40 years." Democrats remained staunchly opposed to missile defense even after the September 11 terrorist attacks. Just this year, Representative John Tierney (D-MA) attempted to cut the Pentagon's missile defense budget by over 50 percent, a proposal that won the support of more over half of his Democratic colleagues, including would-be Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). This June, Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) attempted to cut off all funding for the ground-based interceptor program, which was recently activated to defend the U.S. against a potential North Korean missile attack.
http://missilethreat.com/archives/id....
Gates: Missile defense in place for Hawaii
Updated: June 18, 2009 03:52 PM EDT
Washington - The United States has positioned more missile defenses around Hawaii as a precaution against a possible North Korean launch across the Pacific, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Thursday.
"We do have some concerns if they were to launch a missile to the west in the direction of Hawaii," Gates said.
Gates told reporters at the Pentagon he has sent the military's ground-based mobile missile system to Hawaii, and positioned a radar system nearby. Together the systems theoretically could detect and shoot down a North Korean missile if it came to that.
June 22, 2009 at 7:59 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
concernedjournalist (anonymous) says...
Here is my Letter to the Editor, which has yet to appear on this website or in the printed edition of The Post and Courier:
If Bo Petersen's article had been written in 2006, a few of his numerous inaccuracies would be understandable, as all of the stories had not yet been told nor unfolded. However, as we approach the middle of 2009, much has transpired. Mr. Petersen based his article on the Findings of the Article 32 Hearing, made publicly available on August 31, 2006, New York Times and Los Angeles Times articles, published in 2006 and early 2007, and misinterpretations of third-party interviews.
As a dedicated journalist who has been painstakingly researching the story of Pfc. Corey R. Clagett since the summer of 2006 for my book, I have found that there is a lot of misinformation about the incident at TharThar. Briefly, I will correct some of the more glaring errors in Mr. Petersen's article:
First of all, there is no evidence, physical or otherwise, that Pfc. Clagett killed anyone. Yes, Col. Michael Steele ordered his men to kill all military age (enemy) men on sight but, in the two hearings that occurred prior to Pfc. Clagett's hearing, all bodies were accounted for by the actions of soldiers other than Pfc. Clagett. The gun was not "vibrating" in Pfc. Clagett's hands, since it had actually soared out of them as his startled firing missed the fleeing insurgents.
Secondly, Pfc. Clagett never had a trial; instead, he was given a hearing. His attorney threatened him into making a plea bargain prior to the hearing, telling him it was the only way he would ever have a chance at parole. This same attorney coerced him to "confess" to following Steele's orders.
Thirdly, Pfc. Clagett never received physical nor mental abuse from the men in his mother's life. His stepfather John has had a long, affectionate father-son relationship with Corey for eleven years.
Fourthly, Pfc. Clagett was separated from his wife while he was in the service, yet they did not divorce so that he could continue to provide her with insurance.
Finally, since the Clagett/Dianiska family has made me privy to thousands of pages of non-public documents and I have interviewed Pfc. Clagett himself both in person and by phone and attended his hearing and met all of his attorneys -- none of whom have ever spoken with Mr. Petersen -- I can assure you that his research leaves much to be desired.
Sincerely,
Sheryl L. Guterman
California
June 24, 2009 at 3:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
concernedjournalist (anonymous) says...
Here is my Letter to the Editor, which has yet to appear on this website or in the printed edition of The Post and Courier:
If Bo Petersen's article had been written in 2006, a few of his numerous inaccuracies would be understandable, as all of the stories had not yet been told nor unfolded. However, as we approach the middle of 2009, much has transpired. Mr. Petersen based his article on the Findings of the Article 32 Hearing, made publicly available on August 31, 2006, New York Times and Los Angeles Times articles, published in 2006 and early 2007, and misinterpretations of third-party interviews.
As a dedicated journalist who has been painstakingly researching the story of Pfc. Corey R. Clagett since the summer of 2006 for my book, I have found that there is a lot of misinformation about the incident at TharThar. Briefly, I will correct some of the more glaring errors in Mr. Petersen's article:
First of all, there is no evidence, physical or otherwise, that Pfc. Clagett killed anyone. Yes, Col. Michael Steele ordered his men to kill all military age (enemy) men on sight but, in the two hearings that occurred prior to Pfc. Clagett's hearing, all bodies were accounted for by the actions of soldiers other than Pfc. Clagett. The gun was not "vibrating" in Pfc. Clagett's hands, since it had actually soared out of them as his startled firing missed the fleeing insurgents.
Secondly, Pfc. Clagett never had a trial; instead, he was given a hearing. His attorney threatened him into making a plea bargain prior to the hearing, telling him it was the only way he would ever have a chance at parole. This same attorney coerced him to "confess" to following Steele's orders.
Thirdly, Pfc. Clagett never received physical nor mental abuse from the men in his mother's life. His stepfather John has had a long, affectionate father-son relationship with Corey for eleven years.
Fourthly, Pfc. Clagett was separated from his wife while he was in the service, yet they did not divorce so that he could continue to provide her with insurance.
Finally, since the Clagett/Dianiska family has made me privy to thousands of pages of non-public documents and I have interviewed Pfc. Clagett himself both in person and by phone and attended his hearing and met all of his attorneys -- none of whom have ever spoken with Mr. Petersen -- I can assure you that his research leaves much to be desired.
Sincerely,
Sheryl L. Guterman
June 24, 2009 at 3:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Postandcourier.com is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Postandcourier.com does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website.
Users can now build user-to-user connections, follow friends' recent posts, add an avatar that fits their personality, and more. If you have posted here before you'll need to sign up again, or if you've never posted before, start now by signing up!
Full terms and conditions can be read here.
- Most Commented
- Most Emailed
- Earl to spawn waves, rip currents
- Man stuck in vent after burglary attempt
- The Woodlands Inn sold to local attorney
- Upscale Woodlands Inn bought by local attorney
- Out with the old: Air Force demolishing old houses
- Diabetes now tops Vietnam vets’ claims
- Charleston County service receives national award for top achievement
- Earl has local surf churning
- Quick sale of Noisette land sought
- Surfers to revel in huge waves as Earl passes by
