Double Standard: Iraqi Troops kill Americans-No Prosecution-Amnesty Likely

There is a nasty little double standard in Iraq. The headlines are raging about American troops that are accused of murdering civilians and attempting to cover up the situation. Prosecutions on over a half dozen cases are underway. The US servicemen in question are looking at life in a military jail.

Yet today news came out that Iraqi Forces trained by American Troops were found to have murdered some of the same US troops that were training them. Outrageous yes. Headline maker? Not yet.

Maybe you think its a new story and is just taking sometime to be vetted? Don't bet on it. It happened in 2004. The Army stayed silent about the situation, while it conducted an investigation.

Okay, so give the US military the benefit of the doubt. Let's wait until the investigation wraps up before we rush to judgment. Sounds reasonable. The investigation was concluded in September of 2005. The results of the investigation were just released yesterday.

Okay, time to rush to judgment something stinks in Iraq.

Nadia McCaffrey, a mother of one of the killed soldiers just received notification yesterday that her son was not the victim of an insurgent attack, but instead the victim of a murder by Iraqi forces. US forces on the ground knew this information within minutes of the attack and subsequent deaths of Spc. Patrick McCaffrey and 1st Lt. Andre D. Tyson.

Nadia McCaffrey has been an outspoken critic of the war since her son's death on June 22, 2004.

Double Standard
So the US and British Troops in Iraq, when suspected of crimes are tried in court.

If guilty this is fair enough. Murder is Murder, Torture is Torture, a crime is a crime. The administration and leadership all the way up the chain bears responsibility for these acts, especially as they put soldiers in situations that they are not equipped to deal with such as Abu Ghraib and other headline grabbers.

The soldiers are the last line of defense against bad policy, bad strategy and bad tactical decisions. Thus far, only the soldiers have been punished for the crimes that have occurred in Iraq. The leadership responsible for the bad policy, bad strategy and bad tactical decisions have hung their troops out for the vultures.

But don't get confused that is not the double standard. That's just politics mingled with injustice.

The double standard resides in the fact that the US and Iraqi government are looking to offer amnesty to Iraqi insurgents. If an insurgent commits a crime, the amnesty would clear them if they start being good from now on and pictures and video will insure that they swear upon something important and are not allowed to cross their fingers and toes.

The person that is thought to have killed Spc. Patrick McCaffrey is in custody in Iraq today. However, the laws as they are being drafted to do not allow for him to be charged with a crime for his actions. The man is thought to have been a former sniper in Saddam Hussein's Republican Guards and with that training left two bullet holes in Spc McCaffrey's head. Not just some training accident, this is cold calculated, premeditated murder, and there are no laws to charge him for that murder. Even more than that he went on to join the insurgency and make other attacks possibly against Iraqi's and Americans. For these actions, amnesty is the likely outcome.

At least Iraq hasn't gotten so mixed up that it can be legitimately classified as a quagmire reminiscent of Vietnam, some would say. We're liberating Iraq, securing a source of oil, removing an evil dictator, insuring that weapons of mass destruction are not built and used against us, etc. etc.

To the first point, it is a quagmire. To the second point, it is all those things and we have and are achieving all those goals. The problem is not in the purpose or the principle or even the moral high ground of the matter. All are sound. The problem lies in the ineffective execution by the administration. The administration throughout a decades worth of battle planning and strategy related to Iraq to fight a war that would look good on the 24 hour news channel. The administration sacrificed all of the training and planning that would allow the US and our allies to achieve those goals without falling into a quagmire.

The goals have been achieved but much like a Greek tragedy, we've lost our way in achieving those goals. We've let our administration walk us into a dead end for all of the right reasons, only to be sucker punched and mugged in the recesses of the alley.

I urge readers to read the account of the attack in the article below, my commentary is on the situation and problems. Please seek out the facts and come to your own conclusions. These are mine.

Military comes clean to mom / 2 years after son's death, she gets truth, learns suspect is held

Killer Bee's Successfully remove elderly Man from Home during traditional ceremony

I read an article today about an elderly man who died during an attempt to chase away African Killer Bees in a traditional manner.

The Tradition is two parts.

1. Brew up some Beer and drink it
2. Talk to the the African Killer Bees (The Ancestors will be lured to the beer and chase the bees away)

The thing is no one told the bees that this might actually work. Unfortunately the Killer bees utilized their traditional means of removing a person from their abode.

They stung him to death. (2006 Darwin Award Nomination Pending)

Article excerpts below
IOL: Elderly man died when bee ceremony went wrong: "An elderly man who was stung to death bees at a village near Butterworth at the weekend was probably taking part in a cultural ceremony to remove dangerous African honey bees.

Eastern Cape police said on Monday that Victor Ndoda Nyembezi, 73, had been part of a group of about 100 people who were trying to remove a hive from a homestead in Mgomanzi village on Friday.

'The old man had attended a traditional ceremony in one of the homesteads where the bees were to be chased away traditionally,' said police spokesperson Captain Jackson Manatha.

He said the bees attacked and everyone fled, but Nyembezi was unable to run and was stung to death.



Culpable homicide docket
Police opened a culpable homicide docket.

Eastern Cape health department spokesman Mzukisi Ndara said on Monday that he thought the case was 'not common' in the province.

A cultural expert confirmed such ceremonies exist and a bee expert warned that the bees are dangerous.

Professor Peter Mtuze of Rhodes University in Grahamstown said that traditional Xhosa ceremonies to move bees took place in the Eastern Cape.

Mtuze, who is the university's deputy registrar and has an interest in Xhosa culture as the former head of the university's African languages department, said such ceremonies were usually to remove bees from homes or buildings where they might be a problem, rather than to take the honey.

'It is a vicious bee'
He did not think such ceremonies were common and he had not heard of people involved in them being attacked.

'You've got to hold a ceremony to appease the ancestors so the bees will go away peacefully,' said Mtuze.

He said the ceremony would be arranged by the head "

Mad Cow Disease Attacks Spontaneously

Libby Quaid of the Associate Press writes today about two new cases of Mad cow diseases in Texas and Alabam. The title of this blog has been purposefully hyped to indicate just how scary this could be, afterall isn't that the purpose of news today? Write about the doom and gloom and the fear that should be gripping all of us?

I found one article from chron.com, you know chron.com, well don't you, if you know gridlock-on-rye you must surely know chron.com.

Well maybe not. Almost anyone can throw together a website these days that looks as good as most of the main stream news sources. I'm not knocking chron.com, but I'd never heard of them until they showed up in Google news today.

For the less than main stream news organizations, papers, channels, and blogs its all about getting on Google News, or maybe Slashdot or for the technophiles maybe even digg.com. What's the best way to get listed and exposed such that you'll bring even more traffic to your site?

Why throw out a great headline sure to capture people's attention. If possible say something that no one else is saying such that you'll stick out on Google.

So be wary, be warned and understand what you are reading. There are many people motivated to hype the news.

Here's excerpts from the Chron.com article below:

Chron.com Mad cow cases in Texas, Alabama called mysterious
"WASHINGTON - Two cases of mad cow disease in Texas and Alabama seem to have resulted from a mysterious strain that could appear spontaneously in cattle, researchers say.
. . .

Continued . . . Mad cow disease is not transmitted from cow to cow like a cold or the flu. It is thought to spread through feed, when cows eat the contaminated tissue of other cattle.

Humans can get a related disease, variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease, in similar fashion - by eating meat contaminated with BSE. Mad cow in humans typically afflicts younger people; the average age at death is 28.

A more common form of CJD - not linked to mad cow - can happen spontaneously and is reported in nearly 300 people in the U.S. each year. This form infects mostly older people; the average age at death is 68.

Some scientists are raising the possibility that the atypical strain also might happen spontaneously in cattle. The Texas and Alabama cows were older animals, as were some of the other animals in Europe with seemingly atypical cases."

Beheaded man's father didn't want Martyr nor Bush

There is an interesting interview transcript at CNN.com - Beheaded man's father: Revenge breeds revenge - Jun 8, 2006.

Michael Berg, the father of Nicholas Berg, one of the men behead in Iraq with Zarqawi as the likely murderer, is a pacifist. He did not want the death of Zarqawi and is not happy it happened. He believes that the US actions in Iraq will spur on more violence and revenge and breed and grow more resistance in both the weeks and months to come but also in the years and decades to come.

I would consider myself enlightened to some of Berg's perspective, but I'm not yet capable of being as forgiving. I think its notable that he carries his convictions as strongly as he does, even though I disagree with some of them.

Here is an excerpt from the CNN transcript that gives a flavor of Berg's beliefs:

O'BRIEN: There's a theory that as they try to form some kind of government, that it's going to be brutal, it's going to be bloody, there's going to be loss, and that's the history of many countries -- and that's just what a lot of people pay for what they believe will be better than what they had under Saddam Hussein.

BERG: Well, you know, I'm not saying Saddam Hussein was a good man, but he's no worse than George Bush. Saddam Hussein didn't pull the trigger, didn't commit the rapes. Neither did George Bush. But both men are responsible for them under their reigns of terror. (Watch

I don't buy that. Iraq did not have al Qaeda in it. Al Qaeda supposedly killed my son.

Under Saddam Hussein, no al Qaeda. Under George Bush, al Qaeda.

Under Saddam Hussein, relative stability. Under George Bush, instability.

Under Saddam Hussein, about 30,000 deaths a year. Under George Bush, about 60,000 deaths a year. I don't get it. Why is it better to have George Bush the king of Iraq rather than Saddam Hussein?

Is Lou Dobbs Reading My Blog?

On Monday I wrote an article in this blog titled 'Bush Rallies Support for Democrats in 2006'. The article pointed out two things:

First, Bush is helping Democrats more than he's helping Republicans.

Second, the President and Congress should have more important things to do.

Bush is trying to rouse the Christian Coalition to strengthen his his own base. Democrats fighting for equal rights for everyone despite their sexuality feel like their getting their base pushed by bringing this topic to the front page.

The end result is that the President of the United States is riding on the back of Congress and offering a Presidential Reach Around. He's getting his cookies off and stirring up his base, the Republican Congress has to go against their principles of leaving the constitution alone in favor of making the religious portion of their base happy, and Democrats are receiving the hand job from the president, which allows them to point out just how creepy he is to their own factions.

So my personal thoughts were that Bush is probably helping his political opponents more than he is helping his own party. My main point was that Bush and Congress should both have much more important things to worry about.

In my article and email to the Senators, I identified the following items as being more important than the topic of gay marriage v. gay marriage bans:

The current Ayatollah is threatening to shut off oil from Iran - Oil Prices lurched up again
Iraq War
Terrorism
Oil fiascos
Natural Disaster Preparedness
Economy
etc

Gay marriage or Gay marriage bans are important to some people (not all), however for most people the importance of Gay Marriage or a Gay marriage ban doesn't even make the top 10 or even top 50 issues confronting our country today.

I wrote letters to Senator Saxby Chambliss and Senator John McCain expressing my concern that they and their fellow congressmen and congresswomen were wasting their time with a low priority topic.

Neither Senator lists the category of Gay marriage or gay marriage ban as an issue of concern in their drop down categories for submitting emails to them from their website, so it must not be that important to them either. Note Senator Chambliss responded with an email where he makes it clear that it is and has been very important to him for many years now. Read his response here.

So today, Lou Dobbs writes an article for CNN.com - Dobbs: Gay marriage amendment sheer nonsense - Jun 7, 2006.

Lou points out that there are more important things for politicians to focus on than gay marriage bans,

War
Oil
jobs
economy
out of wedlock births

These are basically the same things I said two days ago minus the out-of-wedlock births and single parents(I copped with an 'etc.' and lumped jobs in with the economy.) I don't have an editorial staff to chime in with some good extra points.

So I have to wonder is Lou Dobbs Reading My Blog?

Well, I don't need to stroke my own ego like a politician would, so I'm going to say that, while it is possible, its much more likely that Lou was able to cut through the crap and see the type of farce that the President in his one night stand with Congress is throwing in our face.

If its obvious to me, and obvious to Lou, and we've both written about it and no doubt Lou will talk about it on the news, and I haven't watched my TIVO of The Daily Show yet, but I'm sure John Stewart will chime in here and show that its obvious to him, Then I'm positive that the rest of the country is thinking, 'What did we really elect this bunch of idiots into office or are they all just smoking crack and hiding like little kids avoiding their chores.'

This has got to be one of the most worthless examples of Government in Action that I've seen in my lifetime. I suspect that Senators in Rome may have debated a gay marriage ban while Rome was burning 1600 years ago.

Senator Saxby Chambliss' Response to my Letter

I wrote an email to my Senator Saxby Chambliss and a similar copy of the letter to Senator John McCain. (Original email in my article Bush Rallies Support for Democrats in 2006)

Below is the response I received from Senator Chambliss. The response was quick, but I would not agree with the message.

June 6, 2006



Mr. Brett Bumeter
Lawrenceville, Georgia
Dear Mr. Bumeter:
Thank you for contacting me regarding S. J. Res. 1, the "Marriage Protection Amendment." I appreciate hearing from you.
In 1996, I co-sponsored the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which provided that each state could determine whether or not to recognize same-sex marriages, and that states were not bound by the decisions made by other states on this issue. The DOMA overwhelmingly passed both the House of Representatives and the Senate and was signed into law by President Clinton. However, recent rulings by activist courts are forcing Congress to take another look at this issue.
I support a constitutional amendment that defines marriage as between a man and a woman. To make sure that the courts understand and enforce the fundamental principles set forth in the DOMA, I am a cosponsor of S. J. Res. 1, the "Marriage Protection Amendment," which was introduced on January 25, 2005.
This is a critical issue, and you can be sure of my support for this amendment when it comes before the Senate for a vote.
Thank you again for taking the time to contact me. As always, I appreciate hearing from my constituents. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of assistance to you in the future. In the meantime, if you would like to receive timely e-mail alerts regarding the latest congressional actions and my weekly e- newsletter, please sign up via my web site at:
www.chambliss.senate.gov.



Sincerely,
Saxby Chambliss
United States Senate

Bush Rallies Support For Democrats in 2006

ABC News: Bush Rallies Gay Marriage Opponents

ABC got this headline wrong. Bush isn't Rallying support for Gay Marriage Opponents, he's polarizing the rest of the country to turn out against Republicans in the mid term election of 2006.

This is such a waste of time and proof of President Bush's inability to assess and direct priorities that its ridiculous.

While President Bush is talking about Gay Marriage Ban's, the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in Iran is threatening to shut off oil to the world, driving oil prices right back up again if nothing else. Iran is fighting with us right now at an economic level. President Bush is concerning himself with a non-issue while Iran is driving instability into the energy market and increasing the threats of inflation. This is the area where the US is the weakest and President Bush doesn't even realized that he's getting sucker punched.

I sent to emails this afternoon to my Senator, Senator Saxby Chambliss of Georgia and Senator John McCain, whom I supported in 2000 before Bush sucker punched him in South Carolina.

From my personal perspective I think Gay Marriage should be allowed. I served in the military and there are a lot of gay people in the military, some not asking and not telling and others that are very much the opposite. I don't care what their sexuality is if they want to defend their country, then that's fine with me.(I feel the same about women in combat. They are capable and have proven themselves in their capability. Let them serve.) I feel that if a couple wants to be married then more power to them, let them pay the same higher taxes that my wife and I pay as a married couple. It will help keep the deficit down. Marriage and sexuality may help promote families, but it is not the deciding factor. I know too many straight married couples that harm the institution of marriage. I also know many gay couples that reinforce the institution of marriage. My message below however is that there are more important issues in the world today. An amendment to the consitution to ban something is a waste of time and misdirection of priorities.

For a satyrical look at this topic see the 'Truth About Marriage' Video from the US Department of Normal Values and Clean Morals.

Both emails were similar: here is the letter I sent to John McCain.

Dear Senator McCain,

I think President Bush's recommendation to amend the constitution with a ban on Gay marriage is absolutely ridiculous.

I think such a ban of exclusion has no place in the constitution, which should focus on inclusion not exclusion. Let State's regulate marriage licensing. It will probably be a 100 years before the state's figure out how they want to deal with the topic, but that's OK. Something like this takes time. My Great Grandmother was an fought against alcohol and for women's rights 100 years ago. Both seemed like good topics at a cursory level, but history has shown that prohibition of alcohol doesn't work and that the country isn't ready to amend the constitution with a equal rights amendment(which I would disagree with but the bottom line is the country as a whole is not ready.)

I'm a Republican. I think the party has shot itself in the foot for the last four years and needs to get its head on straight. We're spending money like democrats and acting on principles just as Rush Limbaugh used to preach. The problem is that we're not executing effectively and at the end the results don't match anyone's expectations. Now our principle's appear faulty because we didn't execute. If the Republican party keeps lamenting about the need for a Gay Marriage Ban, the party is going to hand the mid term elections to the democrats.

If the party is not bright enough to see the error in its way, then maybe a Democrat led Congress is what the country needs right now. I don't say that happily, but choosing battles and priorities is an important leadership characteristic. If the Republican party chooses this as the battle de jour then I think it will be a signal to the rank and file along with the rest of the country that they have lost touch not only on the importance of this issue but also with the real priorities of the day. (Iraq War, Terrorism, Oil fiascos, Natural Disaster Preparedness, Economy etc.) Gay marriage is so far down the ladder of important priorities that it is not even funny. President Bush is wasting his energy on the pulpit talking about it and just inviting ridicule. I think you know how unimportant this topic is as it does not even come up in your 'general topic of your message' drop down box on your contact site that I'm submitting this email under.

For whatever its worth in your consideration of my email, I'm married and have been for over 13 years to a member of the opposite sex. We have 3 kids. I served in the military during the first Persian gulf War. I have 2 bachelor's degrees and a master's degree and run my own business. So in case that helps in understanding where I shake out in the demographics, use it as you will. I was born and raised in Peoria, IL and have lived in Missouri, California, Texas, Boston, Georgia, Illinois and Florida. I supported you in your bid for the presidential nomination in 2000. If you want to make a serious run for it in 2008, you better get your act together and start showing some of the strengths that you used to exhibit. We don't need a President that Panders, we had that with Bill Clinton and got no where with it. We don't need a leader that leads from the gut either without any thought or consideration with how to execute a plan. President Bush has shown us that even with the best principles, if you can execute a solid plan with forethought and consideration the country and the world will not benefit.

Let's start getting it right for a change, Please!



Sign off remark.

I'm outraged about the actions of the NSA recently. I served as an intelligence analyst for the US Army and NSA. I know what can be done with the type of information they collected. It is outragious to me that they crossed this line. General Hayden is a smart leader, but the buck should have stopped with him. He should not have been put in charge of the CIA with a background that allowed the intelligence community to walk all over the domestic rights of normal American citizens and politicians. The action to allow the NSA to continue as it has without even a slap on the wrist is going to come back to haunt the Republican party in the years and decades to come, especially in the years when the Democrats will be in power.

No one should have absolute power over intelligence, its too powerful of a corrupting force.

Best Regards,
Brett Bumeter
Lawrenceville, GA