This is just makes me see red. Cowardly bastards.
Soldier calls nasty bar beating a 'sneak attack'
Updated Tue. Mar. 13 2007 10:40 PM ET
CTV.ca News Staff
A soldier honoured for his military valour in Afghanistan is wondering why strangers beat him up in his hometown bar this past weekend.
"This wasn't two guys on the ice dropping gloves and going, 'OK, let's go'," Master Cpl. Collin Fitzgerald told CTV Ottawa on Tuesday."This was an attack -- a sneak attack. To blindside a guy ... and hit him with an object, there's something wrong."
Fitzgerald is well known in Morrisburg, Ont., a small town about an hour's drive south of Ottawa.He says he'd been in the bar only about 20 minutes late Friday, visiting with a childhood friend who introduced him to people as a war hero, when he was suddenly struck from behind with some type of object. Four men jumped him and began beating on him.
"They were saying 'What kind of hero are you now?'," Fitzgerald's mother Arlene told CTV News."If it was true that they said that, then they're ignorant," Fitzgerald said.
Bystanders pulled the attackers off Fitzgerald and his friends drove him to hospital.The weapons instructor at CFB Trenton had his foot broken in three places and needed 10 stitches to close a cut above his right eye. Fitzgerald, 27, also suffered a broken nose and two black eyes in the Friday night attack.
"Whatever he hit me with, he could have easily taken out an eye," the soldier said. "What if he hit me in the throat? It could have been an artery." Fitzgerald is married, with a young family.
Decorated hero
Gov. Gen. Michaelle Jean recognized Fitzgerald in a Feb. 19 ceremony for braving enemy fire in Afghanistan.He served eight months there. He was one of the first recipients of the Canadian Medal of Military Valour, "for outstanding selfless and valiant actions" carried out on May 24, 2006, during an enemy ambush "involving intense, accurate enemy fire."
According to the military, Fitzgerald "repeatedly exposed himself to enemy fire by entering and re-entering a burning platoon vehicle and successfully driving it off the roadway, permitting the remaining vehicles trapped in the enemy zone to break free."
"Collin was safer fighting the Taliban. At least he saw the enemy coming, or knew the enemy was there," said his mother. "They are just total cowards, nothing but snakes," said Gerald, Collin's father.
Fitzgerald will need at least a month to recover from his injuries. Several of his army buddies are still recovering from injuries they suffered in Afghanistan."They don't realize how good we have it here in Canada and what we're trying to help the Afghan people have," he said of his attackers.Ontario Provincial Police have arrested 21-year-old Travis Baldwin, a Morrisburg resident and hockey player, and charged him with aggravated assault.
An investigation is ongoing.Baldwin will appear in Morrisburg court on May 1. CTV Ottawa has learned he may be the only person criminally charged in connection with the incident. With a report from CTV's Rosemary Thompson and CTV Ottawa's Chris Dayhttp://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew...hub=TopStories
Back in the day when one of our soldiers was attacked and beaten up we would go down town and administer some justice to the perpetrators. I hope things haven't changed all that much at CFB Trenton.
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Tuesday, February 06, 2007
Pat Dollard
If you don't know who Pat Dollard is you probably should. Pat was your typical liberal Hollywood Democrat until he started questioning what he was reading in the MSM. So. At 42 he gave up everything he had in his high flying life as a very succesful Hollywood agent to embed with Marines first it The Triangle of Death and then in Al-Anbar province, armed not with a gun but a video camera. He went where the Marines went, ambushes, IED's, MRE's not showering for weeks at a time to record what was actually happening with the Marines in Iraq. He was very nearly killed. He has distilled 700 hours of raw footage into 15 hour long documentary episodes called Young Americans. http://patdollard.com/What follows is his reponse for the Democrats "plan" for Iraq.
Jan 11th 2007
This Civil War is On: In America, Not Iraq
Democratic Senator Dick Durbin’s official response to President Bush’s speech was literally nothing but drivel. And self-contradictory drivel, no less. Which is no mean ****ing feat. Quite an achievement to make just enough sense to contradict yourself. Which means it made just enough sense to reveal the complete bankruptcy of ideas and policies that has left the now literally treasonous Democratic Party unable to serve America, and only able to serve itself.
The Democrats’ months-old overall position on Iraq makes no sense, and therefor relies on, at best, tortured, twisted and tragi-comically shifting logic and arguments. And the biggest problem with their position ( I’d say policies, but they have none other than the domestic political play of retreat, based on an Orwellian Big Brother declaration of defeat, solely in order to have the advantage in the 2008 elections ) is that it is based not on the facts on the ground in Iraq, but instead on a propaganda soundbite, created and promoted as reality by their Propaganda Ministry ( the MSM ): Iraq is in a civil war. This very concept, created by those desperate for it to be so for the sake of political gain, lays the entire foundation for the Democrats’ position. What if it were not true? Well then, the entire Democratic agenda, quite simply a demand for a retreat, would be wrong. And guess ****ing what?
You got it. I was in Ramadi when Al Qaeda blew up the Shia’s golden-domed shrine. They blew it up with the express goals of fomenting a civil war that the Iraqis clearly were not interested in, and to create the resultant American political divisiveness you see today. The entire Jihad movement very closely monitors American politics and media. They are obsessed with it. They understand that the media war is every bit as critical as the ground war. Americans, very naive and with few alternative sources, most often simply believe what they see and hear in the media, not understanding the media’s motives and manipulations, nor how the media itself has been manipulated. When the Dome was blown up, nearly all Iraqis knew it was Zarqwai and weren’t taking the bait. Meanwhile, I watched as the MSM reported on protests in Ramadi that were not happening. They reported on many phantom events in Ramadi, including the overrunning of the Ramadi Government Center, while I stood in the middle of it, with nary a shot fired all day. Were they lying about the protests? One way or another, by intent or negligence, they were. And let’s not forget, every crime has a motive. The media’s motive is to promote defeat in order to get their client, the Democratic Party, elected. ( The time for mincing words is long gone, there is too much at stake. Treason is as treason does. )
By the time the Dome blew, years had transpired without any broad civil war sentiment or activity, in an Iraq in which 90% of the households have automatic weapons. Nor did that change after the Dome blew. As armed as all Iraqis are, if the civil war game was on, we would see it as clearly as we see the hands at the ends of our arms. Instead all that we see are the violent acts of limited, special-interest sectarian gangs, comprised primarily of, well, gangsters and not the average Iraqi. Shiite and Sunni thugs ( Al Sadr of course amongst them ) used the event to whip up as many potential gang-recruits as they could, and then to go for broke with the violence and seemingly sectarian neighborhood cleansing. And it was sectarian, but sectarian only as it related to gang warfare.
And that is what we are seeing in Iraq - widespread but limited, organized gang turf wars, not the broad, populist, armed movement that is the true definition of a civil war. As it has always been from the beginning, we are not fighting the people of Iraq, we are not fighting a populist insurgency, we are fighting criminal gangs. The people of Iraq, in fact, would like to see democracy, capitalism and modern education flower in their homeland. This is why they vote in greater percentages than we Americans.
The second biggest flaw in the Democrats’ position is the illogical and self-contradictory essence of both their arguments and operating principles. They say the solution in Iraq is political, not just military, so we should retreat. This makes absolutely no sense, or can only make sense to a facile, child-like mind. The problem with their position is astoundingly simple: no political solution is possible without the military strength to implement and protect it. Their positions are at cross-purposes. You simply cannot implement a stable political infrastructure by first eliminating the effective military force that is any such infrastructure’s lifeblood. It’s like removing the amniotic fluid from a womb: the baby is not going to grow. It is going to die.
Their position is nothing short of lunacy. The Democrats have left themselves nothing but such lunactic positions, because their goals for Iraq have nothing to do with what is best for the peace and security of the United States and the world. Their goals for Iraq only have to do with what is best for the Democratic Party: make the Republican Party look bad. And the best way to do that is to make Iraq an American defeat. I have never seen such widespread naked treason, such absolute evil, in all my 42 years. They and the MSM have tunnelvision: they only care about selling their Big Brother, false script of defeat to the American people; for years they have been in a frenzy to sell this war as Vietnam - for personal gain - and now that frenzy is at a fever pitch. In their minds, they cannot, and will not, be stopped. But good people have stopped worse. We can still prevail over the American insurgents that we are now forced to fight. Their positions are so illogical and tortured because it is very hard to make what is bad for America, and indeed what will ultimately be fatal to many Americans, look good for America. This is why you keep shaking your head when you hear the Dems and the MSM speak about this war. Because just as it made no sense for Big Brother to declare “War is Peace” it makes no sense for them to declare that what is bad for America is actually good for America.
And perhaps the final problem with the Democrats’ position I will just touch on here, but will elaborate on later. Their entire posititon is completely devoid of the concept of consequences. Nowhere do they analyze for us, let alone even address, the consequences of a U.S. retreat from Iraq. It is because those consequences are almost certainly a fresh wave of civilian casualties on American soil, at the hands of Jihadis who will then have substantial portions of Iraq’s resources to use for those attacks, as well as the freedom from focusing on Iraq and the resultant freedom to focus on our homeland. They do not want you to know this, because if you do, you will not support a U.S. retreat from Iraq. Yes, they are evil. It sounds crazy, but no other word bears as legitimate a description of their behavior. They rely on us shying from such extreme language, even though it is the truest language, out of our own fear of undercutting our credibility. Credibility is not lost by operating in the extremes, it is lost by operating outside of the truth. The contemporary Democratic Party has become the most malignant internal cancer to eat at the body of America, in the history of America.Yes, clearly the Civil War is on in America.
And to quote one of the left’s own icons, Michael Stipe of REM, “The time to rise has been engaged”.
Jan 11th 2007
This Civil War is On: In America, Not Iraq
Democratic Senator Dick Durbin’s official response to President Bush’s speech was literally nothing but drivel. And self-contradictory drivel, no less. Which is no mean ****ing feat. Quite an achievement to make just enough sense to contradict yourself. Which means it made just enough sense to reveal the complete bankruptcy of ideas and policies that has left the now literally treasonous Democratic Party unable to serve America, and only able to serve itself.
The Democrats’ months-old overall position on Iraq makes no sense, and therefor relies on, at best, tortured, twisted and tragi-comically shifting logic and arguments. And the biggest problem with their position ( I’d say policies, but they have none other than the domestic political play of retreat, based on an Orwellian Big Brother declaration of defeat, solely in order to have the advantage in the 2008 elections ) is that it is based not on the facts on the ground in Iraq, but instead on a propaganda soundbite, created and promoted as reality by their Propaganda Ministry ( the MSM ): Iraq is in a civil war. This very concept, created by those desperate for it to be so for the sake of political gain, lays the entire foundation for the Democrats’ position. What if it were not true? Well then, the entire Democratic agenda, quite simply a demand for a retreat, would be wrong. And guess ****ing what?
You got it. I was in Ramadi when Al Qaeda blew up the Shia’s golden-domed shrine. They blew it up with the express goals of fomenting a civil war that the Iraqis clearly were not interested in, and to create the resultant American political divisiveness you see today. The entire Jihad movement very closely monitors American politics and media. They are obsessed with it. They understand that the media war is every bit as critical as the ground war. Americans, very naive and with few alternative sources, most often simply believe what they see and hear in the media, not understanding the media’s motives and manipulations, nor how the media itself has been manipulated. When the Dome was blown up, nearly all Iraqis knew it was Zarqwai and weren’t taking the bait. Meanwhile, I watched as the MSM reported on protests in Ramadi that were not happening. They reported on many phantom events in Ramadi, including the overrunning of the Ramadi Government Center, while I stood in the middle of it, with nary a shot fired all day. Were they lying about the protests? One way or another, by intent or negligence, they were. And let’s not forget, every crime has a motive. The media’s motive is to promote defeat in order to get their client, the Democratic Party, elected. ( The time for mincing words is long gone, there is too much at stake. Treason is as treason does. )
By the time the Dome blew, years had transpired without any broad civil war sentiment or activity, in an Iraq in which 90% of the households have automatic weapons. Nor did that change after the Dome blew. As armed as all Iraqis are, if the civil war game was on, we would see it as clearly as we see the hands at the ends of our arms. Instead all that we see are the violent acts of limited, special-interest sectarian gangs, comprised primarily of, well, gangsters and not the average Iraqi. Shiite and Sunni thugs ( Al Sadr of course amongst them ) used the event to whip up as many potential gang-recruits as they could, and then to go for broke with the violence and seemingly sectarian neighborhood cleansing. And it was sectarian, but sectarian only as it related to gang warfare.
And that is what we are seeing in Iraq - widespread but limited, organized gang turf wars, not the broad, populist, armed movement that is the true definition of a civil war. As it has always been from the beginning, we are not fighting the people of Iraq, we are not fighting a populist insurgency, we are fighting criminal gangs. The people of Iraq, in fact, would like to see democracy, capitalism and modern education flower in their homeland. This is why they vote in greater percentages than we Americans.
The second biggest flaw in the Democrats’ position is the illogical and self-contradictory essence of both their arguments and operating principles. They say the solution in Iraq is political, not just military, so we should retreat. This makes absolutely no sense, or can only make sense to a facile, child-like mind. The problem with their position is astoundingly simple: no political solution is possible without the military strength to implement and protect it. Their positions are at cross-purposes. You simply cannot implement a stable political infrastructure by first eliminating the effective military force that is any such infrastructure’s lifeblood. It’s like removing the amniotic fluid from a womb: the baby is not going to grow. It is going to die.
Their position is nothing short of lunacy. The Democrats have left themselves nothing but such lunactic positions, because their goals for Iraq have nothing to do with what is best for the peace and security of the United States and the world. Their goals for Iraq only have to do with what is best for the Democratic Party: make the Republican Party look bad. And the best way to do that is to make Iraq an American defeat. I have never seen such widespread naked treason, such absolute evil, in all my 42 years. They and the MSM have tunnelvision: they only care about selling their Big Brother, false script of defeat to the American people; for years they have been in a frenzy to sell this war as Vietnam - for personal gain - and now that frenzy is at a fever pitch. In their minds, they cannot, and will not, be stopped. But good people have stopped worse. We can still prevail over the American insurgents that we are now forced to fight. Their positions are so illogical and tortured because it is very hard to make what is bad for America, and indeed what will ultimately be fatal to many Americans, look good for America. This is why you keep shaking your head when you hear the Dems and the MSM speak about this war. Because just as it made no sense for Big Brother to declare “War is Peace” it makes no sense for them to declare that what is bad for America is actually good for America.
And perhaps the final problem with the Democrats’ position I will just touch on here, but will elaborate on later. Their entire posititon is completely devoid of the concept of consequences. Nowhere do they analyze for us, let alone even address, the consequences of a U.S. retreat from Iraq. It is because those consequences are almost certainly a fresh wave of civilian casualties on American soil, at the hands of Jihadis who will then have substantial portions of Iraq’s resources to use for those attacks, as well as the freedom from focusing on Iraq and the resultant freedom to focus on our homeland. They do not want you to know this, because if you do, you will not support a U.S. retreat from Iraq. Yes, they are evil. It sounds crazy, but no other word bears as legitimate a description of their behavior. They rely on us shying from such extreme language, even though it is the truest language, out of our own fear of undercutting our credibility. Credibility is not lost by operating in the extremes, it is lost by operating outside of the truth. The contemporary Democratic Party has become the most malignant internal cancer to eat at the body of America, in the history of America.Yes, clearly the Civil War is on in America.
And to quote one of the left’s own icons, Michael Stipe of REM, “The time to rise has been engaged”.
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Stopping Corruption in Iraq: Every Little bit Helps!
Bill Ardolino has just returned from an embed with Marines in Fallujah. Bill blogs from: INDC Journal. It appears that one of his posts caused quite a stir with a certain Iraqi Army General.
January 30, 2007
Ghost Soldiers Follow-Up: Backstory and Hopeful Signs of Accountability in Iraq
Posted by Bill
I'd learned about how ghost soldiers were bleeding manpower and pay from the Iraqi Army on the 17th of January, when an outgoing Military Transition Team (MiTT) member angrily complained about security operations compromised by thin Iraqi Army units that were purposefully undermanned to skim payroll. Within 24 hours, his gripe had been verified to me by several American and Iraqi sources, and it quickly became apparent that logistical and manpower difficulties partly stemming from corruption were a major impediment to the success of Iraqi Army units operating in Falllujah.
I was awakened late at night on the 18th by a marine corporal who informed me that Brigade MiTT Commander Lt. COL Clayton Fisher requested my presence as soon as possible. I walked over to Fisher's office and found the MiTT leadership in a state of slightly tense animation; the Lt. COL asked me to use my web research skills to find an article about Iraqi Army Second Brigade Commander General Khalid Juad Khadim that was apparently causing quite an uproar among the Iraqi soldiers, the Arab media and the general himself. Searching on the name of the former MiTT commander quoted in the piece, it wasn't long until I'd found Ned Parker's Times of London article exposing endemic corruption in the Iraqi Ministry of Defense and the Iraqi Army.
Having learned of the extent of this corruption in the days prior, I could see that the article was accurate except for one significant piece of information: the Iraqi general specifically accused of stealing payroll in Fallujah was not "ousted," as the article claimed, but was in fact still in command and sitting in an office 30 yards from me as I read the premature report of his professional demise. And boy, was he ticked off.
In between initially futile diplomatic missions to the general's office by the MiTT leadership, the marines staged their weapons in "Condition One" (loaded and ready) and moved me from my solo bunk to share a room with a marine; the coincidence that a journalist was embedded with the Iraqi Brigade on the same day that the Times story broke was not lost on the Americans nor the Iraqi Army officers, and the marines were prudently cautious about the potential for flaring tempers. In addition, the direct quotes in the Times article from former MiTT commander Lt. COL Teeples caused a rift of suspicion and distrust between the Khalid's staff and the current MiTT members. In my case, aside from receiving a few poisonous looks from members of Khalid's security detail, nothing came of the ill will.
Eventually the general calmed down enough to speak to the MiTT leadership, several senior officers and State Department officials. He denied all charges and demanded to file a complaint with the Marines and the US government, apparently misunderstanding the relationship between a free press and governmental entities in Western society. He vowed to fight the charges and went ahead with a planned trip to Habbaniyah the next morning. Over the next 24 hours he refused two of my interview requests, a group of men in civilian vehicles robbed his house of all valuables and the general lit a pyre of documents behind his office late at night. He then left for Baghdad early Monday morning, continuing to assert via telephone his intent to fight the charges and open the books to investigators.
On Tuesday, Iraqi First Division Maj. General Tariq Abdul Wahab Jasim announced that Khalid had been relieved.
And just this morning, I learned of the official appointment of his successor, a General Ali, who one marine describes thusly:
"He's got a great attitude and is a true leader. He's been shaking things up around here, chewing Iraqi butt like it's cool, getting the Jundi to PT and making the brigade staff ... work."
So what happened to the Iraqi Army in Fallujah?
To some extrent, General Khalid was scapegoated. While he was certainly guilty of corruption given his position's authority over the Brigade payroll, he's far from the only one; skimming is so common in the Iraqi Army and Ministry of Defense, I'd bet that you'd be hard pressed to find a senior officer without a hand in the pot. But that said, the Times article called out Khalid by name. From there, the Arab media picked up the story and ran with it, which caused quite a stir among the general's staff as well as other Iraqi Army, marine and American civilian officials. I added a very minor contribution, and within several days, the general had been relieved and replaced.
Thus begin stirrings of accountability in the Arab world.
It would be naive to think that such an event will stop corruption in the Iraqi bureacracy, but it may help curtail it; General Khalid's demise could serve as a cautionary tale to his successor and other general officers and bureacrats up the line. Instead of misreporting and skimming 50% of the pay intended for the Jundi, they might skim 20%. Instead of selling half of the fuel budgeted for operations, they may cut back to a third. And so it goes. The more the media can specifically expose individuals who prioritize criminal activity and personal gain over the establishment of Iraq's security, the better chance Iraq has to build a working government, defeat the insurgency and find stability. And it's important to note that it while the initial article appeared in a Western news outlet, it was the Arab media's repetition of the story that really generated heat among the IA officers.
Regionally, this is a new paradigm. And this exposure of and quick accountability for General Khalid's corruption were among the more encouraging things I saw during my time in Iraq.
http://www.indcjournal.com/
January 30, 2007
Ghost Soldiers Follow-Up: Backstory and Hopeful Signs of Accountability in Iraq
Posted by Bill
I'd learned about how ghost soldiers were bleeding manpower and pay from the Iraqi Army on the 17th of January, when an outgoing Military Transition Team (MiTT) member angrily complained about security operations compromised by thin Iraqi Army units that were purposefully undermanned to skim payroll. Within 24 hours, his gripe had been verified to me by several American and Iraqi sources, and it quickly became apparent that logistical and manpower difficulties partly stemming from corruption were a major impediment to the success of Iraqi Army units operating in Falllujah.
I was awakened late at night on the 18th by a marine corporal who informed me that Brigade MiTT Commander Lt. COL Clayton Fisher requested my presence as soon as possible. I walked over to Fisher's office and found the MiTT leadership in a state of slightly tense animation; the Lt. COL asked me to use my web research skills to find an article about Iraqi Army Second Brigade Commander General Khalid Juad Khadim that was apparently causing quite an uproar among the Iraqi soldiers, the Arab media and the general himself. Searching on the name of the former MiTT commander quoted in the piece, it wasn't long until I'd found Ned Parker's Times of London article exposing endemic corruption in the Iraqi Ministry of Defense and the Iraqi Army.
Having learned of the extent of this corruption in the days prior, I could see that the article was accurate except for one significant piece of information: the Iraqi general specifically accused of stealing payroll in Fallujah was not "ousted," as the article claimed, but was in fact still in command and sitting in an office 30 yards from me as I read the premature report of his professional demise. And boy, was he ticked off.
In between initially futile diplomatic missions to the general's office by the MiTT leadership, the marines staged their weapons in "Condition One" (loaded and ready) and moved me from my solo bunk to share a room with a marine; the coincidence that a journalist was embedded with the Iraqi Brigade on the same day that the Times story broke was not lost on the Americans nor the Iraqi Army officers, and the marines were prudently cautious about the potential for flaring tempers. In addition, the direct quotes in the Times article from former MiTT commander Lt. COL Teeples caused a rift of suspicion and distrust between the Khalid's staff and the current MiTT members. In my case, aside from receiving a few poisonous looks from members of Khalid's security detail, nothing came of the ill will.
Eventually the general calmed down enough to speak to the MiTT leadership, several senior officers and State Department officials. He denied all charges and demanded to file a complaint with the Marines and the US government, apparently misunderstanding the relationship between a free press and governmental entities in Western society. He vowed to fight the charges and went ahead with a planned trip to Habbaniyah the next morning. Over the next 24 hours he refused two of my interview requests, a group of men in civilian vehicles robbed his house of all valuables and the general lit a pyre of documents behind his office late at night. He then left for Baghdad early Monday morning, continuing to assert via telephone his intent to fight the charges and open the books to investigators.
On Tuesday, Iraqi First Division Maj. General Tariq Abdul Wahab Jasim announced that Khalid had been relieved.
And just this morning, I learned of the official appointment of his successor, a General Ali, who one marine describes thusly:
"He's got a great attitude and is a true leader. He's been shaking things up around here, chewing Iraqi butt like it's cool, getting the Jundi to PT and making the brigade staff ... work."
So what happened to the Iraqi Army in Fallujah?
To some extrent, General Khalid was scapegoated. While he was certainly guilty of corruption given his position's authority over the Brigade payroll, he's far from the only one; skimming is so common in the Iraqi Army and Ministry of Defense, I'd bet that you'd be hard pressed to find a senior officer without a hand in the pot. But that said, the Times article called out Khalid by name. From there, the Arab media picked up the story and ran with it, which caused quite a stir among the general's staff as well as other Iraqi Army, marine and American civilian officials. I added a very minor contribution, and within several days, the general had been relieved and replaced.
Thus begin stirrings of accountability in the Arab world.
It would be naive to think that such an event will stop corruption in the Iraqi bureacracy, but it may help curtail it; General Khalid's demise could serve as a cautionary tale to his successor and other general officers and bureacrats up the line. Instead of misreporting and skimming 50% of the pay intended for the Jundi, they might skim 20%. Instead of selling half of the fuel budgeted for operations, they may cut back to a third. And so it goes. The more the media can specifically expose individuals who prioritize criminal activity and personal gain over the establishment of Iraq's security, the better chance Iraq has to build a working government, defeat the insurgency and find stability. And it's important to note that it while the initial article appeared in a Western news outlet, it was the Arab media's repetition of the story that really generated heat among the IA officers.
Regionally, this is a new paradigm. And this exposure of and quick accountability for General Khalid's corruption were among the more encouraging things I saw during my time in Iraq.
http://www.indcjournal.com/
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
2nd Lt. Mark Daily from 2nd Battalion, 7th Cavalry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division, based out of Fort Bliss Texas
2nd Lt Mark Daily was killed in Iraq on January 15th, 2007 along wtih three other Soldiers from 2nd Battalion, 7th Cavalry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division, based out of Fort Bliss Texas. What follows is his MySpace posting to explain why an honoured college graduate such as he would join the Army and volunteer for a tour of duty in Iraq.
Sunday, October 29, 2006
WHY I JOINED
Current mood: optimistic
Why I Joined:
This question has been asked of me so many times in so many different contexts that I thought it would be best if I wrote my reasons for joining the Army on my page for all to see. First, the more accurate question is why I volunteered to go to Iraq. After all, I joined the Army a week after we declared war on Saddam's government with the intention of going to Iraq. Now, after years of training and preparation, I am finally here.
Much has changed in the last three years. The criminal Ba'ath regime has been replaced by an insurgency fueled by Iraq's neighbors who hope to partition Iraq for their own ends. This is coupled with the ever present transnational militant Islamist movement which has seized upon Iraq as the greatest way to kill Americans, along with anyone else they happen to be standing near. What was once a paralyzed state of fear is now the staging ground for one of the largest transformations of power and ideology the Middle East has experienced since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Thanks to Iran, Syria, and other enlightened local actors, this transformation will be plagued by interregional hatred and genocide. And I am now in the center of this.
Is this why I joined?
Yes. Much has been said about America's intentions in overthrowing Saddam Hussein and seeking to establish a new state based upon political representation and individual rights. Many have framed the paradigm through which they view the conflict around one-word explanations such as "oil" or "terrorism," favoring the one which best serves their political persuasion. I did the same thing, and anyone who knew me before I joined knows that I am quite aware and at times sympathetic to the arguments against the war in Iraq. If you think the only way a person could bring themselves to volunteer for this war is through sheer desperation or blind obedience then consider me the exception (though there are countless like me).
I joined the fight because it occurred to me that many modern day "humanists" who claim to possess a genuine concern for human beings throughout the world are in fact quite content to allow their fellow "global citizens" to suffer under the most hideous state apparatuses and conditions. Their excuses used to be my excuses. When asked why we shouldn't confront the Ba'ath party, the Taliban or the various other tyrannies throughout this world, my answers would allude to vague notions of cultural tolerance (forcing women to wear a veil and stay indoors is such a quaint cultural tradition), the sanctity of national sovereignty (how eager we internationalists are to throw up borders to defend dictatorships!) or even a creeping suspicion of America's intentions. When all else failed, I would retreat to my fragile moral ecosystem that years of living in peace and liberty had provided me. I would write off war because civilian casualties were guaranteed, or temporary alliances with illiberal forces would be made, or tank fuel was toxic for the environment. My fellow "humanists" and I would relish contently in our self righteous declaration of opposition against all military campaigns against dictatorships, congratulating one another for refusing to taint that aforementioned fragile moral ecosystem that many still cradle with all the revolutionary tenacity of the members of Rage Against the Machine and Greenday. Others would point to America's historical support of Saddam Hussein, sighting it as hypocritical that we would now vilify him as a thug and a tyrant. Upon explaining that we did so to ward off the fiercely Islamist Iran, which was correctly identified as the greater threat at the time, eyes are rolled and hypocrisy is declared. Forgetting that America sided with Stalin to defeat Hitler, who was promptly confronted once the Nazis were destroyed, America's initial engagement with Saddam and other regional actors is identified as the ultimate argument against America's moral crusade.
And maybe it is. Maybe the reality of politics makes all political action inherently crude and immoral. Or maybe it is these adventures in philosophical masturbation that prevent people from ever taking any kind of effective action against men like Saddam Hussein. One thing is for certain, as disagreeable or as confusing as my decision to enter the fray may be, consider what peace vigils against genocide have accomplished lately. Consider that there are 19 year old soldiers from the Midwest who have never touched a college campus or a protest who have done more to uphold the universal legitimacy of representative government and individual rights by placing themselves between Iraqi voting lines and homicidal religious fanatics. Often times it is less about how clean your actions are and more about how pure your intentions are.
So that is why I joined. In the time it took for you to read this explanation, innocent people your age have suffered under the crushing misery of tyranny. Every tool of philosophical advancement and communication that we use to develop our opinions about this war are denied to countless human beings on this planet, many of whom live under the regimes that have, in my opinion, been legitimately targeted for destruction. Some have allowed their resentment of the President to stir silent applause for setbacks in Iraq. Others have ironically decried the war because it has tied up our forces and prevented them from confronting criminal regimes in Sudan, Uganda, and elsewhere.
I simply decided that the time for candid discussions of the oppressed was over, and I joined.
In digesting this posting, please remember that America's commitment to overthrow Saddam Hussein and his sons existed before the current administration and would exist into our future children's lives had we not acted. Please remember that the problems that plague Iraq today were set in motion centuries ago and were up until now held back by the most cruel of cages. Don't forget that human beings have a responsibility to one another and that Americans will always have a responsibility to the oppressed. Don't overlook the obvious reasons to disagree with the war but don't cheapen the moral aspects either. Assisting a formerly oppressed population in converting their torn society into a plural, democratic one is dangerous and difficult business, especially when being attacked and sabotaged from literally every direction. So if you have anything to say to me at the end of this reading, let it at least include "Good Luck"
Mark Daily
On his MySpace front page, he featured this quote:
"Patience demolishes mountains" -Arab proverb
He wanted to be a journalist.
These are the kind and caliber of men who fight for us. Twenty-three years young. God rest his soul. And never, never forget.
Sunday, October 29, 2006
WHY I JOINED
Current mood: optimistic
Why I Joined:
This question has been asked of me so many times in so many different contexts that I thought it would be best if I wrote my reasons for joining the Army on my page for all to see. First, the more accurate question is why I volunteered to go to Iraq. After all, I joined the Army a week after we declared war on Saddam's government with the intention of going to Iraq. Now, after years of training and preparation, I am finally here.
Much has changed in the last three years. The criminal Ba'ath regime has been replaced by an insurgency fueled by Iraq's neighbors who hope to partition Iraq for their own ends. This is coupled with the ever present transnational militant Islamist movement which has seized upon Iraq as the greatest way to kill Americans, along with anyone else they happen to be standing near. What was once a paralyzed state of fear is now the staging ground for one of the largest transformations of power and ideology the Middle East has experienced since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Thanks to Iran, Syria, and other enlightened local actors, this transformation will be plagued by interregional hatred and genocide. And I am now in the center of this.
Is this why I joined?
Yes. Much has been said about America's intentions in overthrowing Saddam Hussein and seeking to establish a new state based upon political representation and individual rights. Many have framed the paradigm through which they view the conflict around one-word explanations such as "oil" or "terrorism," favoring the one which best serves their political persuasion. I did the same thing, and anyone who knew me before I joined knows that I am quite aware and at times sympathetic to the arguments against the war in Iraq. If you think the only way a person could bring themselves to volunteer for this war is through sheer desperation or blind obedience then consider me the exception (though there are countless like me).
I joined the fight because it occurred to me that many modern day "humanists" who claim to possess a genuine concern for human beings throughout the world are in fact quite content to allow their fellow "global citizens" to suffer under the most hideous state apparatuses and conditions. Their excuses used to be my excuses. When asked why we shouldn't confront the Ba'ath party, the Taliban or the various other tyrannies throughout this world, my answers would allude to vague notions of cultural tolerance (forcing women to wear a veil and stay indoors is such a quaint cultural tradition), the sanctity of national sovereignty (how eager we internationalists are to throw up borders to defend dictatorships!) or even a creeping suspicion of America's intentions. When all else failed, I would retreat to my fragile moral ecosystem that years of living in peace and liberty had provided me. I would write off war because civilian casualties were guaranteed, or temporary alliances with illiberal forces would be made, or tank fuel was toxic for the environment. My fellow "humanists" and I would relish contently in our self righteous declaration of opposition against all military campaigns against dictatorships, congratulating one another for refusing to taint that aforementioned fragile moral ecosystem that many still cradle with all the revolutionary tenacity of the members of Rage Against the Machine and Greenday. Others would point to America's historical support of Saddam Hussein, sighting it as hypocritical that we would now vilify him as a thug and a tyrant. Upon explaining that we did so to ward off the fiercely Islamist Iran, which was correctly identified as the greater threat at the time, eyes are rolled and hypocrisy is declared. Forgetting that America sided with Stalin to defeat Hitler, who was promptly confronted once the Nazis were destroyed, America's initial engagement with Saddam and other regional actors is identified as the ultimate argument against America's moral crusade.
And maybe it is. Maybe the reality of politics makes all political action inherently crude and immoral. Or maybe it is these adventures in philosophical masturbation that prevent people from ever taking any kind of effective action against men like Saddam Hussein. One thing is for certain, as disagreeable or as confusing as my decision to enter the fray may be, consider what peace vigils against genocide have accomplished lately. Consider that there are 19 year old soldiers from the Midwest who have never touched a college campus or a protest who have done more to uphold the universal legitimacy of representative government and individual rights by placing themselves between Iraqi voting lines and homicidal religious fanatics. Often times it is less about how clean your actions are and more about how pure your intentions are.
So that is why I joined. In the time it took for you to read this explanation, innocent people your age have suffered under the crushing misery of tyranny. Every tool of philosophical advancement and communication that we use to develop our opinions about this war are denied to countless human beings on this planet, many of whom live under the regimes that have, in my opinion, been legitimately targeted for destruction. Some have allowed their resentment of the President to stir silent applause for setbacks in Iraq. Others have ironically decried the war because it has tied up our forces and prevented them from confronting criminal regimes in Sudan, Uganda, and elsewhere.
I simply decided that the time for candid discussions of the oppressed was over, and I joined.
In digesting this posting, please remember that America's commitment to overthrow Saddam Hussein and his sons existed before the current administration and would exist into our future children's lives had we not acted. Please remember that the problems that plague Iraq today were set in motion centuries ago and were up until now held back by the most cruel of cages. Don't forget that human beings have a responsibility to one another and that Americans will always have a responsibility to the oppressed. Don't overlook the obvious reasons to disagree with the war but don't cheapen the moral aspects either. Assisting a formerly oppressed population in converting their torn society into a plural, democratic one is dangerous and difficult business, especially when being attacked and sabotaged from literally every direction. So if you have anything to say to me at the end of this reading, let it at least include "Good Luck"
Mark Daily
On his MySpace front page, he featured this quote:
"Patience demolishes mountains" -Arab proverb
He wanted to be a journalist.
These are the kind and caliber of men who fight for us. Twenty-three years young. God rest his soul. And never, never forget.
Monday, January 15, 2007
Canada Must Stay the Course in Afghanistan
This following column by Edmonton Sun columnist Doug Beazley who recently returned from embedding with Candian troops in Iraq. I give him full marks for supporting the Canadian troops in Iraq. Where I sharply disagree with him is his assertion that everthing that has gone wrong in Iraq is the fault of president Bush. He's also only partly right about many in Pakistan supporting the Taliban. In fact Islamist forces within the Iraqi military and intellegence service actually created the Taliban. Further Pakistan was one of only three countries to recognize the Taliban as the official government of Afghanistan. The other teo were Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
It was essential at the beginning og the war that Bush make nuclear armed Pakistan make Musharaf, president of Pakistan where his best interests lay. Musharaf is on shaky ground at the moment and has been the target of assisination attempts.
Beazely's got it right though that Canada must stay and help the people of Afghanistan get back to a sustainable way of life:
Sun, January 14, 2007
For Dion, Afghanistan is Quebec
By Doug Beazley
A cop stole my glove when I was in Kabul last month. He didn't keep it long - I'd dropped one leather glove on the sidewalk where I was conducting an interview, and a passing Afghan officer pocketed it.
He gave it back, sheepishly, when I asked for it. The event struck me at the time as being symbolic. The real problem with Afghanistan after the Taliban isn't war, or the drug trade. It's that the country remains so impoverished and mired in official graft that even police officers have to resort to petty theft to keep warm.
And it's not going to get any better any time soon - not as long as U.S. President George W. Bush stays in office, and certainly not if the Liberals under Stephane Dion take power after the next election. For Bush, the aim in Afghanistan was to crush the Taliban quickly and cheaply, and then move on to further triumphs in Iraq. We all saw how well that turned out.
For Dion, the Liberals' Afghanistan policy is actually their Quebec policy. The party badly needs to rebuild itself in Quebec and block any Conservative gains there. And the Afghanistan mission is especially unpopular in Quebec, where it is closely linked with the blundering Bush administration.
The rest of the column is here:http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Columnists/Beazley_Doug/2007/01/13/3361716.html
It was essential at the beginning og the war that Bush make nuclear armed Pakistan make Musharaf, president of Pakistan where his best interests lay. Musharaf is on shaky ground at the moment and has been the target of assisination attempts.
Beazely's got it right though that Canada must stay and help the people of Afghanistan get back to a sustainable way of life:
Sun, January 14, 2007
For Dion, Afghanistan is Quebec
By Doug Beazley
A cop stole my glove when I was in Kabul last month. He didn't keep it long - I'd dropped one leather glove on the sidewalk where I was conducting an interview, and a passing Afghan officer pocketed it.
He gave it back, sheepishly, when I asked for it. The event struck me at the time as being symbolic. The real problem with Afghanistan after the Taliban isn't war, or the drug trade. It's that the country remains so impoverished and mired in official graft that even police officers have to resort to petty theft to keep warm.
And it's not going to get any better any time soon - not as long as U.S. President George W. Bush stays in office, and certainly not if the Liberals under Stephane Dion take power after the next election. For Bush, the aim in Afghanistan was to crush the Taliban quickly and cheaply, and then move on to further triumphs in Iraq. We all saw how well that turned out.
For Dion, the Liberals' Afghanistan policy is actually their Quebec policy. The party badly needs to rebuild itself in Quebec and block any Conservative gains there. And the Afghanistan mission is especially unpopular in Quebec, where it is closely linked with the blundering Bush administration.
The rest of the column is here:http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Columnists/Beazley_Doug/2007/01/13/3361716.html
Friday, December 22, 2006
SUPPORT THE TROOPS
WISH THEM A MERRY AND SAFE CHRISTMAS
"Since August ... let's see," said McMahon, scanning a clipboard. "We've moved 6,743 bags of mail, weighing a total of 116,883 kilos.
"Now, in this last week, you're talking 835 bags, 14,500 kilos. Since Dec. 8."
A little over 2,000 kilos a day. And not all of it even addressed to anyone in particular.
Since September, when Operation Medusa really turned Afghanistan and the Canadian military into a hot topic back home, there's been an outpouring of sympathy and support from hundreds of thousands of Canadian civilians - most of whom, apparently, don't actually know anyone serving overseas.
"We get a ton of unaddressed mail, usually posted to 'anyone in the Canadian Forces,'" said McMahon. "Padre usually gets it, and it takes a long time to get through.''
And the things they send. Toothpaste. Cookies. Candy. Toiletries. Sudoku puzzle books.
"Those things were huge a few months back," said Cpl. Claude Robichaud of the Fleet Mail Office.
There's also Kraft Dinner - tons of it.
"I guess it gives the guys on the line a break from rations, but we've been getting an awful lot of it," said Robichaud. "All it takes is for one guy on leave to say, 'Gee, I sure miss KD when I'm in Afghanistan,' and it's an avalanche."
Just this week, the Canadian Forces issued a press release pleading with the public to stop sending unaddressed care packages to Afghanistan.
"The CF resupply system cannot handle care packages addressed to 'Any CF member' for a variety of reasons, including security and volume," the release said.
The military does encourage people to write or post messages to the troops.
You can post electronically at:
http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/Community/Messageboard/index_e.asp
If you want to send something unaddressed via snail mail, you can do that too. Go to the forces website at www.forces.gc.ca and follow the links to find the addresses.
The above was written by Doug Beasly from Afghanistan for Sun Media. What follows is from the official site:
In addition to providing morale and welfare programs, activities, and services to enhance the quality of life of the CF community, the CFPSA offers Canadians several ways of supporting the dedicated men and women who serve our country.
The mission re-supply system is designed to move operational and operational support equipment. Donated goods do not qualify as such, and can only be moved when space is available. Such space is extremely limited and its use requires extensive coordination in order to keep it under control. If you are an individual or a group external to the CF, please use one of the options listed on this page:
This restriction does not apply to CF family members and personal friends who can send parcels to individual CF members overseas by following guidelines available at http://www.cfpsa.com/en/psp/mil/sending_e.asp
Buying official "Support Our Troops" merchandise: The only "Support Our Troops" merchandise sanctioned by the CF,includes ball caps, t-shirts, car and fridge magnets, cling vinyl window decals, bracelets, lapel pins, and more. Order these and other items online at CANEX. All proceeds from the sales of CFPSA "Support Our Troops" items are reinvested directly into morale and welfare programs for CF members and their families.
"Since August ... let's see," said McMahon, scanning a clipboard. "We've moved 6,743 bags of mail, weighing a total of 116,883 kilos.
"Now, in this last week, you're talking 835 bags, 14,500 kilos. Since Dec. 8."
A little over 2,000 kilos a day. And not all of it even addressed to anyone in particular.
Since September, when Operation Medusa really turned Afghanistan and the Canadian military into a hot topic back home, there's been an outpouring of sympathy and support from hundreds of thousands of Canadian civilians - most of whom, apparently, don't actually know anyone serving overseas.
"We get a ton of unaddressed mail, usually posted to 'anyone in the Canadian Forces,'" said McMahon. "Padre usually gets it, and it takes a long time to get through.''
And the things they send. Toothpaste. Cookies. Candy. Toiletries. Sudoku puzzle books.
"Those things were huge a few months back," said Cpl. Claude Robichaud of the Fleet Mail Office.
There's also Kraft Dinner - tons of it.
"I guess it gives the guys on the line a break from rations, but we've been getting an awful lot of it," said Robichaud. "All it takes is for one guy on leave to say, 'Gee, I sure miss KD when I'm in Afghanistan,' and it's an avalanche."
Just this week, the Canadian Forces issued a press release pleading with the public to stop sending unaddressed care packages to Afghanistan.
"The CF resupply system cannot handle care packages addressed to 'Any CF member' for a variety of reasons, including security and volume," the release said.
The military does encourage people to write or post messages to the troops.
You can post electronically at:
http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/Community/Messageboard/index_e.asp
If you want to send something unaddressed via snail mail, you can do that too. Go to the forces website at www.forces.gc.ca and follow the links to find the addresses.
The above was written by Doug Beasly from Afghanistan for Sun Media. What follows is from the official site:
In addition to providing morale and welfare programs, activities, and services to enhance the quality of life of the CF community, the CFPSA offers Canadians several ways of supporting the dedicated men and women who serve our country.
The mission re-supply system is designed to move operational and operational support equipment. Donated goods do not qualify as such, and can only be moved when space is available. Such space is extremely limited and its use requires extensive coordination in order to keep it under control. If you are an individual or a group external to the CF, please use one of the options listed on this page:
This restriction does not apply to CF family members and personal friends who can send parcels to individual CF members overseas by following guidelines available at http://www.cfpsa.com/en/psp/mil/sending_e.asp
Buying official "Support Our Troops" merchandise: The only "Support Our Troops" merchandise sanctioned by the CF,includes ball caps, t-shirts, car and fridge magnets, cling vinyl window decals, bracelets, lapel pins, and more. Order these and other items online at CANEX. All proceeds from the sales of CFPSA "Support Our Troops" items are reinvested directly into morale and welfare programs for CF members and their families.
Thursday, December 21, 2006
Canadian troops launch major offensive in Panjwaii district
BILL GRAVELAND Wed Dec 20, 11:05 AM ET
MAS'UM GHAR,
Afghanistan (CP) - Canadian troops and tanks rolled into a small town in the Panjwaii district Wednesday as Canada launched its first major offensive as part of Operation Baaz Tsuka.
Members of Charles Company Combat Team - consisting of two troops of Canadian Leopard tanks, a company of light armoured vehicles, three platoons of infantry, a company of Afghan National Army soldiers as well as artillery and support - left the forward operating base near the village of Bazar-e-Panjwaii early Wednesday as bright sunlight burst over the local mountains. The destination was Howz-e Madad, located just north of the Arghandab River.
"We've been like caged leopards I guess, waiting to get out on the prowl," said Cpl. Steve Hamel, 28, of Canal Flats, B.C. sitting in a long line of armoured vehicles.
"You'd be crazy not to be nervous but everybody's going to fall back on their training so it's all good. You get more of an adrenaline rush," he added.
The goal of the mission is to either kill or force hardline Taliban leaders to leave the Panjwaii-Zahre district, an area that was once the heartland of the Taliban, where Canadian troops have been in bloody skirmishes with them for the past several months.
My hope is that our troops slaughter as many of the bastards as they can find while taking minimum casualties. The rest of the above article is here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/cpress/20061220/ca_pr_on_na/afghan_cda_baaz_tsuka
MAS'UM GHAR,
Afghanistan (CP) - Canadian troops and tanks rolled into a small town in the Panjwaii district Wednesday as Canada launched its first major offensive as part of Operation Baaz Tsuka.
Members of Charles Company Combat Team - consisting of two troops of Canadian Leopard tanks, a company of light armoured vehicles, three platoons of infantry, a company of Afghan National Army soldiers as well as artillery and support - left the forward operating base near the village of Bazar-e-Panjwaii early Wednesday as bright sunlight burst over the local mountains. The destination was Howz-e Madad, located just north of the Arghandab River.
"We've been like caged leopards I guess, waiting to get out on the prowl," said Cpl. Steve Hamel, 28, of Canal Flats, B.C. sitting in a long line of armoured vehicles.
"You'd be crazy not to be nervous but everybody's going to fall back on their training so it's all good. You get more of an adrenaline rush," he added.
The goal of the mission is to either kill or force hardline Taliban leaders to leave the Panjwaii-Zahre district, an area that was once the heartland of the Taliban, where Canadian troops have been in bloody skirmishes with them for the past several months.
My hope is that our troops slaughter as many of the bastards as they can find while taking minimum casualties. The rest of the above article is here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/cpress/20061220/ca_pr_on_na/afghan_cda_baaz_tsuka
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
The Killing Zone
Here's another report from Sun Media's Doug Beazley embedded with Canadian troops in Afghanistan. I suspect Cpl. Singh won't hestitate to fire the next time.
Climb aboard Master Cpl. Andy Singh's Bison and enter ...
By DOUG BEAZLEY, SUN MEDIA
They were rolling down from Panjwayi to Kandahar Airfield, and they were halfway home when the radio started squawking.
Vehicle approaching on the left, coming slow. Black Toyota Corolla. One occupant. Everybody move to the right.
Master Cpl. Andy Singh was in the cockpit of his Bison transport, head and shoulders clear of the roof, his C-6 light machine gun pointed at the horizon, his finger on the trigger.
RAW AND RED
"We were doing about 60 kmh when the car came up on the left. I was sighting him with my gun," said Singh, rubbing the tips of his fingers together - still raw and red from where he lost the skin.
"I could see his face. He was a really young guy, maybe his early 20s, light beard. He looked me in the eyes.
"I swear ... and I know how this sounds ... he looked like he didn't want to do what he was going to do. He looked like he was saying 'sorry.' "
The next moment, a bright orange ball of light the size of a grapefruit burned away the suicide bomber's face. There was a loud crack, and the car dissolved in a ring of shrapnel.
Read the rest: http://www.torontosun.com/News/Afghanistan/Sun/2006/12/20/2895721-sun.html
Climb aboard Master Cpl. Andy Singh's Bison and enter ...
By DOUG BEAZLEY, SUN MEDIA
They were rolling down from Panjwayi to Kandahar Airfield, and they were halfway home when the radio started squawking.
Vehicle approaching on the left, coming slow. Black Toyota Corolla. One occupant. Everybody move to the right.
Master Cpl. Andy Singh was in the cockpit of his Bison transport, head and shoulders clear of the roof, his C-6 light machine gun pointed at the horizon, his finger on the trigger.
RAW AND RED
"We were doing about 60 kmh when the car came up on the left. I was sighting him with my gun," said Singh, rubbing the tips of his fingers together - still raw and red from where he lost the skin.
"I could see his face. He was a really young guy, maybe his early 20s, light beard. He looked me in the eyes.
"I swear ... and I know how this sounds ... he looked like he didn't want to do what he was going to do. He looked like he was saying 'sorry.' "
The next moment, a bright orange ball of light the size of a grapefruit burned away the suicide bomber's face. There was a loud crack, and the car dissolved in a ring of shrapnel.
Read the rest: http://www.torontosun.com/News/Afghanistan/Sun/2006/12/20/2895721-sun.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
