From
Blog and Tan.
This is a follow-up to SusanG's recent post about the
Haditha incident. The words of John Murtha are under fire lately
on the right. The incident is currently under investigation; Murtha alleges Marines killed civilians:
CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: Let me ask you Mr. Murtha to give us some details about that. Draw us a picture of what happened at Haditha.
REP. JOHN "JACK" MURTHA:
Well, I'll tell you exactly what happened. One Marine was killed and the Marines just said we're going to take care - we don't know who the enemy is, the pressure was too much on them, so they went into houses and they actually killed civilians. And, and -
MATTHEWS:--was this My Lai? Was this a case of - when you say cold blood Congressman, a lot of people think you're basically saying you got some civilians sitting in a room around a field and they're executed.
MURTHA: That's exactly it.
Murtha added elsewhere--in support of our troops--
that "Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them." I'm not privvy to any facts about this case, so I make no judgment. Some allege Murtha's comments are premature, which is a possibly legit position. He is repeating info
he was told by soldiers, so it's heresay.
Time Magazine reported the details of the incident back in March:
the civilians who died in Haditha on Nov. 19 were killed not by a roadside bomb but by the Marines themselves, who went on a rampage in the village after the attack, killing 15 unarmed Iraqis in their homes, including seven women and three children. Human-rights activists say that if the accusations are true, the incident ranks as the worst case of deliberate killing of Iraqi civilians by U.S. service members since the war began.
So Murtha isn't making things up, although the details are still in question from a legal standpoint and he's relying on information obtained second-hand from servicemen that's corroborated by a major news publication. That publication put the information in the public domain, two months prior to Murtha's comments. But blowhards like Sean Hannity aren't willing to consider the facts of the case--they'd rather point the finger of blame at the messenger.
I write frequently about responsibility, often to highlight cases where Republicans and conservatives fail to take it. This is especially important to me because of the duplicity involved in righteously demanding others "take personal responsibility," but failing to do so themselves. A prime example of this duplicity talk radio's stalwart, Sean Hannity:
May 18:
HANNITY: What Murtha did is a disgrace to the men and women that are serving and putting their lives on the line.
May 23:
Hannity continued, "They're justifying violence against our troops because US Congressmen are out there saying that, `Hey, American troops are killing civilians in cold blood.'" Hannity offered no proof of that assertion.
Instead of considering that the pressure, poor planning, lack of body armor, and other battlefield conditions might have led to something disgraceful--or that ultimately, if stories about atrocities committed by Americans are harmful, perhaps Americans shouldn't commit atrocities--Hannity paints Murtha as a disgrace for mentioning it! This is typical
Hannity nonsense:
"You have undermined our president, you have undermined our troops, you have undermined our war effort from day one and you're doing it for the sinister reason of political gain and for that reason, I think you will find yourselves out of power again after the elections in 2006 cause I don't really hear a plan for you (sic) on our homeland security."
So, get this--the American military is so weak that someone's
words put them in peril? Is that what Sean Hannity believes? Not only that, but this bile coming from Hannity--who's never served in the military--refers to a 35 year veteran with two Purple Hearts?
Veterans for Peace (veterans of the "War on Terror") thinks that's slimy. And corroborating a lack of agreement with Hannity is a Bush supporter,
Tommy Franks:
Hannity, positioning himself for an attack, asked Franks what he thought of Murtha's comments. In remarks that surely must have disappointed Hannity, Franks had nothing but praise for Murtha. Franks said he disagrees that the military is broken but then, in what seemed like a somewhat tacit admission of support, he also said Murtha is in the better position to judge.
Let's put responsibility where it belongs, on those managing the conflict, and stop with the unproductive smearing.