Category: Antiwar crowd

  • Did I strike a nerve?

    2332478733_fb2fb45dd6
    Jason Hurd was at Winter Soldier II in Silver Spring, MD and testified that he ALMOST shot an Iraqi who wouldn’t stop when she approached his checkpoint. He ALMOST shot her, but then he didn’t – that was reason enough for him to sling snot all over the assembled hippies as he wept. TSO and I were barely able to contain our laughter.

    Now two years later, he wishes an incurable disease upon me for my little tirade last night;

    jason-hurd-facebook

    Nice. I guess I deserve the disease because I spoke my mind and my words struck a nerve. I wonder how Jason comes down on the flag burning issue? I wish Jason a long and fruitful life and I hope ALMOST shooting an 80-year-old woman is the worst thing that ever happens to him…after he grows up.

    According to my mole in IVAW, this is how the voting went among the board on the issue; Since Millard brought the complaint to the board and the complaint was against Matthis, they didn’t have a vote. Cameron White voted to censure Matthis and Wes Davies hasn’t voted yet. Bryan Reinholdt, the public school teacher, claims he may change his vote later…I guess depending on which way the wind blows…but right now, he supports flag burning. Seth Manzell, who counts Noam Chomsky as one of his influences, Adrianne Kinne and Victor Agosto are solid supporters of Matthis.

    I guess Jose Vasquez punted the issue again.

  • Why IVAW all burned the flag on Mar. 20th

    IVAW's Matthis Chiroux, Robyn Murray and MFSO's Elaine Brower burn the US flag "This is not my country!"
    IVAW's Matthis Chiroux, Robyn Murray and MFSO's Elaine Brower burn the US flag "This is not my country!"

    In the above depicted incident, IVAW board member Matthis Chiroux, while garbed in his IVAW T-shirt took it upon himself to speak for the entire organization and burn a flag at a rally organized and paid for by the Maoist ANSWER organization. The IVAW organization has had several opportunities to separate themselves from the incident.

    Jose Vasquez, the Executive Director of IVAW could have asserted some authority and come out firmly against Matthis Chiroux’ actions. Instead he prattled on about his Puerto Rican ancestry as if that had something to do with issue.

    The only board member who decided to speak up and complain was Geof “Stolen Valor” Millard. With the tacit approval of the Board, Matthis decided to compare himself to Martin Luther King, Jr in his strained pseudo-intellectual attempt to dazzle us with his idiot missive.

    So the Board had a meeting over the incident. On Facebook I found this response from the Board to one of their members who inquired about their final decision;

    Thank you for your input on this subject. After much debate the board agreed, with one exception, not to censure Matthis for his actions. However, this does not mean that the board supports his actions. Rather, it is an expression of the belief that, while Board Members do represent the membership in some capacities, participation on the board should not stifle individual expression.

    The matter is left to Matthis to engage with the people he has angered by his actions.

    Have you ever read such a pussy response in your life? “We won’t censure Matthis, but that doesn’t mean we support his actions”. That rates right up there with “near hit” and “almost pregnant”.

    So what does it mean to my readers who are still IVAW members? You burned the flag, too. He was wearing the shirt, he’s a board member, you burned the flag, too, because your board decided that, unless you confront Matthis yourself, you’re giving your tacit approval to his theater.

    Many of you have defended to me your membership in the IVAW after the Jesse MacBeth fiasco by declaring that Jesse MacBeth happened before you joined. Did Matthis Chiroux happen before you joined? Did Matthis Chiroux write about how much he’s like Martin Luther King, Jr. before you joined? Was he walking around declaring that he’s an Afghanistan veteran before you joined? Did he declare that there’s no honor in your service and sacrifice to the country before you joined? Did he apologize to an Afghan parliamentarian for his occupation of her country before you joined? Did he claim to have PTSD from listening to barracks talk before you joined?

    Was he elected to the Board after you joined? Did he and his ISO insurgents hijack the organization before you joined?

    What exactly are you doing these days belonging to an organization led by mostly non-combat veterans (wearing the same “Iraq Veterans” emblazoned on their chests as you have) who don’t even understand you and do their level best to marginalize your concerns and silence you?

    And, oh, the word is that anyone who wants to confront Matthis, he’ll be at the East Gate of Fort Hood burning another flag on Saturday afternoon after a march from Under the Hood Cafe – that innocuous little coffee shop.

  • That “collateral murder” video


    Everyone is talking about the video from Wikileaks. UberPig, Laughing Wolf, Rusty Shackelford, Ed Morrissey and Bill Roggio. Rusty takes the pertinent parts of the 17 minute video apart frame by frame.

    Bryan Casler tries to muddy up the conversation at Iraq Veterans Against the War.Katie O’Malley sent us a link to Huffington Post’s discussion on the subject – providing smoke.

    I wasn’t there, I didn’t see what happened before Wikileaks decided where we could begin seeing the video, but based on what I’m seeing, a bunch of friends with AK47s and at least one RPG are crowded on the corner, while one guy sets up security on another corner. Its obvious that they’re up to no good and need to get ventilated before the dismounted US infantry gets in trouble. Simple.

    This is how little the Left knows about what they’re watching. In the narrative, Wikileaks calls Bradleys tanks (that REALLY pisses me off). Then the idiot at Huffington Post describes a Bradley running over a body, but in the video, it’s clearly a HUMV. I guess there isn’t much difference between a hummer and a Brad, huh?

    I’m guessing the anti-war crowd couldn’t watch the video past the title pages.

  • Oathkeepers feel the heat

    Apparently, I have spies inside Oathkeepers about which I know nothing. One of them sent me this missive from Stuart Rhodes, the founder of Oathkeepers and a former Ron Paul stafferl

    [S]elf identified IVAW members are NOT allowed to post on our forums, period. I simply don’t want them in this org. That is why Eric [Orseske] has been given the boot. They are just too divisive, and also have too many links to radical leftists and outright Marxists. Marxists are just as much enemies of our Constitution as Fascists. I’m not saying ALL IVAW are Marxists, because I know for a fact not all are. But they have some among them, and I just don’t have time to try to separate them out. And they have certainly gotten into bed with some high profile, self-identified far leftists who I consider Marxists. And, as Eric shows, they tend to be one issue people who can’t resist getting in the face of active duty with their opposition to the war. So, until a person resigns from and renounces membership in IVAW, I don’t want them here.

    Oath Keepers is neutral on the issues of the constitutionality of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars because we are focused on what is happening here at home. Yes, the constitutionality of a war certainly matters, but this org is focused on the rapid destruction of our Republic here at home. I want to reach ALL current serving, whatever their opinion of the war. I want to reach the ones in the sandbox as well as those who are here at home, most of whom support the war and are obviously emotionally invested in it. Whatever your opinion on it, how will it help to beat them over the head on it? The main point of Oath Keepers is to keep them from being used as tools of force and oppression against our people, not to debate foreign policy. So, it is counterproductive to have people here who don’t know how to leave those topics alone

    That’s 180 degrees from last September when I first posted about Oathkeepers. After that post, Rhodes and other Oathkeepers not only defended IVAW, they quoted Ron Paul’s endorsement of Adam Kokesh as justification for allowing IVAW members to broadcast their propaganda on Oathkeepers’ website. From some of the comments left here at TAH, it appears that Oathkeepers has been hemorrhaging membership as a result of their brief foray into the Left side of the political spectrum.

    It also appears that when their true thoughts about US foreign policy is known, it hurts their organization, why else would they forbid discussion of the subject? In fact, I’m sure the more we discover about the oathkeepers the less we’ll like them. Not at level of the SPLC or Mark Potok, though.

  • More flag burning reaction

    IVAW's Matthis Chiroux, Robyn Murray and MFSO's Elaine Brower burn the US flag "This is not my country!"
    IVAW's Matthis Chiroux, Robyn Murray and MFSO's Elaine Brower burn the US flag "This is not my country!"

    Debra sends this reply by way of Facebook;

    24902_426034408997_664123997_5269128_4774709_n

  • Matthis: Ya know who I remind me of?

    Matthis Chiroux of the IVAW burns an American flag in Lafayette Park, DC
    Matthis Chiroux of the IVAW burns an American flag in Lafayette Park, DC

    We’ve heard from several of the IVAW members on what they think of Matthis and his flag burning antics over the last few weeks but this is the height of conceit. Matthis Chiroux tells us “I’m not like Martin Luther King, Junior, but ya know who is like Martin Luther King? Me!
    (more…)

  • Gordon Duff and reality; unacquainted entities

    Last time I checked, the 2008 election ended back in 2008, but Gordon Duff, the crazy old coot uncle of the internet veteran community, thinks “Time has come for John McCain to make some public disclosures.” I’d have thought that time would have been before the election, but I may be wrong. For absolutely no reason, Duff makes this proclamation;

    Most famous John McCain quote: “You know why Chelsea Clinton’s so ugly? Because her dad is Janet Reno.”

    Like so much blather I read from the Left these days, this quote seems to have no connection to McCain. The only cites I can find to this are from the Crooks and Liars, TPM, Think Progress crowd so I don’t know where they got this.

    Then Duff runs off a laundry list of questions he feels McCain should answer;

    1. Why did you have your service record and POW debriefing classified FOREVER?
    2. Did you provide military secrets to North Vietnam as stated by Colonel Edwin Hopper of Army Intelligence?
    3. Did you narrate 32 propaganda broadcasts for the North Vietnamese and give interviews to communist papers as is stated at www.mccainbetrayspows.com?
    4. Why have you kept your Presidential Pardon secret? Did you know that you are the only person serving in Congress with a Presidential pardon?
    5. Was Colonel Hopper accurate when he accused you of providing flight paths and altitude information to North Vietnamese gunners, to help them shoot down American planes?
    6. Are you aware that Colonel Ted Guy was in the process of preparing treason charges against you when you received your presidential pardon?
    7. Why did you work to end all POW inquires? Why are you referred to as the Manchurian Candidate by POW/MIA groups?

    John McCain has no authority to classify or declassify his records. Ever. Government classification of ANY document is under the authority of the President or his agents. In fact any President can change the classification of any document contrary to his predecessors.

    For questions 2 and 3 the answers are the same; read the Code of Conduct, and let’s see your proof, Duff.

    For number 4; If John McCain has secret pardon, how do you know about it? The only internet reference to John McCain and a presidential pardon are in reference to a pardon for dead boxer. 20 pages on Yahoo and I read them all. Of course the headline of the story begins “McCain Wants Pardon…” so that’s all Dugg needed tp read.

    Numbers 5 & 6 have the same answer – did they? You seem to have the answer, let’s see your evidence, Gordo.

    #7; You talk like you know something the rest of us don’t know. Let’s have it.

    Actually, Duff’s entire post comes from the Democrats’ Final Hour attempt at “swiftboating” McCain – more than likely, Dugg got his talking points from this PRWeb press release which mentions a “blanket pardon” of all POWs, I can’t find a cite for that pardon, though – and if there was indeed a “blanket pardon” no rational person could think that only McCain was affected.

    And even if McCain did give information to the Vietnamese, that’s covered in the Code of Conduct. I know Duff is a military expert with his 18 months in the Marines leaving as a PFC – the smartest PFC ever. But Section 6(g) of the Code of Conduct recognizes that military members aren’t supermen…or Gordon Duff, combat S-3 clerk Marine;

    g. The best way for a prisoner to keep faith with country, fellow prisoners and self is to provide the enemy with as little information as possible.

    “…as possible” being the operative phrase here.

    I wonder if Duff has a list of questions like that for John Kerry or Wesley Clark, or Ann Wright.

  • Branum takes another life

    James Branum, the guy who calls himself the GI Rights lawyer, has destroyed another life – this time it’s a young soldier by the name of Eric Jasinski.

    A Fort Hood soldier who failed to deploy with his unit to Iraq in December 2007 will spend at least 27 days in the Bell County jail.

    Spc. Eric Jasinski pled guilty Wednesday to a charge of desertion at his court martial on Fort Hood, said his attorney James Branum.

    Branum said mitigating circumstances that included a diagnosis of post traumatic stress syndrome after a tour to Iraq in 2006 made Jasinski decide he would not deploy.

    “He was seeing a psychiatrist for his condition and prescribed Zoloft for depression and Trazadone to get to sleep, and they handed him his gun and told him to go back to Iraq,” Branum said.

    The sentence is 30 days in jail, 27 days for good behavior, Branum said. He also was reduced in rank to private first class and had pay and benefits docked for two-thirds of one month.

    Branum spent the last several months sticking his finger in the Army’s collective eye along with his buddies at Courage to Resist and the socialists at Under the Hood Cafe until the court martial.

    Branum’s unbelievably consistent track record of getting jail time for ONE HUNDRED PERCENT of his clients remains unblemished. Now that he has the support of the Under the Hood Cafe, he’ll be putting a lot more in jail unless someone starts helping these Victims Of Branum and get them away from his self-serving legal advice and blind obedience to his anti-war agenda.