The Uber-Left weblog Daily Kos is under fire. I, for one, am inclined to forgive. But first, let's look at what happened. James Taranto reports:
Markos Moulitsas Zuniga, who runs the Angry Left Daily Kos blog, had this to say in a post yesterday about the murders of four American contractors who were helping to deliver food in Fallujah, Iraq:Michele is righteously pissed, and has a roundup of other reactions. Joe Gandelman is more calm but predicts that this will do for Daily Kos what "the scream" did to Howard Dean.
*** QUOTE ***
Every death should be on the front page
Let the people see what war is like. This isn't an Xbox game. There are real repercussions to Bush's folly.
That said, I feel nothing over the death of merceneries [sic]. They aren't in Iraq because of orders, or because they are there trying to help the people make Iraq a better place. They are there to wage war for profit. Screw them.
*** END QUOTE ***
Zuniga has taken down the original post, but in a new post he acknowledges it and offers a partial retraction, which essentially amounts to saying he didn't actually "feel nothing"; in fact, he was angry at the victims. Blogger Michael Friedman has a screen shot of the original post.
It's worth noting that the Daily Kos is popular among Democratic leaders. Zuniga is a principal in the Armstrong Zuniga political consulting firm, which touts the Daily Kos as "the most popular political weblog with over 3 million monthly visits." Friedman has a list of congressional candidates who advertise on the site, and in a February posting Zuniga reported that Terry McAuliffe, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, "asked if I would post" a "Message to Blog Community."
About Zuniga's comments, we have nothing to say. They speak for themselves.
Myself? I haven't considered reading Daily Kos since he suggested that Americans are so stupid, they might just be better off if the economy deteriorated further, so they wouldn't make the dumb mistake of re-electing Bush.
Still, Zuniga's human. I think all that happened is that Zuniga lost it, said some things he regretted, panicked, and tried to pretend it never happened.
I've done things like that. We all have. You shoot your mouth off, then you flush beet red, and you panic and see if you can't cover your tracks or make it better somehow.
If you've never done something like that, then you are either not very opinionated or you're a saint.
But if you're a grownup, you admit it when you're called on it, and try not to do it again.
My take: Zuniga should take a hard look inside and ask himself why he thinks so little of his fellow Americans, and why his hatred for Bush has reached such extremes. He might also want to consider just how elitist he an his fellow leftists have apparently become.
Ultimately, he might want to ask himself about whether the level of hatred he's been pumping out over at Daily Kos is really healthy for himself, his party, or America.
It might make him a better blogger. It might also be healthy for the party he works for.
Bill's got a correspondence with Kos which seems to indicate that the man really doesn't regret his comments. Ah well. An inappropriate hatred can rot the soul, can't it?
Dean,
That's very noble of you but it wouldn't work for me.
The fact that Zuniga can watch the whole thing and "feel nothing" for the "mercenaries" suggests to me that he has completely missed the point of what being on the left is supposed to be all about, namely having compassion for other human beings. I don't think a little navel gazing, or even a great deal of navel gazing, is going to help him.
Maybe he said something off the cuff and then regretted it. Yes, we all have. I have several times, on my blog. But I never deleted the offending post and tried to pretend it never happened, going so far as to replace the post (at the same URL) with something less controversial. In fact, I've even made it my goal to set up redirects whenever my permalinks have changed.
And he has acknowledged it, and done nothing but try to rationalize his actions. Oh, he hates mercenaries because he had a bad childhood experience. Same with me and spiders.
And I see nothing wrong with Michael Friedman's taking the fight to Kos' advertisers. He "feels nothing" over these people's deaths because they're just out for profit. Well it looks like Kos brings over $10,000 a month on advertising, as it stands. He wants to be a self-righteous capitalist-hating hate-monger? Fine. But not while making a hefty profit.
The Democratic party in this country has been overrun by hatemongers and racists. Kos is one shining example of this fact. Truly sad.
Dean, I would normally agree with your statement that anyone can make a mistake, and that Zuniga should be given the benefit of the doubt. However, Zuniga's followup statement is not an apology, or even a retraction. It is a rationalization. He is not sorry for what he said, only how he said it.
When you said we all have done things like that, it is true. Yet, you left out the part where we said , "Gee, maybe I was wrong, sorry." Zuniga, or anyone else cannot expect to be forgiven without an apology. If there's no apology, then it's up to the rest of the world to agree with his sentiments, or not.
I choose "not."
The first step in any 12-step program is to admit you have a problem. I doubt that KOS or his friends are anywhere near that point yet.
I used to visit kos but I stopped shortly after he moved to scoop - it was a rational enough blog up until around that time - and this incident is a good example of why I stopped.
The 'retraction' wasn't a retraction as such, but it was an apology; to pretend he didn't disavow his callousness would be unfair.
"Still, Zuniga's human."
Yes he is, God love 'im. He's every bit as human as Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin and Pol Pot, and believe me, I have just as much sympathy for him as I do for those other poor, misguided, misunderstood gentlemen.
"Ultimately, he might want to ask himself about whether the level of hatred he's been pumping out over at Daily Kos is really healthy for himself, his party, or America."
Unless Zuniga is a compulsive simpleton whose rantings are utterly beyond any form of self-control, he most certainly has already asked himself this very question and decided that the answer is, most emphatically, "Yes."
Jesus Christ, Dean, the guy made an explicit public declaration that he is a sociopath.
Wake up!
Oh, for those looking for the actual entry, you can still reach it. Go to this link and search for the word screw them, and you'll see the original entry.
Geez louise, we're comparing him to genocidiers now? Talk about extremist, hateful rhetoric guys.
I may have said some dumb things in my lifetime but I have NEVER thought, "Screw them! They made tons of money, they went there voluntarily....who cares" when people who are trying to help those in another country are killed.
There is absolutly NO excuse for what he said, human being who makes mistakes or not. The fact that he later on went back and tried to cover his ass just proves that he wasn't "making a mistake". If you're a real human being, a "real man", you face up to what you said or did and if you have REAL remorse, you apologize for what you said, not turn around and boo hoo about your childhood and how you think the soldiers should have gotten top billing. Last time I checked, soldiers are volunteers too.
There are some things that you can overlook with your explanation....they're human, they just made a mistake. But Kos has jammed his foot inside of his mouth WAY too many times in the past and this time, it was his true colors that came out.
I do not accept that there is an excuse for a grown man to mock the deaths and disgusting behavior to the corpses. If they made a lot of money...so what?! I'd like to see Kos go over there for pennies. Oh. That's right. He won't because he's too busy pissing and whining about how horrible everything is instead of actually doing something to make a difference.
Screw him.
Oh, so *this* might be the foot-in-mouth straw that breaks the back of the Dem hate-spewing?
You'll pardon me if I don't hold my breath.
Forgive? Yes, just like the liberals forgave Trent Lott when he mispoke.
As someone who has said stupid things, I'm inclined to forgive. I've never taken Kos seriously, though. The one thing I find consistently about the Left is an immaturity in political matters underlying it all: Opponents are liars, opponents are evil, opponents are misguided. This kind of response doesn't surprise me. The man needed to grow up. He's not gonna.
$10k a month? Ack. I'd love $10k a month. I'd pretend to be a leftist to get $10k a month for sitting on my ass and pundifying on the issues of the day.
"Bill the BlogSlut"
Kinda catchy ;-)
"Mercenaries", "Screw them". That is REALLY nice, especially to the families. So what if they went there voluntarily? Firefighters, police officers, soldiers, and many others do what they do voluntarily. Should we not care when they die? What a piece of shit this guy is.
Dean,
I sent you an e-mail about this - I started an e-mail exchange with kos about this up at my site. I've got one interesting response so far, but I'm waiting for the second response which should be the pay-off of whether the kid fully grasps what he said and whether he will take responsibility for it.
Follow the "my Apologies" entry and click at top right to follow the thread to "E-mailing Kos 1" and then "2" ... hopefully he's got another response to my last e-mail coming ...
Bill
Sorry, correct link:
http://www.indcjournal.com/archives/000184.html
Dean,
Its what's in the mind - I've posted intemperate remarks from time to time as well, and deeply regretted that I let my anger show like that - but I was angry, right? There was something there, not just a "mistake".
The post in question was clearly written by a man who was angry - now, as to whether he's just so angry with President Bush that its unhinged his good judgement, or (what I believe) that he just doesn't like the United States and glories in our defeats is subjective judgement that observers will have to decide for themselves.
I think we all say some terrible things from time to time. I submit myself as one of them. The fact that each of us has doesn't remove us from saying "That was absolutely, hands-down, wrong to say." I agree with you, Dean, the site is becoming a stewing pot of vengeful deadly hate.
I followed the links and read the dialogue between Bill and Markos. Bill asked some very good questions (and in a very civil manner, too). I await the response to the second e-mail. I really think the people who deserve an apology are the families of the men who died. I don't think it would be that hard to find a way to contact them and to personally apologize for such paltry and unsympathetic words as "Screw them."
Even his rationalizations show how deeply misguided he is. The other deaths weren't ignored, the post-mortem mutilation angle was played up. The recent deaths of other servicemen were also broadcast in every major news outlet in the country. So even the rationalized basis for his anger is bullshit.
The guy's crazy and should be an example of what happens when you start believing extreme political rhetoric. All of a sudden things you say don't make sense because they're based on beliefs that aren't true.
Bush isn't a crook who took us to war based on a lie in order to make his oil industry buddies rich. Now, if you believe that's so obvious it's not even worth discussing, maybe Kos' outburst might make more sense. Of course the security personnel are no different from right wing paramilitary mercenaries. It's so obvious it goes without saying. In fact, these same guys were probably assigned to infiltrate the Florida election process and spoil votes cast for Al Gore. They're the US version of the Gestapo.
I visited his site just to read his comments and rationalizations is full. I saw nothing particularly surprising. Lefties have been claiming anyone who disagrees with them are fascists so long they act as if there is truly no difference between Republicans and Nazis. Commenters in support of him are equally delusional.
All of this is a perfectly predictable effect of 40 years of lefties reciting anti-amercan views as if they're true. You can't believe having an entire subculture devoted to pretending America is a racist, criminal, imperialist nation has no effect on people. It does. People like Kos are the result. That's not so bad. (He's an idiot, but there are worse things). In other countries such rhetoric is used to recruit terrorists. That's bad.
Wait; where these guys soldiers sworn to the US government, sworn to protect our constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic-- or were they mercenaries, paid to take bloody orders from a fucking corporation*?
Because, really, the answer makes all the difference to me.
*NB: Normally I like corporations. But mercenaries are kind of disgusting...
Are you kidding? "Mercenaries" that provide security to workrs delivering food aid are offesive to you? Why, because they carry weapons? Give me a break.
No. they offend me because they are in the employ of the US government, and thus I am responsible for their behavior. But they are not accountable to me, nor sworn to uphold the constitution...
What makes this really disgusting is that Bush sought to reduce combat pay for American Soldiers, and seemingly uses that money to hire mercenaries. Does anyone else see the problem with that?
I'm still waiting for someone to explain why you use the term "mercenary". They're security personnel. They aren't tasked with fighting insurgents or terrorists. They're a security detail for civilian personnel.
Civilians don't want military security because it makes them a bigger target. So they get private security. Why is this so tough to understand? Why are critics so ready to jump on every issue as a misdeed that can't even honestly evaluate the facts?
"What makes this really disgusting is that Bush sought to reduce combat pay for American Soldiers, and seemingly uses that money to hire mercenaries. Does anyone else see the problem with that?"
Andrew, there are a whole hosts of reasons that make this more complex than your outrage demands. DO WE HAVE ENOUGH TROOOPS? Are our troops adequately trained in skills like force protection of a huge variety of different tasks and contractors? Are these "mercenaries" being paid by the Corporations involved in the reconstruction?
It's an insecure place, Iraq, I can't see how anyone can criticize hiring private security firms to protect workers and do jobs that soldiers may not be uniquely suited for. These mercennaries aren't running around killing people, they are protecting people.
MJ: I am hardly a critic of this war. Or at least, I am hardly a critic of the idea of us being there in the first place. I am, when occasion merits it, critical of some of the things we do over there.
Also, I am asking the question of whether or not, not stating that they are. If they are, then obviously I have a whole different reaction set than I do if they are not...
Although, frankly, your insistence that they are “security personnel” seems a bit like thinking that your parents really did send your old dog to a farm...
Bill:
If I recall, not having enough troops to do this job was sited as a reason we shouldn’t have done it, or as a reason to get more allies on board. Perhaps we should have listened...
Speaking of listening, I am willing to listen to reasons that we should be using mercenaries. What I want to know is how we know that our mercenaries aren’t being used for anything other than passive defense...
"Although, frankly, your insistence that they are “security personnel” seems a bit like thinking that your parents really did send your old dog to a farm..."
We'll, if you want to engage in complete supposition that's your business. The story I read describes them as guards on a food shipment convoy. If you have reason to dispute that that would be relevant. But declaring someone a merc whose described job is security should require at least the assertion that their job was a cover for something else, don't you think?
This is what I'm getting at. You don't even bother to assert that the truth is different, you just assume they're mercs. That assumption implies that the assignment isn't relevant. This is exactly Kos' position. So far as I can tell, neither Kos nor anyone else has claimed that these guys are mercs and the security job is cover. They believe these guys are mercs regardless of what their function is.
I don’t assume that the security guard designation is cover; the more I hear it, the more it sounds like a euphemism...
I don’t mean to sound like the ass I am probably coming off as here, but:
“or were they mercenaries, paid to take bloody orders from a fucking corporation*?”
This is an interrogative statement, as evidenced by both its structure (it starts with the question-word “were”), and its punctuation (it ends with a question mark).
Webster’s defines question as “2 a : an act or instance of asking : INQUIRY”. So, as you can see, I was not making an assumption, but rather asking the question: were these guys mercenaries? If so, I have one set of opinions. If not, I have another set of opinions. Thus far, both you and Bill seem to be assuming that they are, in fact, mercenaries. After that assumption, you try and prove to me that mercenaries aren’t such bad people after all...
But first things first: Are they mercenaries?
Even if they went there to make money, even if they were under the orders of a "fucking corporation", they don't deserve a "screw them" from anybody. If I go to work (I got there JUST TO MAKE MONEY, you know) and get murdered by insurgents and burned and dragged through the streets etc...why would I deserve to be "screwed"? People who work for "fucking corporations" don't deserve to live? The Left has now gone so far as to assert that everyone who has a job deserves to die and their bodies be mutilated for spectacle?
"What makes this really disgusting is that Bush sought to reduce combat pay for American Soldiers, and seemingly uses that money to hire mercenaries"
I'm looking for the question in this comment, but can't seem to find it.
There's a more detailed description of events at the Belmont club. As far as I can tell, there isn't a single blog or article questioning their function. Everone who is referring to them as mercs has done so solely based on the facts that they are armed and not part of the military.
If they are mercenaries, that makes the bloodsucking parasites. That makes them human vulture, no better than pimps or drug dealers. People who fight wars for money tear at the very fabric of humanity, pulling us backward toward barbarism and feeding off the corpses dropped along the way...
It isn’t the fact that they work for corporations, but rather what they do for those corporations that has my blood boiling. I am surprised that anyone with enough intelligence to read has trouble separating “accountant” (or whatever you do) from “paid killer”...
My father-in-law is the head of security at a large company. Is he a mercenary too?
Mj:
The question remains the same “Are they...” as before, the statement you quote is a response based upon the seeming affirmative answer to that question. That is, it seemed to me that the answer I was being given was “yes, they are mercenaries”, and my statement followed. If the answer is “no, they are not” as you seem to be saying now, then obviously I would feel differently...
I’ll take a look at this Belmont club (Google finds it rather easily...) and see what there is to see. I’m not so wedded to the idea that they are mercenaries that I am unwilling to give these guys the benefit of the doubt...
Mj,
just saw your last statement. Probably not.
I doubt your Father-in-law is a soldier-for-hire inside of a war zone. The difference really is one of Offense vs. Defense. If your Father-in-law were ever to seek out and kill people who were a threat to the interests of his company, yes, he would be. Since that isn’t typically in the job description of the run of the mill head of security, it seems unlikely that he is a mercenary...
Andrew, i'm sorry but your opinion is disgusting;
If they are mercenaries, that makes the bloodsucking parasites. That makes them human vulture, no better than pimps or drug dealers. People who fight wars for money tear at the very fabric of humanity, pulling us backward toward barbarism and feeding off the corpses dropped along the way...
Who the HELL are you to make this judgement? Guess what soldiers in the US Army get paid to do? That's right KILL. KILL, KILL , KILL. It's their job. They put money in retirement accounts based on hazard pay they recive while deployed. Are they parasites too?
just because someone doesn't have a uniform on doesn't make them some bloodsucker. Read the biographies of the men that were killed - they were adventurous, idealistic Americans. They were not "hit men." They did not work by some lower moral stanadard because they weren't in uniform. they were not employed by some African warlord who uses mercenaries to massacre and doiminate civilians. THEY WERE HELPING TO REBUILD IRAQ.
Jesus. They were protecting food shipments. I can't even understand how anyone focuses their outrage over the fact that they were private contractors that carried weapons. this is a common progression among special forces personnel - to do quite a bit of time in the military and then work for private security firms to feed their families. One was an ex-ranger, the other a former SEAL, i'm not sure about the other two.
Spare your judgement and outrage for the animals that desecrated their bodies for kicks.
Read this Andrew;
http://grimbeorn.blogspot.com/2004_03_28_grimbeorn_archive.html#108093383541889022
Bill,
If their mission was primarily defensive and not offensive, then they were not mercenaries...
Ultimately, the job of the American military is primarily defensive, not offensive...
If you are over there right now, doing a job that is defensive, you are not a mercenary...
What I keep asking, is: Is this the case? Are the private security personnel in Iraq engaged in offensive or defensive actions? Give me a strait answer to that.
I posted what I think of the KOS broohaha on my blog, but I see we've moved on, cool.
Blackwater USA's site was down when I checked the first time for "capacity" reasons, but keep trying.
From their site:
Please Mail the contributions to:
Memorial Fund
PO Box 159
Moyock, NC 27958
Please Make checks Payable to:
Memorial Fund
Please no cash contributions
Also: "On over 6000 acres of private land, The most comprehensive private tactical training facility in the United States. "
Legally, there's nothing wrong with mercenaries, er, um, security personel, ahhhh....hired guns. The UN Convention Against Mercenaries was never signed by the US or ratified by the UN. "Reports suggest that the United States is using between 10,000 to 15,000 private "contractors," more than the size of the British armed forces in Iraq, for policing and protection of its operations.
According to AxisofLogic/ U.S. Military POTUS loves to privatize the war and (yes boys and girls there is a link to) Haliburton's subsidiary Brown and Root, was paid to come up with the plan.
This quote was also in the AxisofLogic/ U.S. Military article:
The Commercial Republic pays its own way. Forgive me, I have to go now. I have to pick up the pieces of brain that have oozed out of my head.
"...that makes the[m] bloodsucking parasites. That makes them human vulture, no better than pimps or drug dealers."
And what do we find when we visit your website? We find that you're a divorce lawyer.
Yes, Virginia, there IS a God--and boy, has he got one helluva sense of humor! ROFLMAO!!!!
Would you like to elaborate Dave?
Hmm. Dave stays pretty anonymous. Mr. no@wayinhell.org. Why don't we hear a list of your accomplishments. Many, but not all, of mine are on display and part of the public record.
I'll bet you have a record too.
If their mission was primarily defensive and not offensive, then they were not mercenaries...
Andrew, you're reaching so desperately at this point that you aren't even making any sense. Since you love bringing out the dictionary...
What does this have to do with offense/defense? Nothing. Just admit it: your bloodthirsty hatred of "mercenaries" is unfounded and wrong. There are bad mercenaries in the world, yep, but there are also good ones. Live with it.
And what on Earth makes you think these people even might have been there for a "primarily offensive" mission? I mean, you obviously are leaning toward that conclusion, or else why would you be making all these incredibly feable arguments? They were there to protect contractors. End of story. Conspiracy theories need not apply. In reality -- ie: not fantasy -- "fucking corporations" don't hire mercenaries to go into other countries to kill as much as possible. There's no rational reason to believe this. These "fucking corporations" are rebuilding Iraq. Iraq is a warzone. So they need protection.
Yep, got to go with the "Dispassionate" part of my psyche and not the left brain. I don't feel anymore or less for Fallujah Four than any other soldier killed there. Sux for all of them Actually, since our soldiers swear an oath to protect me, and these guys only swore an oath that the signature on the back of their checks were authentic, probably a little less, but not much They're victims, not heros.
The creeps I despise even more than the mobsters who live in that town are the clerics who only condemn corpse desecration, but not murder. That's like a neighbor complaining about the mess after a tornado destroys your home.
It's going to take more than a generation before this place becomes civilized. The old guard must die off first. These are the same type of "spiritual?" leaders who dress children in C-4 vests.
But next time I take over a third world country, I'm giving Gary Jackson a call.
Everyone needs goals in life. Saddly, I think we're going to need him.
They weren't "mercenaries," by any stretch of the imagination. Instead of whining about lost advertisers and "hate-filled" messages, Kotze ought to be thanking his lucky stars that none of the victims' families are suing him for libel - yet.
My hatred of mercenaries is not bloodthirsty. It is, however, real.
As for the definitions, they don’t fit. Either we define as mercenary anyone who takes a paycheck for doing his job (I’d love to explain that to my boss!) or we define it as someone who works for a foreign army. Since these guys were working for a corporate army, they could not be considered Foreign. (Especially since the Corporation in question is American)
Someone pointed me at a newsmax article (I know, not the best source. But the info seems correct, if not the spin)
“the international convention against the recruitment, use, financing and training of mercenaries defines a mercenary as any person who:
Is specially recruited locally or abroad for the purpose of participating in a concerted act of violence aimed at
Overthrowing a Government or otherwise undermining the constitutional order of a State; or
Undermining the territorial integrity of a State;
Is motivated to take part therein essentially by the desire for significant private gain and is prompted by the promise or payment of material compensation. ...
The bottom line of the rule of war: "A mercenary, as defined in article 1 of the present Convention, who participates directly in hostilities or in a concerted act of violence, as the case may be, commits an offence for the purposes of the Convention."
Since the government of Iraq has already been overthrown, and the Security personnel over there are helping keep order, rather than toss it overboard, they are not mercenary, under international law.
Oh, and where does Offense/Defense come in? Precicly at the point of overthrowing a sovereign state vs. defending one.
And, just so we are abundantly clear on the subject:
The pieces of shit who killed those men are working to re-establish one of the worst regimes on the face of the earth. I do have bloodthirsty hatred towards them. Not just for this desecration, but rather for what they are hopping to gain by it...
FYI The Kerry campaign blog has dropped Daily Kos from its blogroll.
I get a nothing at the Daily Kos.
Yours,
Wince
"If they are mercenaries, that makes the bloodsucking parasites. That makes them human vulture, no better than pimps or drug dealers. People who fight wars for money tear at the very fabric of humanity, pulling us backward toward barbarism and feeding off the corpses dropped along the way..." - Andrew Cory
Back that judgement with facts and links, boy.
"My hatred of mercenaries is not bloodthirsty. It is, however, real." - Andrew Cory
And it's based on what, reading a couple of Hammer's Slammers novels? Have you ever known any mercs? Talked to any? Served in combat with any? Observed a combat zone where mercenaries were operating?
Or are you just bloviating based on what you think constitutes mercenaries and mercenary activities?
Maybe he just hated the A-Team...
"If they are mercenaries, that makes the bloodsucking parasites. That makes them human vulture, no better than pimps or drug dealers. People who fight wars for money tear at the very fabric of humanity, pulling us backward toward barbarism and feeding off the corpses dropped along the way..."
And US soldiers work for free, I suppose, and therefore don't tear at the very fabric of humanity, etc, etc.
"It isn’t the fact that they work for corporations, but rather what they do for those corporations that has my blood boiling."
Keeping order and protecting American civilians who are rebuilding the country has your blood boiling?
"I am surprised that anyone with enough intelligence to read has trouble separating “accountant” (or whatever you do) from “paid killer”..."
There's plenty of separation. The "paid killers" on our side put their lives on the line to help protect their fellow citizens and the local population from thugs.
"Although, frankly, your insistence that they are “security personnel” seems a bit like thinking that your parents really did send your old dog to a farm..."
Well, if they did work on side ventures that involved hunting down and killing Islamist thugs, I still wouldn't have a problem with it. But I see no evidence that this is the case in any event.
I remember a story about the NY Times private security guards not letting locals into their own property which was close to the NY Times Bagdad office. After the UN bombing, there was some question whether hiring former regime people as private security guards had been a good idea. I suspect that most of the foreign organizations, be they corporations, press, International Agencies, or NGO's are using private security.
I think the mercenary charge is a red herring. I suspect Kos is pleased when soldiers are killed but doesn't dare to admit it. In this case he did say he was pleased because he thought he could get away with it.
I hope I am wrong. I am not that familar with his site so perhaps I am doing him an injustice.
A thousand dollars a day mercenaries. Chalabi uses them to torture and interrogate. The "rape rooms" of Saddam are nothing compared to these.
At taxpayers expense. And the hatred shown for them is what gets directed at our troops. How to solve this hatred? Close newspapers and jail Moslem religious leaders.
You are a wannabe leftist. These tactics are nazism. You see no qualms about such. The ends never justifies the means.
Three Americans died out of 8 people. What countries were the other mercenaries from? CHile? Or the plane load that was stopped in Africa who felw from the Corlinas near Blackwater's 5,200 acre compund? Or the central Americans(salvadorans) who died under Spanish control the day after kos' statements?
"Civilian contractors". If people with body armor, kevlar, automatics and sidearme, comes into your house, tells everyone to get on their knees, and can terror/interrogate with no oversight and never answer for their deeds you would say "It's okay honey, kids, get on your knees- they're just civilian contracotrs, and three of them are Americans!"
How many times do you mourn electric chair/ capital punishment convicts? After all, they're Americans, and as you note how they die is irrelevant.