Posted on 06/21/2006 2:49:57 AM PDT by beaversmom
Two American soldiers, missing since an insurgent ambush at the checkpoint they were manning last Friday, were found dead Monday night on a street just south of Baghdad. An Iraqi General confirmed to the Associated Press that the soldiers’ bodies showed “signs of torture,” and that the men appeared to have been killed in a particularly “barbaric” way. This assertion appears to be backed up both by the fact that DNA tests were required to positively identify the remains, and by the claim of responsibility made by the self-titled new leader of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, who posted on an Islamist website that he “carried out the verdict of the Islamic court" for the death of terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi by “slaughtering” (a word most often employed when referring to beheadings) the two soldiers.
Privates First Class Kristian Menchaca and Thomas Tucker were members of the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault)’s “Strike” Brigade, based at Fort Campbell, Kentucky. Both Menchaca and Tucker volunteered to be members of the US Army. Both volunteered to be infantrymen. Both knew, as do all members of the US Armed Forces, that they could end up in harm’s way as a result of their volunteering—doubly so since both initially enlisted well after the Iraq War (and postwar process) had begun. In a written statement, Tucker’s family said that their son had joined the military in part out of a desire to "do something positive.” They also released to the press the text of a message he left on their answering machine less than a week before his capture, in which he reaffirmed his commitment to, and belief in, his mission. "I'm defending my country," he said, and he asked his mother to be proud of him.
Interestingly silent on this and other atrocities carried out by the insurgents in Iraq are the “human rights” groups who seem to spend every day accusing the United States of torture, war crimes, and various human rights violations. UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan has called the Iraq war “illegal,” and John Pace, former UN chief of Human Rights for Iraq, has said that human rights conditions are “as bad now as they were under Saddam,” but was it America that filled mass graves with hundreds of thousands of murdered Iraqi civilians? Last month, Human Rights Watch again accused the US of “brutalizing Muslim suspects in the name of the war on terror,” but how many times have Americans strapped bombs to their own chests and purposely detonated themselves in a large crowd of civilians? Amnesty International’s website highlights America’s use of “torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment” against terrorist captives, but how many prisoners—Muslim or otherwise—have Americans brutally beheaded?
Despite the immediate attempts of the anti-war Left to make this murder of American soldiers into an election-year political issue, the gradually stabilizing situation on the ground—especially evidenced by the decreasing frequency of effective insurgent attacks, combined with the increasing desperation of their methods—almost inarguably proves that a turning point in Iraq has been reached. Zarqawi’s demise at the hands of Air Force pilots and joint Special Operations troops was the most obvious sign of this improvement, but the tide had been turning in the favor of freedom long before Al Qaeda’s leader in Iraq was finally caught.
Beyond providing intelligence which will enable us to more effectively counter the remnants of the insurgency, the information gleaned from Zarqawi’s safehouse has given us additional proof that the battle against the insurgency is being won—and that that has been the case for some time. Computer files recovered after the bombing show that Zarqawi had been growing more and more concerned about the "bleak situation" his insurgents were facing. "Time is beginning to be of service to the U.S. forces,” he wrote, “by allowing them to form and bolster the [Iraqi] National Guard, undertake big arrest operations, carry out a media campaign weakening the resistance's influence and presenting it as harmful to the people, creat[ing] division among [the insurgency’s] ranks." He was rapidly approaching the conclusion that the only way "to get out of this crisis” was “to entangle the American forces into another war,” such as one with Iran. These are not the words of a bold, invincible leader of an army of freedom fighters on the verge of defeating the world’s greatest military. They are not the words of a man simply in need of the West to “reach out” to him in an effort to “make an appeal to his human decency,” as many peace-at-any-cost proponents have claimed. Rather, these words reflect the increasingly desperate thoughts of a man who is struggling to avoid the fact that he must finally begin to come to terms with impending, and inevitable, defeat.
There is no question that these two murdered soldiers, and all others lost in Iraq and elsewhere in the world, are to be mourned. Both Kristian Menchaca and Tom Tucker left behind families, friends, and other loved ones. Given that fact, and the fact that, due to an overriding love of America and belief in its ideals, they volunteered to serve their country even though they fully understood that they might one day have to make this ultimate sacrifice, it is supremely important—even necessary—that, along with a loving family, they leave behind a grateful nation.
America should recognize these men as examples of the myriad heroes which make up our all-volunteer military, and should realize that, without supporting the mission the troops are doing—and the cause for which they are volunteering to give their lives, should it come to that—it is not possible to support the troops themselves. The tide has turned in the battle to win the peace in postwar Iraq, and those who have stood on the sidelines for the past three years—or, worse, who have actively worked against the cause of freedom and democracy in that nation—are dangerously close to being remembered (if they are remembered at all) not for their support of human rights, but for their self-righteous fight against them—all in the name of their hatred of America, and of George W. Bush.
It would be fitting if Iraq built a memorial to those who died so they could be free.
It depresses me that humans can be so savage. These soldiers were just boys.
I dispair that anyone could think of torturing to death a 19yo PFC as honourable 'revenge'.
They're only outraged when someone crosses the line and puts panties on a terrorist's head. Conversely, there is no line for terrorists. Terrorists can do anything and not cross one.
But for Americans I guess the line is drawn at panties. Put panties on a terrorist's head, or do anything worse, and the left is going to scream.
The silence is deafening .......
OK, any one surprised by this silence, raise your hand.
I don't see any hands?
..." they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside ....Oh wait- forget it, that was the American scum."
"I'm sure Murtha will be out the rest of week on TV decrying the brutality of the bastards who did this"
You forgot the </sarc/off> switch.....
Their silence...
Expect nothing from Amnesty International, their Secretary General is a muslim - and the United Nations is nothing but a tool of the islamist block:
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
U.N. Human Rights Commission meeting
Islamic United Nations representatives blocked an attempt to have the world body condemn killing in the name of religion.
The International Humanist and Ethical Union said it submitted the request to the U.N. Human Rights Commission in Geneva in response to moves by Islamic clerics to legitimize the current wave of terror attacks.
IHEU representative David Littman tried to deliver a prepared text in the names of three international NGOs – the Association for World Education, the Association of World Citizens and the IHEU – but was blocked by the "heavy-handed intervention" of Islamic representatives of the panel.
Littman said that after repeated interruptions, he was unable to complete his speech.
The Muslims members said they saw the text as an attack on Islam.
The IHEU argued Littman's speech was a report on recent critical comment on Islamist extremism by a number of notable Muslim writers.
The intent was for the U.N. Human Rights Commission "to condemn calls to kill, to terrorize or to use violence in the name of God or any religion."
The text referred to recent decisions by high-ranking Muslim clerics to confirm that those who carry out suicide bombings remain Muslims and cannot be treated as apostates.
A Saudi cleric, for example, issued a fatwa saying that innocent Britons were a legitimate target for terrorist action. Also, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, dean of the College of Sharia and Islamic Studies at Qatar University, who has visited Britain, said terror attacks are permissible.
Roy Brown, president of IHEU, said the censorship is "part and parcel of the refusal by the Islamic representatives at the U.N. to condemn the suicide bombers, or to accept any criticism of those who kill innocent people in the name of God."
Irene Khan - Biography
Irene Zubaida Khan joined Amnesty International as the organization’s seventh Secretary General in August 2001.
Taking the helm in Amnesty International as the first woman, the first Asian and the first Muslim to guide the world’s largest human rights organization, Irene brought a new perspective to the organization. As an individual, she brought experience and enthusiasm for putting people at the heart of policy...
http://web.amnesty.org/library/print/ENGORG100102002
For eight years now, a UN committee has labored to draft a "comprehensive convention on international terrorism." It has been stalled since day one on the issue of "defining" terrorism. But what is the mystery? At bottom everyone understands what terrorism is: the deliberate targeting of civilians. The Islamic Conference, however, has insisted that terrorism must be defined not by the nature of the act but by its purpose. In this view, any act done in the cause of "national liberation," no matter how bestial or how random or defenseless the victims, cannot be considered terrorism.
http://sayanythingblog.com/2004/10/22/terrorism_as_a_right/
And I guess that's why the MSM continues to describe the murdering, disgusting scum, the terrorists that gravitate to Iraq, as 'insurgents' or 'militants' - or, as Micheal Moore described them, 'freedom fighters' - anything but what they are. MUSLIM TERRORISTS...who, incidently, in the last five months have killed some five thousand Iraqi civilians.
These so called "human rights" groups revel in the coverage they receive from the liberals in the print & television media whenever they attack the U.S. military for any perceived or imagined injustice to enemy combatants.
In this instance, as in others, when the true primitive brutality of the terrorists becomes painfully clear they say little or nothing ... simply because the media wouldn't cover it even if they were inclined to make a statement ... which of course they're not. In the perverted thought process of liberals, America is bad terrorism is good .... after all terrorists are really poor oppressed people trying to win their version of religious freedom.
All the left and medias hard work on Hadithia(sp)was for nothing....this brutal killing just muted that story as an issue.
People who are offereing Aid and Comfort to the Enemy.
This will be minimized and swept under the rug by the MSM, while a contiuous series of red herrings are thrown at Jane Soccer Mom. The ACLU wants access to the poor souls held against their will at Gitmo, a bunch of Marines went postal at Haditha, on-going trials of American soldiers in court because they didn't consultant with the enemy's attorneys before defending themselves, etc., etc.
Menchacha's family was on LKL last night, I watched a few minutes of it. They (sister/cousin) stated that the Uncle who is blaming this atrocity on Bush DOES NOT SPEAK FOR THE FAMILY. LKL and the other guy (who used to work for CBS, and whose name I cannot remember) tried like heck to get these people to condemn Bush -- they would NOT do so. They said they were proud of their family member. Later on, Ms. Jane Harmen, democrat CA, came on and blamed the death of these two soldiers on Bush's policies. It was beyond disgusting. Making it ever more clear, that american's can never again give power to a party who considers its own country the enemy, rather than understanding the terrorism we face.
It is times like this that I really miss flamethrowers. I would love to start turning these Muslim scum into human candles and see how much they enjoy being the object of the barbaric treatment they so enjoy giving to others.
bttt
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.