Looks like the IVAW peeps got themselves an invite to testify before the incredibly powerful Congressional Progressive Caucus, and I will be there, ready to rhetorically slay them with the jawbone of an [Kucinich].
WHAT: Winter Soldier on the Hill
WHO: Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW) & The Congressional Progressive Caucus
WHEN: May 15, 2008, 9:30am-12:30pm
WHERE: 2261 Rayburn House Office Building
WHY: To present eyewitness accounts of the Iraq occupation to Congress.
WHO: Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW) & The Congressional Progressive Caucus
WHEN: May 15, 2008, 9:30am-12:30pm
WHERE: 2261 Rayburn House Office Building
WHY: To present eyewitness accounts of the Iraq occupation to Congress.
OK, first off, this is ridiculous. Just so you realize, they aren't testifying before the House Armed Services Commitee. They aren't testifying before the Foreign Relations or Veterans' Affairs Committees. They are testifying before the Congressional Progressive Caucus, which means they will literally be preaching to the choir.
What will they be testifying on?
Washington, DC On May 15, members of Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW) will testify under oath before Congress about their eyewitness accounts of the military occupation of Iraq. Testifiers will include veterans who served during the surge.
This testimony represents a shift from reports to Congress from high-level commanders and political appointees to direct accounts from boots-on-the-ground soldiers and Marines about the situation in Iraq. Testifiers will detail the ineffectiveness of the "troop surge," the dehumanization, abuse and killing of innocent Iraqi civilians, and the breakdown of the military as a result of the ongoing occupation of Iraq.
Yeah, I've heard all that before. But who will be testifying?
Testifiers will include Luis Montalvan, who served two tours in Iraq as an Army Captain; Jason Washburn, a US Marine Corps Infantry Rifleman who served three tours in Iraq; and Kristofer Goldsmith, who served in the Army as an Artillery Forward Observer in Sadr City, Iraq.
Awesome. The Wrath of (Ghenghis) Khan returns! Can't wait to see them react to his smarmy jackassery. That ought to be good.
Anyway, as it just so happens, I have that day off of work to go see my beloved Red Sox beat the hell out of Baltimore, so I will attend this hearing, assuming it is open to the public. Should be good times! So, stay tuned for more fun.
16 comments:
"Mr. Montalvan, your time is up"
"No it isn't"
{Scuffle}
Sounds like a good time.
I just got in contact with my Congressman's office and they're making arrangements for us to attend. Good catch, TSO.
So TSO, will you attempt to address Mr. Montalvan publically in this arena to show the contradictions he has brought to light every other time he's tried to tell his jumbled up stories?
Unfortunately, I'm not certain that this arena will be one I can do that in. However, we could always write up testimony and submit it, or atleast put it out front of the hearing room.
Well, if you're going to waste time writing something that no one will read, why not just pen a letter to Santa? Or Gandalf? I hear that he and Magneto were related...and they both drove Jeep Wranglers...I'm just sayin'.
This is a repeat of 1971. Just amazing the playbook copying they've done. The SFRC would not give Kerry's opposition any time to speak then, and I'm sure this "Progressive Caucus" will likewise marginalize any contrary voices.
One point, I don't recall any IVAW-WS witnesses who had actually been in Iraq during the surge. Yet delegitimizing the surge seems to be their prime goal.
I also recall that being under oath, or testifying before some of the ad hoc committees in 1971 while not under oath, but under criminal consequences of false testimony to Congress nonetheless, (Dellums committee, McGovern committee, etc.) did not deter some VVAW witnesses from lying anyway.
But if we can prove lies in these venues today, it would be a different story. They could be made to pay.
Will there be escorts to the bathrooms again? Or on-site psychological counsellors for those who become hysterical during the testimony?
Claymore;
If written counter-testimony can also be entered into the Congressional Record, it will help a lot in the future. The only record of the VVAW WS 1971 that has stood the test of time was their Detroit testimony as recorded in the C/R by Sen. Hatfield. It has been the source of all "conventional wisdom" about Vietnam "atrocities" ever since, and may always be, in spite of all the extraneous writings debunking much of it in magazines and newspaper articles over the past 40 years.
It is very important to get side-by-side rebuttal for the truth in the same historical source record - and the primary historical source record at that.
I'd be willing to bet the "progressive caucus" will block this.
That's the thing, THEY ARE NOT TESTIFYING BEFORE A COMMITTEE. And I highly doubt that it will be "under oath." This is only a Caucus. So I could go up there and say I fornicated with Mrs Claus and they couldn't do anything about it.
Once again, more ridiculousness.
If this testimony gets official recognition, as it now must, this should be the needed impetus for the military (NCIS, CID) to investigate their claims. This is actually what we want, especially if the military can be persuaded to make their findings public - NOT what happened in 1971-73.
It took us 36 years to find out the truth about the CID investigation of WS-1971!
TSO- It does not matter if they are under oath or not.
It took a while to settle this question about Kerry in 1971 before the SFRC. He was NOT under oath. But in testifying to any congressional group, official or ad hoc, there is separate law governing truthfulness of testimony. There is legal exposure.
In fact, I believe this is what sent Martha Stewart (or some other high profile case recently) to prison. They had no substantive case aggainst her, but she was charged and convicted of lying to the FBI - if memory servbes.
The same applies for testimony before any governmental investigative body.
I agree on all that, but I do not believe that a Caucus is such a body.
They are taking testimony from a guy who argued for the surge before the surge was cool, a guy who claims he killed a grandmother with a Mk19, and a guy who failed trying to kill himself then was booted for malingering.
I think it's safe to say that this testimony be long on hilarity, and short on effectiveness.
...I'm starting a Hot Wheels Caucus today and we're investigating why my mother felt it necessary to deprive me of my collection of toys and sell them at a yard sale. REPARATIONS!!!! I DEMAND REPARATIONS!!!!!!!!
TSO - some interesting counter-balance to this caucus of retards would be Michael Yon since he was actually in Iraq with the troops during the surge and his new book covers it quite well. Goldsmith truly sounds like a "winner"... pizza delivering malingerer. Yeah I'd trust him to tell the truth.
Robin-
I have always said that if I were king for a day I would spend that day with Yon. He's the only guy without an agenda that could give the real poop. I wish I were a Congressman, cause I would bring him in in 3 seconds to testify. He wouldn't want to do it probably, but I trust no one on earth as much as him. I read his book in 2 days, it was phenomenal.
Why is it that Robin always has an insult to throw out at a veteran she disagree's with politically?
Post a Comment