Wednesday, April 28, 2010

Controversy Over US WarShip Named For Murtha

Whew! Somebody got paid off here big time:

Murtha — “our dear Jack,” as Pelosi referred to him — deserved the honor as a tireless advocate for troops generally and Marines in particular, she said, and she recalled admiring his rapport with them.

“Whether on the battlefield, or on the bedside, he thanked them for their courage, listened to their concerns, and asked them for comment — and he answered their needs, and responded to their calls, whether it was for body armor, up-armored vehicles… radios, you name it,” Pelosi said. “In those minutes [together], he bonded with them especially because he would share his own personal military service with them, and cared for them as a father. They knew it, and they returned his respect.”

Oh barf! The guy who cuddled up to Code Pink, the same people who bragged about $600,000 to the enemies who shot at our troops in Fallujah? The guy who accused innocent Marines of being 'cold-blooded murderers' on national TV and leaned on the brass to put them through hell before they were even tried?

Apparently there are a lot of servicemen who aren't 'returning his respect'. Or rather, they're returning exactly the respect they received from Fat Jack Murtha:

..thousands of Web users remembered a different Murtha — the one who opposed the Iraq war and accused Marines in 2005 of killing Iraqis “in cold blood” — when reacting to the announcement about the ship named in his honor. A Facebook group called “People Against Naming A Navy Ship USS Murtha” had 1,336 members as of Monday morning, and it was becoming a clearinghouse for angry comments and homemade cartoons criticizing Murtha.

Posters on the Facebook page said Murtha, who served in the Marine Corps during the Korean and Vietnam eras, “betrayed the brotherhood,” that naming a ship for him was a “slap in the face” and that if the Navy wanted to name a ship for him, it should have chosen “a nice, stinky garbage scow.”

The Navy was getting angry responses even on its own official website, where visitors used the same page where the announcement appeared to criticize it. Visitors called the decision to name a ship for Murtha “an absolute disgrace,” “inappropriate” and said it was just as bad as naming a warship for Benedict Arnold.

“The naming of LPD 26 after John Murtha is inappropriate,” wrote David Martin. “There many men and women with greater records of valor and service to the country who deserve the honor of having a warship named in their memory before John Murtha has a warship [named] in his honor. He made sure there was an airport named after himself. What more does there need to be?”

Actually, there were close to 4,000 members on Facebook when I last looked.

please helps me write more gooder!

1 comment:

B.Poster said...

A key difference that stands out at the beginning of this piece that Mr. Khan is not accounting for is Jews in Holocaust era Germany had very little representation within the German government government or within the German media. In fact, they had very little support any where they could rely upon.

In contrast, Muslims in America have representatives at virtually every level of the American government who are diligently watching out for the interests 24/7. Not only this, but they have representatives in simillary positions within the private sector. Finally, they have numerous allies in the media. As such, it is going to be virtually impossible to slander them. Because of all of this Muslims as victims simply doesn't hold any water.

You are correct to point out that it is there numerous actions that lead people to mistrust them. It is not how they are being portrayed in the media.