Wounded U.S. Troops Describe Massive Insurgent Firepower in Fallujah
Mood:  blue
Topic: Impending Draft
Wounded U.S. Troops Describe
Massive Insurgent Firepower in Fallujah
By Tony Czuczka
The Associated Press

Monday 15 November 2004

Landstuhl, Germany - Fallujah's masked fighters have been fighting house to house, firing from rooftops and mosques with a seemingly unending supply of firepower, wounded U.S. servicemen said Monday, recounting tough urban combat in the Iraqi insurgent stronghold.

"They were ready to fight to the death," Lance Cpl. Travis Schafer, a rifleman with a Marine battalion, told a news conference at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, where he was being treated for a shrapnel wound in his right hand. A rocket-propelled grenade had exploded 15 yards to his right in a deserted marketplace.

"It's house-to-house fighting," he said. "Rooftop-to-rooftop."

About 70 wounded soldiers have been arriving daily at the military hospital in Germany since the week-old offensive in Fallujah began - about twice the normal number of casualties from Iraq.

The troops said the insurgents appeared well-organized and heavily armed.

"They had their own little plan of what they were going to do, a pretty set idea of where they were going to fight," said U.S. Army Spc. Kris Clinkscales, 22, of San Antonio, Texas, his right arm in a sling with shrapnel wounds.

Schafer, of Puyallup, Wash., was surprised by the fighters' firepower.

"It seemed like they have a pretty unlimited amount of RPGs and mortars. They seemed to fling those about wildly," he said.

Schafer, with the 1st Marine Regiment, said his unit had only pushed 400 yards into the city before it took heavy fire from small arms, mortars and RPGs.

"They were locking on us with RPGs and mortars from buildings all around us," the 20-year-old said. "Even from mosques they were firing - from all over the place."

Lance Cpl. Ryan Chapman with the 1st Marine Regiment, had an ugly scar over his left eye - a reminder of his encounter with a sniper.

As his unit came under sustained fire, Chapman had been tracking a sniper with the telescopic sight of his wire-guided missile launcher. But he was hit first, with bullet striking his forehead just below the edge of his helmet.

Chapman, 22, of Lawrence, Kansas, acknowledged he had been lucky, but he said he was eager to get back into action.

"It's nothing too serious. It cracked my skull, but I think it looks worse than it is," he said. "I want to go back - my buddies are out there."

He was among 419 patients admitted to Landstuhl in the last week, 233 of whom had combat-related injuries, according to doctors. The most common wounds have been from bullets or blast injuries from rocket-propelled grenades.

While most the recent casualties in Landstuhl are from Fallujah, officials do not have a precise breakdown.

Another 46 wounded troops from Iraq were en route to the hospital Monday, Landstuhl spokeswoman Marie Shaw said.

The offensive in Fallujah has killed at least 38 American troops and six Iraqi soldiers. The number of U.S. troops wounded is now 275, although more than 60 have returned to duty. U.S. officials estimated more than 1,200 insurgents have been killed.

No estimate of civilian casualties has been given.

US Death Toll Rises in Fallujah
Mood:  blue
Now Playing: Halo 2 - We Just Beat It Again - Round 3
U.S. Death Toll Rises in Fallujah
Reuters and Agence France-Presse

Monday 15 November 2004

The US military says 38 US soldiers have died in the week-long offensive to recapture the Iraqi city of Fallujah from rebels and 275 had been wounded.

The toll includes three non-combat deaths.

In a statement, the military said 60 of the wounded had already returned to duty.

More than 10,000 US and 2,000 Iraqi soldiers took part in the assault to take the city ahead of elections due in January.

The US military says about 1,000 insurgents have been killed and 450 to 550 captured.

There is no word on civilian casualties, but residents say many people have died.

A hospital spokeswoman says 419 US soldiers wounded in Iraq have been treated at a US military hospital in Germany.

She says more than 220 of the soldiers were wounded in combat, either by bullets or burns and most had been involved in the major assault on the rebel city of Fallujah.

Just under 200 of the wounded have already been sent on to the United States for further treatment, she said.

The Landstuhl Regional Medical Centre in south-west Germany is the largest US military medical facility outside the United States.

Ohio Voters Tell of Election Day Troubles at Hearing
Mood:  incredulous
Now Playing: Halo 2
Topic: Voting
Ohio Voters Tell of Election Day Troubles at Hearing
By Reginald Fields
The Cleveland Plain Dealer

Sunday 14 November 2004

Tales of waiting more than five hours to vote, voter intimidation, under-trained polling-station workers and too few or broken voting machines largely in urban or heavily minority areas were retold Saturday at a public hearing organized by voter-rights groups.

For three hours, burdened voters, one after another, offered sworn testimony about Election Day voter suppression and irregularities that they believe are threatening democracy.

The hearing, sponsored by the Election Protection Coalition, was to collect testimony of voting troubles that might be used to seek legislative changes to Ohio's election process.

The organizers chose Ohio because it was a swing state in the presidential election as well as the site of numerous claims of election fraud and voter disenfranchisement.

"I think a lot of us had a sense that something had deeply went wrong on Nov. 2 and it had to do with the election process and procedures in place that were unacceptable," said Amy Kaplan, one of the hearing's coordinators.

Kaplan said the hearing gave everyday citizens a chance to have their concerns placed into public record.

Both a written and video report on the hearing will be provided to anyone who wants a copy, especially state lawmakers who are considering mandating Election Day changes, Kaplan said.

Many of the voters who testified were clearly Democrats who wonder if their losing presidential candidate, Sen. John Kerry, was able to draw all the votes that were intended for him.

"I call on Sen. Kerry to un-concede until there is a full count of the votes," said Werner Lange of Trumbull County, who claimed that polling places in his Northeast Ohio neighborhood had half the number of voting machines that were needed.

"This caused a bottleneck at polling stations, and many people left without voting," he said.

Others said they were testifying not on political grounds but out of concern for a suspicious election system that should be above reproach.

Harvey Wasserman of Bexley said he tried to vote absentee with the same home address he has used for 18 years but was told he couldn't because his absentee application had the wrong address.

"But the notice telling me I had the wrong address arrived at the right address," he said. "I wonder, how many of these absentee ballots were rejected for no good reason?

"My concern is not out of the outcome of the election," Wasserman said, "but that this could go on and an election could be stolen. And we simply can't have that in a democracy."

Recount in Ohio a Sure Thing - Call on Kerry to Reverse Concession
Mood:  happy
Now Playing: Halo 2 - We're Kicking Ass Again
Topic: Politics
Recount in Ohio a Sure Thing
t r u t h o u t | Press Release

Monday 15 November 2004

Green Party Campaign Raises $150,000 in 4 Days, Shifts Gears to Phase II

WASHINGTON -- November 15 -- There will be a recount of the presidential vote in Ohio.

On Thursday, David Cobb, the Green Party?s 2004 presidential candidate, announced his intention to seek a recount of the vote in Ohio.

Since the required fee for a statewide recount is $113,600, the only question was whether that money could be raised in time to meet the filing deadline.

That question has been answered.

?Thanks to the thousands of people who have contributed to this effort, we can say with certainty that there will be a recount in Ohio,? said Blair Bobier, Media Director for the Cobb-LaMarche campaign.

?The grassroots support for the recount has been astounding.

The donations have come in fast and furiously, with the vast majority in the $10-$50 range, allowing us to meet our goal for the first phase of the recount effort in only four days,? said Bobier.

Bobier said the campaign is still raising money for the next phase of the recount effort which will be recruiting, training and mobilizing volunteers to monitor the actual recount.

The Ohio presidential election was marred by numerous press and independent reports of mis-marked and discarded ballots, problems with electronic voting machines and the targeted disenfranchisement of African American voters.

A number of citizens? groups and voting rights organizations are holding the second of two hearings today in Columbus, Ohio, to take testimony from voters, poll watchers and election experts about problems with the Ohio vote.

The hearing, from 6-9 p.m., will be held at the Courthouse, meeting room A, 373 S. High St., in Columbus. The Cobb-LaMarche campaign will be represented at the hearing by campaign manager Lynne Serpe.

A demand for a recount in Ohio can only be filed by a presidential candidate who was either a certified write-in candidate or on the ballot in that state.

Both Green Party candidate David Cobb and Libertarian candidate Michael Badnarik will be demanding a recount.

No other candidate has stated an intention to seek a recount and no other citizen or organization would have legal standing to do so in Ohio.

The Cobb-LaMarche campaign is still exploring the possibility of seeking recounts in other states but no decision has been made yet.

Mounting Evidence of Voter Fraud - Audits Abound!
Mood:  loud
Topic: Voting
To View The Site - Help Protect Your Vote

BREAKING -- SATURDAY NOV 13 2004: Black Box Voting has launched a fraud audit into Florida. Three investigators (Bev Harris, Andy Stephenson, and Kathleen Wynne) are in Florida right now. We will initiate hand counts on selected counties that have not fully complied with our Nov. 2 Freedom of Information request by Monday (Diebold counties) or Tuesday (other counties).

BREAKING -- SATURDAY NOV 13 2004: We have reports that both David Cobb (Green Party) and Michael Badnarik (Libertarian Party) will be filing for official recounts in Ohio. Black Box Voting is also launching a fraud audit in Ohio. Gotta be replaced: Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell. Please invoke the following name change on Blackwell immediately, as he is 2004's Katherine Harris. He should now be referred to at all times as "Katherine Blackwell." Please retain this moniker for any future runs for governor. How to be your own media. Spread the word. Latest Katherine Blackwell outrage: Failure to properly account for provisional ballots, and refusing to allow citizens to see the pollbooks.

BREAKING -- SATURDAY NOV 13 2004: Black Box Voting is implementing fraud diagnostics on the state of New Mexico. Information we recently received is indicative of widespread vote manipulation. We are not going to publicize the specifics here.

BREAKING -- SATURDAY NOV 13 2004: Black Box Voting is requesting legal assistance for a specific county in Georgia. Indications of corrupt voting processes, with possible criminal actions by local officials.

BREAKING -- SATURDAY NOV 13 2004: Black Box Voting is launching a fraud investigation on Pima County Arizona.

BREAKING -- SATURDAY NOV 13 2004: Black Box Voting is launching a fraud investigation on the state of Nevada. Pro bono legal help certified to practice in Nevada, needed immediately. Multiple irregularities. Need people to take affidavits from election workers, statewide.

BREAKING -- FRIDAY NOV 12 2004: Ralph Nader to audit Diebold machines in New Hampshire. According to Nader, the current situation with voting machines warrants investigation. Several elements make voting machines "probative" for investigation, according to Nader, a consumer affairs lawyer: proprietary ownership, secret code, vested interests, a high-value reward, and lack of any real consequences, or likelihood of getting caught, for vote manipulation. "We are told that shenanigans are just politics," said Nader at a press conference on Nov. 10. "Well, it's not politics. It's taking away people's votes."

SUNDAY Nov. 7 2004: Freedom of Information requests at BlackBoxVoting.ORG have unearthed two Ciber certification reports indicating that security and tamperability was NOT TESTED and that several state elections directors, a secretary of state, and computer consultant Dr. Britain Williams signed off on the report anyway, certifying it.

New Flag Proposal
Mood:  mischievious
Now Playing: Behind The Scenes - Halo 2 (Yes, We Beat the Game)
Topic: Down With King Dubya

Who Are the Activists Now?
Mood:  irritated
Now Playing: Linkin Park - Breaking the Habit
Topic: Politics
Who Are the Activists Now?
By Michael Kinsley
The Los Angeles Times

Sunday 14 November 2004

Judges that rule for Bush escape that nasty label.

What does President Bush mean, if anything, when he says that his kind of judge "knows the difference between personal opinion and the strict interpretation of the law"? Every judge sincerely believes that he or she is interpreting the law properly.

Read More...

But has anybody read the 2004 Republican platform on abortion? It doesn't merely call for reversal of Roe vs. Wade. It calls for "legislation to make it clear that the 14th Amendment's protections apply to unborn children," and for judges who believe likewise. How's that for activism? If fetuses are "persons" under the 14th amendment, which guarantees all persons "equal protection of the law," abortion would be illegal whether a state or the Congress wanted to keep it legal it or not. More than that: There could be no legal distinction between the rights of fetuses and the rights of human beings after birth. So, just for example, a woman who procured an abortion would have to be prosecuted as if she had hired a gunman to murder her child. The doctor would have to be treated like the gunman. And that includes capital punishment in states that have it. And the party that now controls all three branches of government says this is already the case. Only legislation is needed to "make it clear," and judges are needed who will enforce it.

But no "activism," please. The Republican Party can't stand that.

FOCUS: Roe vs. Wade at Crossroads
Mood:  down
Topic: Politics
Roe v. Wade at Crossroads
Newsday

Saturday 13 November 2004

Abortion foes are just one Supreme Court justice away from victory.

Anyone who thinks abortion rights aren't in serious jeopardy should consider the plight of Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania.

Specter has been a Republican for 40 years. He's in line to become chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee in January. He has voted to confirm every single one of President George W. Bush's judicial nominees. Despite that record, angry conservatives are determined to block his rise to chairman. Why?

Because Specter supports abortion rights. And because he had the temerity to state the obvious: That Bush would have trouble winning Senate confirmation of any Supreme Court nominee who is notoriously anti-abortion rights. That's a simple mathematical fact.

It takes only 51 of 100 Senate votes to confirm a judicial nominee. But it takes 60 votes to cut off debate and move to a confirmation vote. Come January, there will be 55 Republicans in the Senate. Do the math. That's not enough to derail a determined Democratic filibuster. Specter said he was alluding to that numerical reality when he made the remark that has haunted him all week.

But conservative foes of abortion rights have been emboldened by the perception that they provided Bush's margin of victory Nov. 2. They aren't of a mind to tolerate even the barest hint of resistance to their agenda, which is reversal of Roe v. Wade. That would be a tragedy. It would strip women of the right to control their bodies and turn the clock back to the grisly days of back-alley abortions.

Bush has a choice to make. Option 1: He could opt for polarizing political warfare by nominating anti-abortion absolutists for the top court. He could push for a change in Senate filibuster rules to deprive Democrats of that time-honored tactic and rely on raw political power to beat back all opposition. Option 2: Do what he promised during the campaign - impose no abortion litmus test for judicial candidates, while nominating people who will strictly interpret the Constitution rather than legislating from the bench. That's the better course.

Partisan warfare over the abortion positions of Supreme Court nominees would inflame the country's political division and undermine public confidence in the independence of the judicial system.

Bush has the right to nominate people who share his political views. But he should engage Democrats in the process in search of nominees acceptable to both sides. Democrats have blocked 10 of his lower court picks, employing the filibuster as their weapon of choice. But Bush is in the driver's seat. The Senate confirmed more than 200 of his judicial nominees, many of whom share his anti-abortion convictions.

Anti-abortion forces won't like a less confrontational approach because they're just one justice away from achieving their objective. Roe v. Wade, which established a constitutional right to abortion, commanded a 7 to 2 majority in 1973. More recent abortion decisions have seen that majority slip to 5 to 4. There are no immediate Supreme Court vacancies. There haven't been any for a decade. But the court is aging and Chief Justice William Rehnquist was recently diagnosed with thyroid cancer. There will probably be one or more spots to fill in the next four years.

Replacing Rehnquist, a solid vote against abortion rights, isn't likely to alter the court balance. But that balance could tip decisively should any one of the abortion-rights supporters leave the bench. That includes Justices John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer, as well as swing voters David Souter, Sandra Day O'Connor and Anthony Kennedy, whose positions on abortion are less black and white.

The nation may be approaching a legal sea change that could end or sharply curtail a woman's right to abortion. But change that profound should be approached through reasoned debate, not a political beat-down.

FOCUS: Fallujah - Breaking a City in Order to Fix It
Quasi-Original Article

Breaking a City in Order to Fix It
By Edward Wong
The New York Times

Sunday 14 November 2004

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Neutralizing the threat from the green-domed mosque looked almost effortless. Marines in the dusty warrens of Fallujah had been taking fire from one of its twin minarets. They called in air support. A 500-pound bomb slammed into a blue-tiled tower, obliterating a signature part of the Khulafa Al Rashid mosque, the city's most celebrated religious building.

As in a fevered dream, that and other scenes of destruction played out last week in Fallujah before the eyes of American troops, residents and reporters. By early Saturday, marines and soldiers had swept through most of the city and cornered insurgents in the south, leaving behind shelled buildings, bullet-riddled cars and rotting corpses.

It proved one thing: That the Americans are great at taking things apart. What comes after the battlefield victory has always been the real problem for them during their 19 months in Iraq.

The commanders say their goals now in Fallujah are to install a viable Iraqi government and security force, rebuild the city to win back the confidence of the residents and persuade the Sunni Arabs, who were Saddam Hussein's base of support and were ousted from power with him, to lay down their arms and take part in a legitimate political process.

Difficult as all of that seems, it is the last aim - persuading the Sunnis to act as a loyal minority in a democracy - that may be the most improbable goal of the retaking of Fallujah by storm.

American officials say that if it can be done, Fallujah, which has assumed mythic status across the Arab world for its resistance, could then serve as a model for the rest of Iraq, and Iraq as a model for the rest of the Middle East.

But given the track record of the Americans and their allies, military analysts say, the immediate goals in Fallujah seem naive, if not utterly inconsequential given the surging resistance across the Sunni-dominated regions of Iraq, almost certainly organized by the very leaders who fled Fallujah before the offensive.

"Iraq is a complex problem," said Charles Pena, director of defense policy studies at the Cato Institute, a libertarian research group based in Washington. "Our problem is that we keep leading people to believe that there are simple solutions."

"Our military action creates other problems that our military cannot solve," he said. "And we haven't been very good at fixing what we broke in Iraq."

American commanders say they had no illusions that the Fallujah offensive would let them capture the Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the most wanted man in Iraq, or break the back of the insurgency.

What they do not acknowledge is that seizing Fallujah does not bring them much closer to solving the occupation's most intractable problem - how to get Sunni Arabs to overcome their feelings of disenfranchisement and accept the role of a minority in a democratic Iraqi state.

Sunni Arabs make up only a fifth of Iraqis; three-fifths are Shiite Arabs and the remaining fifth are mostly Sunni Kurds. But Sunnis dominate most of the Middle East and have ruled the region now called Iraq since the Ottoman Empire. There are few signs they are willing to accept a subservient role in the new government.

In anticipating a democracy, the Americans have signaled at every turn that they foresee power flowing to the majority Shiites, and the elections scheduled for January are a way to accomplish that in a manner that appears legitimate. Hammering Fallujah is supposed to force insurgent Sunnis to realize the hopelessness of armed conflict and instead turn to the ballot box.

But it is not so easy to convince people with little concept of minority rights that a Western-style democracy will work for them. For Sunnis to accept this new style of government, they will have to be persuaded that their rights will still be respected by an American-backed Shiite-dominated ruling class, and that they will have some power and autonomy - concerns that to a lesser degree plague even the Kurds, perhaps the staunchest supporters of the American presence here.

The American commanders here hold up their recent actions in the Shiite areas of Karbala, Najaf and Sadr City as models of how overwhelming force drove rebels into legitimate politics. Fallujah will be no different, they say. But Moktada al-Sadr, the firebrand cleric who led the Shiite insurgency, has everything to gain and nothing to lose by taking part in elections. He can expect his hugely popular organization to win many seats in the national assembly and become part of the Shiite power establishment.

There is no such hope for the Sunnis, which is why the leading group of Sunni clerics, the Muslim Scholars Association, called last week for a boycott of the elections. The group says it represents 3,000 mosques across Iraq and has been staunchly anti-American since the start of the war. Still, some secular Sunnis, like the former exile Adnan Pachachi, have been more welcoming of the American presence and say they intend to take part in the elections.

Installing a working Iraqi government and police force in Fallujah is a less ambitious goal, but it too seems a stretch for the Americans. In the offensive, most of the Iraqi forces have done little actual fighting. They roll in after the Americans have already cleared city blocks of insurgents and are assigned to search buildings.

Some seem disoriented as they stand in the debris-strewn landscape, their brown uniforms spotless from not having done a lick of fighting. Little has changed since last May, when the First Armored Division laid siege to Karbala, and Iraqi security forces merely cleared weapons out of mosques.

In Mosul on Thursday, police officers at a half-dozen police stations scurried away as soon as insurgents began firing their rocket-propelled grenades and Kalashnikov rifles. Two weeks ago, bombings and mortar attacks left at least 30 dead in Samarra, only a month after American forces swept through the city and claimed a resounding victory. A senior American military officer in Baghdad admitted that after the Americans left, the insurgents were able to overwhelm the poorly trained Iraqi police.

In Samarra, the guerrillas evacuated before American armor rolled in, and then bided their time, which is the greatest advantage an insurgency has, because the occupying force at some point will depart. The insurgents don't need a safe haven like Fallujah to run down the clock. "In fact, Maoist tactics would argue against trying to settle in a city and hold it at this stage of a weak insurgency, and for using the population as a sea to swim in," said Anthony H. Cordesman, a Middle East analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

It is absurd, Mr. Cordesman adds, to believe that destroying Fallujah and then rebuilding it will win support for the Americans and the interim government. The American military said it has put aside $100 million for reconstructing the devastated city. But that does not solve the much bigger problem of unemployment, now at 60 percent nationwide. That is a motivating factor for young men joining the insurgency.

"How much money and aid effort does it really take," Mr. Cordesman said, "to jump-start an economy rather than provide welfare for Fallujah?"

-------

Dexter Filkins contributed reporting from Fallujah for this article.

Letters From the Soldiers - Please Read
Mood:  blue
Topic: Impending Draft
Letters from soldiers

I am a soldier in the United States army. I was in Iraq with the Fourth Infantry Division.

I was guarding some Iraqi workers one day. Their task was to fill sandbags for our base. The temperature was at least 120. I had to sit there with full gear on and monitor them. I was sitting and drinking water, and I could barely tolerate the heat, so I directed the workers to go to the shade and sit and drink water. I let them rest for about 20 minutes. Then a staff sergeant told me that they didn't need a break, and that they were to fill sandbags until the cows come home. He told the Iraqis to go back to work.

After 30 minutes, I let them have a break again, thus disobeying orders. If these were soldiers working, in this heat, those soldiers would be bound to a 10-minute work, 50-minute rest cycle, to prevent heat casualties. Again the staff sergeant came and sent the Iraqis back to work and told me I could sit in the shade. I told him no, I had to be out there with them so that when I started to need water, then they would definitely need water. He told me that wasn't necessary, and that they live here, and that they are used to it.

After he left, I put the Iraqis back into the shade. I could tell that some were very dehydrated; most of them were thin enough to be on an international food aid commercial. I would not treat my fellow soldiers in this manner, so I did not treat the Iraqi workers this way either.

This went on for eight months while I was in Iraq, and going through it told me that we were not there for their freedom, we were not there for WMD. We had no idea what we were fighting for anymore.

______________

From: RH
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2003 4:57 PM
Subject: Iraqi freedom veteran supports you

Dear Mr Moore,
I went to Iraq with thoughts of killing people who I thought were horrible. I was like, "Fuck Iraq, fuck these people, I hope we kill thousands." I believed my president. He was taking care of business and wasn't going to let al Qaeda push us around. I was with the 3rd Squadron, 7th Cavalry, 3rd Infantry division out of Fort Stewart, Georgia. My unit was one of the first to Baghdad. I was so scared. Didn't know what to think. Seeing dead bodies for the first time. People blown in half. Little kids with no legs. It was overwhelming, the sights, sounds, fear. I was over there from Jan'03 to Aug'03. I hated every minute. It was a daily battle to keep my spirits up. I hate the army and my job. I am supposed to get out next February but will now be unable to because the asshole in the White House decided that now would be a great time to put a stop-loss in effect for the army. So I get to do a second tour in Iraq and be away from those I love again because some guy has the audacity to put others' lives on the line for his personal war. I thought we were the good guys.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


From: Michael W
Sent: Tuesday July 13 2004 12.28pm
Subject: Dude, Iraq sucks


My name is Michael W and I am a 30-year-old National Guard infantryman serving in southeast Baghdad. I have been in Iraq since March of 04 and will continue to serve here until March of 05.

In the few short months my unit has been in Iraq, we have already lost one man and have had many injured (including me) in combat operations. And for what? At the very least, the government could have made sure that each of our vehicles had the proper armament to protect us soldiers.

In the early morning hours of May 10, one month to the day from my 30th birthday, I and 12 other men were attacked in a well-executed roadside ambush in south-east Baghdad. We were attacked with small-arms fire, a rocket-propelled grenade, and two well-placed roadside bombs. These roadside bombs nearly destroyed one of our Hummers and riddled my friends with shrapnel, almost killing them. They would not have had a scratch if they had the "Up Armour" kits on them. So where was [George] W [Bush] on that one?

It's just so ridiculous, which leads me to my next point. A Blackwater contractor makes $15,000 [#8,400] a month for doing the same job as my pals and me. I make about $4,000 [#2,240] a month over here. What's up with that?

Beyond that, the government is calling up more and more troops from the reserves. For what? Man, there is a huge fucking scam going on here! There are civilian contractors crawling all over this country. Blackwater, Kellogg Brown & Root, Halliburton, on and on. These contractors are doing everything you can think of from security to catering lunch!

We are spending money out the ass for this shit, and very few of the projects are going to the Iraqi people. Someone's back is getting scratched here, and it ain't the Iraqis'!

My life is left to chance at this point. I just hope I come home alive.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


From: Specialist Willy
Sent: Tuesday March 9 2004 1.23pm
Subject: Thank you

Mike, I'd like to thank you for all of the support you're showing for the soldiers here in Iraq. I am in Baghdad right now, and it's such a relief to know that people still care about the lemmings who are forced to fight in this conflict.

It's hard listening to my platoon sergeant saying, "If you decide you want to kill a civilian that looks threatening, shoot him. I'd rather fill out paperwork than get one of my soldiers killed by some raghead." We are taught that if someone even looks threatening we should do something before they do something to us. I wasn't brought up in fear like that, and it's going to take some getting used to.

It's also very hard talking to people here about this war. They don't like to hear that the reason they are being torn away from their families is bullshit, or that their "president" doesn't care about them. A few people here have become quite upset with me, and at one point I was going to be discharged for constantly inciting arguments and disrespect to my commander-in-chief (Dubya). It's very hard to be silenced about this when I see the same 150 people every day just going through the motions, not sure why they are doing it.

[ Willy sent an update in early August ]

People's perceptions of this war have done a complete 180 since we got here. We had someone die in a mortar attack the first week, and ever since then, things have changed completely. Soldiers are calling their families urging them to support John Kerry. If this is happening elsewhere, it looks as if the overseas military vote that Bush is used to won't be there this time around.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


From: Kyle Waldman
Sent: Friday February 27 2004 2.35am
Subject: None

As we can all obviously see, Iraq was not and is not an imminent threat to the United States or the rest of the world. My time in Iraq has taught me a little about the Iraqi people and the state of this war-torn, poverty-stricken country.

The illiteracy rate in this country is phenomenal. There were some farmers who didn't even know there was an Operation Iraqi Freedom. This was when I realised that this war was initiated by the few who would profit from it and not for its people. We, as the coalition forces, did not liberate these people; we drove them even deeper into poverty. I don't foresee any economic relief coming soon to these people by the way Bush has already diverted its oil revenues to make sure there will be enough oil for our SUVs.

We are here trying to keep peace when all we have been trained for is to destroy. How are 200,000 soldiers supposed to take control of this country? Why didn't we have an effective plan to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure? Why aren't the American people more aware of these atrocities?

My fiancee and I have seriously looked into moving to Canada as political refugees.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


From: Anonymous
Sent: Thursday April 15 2004 12.41am
Subject: From KBR truck driver now in Iraq

Mike, I am a truck driver right now in Iraq. Let me give you this one small fact because I am right here at the heart of it: since I started this job several months ago, 100% (that's right, not 99%) of the workers I am aware of are inflating the hours they claim on their time sheets. There is so much more I could tell you. But the fact is that MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of dollars are being raped from both the American taxpayers and the Iraqi people because of the unbelievable amount of greed and abuse over here. And yes, my conscience does bother me because I am participating in this rip-off.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


From: Andrew Balthazor
Sent: Friday August 27 2004 1.53pm
Subject: Iraqi war vet - makes me sound so old

Mr Moore, I am an ex-military intelligence officer who served 10 months in Baghdad; I was the senior intelligence officer for the area of Baghdad that included the UN HQ and Sadr City.

Since Bush exposed my person and my friends, peers, and subordinates to unnecessary danger in a war apparently designed to generate income for a select few in the upper echelon of America, I have become wholeheartedly anti-Bush, to the chagrin of much of my pro-Republican family.

As a "foot soldier" in the "war on terror" I can personally testify that Bush's administration has failed to effectively fight terrorists or the root causes of terror. The White House and the DoD failed to plan for reconstruction of Iraq. Contracts weren't tendered until Feb-Mar of 2003, and the Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance (the original CPA) didn't even come into existence until January 2003. This failure to plan for the "peace" is a direct cause for the insecurity of Iraq today.

Immediately after the "war" portion of the fighting (which really ended around April 9 2003), we should have been prepared to send in a massive reconstruction effort. Right away we needed engineers to diagnose problems, we needed contractors repairing problems, we needed immediate food, water, shelter, and fuel for the Iraqi people, and we needed more security for all of this to work - which we did not have because we did not have enough troops on the ground, and CPA decided to disband the Iraqi army. The former Iraqi police were engaged far too late; a plan should have existed to bring them into the fold right away.

I've left the military. If there is anything I can do to help get Bush out of office, let me know.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


From: Anthony Pietsch
Sent: Thursday August 5 2004 6.13pm
Subject: Soldier for sale

Dear Mr Moore, my name is Tony Pietsch, and I am a National Guardsman who has been stationed in Kuwait and Iraq for the past 15 months. Along with so many other guard and reserve units, my unit was put on convoy escorts. We were on gun trucks running from the bottom of Iraq to about two hours above Baghdad.

The Iraqi resistance was insanity. I spent many nights lying awake after mortar rounds had just struck areas nearby, some coming close enough to throw rocks against my tent. I've seen roadside bombs go off all over, Iraqis trying to ram the side of our vehicle. Small children giving us the finger and throwing rocks at the soldiers in the turrets. We were once lost in Baghdad and received nothing but dirty looks and angry gestures for hours.

I have personally been afraid for my life more days than I can count. We lost our first man only a few weeks before our tour was over, but it seems that all is for nothing because all we see is hostility and anger over our being there. They are angry over the abuse scandal and the collateral damages that are always occurring.

I don't know how the rest of my life will turn out, but I truly regret being a 16-year-old kid looking for some extra pocket money and a way to college.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


From: Sean Huze
Sent: Sunday March 28 2004 7.56pm
Subject: "Dude, Where's My Country?"

I am an LCPL in the US Marine Corps and veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Mr Moore, please keep pounding away at Bush. I'm not some pussy when it comes to war. However, the position we were put in - fighting an enemy that used women, children, and other civilians as shields; forcing us to choose between firing at "area targets" (nice way of saying firing into crowds) or being killed by the bastards using the crowds for cover - is indescribably horrible.

I saw more than a few dead children littering the streets in Nasiriyah, along with countless other civilians. And through all this, I held on to the belief that it had to be for some greater good.

Months have passed since I've been back home and the unfortunate conclusion I've come to is that Bush is a lying, manipulative motherfucker who cares nothing for the lives of those of us who serve in uniform. Hell, other than playing dress-up on aircraft carriers, what would he know about serving this nation in uniform?

His silence and refusal to speak under oath to the 9/11 Commission further mocks our country. The Patriot Act violates every principle we fight and die for. And all of this has been during his first term. Can you imagine his policies when he doesn't have to worry about re-election? We can't allow that to happen, and there are so many like me in the military who feel this way. We were lied to and used. And there aren't words to describe the sense of betrayal I feel as a result