.
If I could, I would force everyone I know -and many I don’t know- to read this post by Rusten Currie on a MilBlog called Sic Vis Pacem, Para Bellum.
The little girl in the pics is named Adele, she was the most beautiful little girl in the world to me. Her smile just melted me, and the little guy in the pics with me was just so adorable, he walked up to me and said “Pleased to meet you mister.” He offered me his hand, and well he got the other half of my heart. A picture is worth much more than a thousand words, they are moments in time, real time.
Scoot …
Americans prefer to read the book from its ending, so here goes.
Short intro on Lieutenant C at BooMan Tribune from recent diary on Iraq.
User ID #: 443
Country: Iraq
Homepage: currierd.typepad.com
Email: rdcurrie@comcast.net
Bio:
Serving 1 year of my life in B’dad so that others might breathe free.
by BooMan Sat Mar 26th, 2005
I would like to welcome Lieutenant C to the site.
He is stationed in Iraq. He has self-identified himself as a Republican, and has offered to answer questions, either here, or by email: rdcurrie@comcast.net.
Please remember he is an officer, and treat him with the utmost respect.
Ask him a question and he’ll try to respond when he has the chance. Bookmark this thread to make sure you get his responses.
Read up on the comments, questions and replies given. The diary has led to conflicts, criticism and also a lot of support expressed for US soldiers send into harm’s way by the Bush | Cheney | Rumsfeld administration. Today’s diary covers a complete new viewpoint on the ID of Lt. Rusten D. Currie.
Military.com gives one a chance to locate a buddy in the armed forces. Here is a summary of Lt. C’s profile in his own words.
Rank: O-1 Second Lieutenant
Service: Army
Status: National Guard
Self Description: In Military Intelligence, there is always a 10% chance
for rain even on a sunny day… I am the one in between now Admiral
Highfill, and General Humble… (Anything but Humble that is…)
Military.com Memberships Affiliation Years
- 1st Battalion, 5th Marines Active Duty 1992-1996
- 1st/184th Infantry Regiment Active Duty 2003-2004
[A] Meet Lt Rusten D. Currie – Military Service Records
Here I will list some of his military records as can be found at Military.com – Find A Buddy.
- 1992-1996 Marine Corps 1st Battalion 5th Marines — Grade E-4 Specialty O351
- 2003-2004 Army National Guard and Active Duty Military Intelligence — 1st Batallion 184th Infantry — Grade O-1 Specialty MI
I do not know the insignes on their uniforms, but Currie in the middle has different insignes on his lapel. The photo is Hi-res, so in a viewer you can easily enlarge pic to read the name tags. I could discern the following names from Left to Right — Ingham?, Bagley, Currie, Sanders, -not visible-, also in contradiction to Currie’s own words in his profile at Military.com.
#
The Marine Corps were founded on November 10, 1775 by the Continental Congress in Philadelphia, and took part in the quasi-war with France and against Barbary Pirates off the “shores of Tripoli” while the service was still young. The Corps participated in many wars of the nineteenth century, including defending Washington against the British in… More »
“LETS GO”
The 184th Infantry Regiment traces its roots to the Civil War. The regiment has proudly served on the battlefields of France and on Pacific islands, in the streets of Los Angeles and the firelines in California. This is a tribute to all who have served in the ranks of the 184th.
Latest members to join this unit:
- Navarro, Vhong Supporter -
- Lopez, Melissa C Family Member 2002-2004
- Schlechter, Joseph R Veteran 1957-1959
- Bandy, Daniel W Active Duty 2004-2004
- Currie, Rusten D Active Duty 2003-2004
Listed addresses for CURRIE, Rusten D. – Age 33 –
Venice CA and in Missouri: Ballwin, Ellisville and St. Charles, all locations near Créve Coeur and in vicinity of St. Louis.
[B] A critical review of blog Pax Romana by Rusten D. Currie et al.
I found the diary on Lieutenant C – Rusten D Currie – difficult to cope with. There were from the start two possibilities —
- A true blog from a soldier in Iraq, I could personally not engage in a political exchange of views, as I vehimentally oppose the war from the start and the deceit and lies to the American people by the Bush | Cheney | Rumsfeld administration. I find the occupation of Iraq and the killings of 30,000 innocent Iraqi citizens dead wrong, had nothing to do with the attack of 9/11.
- A shill operating to stifle criticism on Iraq by hijacking a platform of democratic grass roots discussion.
Simply put, as I read the replies from Lt C, I found them offensive by nature and unnatural. His remarks where often right-wingnut, far fetched and strikt political and military PROPAGANDA. I could not engage in discussion, and left a single comment. IMHO I found the diary of Lieutenant C an insult to critical thought, mandatory in a Democracy.
I copied all the replies of Lt C into my word processor for another critical review and took a closer look at his webblog. Especially the use of Latin on the website and his Pax Romana intrigued me. So I started by questioning his Pax Romana, or building of a new empire for a 1000 yr era, similar to the Romans under emperor Augustus around 14 BC and a period of 200 years. Based on suppression of any rebellion and promotion of free trade.
Augustus was one of the great administrative geniuses of history. The gigantic work of reorganization that he carried out in every field of Roman life and throughout the entire empire not only transformed the decaying republic into a new, monarchic regime with many centuries of life ahead of it but also created a durable Roman peace, based on easy communications and flourishing trade. It was this Pax Romana that ensured the survival and eventual transmission of the classical heritage, Greek and Roman alike, and provided the means for the diffusion of Judaism and Christianity.
Although his regime was an autocracy, Augustus, being a tactful and imaginative master of propaganda of many kinds, knew how to cloak that autocracy in traditionalist forms that would satisfy a warworn generation — perhaps, most of all, the upper bourgeoisie immediately below the leading nobility, since it was they who benefitted from the new order more than anyone. He was also able to win the approbation, through the patronage of Maecenas, of some of the greatest writers the world has ever known, including Virgil, Horace, and Livy.
Their enthusiasm was partly due to Augustus’ conviction that the Roman peace must be under Occidental, Italian control. This was in contrast to the views of Antony and Cleopatra, who had envisaged some sort of Greco-Roman partnership such as began to prevail only three or four centuries later. Augustus’ narrower view, although modified by an informed admiration of Greek civilization, was based on his small-town Italian origins. These were also partly responsible for his patriotic, antiquarian attachment to the ancient religion and for his puritanical social policy.
© Encyclopedia Brittanica
[C] Another website praises Rusten D. Currie with report on Falluja and Iraqi children – photo of “Iraqi girl Adele”.
Having some idea of Pax Romana and Lt Rusten D Currie, and used Google search in its combination. I soon found another website, praising the blog of Lt C – Rusten D Currie – in particular his eyewitness account on Fallujah and the latest report on the Iraq children and little Iraqi girl Adele. See photo by intro above. The fair haired boy also raises my suspicion as to where photo was taken, but I didn’t succeed realizing it would be looking for a needle in a hay stack.
Googling for Images on “Iraqi girl” I found mostly severely bruised and injured Iraqi children, not the beautiful and smiling Adele of Lt C. No wonder Lt C in his replies made sure to bash all media on Iraq reporting.
[D] WhoIs Eldridge Currie on Internet and Pax Romana in March 9, 2003 – lead-up to Iraqi war
In GROUPS I Googled for currie and pax romana and found a thread in 2003 started by Eldridge Currie on subject: Greatest Terrorist Nation. His Email name was hidden by @cryptomail.org. Reading this discussion, the matter included the US Empire and Pax Romana. I pasted the thread in my word processor and cleaned it up so it could be read more easily.
WhoIs Eldridge Currie, I found one more mention in 1998, a discussion on Internet software development. His name was referenced to etcurrie@bigfoot.com and did some DNS – WhoIs tracking. Eldridge Currie is most likely an established person on the Internet, not connected to Rusten D Currie, but does provide a nice cover for a shill operation.
The exchange in March 2003 on thread is interesting though, as it seems the discussion was started by Eldridge Currie with an opposing view, IMO just to put the topic Greatest Terrorist Nation on agenda for discussion. Currie left it by opening statement and did not engage, unless through an alias. I recall that JG|JG used a double alias to have a discussion started on FR.
Later I found a comment that the use of name Eldridge Currie was likely identity theft. See Post #2 – Eldridge Currie = Abu Musa Ali by Post Analysis Centre.
[E] CONCLUSION IMHO
Rusten D. Currie is another shill reporter, similar to JG|JG and Bryan Suits, see dKos diary on PsyOps by LondonYank. Currie either still works for DoD Military Intelligence in Iraq, or is back in the US sitting behind a desk. He could also be employed, since leaving active duty, by one of the many GOP affiliated organisations who are receiving lots of state and federal money through grants, subsidies, tax breaks, “contracts” from Homeland Security or Commerce department – religion hand-outs – by the Bush | Cheney administration.
See my recent diary and references to more dKos diaries.
If Rusten D. Currie does live in St. Charles MO, he may even be employed by SBVT sponsor and backer Wiliam Franke, Founder, President and CEO of GANNON International of Créve Coeur MO, just next door.
A true picture of Iraqi US Marine Operations can be found on the official website:
2/5, 1/5 Civil Affairs Groups [CAG]work together.
Submitted by: 2nd Marine Division
Story Identification #: 200538112230
Story by Cpl. Tom Sloan
[F] APPENDIX
I thought I had finished diary, but after looking at some of the Google Images as linked above under alinea [3], I stumbled across a US Operation called:
Operation Iraqi Children [OIC]
LINK: Unit Pages » Operation Iraqi Freedom » Operation Iraqi Children.
Gary Sinise – LT Dan in Forrest Gump – is doing great things in Iraq in support of OIC
Check it out yourself, see some familiar features compared to the intro photo of “Iraqi girl”.
As back-up website – Archive.org – Operation Iraqi Children
Oui – Liberté – Egalité – Fraternité
I enjoyed doing research on topic of Lt C. past weekend …
I hope you will enjoy reading diary.
Oui – Liberté – Egalité – Fraternité
Possibly very well – I need to read it again on slow gear to decide.
In addition to LondonYank’s piece, your intriguing hypothesis fits nicely into this recent proposition on dKos by our very own Welshman.
should email him and invite him to defend himself.
.
He will find out soon enough, I imagine he checks BT regularly.
BTW it’s after midnight in NL also! Nite.
Oui – Liberté – Egalité – Fraternité
Oui, what a story! Only one read so far, and have not clicked all the links yet – but the conclusion seems clear enough.
I’d fully expect infiltration at kos, but already – in this little pond! I hope Liuetenant C picks up on Booman’s invitation above.
Never step onto the internets without it
Why you are making this assertion. I have had private emails with Lt. Currie, and in no way can I believe the above.
He was disturbed by the treatment he received in the diary and now this. Boy, I’m sure he will be really disturbed by this.
I can’t say any more than that, due to obvious reasons, but I just don’t understand why you went to these lenghts to disprove someone whom I think Booman invited here in the first place.
Are you a suspicious person Qui, because you were suspicious of my Iraq friend also. Why?
I think on the balance of evidence available to me that Lt C has been on active duty in Iraq.
The specific allegations made by Oui are relatively few; I would summarise them as:
1. Rusten D Currie’s own entry in military.com lists him as being in Intelligence.
My answer: so what? He appears to me to have been in the Marines originally as a volunteer, and subsequently to have become a member of the National Guard, in which capacity he has been called to active service and sent to Iraq. On his website he makes no secret of performing an intelligence function for his unit: there are posts which discuss his frustration with having to listen to every soldier who comes to him with gossip collected from Iraqi sources. Looks to me like he’s doing on-the-ground operational intelligence for his unit rather than psyops attacks on BT. And in any event, I thought Booman presented Lt C in a context which suggested Booman had approached Lt C to write a guest post, rather than vice versa. It wasn’t an active attempt by Lt C to use BT.
2. Listed addresses for CURRIE, Rusten D. – Age 33 –
Venice CA and in Missouri: Ballwin, Ellisville and St. Charles, all locations near Créve Coeur and in vicinity of St. Louis. “If Rusten D. Currie does live in St. Charles MO”…
My answer: Not really clear what the allegation is here, but Currie’s blog has a post dated 8 April which says he is on leave and in St Louis to visit his parents. The post makes it clear that his wife ‘DJ’ flew with him to St Louis (doesn’t say where from) after he arrived back in Texas from Baghdad. Could his wife live in Venice, CA? There’s a link from Currie’s blog to his Amazon.com wishlist, where the ‘delivery address’ is given as Venice, CA. So far I don’t see anything suspicious or deceptive.
3. His remarks where often right-wingnut, far fetched and strikt [sic] political and military PROPAGANDA.
My answer: Hey, Booman declared at the outset that Lt C was a self-confessed Republican. Currie’s blog post about being on leave mentions a phone call to NY Republicans re financing his campaign. He seems like a hard-core Republican, so why be surprised when he spouts something that sounds like propaganda to most readers of BT? We were warned.
The discussions about Pax Romana and about Eldridge Currie/identity theft seem to me red herrings. Currie is a bit of a military history nut and (strangely) interested in the US as an imperial power: look at the Amazon link above where you find lots of books consistent with this. Oui doesn’t even claim any connection between Eldridge Currie and Rusten D Currie. What’s the issue here?
Sorry folks, I know every one likes to uncover a conspiracy, but frankly, RD Currie looks to me like he is who he claims to be… a Republican soldier serving in Iraq.
and in a community, that they are who they claim to be and report from Iraq a factual account of their mission.
It’s clear the “fairy tale” about Adele is false, it was no chance meeting but part of the civil group on a OIC mission. Iraqi girl was just handed educational material in a plastic bag she is holding on to! That’s her secret for a BIG smile.
Apparently OIC program profits from the pretty picture sessions for propaganda purpose to sell us the Iraqi war. Look how our American sons and daughters doing their duty are well received by happy Iraqi children. The hypocrisy drips from the top of the heap.
Be attent people, compare the BS from Lt C and read an official account from the USMC website I linked. As far as I’m concerned, the deceit and lies have gone on for too long.
Lt C lies about the officers on the photo, you can read their names from the tags. He is to me a conman purposely making up stories. You can have a different political view, but stop lying or you are useless.
On this site we have more republicans contributing ……
Email: thecookie83*at*yahoo*dot*com
If you’ve gotten this far, you probably know I’m a conservative. I promise, however, that I’m not an unthinking automaton. I’m a reasonable person, interested in open, intellectual debate. I hope you can learn from me as I learn from you.
RFTR clearly states who he is, his goals and his website has no double bottom. I can handle that and engage in a discussion for as long as parties judge it a merit.
When someone deceives and is lying, I naturally ask the question: “Why, for what purpose”.
Read diary on Bryant Suits and PsyOps written by LondonYank, it is a duplicate story of Lt C. Respect an officer, not for what he is but for what he represents. He has a status to represent the American people, not just Republicans, but everyone.
It is odd that soldiers critically wounded, treated and recovering in US Army Hospital in Landstuhl, Germany , are not permitted to air any dissenting political view. How come these officers still in active duty can spread this wingnut propaganda and receiving a salary paid for by us?
Oui – Liberté – Egalité – Fraternité
Oui, you haven’t answered any of the alternative views I offered above. What are your specific allegations against Currie / Lt C?
What is your point about the photo of the Iraqi girl? I don’t see how we have been ‘conned’ or that Currie is misleading us. Even if the girl is smiling because she has just been presented with one of Operation Iraqi Children’s school kits, so what? Currie doesn’t claim anything other than that Adele melted his heart. If you look at his post on his blog following his return to the US, he says “I have showed my friends and family little Adele’s picture, and they too have fallen in love with her, as insane as this sounds I can’t wait to see here [sic] again.” Sounds believable to me. What’s your point about this? Where’s the deception?
that you felt the need to drag me into this…
Can you state clearly, in a few short sentences what you’re alleging regarding this Currie guy? I read the diary, and don’t follow your logic.
Are you saying that because he has the same last name as some other guy he must be that other guy…?
Ya totally lost me…
.
I thought that was a rather nice thing to do, and I made you a compliment. I understand you had some hospitality concerns at dKos community. Too much distraction to report on, you will lose valuable time when meeting Dems and Repubs head on, don’t you think?
It amazes me how utterly angry the Democrat Left is. Now, I post on DailyKos quite often, and I usually have a lot of patience for these people. Every now and then, however, I just get overwhelmed. Today is one of those days. And so, I’m going to [bitch] complain to you about it.
Oui – Liberté – Egalité – Fraternité
Well, I do appreciate your compliments.
Alohawhatever-it-is, however, seems to think that I’m not really a Republican, or that I’m paid to be here. If that’s the case, can someone tell me where to pick up the checks? I spend an awful lot of time here (even more at DKos) and I have not a dime to show for it.
And I assure you, I am a Republican.
Anyway, I do appreciate that this community is generally more accepting of alternate persepctives than Kossacks seem to be. So thanks to all you good folks out there. As Hannity might say (though certainly not about any of you), you’re all great Americans.
and don’t forget her name!
I you want hospitality to continue.
Oui – Liberté – Egalité – Fraternité
Yeah, sorry about that…
I was on the comment screen and too lazy to go back and look it up.
My apologies to all concerned.
Here we go again. It will never cease to amaze me how naive some folks are. Oui, I felt this way about Another Perspective and Lt. C and caught heat for expressing my concerns. Sure they say from the onset they are repugs because if they didn’t they would be trolled right off most liberal sites for most of their answers. You have done a very good diary and spent the time to research when you knew something was not right.
Why do any of you automatically assume these are good, well intentioned people that just want us to see their point of view. Folks, get real, the GD government is hip deep in propoganda, Armstrong, Gannon/Guckert, and so many others. And what some tend to forget is they are damn good at it. THATS why they are in power. They worm in and weasel out information. They are the kings of spin and no doubt these guys are just another form of paid shills.
Another perspectives, cool, calm demeanor and his lengthy, wordy non answers clued me in. I still stand my ground on my feelings about him. But hey, that’s what makes the world go round, differing viewpoints but this old gal has to side with Welshman and Oui on this. I hope that we can be more careful about who is welcome or invited here.
And to those that have exchanged private emails with these guys, good for you hope you learn something useful from them. Cults move in mysterious ways, one lamb at a time.
I don’t disagree with you about Lt C’s views and what he stands for. I stopped reading the exchange that followed his post because I didn’t think I would learn anything from it – I fundamentally disagree with his world view and almost everything he spouted. I thought it was a mistake on Booman’s part to have invited the post.
But the problem for me is that Oui’s diary does not hang together. Even my cursory follow up suggests a rational alternative explanation for most of Oui’s (sometimes implied) allegations. Look closely at what Oui is claiming: there are relatively few clear allegations in all the verbiage.
I ask again: what are the specific allegations of deception or falsehood against Lt C / Currie?
My take on Lt C and AP:
Lt C is in Iraq, where he is a desk jockey interviewing Iraqi prisoners. He plays pretty fast and loose with facts and tends to exaggerate quite a bit. While that might be nothing more than an irritation stateside, it is worrisome when coming from an intelligence officer in Iraq. People’s lives depend on the accuracy of intelligence reports, and if he as careless in his reports as he was here, then real people are going to get hurt.
AP is a 21 year old Yalie who thinks that spouting RW talking points makes him appear to be intelligent; when I read his posts, I kept getting flashes of the guy in the bar that Matt Damon verbally takes apart in the scene in Good Will Hunting. Great on grand pronouncements, short on original thought.
Pretty clear that I had major concerns with some of the things that each said, but I don’t think that either is anything other than what was represented.
This is all just silly, you are saying what, Qui, that Lt. C isn’t a soldier and Another Perspective isn’t a Rep. and you all are so concerned, about what, that someone told you their views that are not your own, someone used REp. talking points in their discussion, oh my, and you would expect Reps. to do what, use your talking points, or Dem Talking points, or conform to some example you would thing correct.
Are you familiar with the Faqs on this site, and that Booman has not created an all Dem blog here, but one for people of all kinds to discuss issues, not to go an investigate someone who comes on these boards because you don;t like what they said, and not to cast doubt on someone because you don’t agree.
I had an intense long dialogue with Alhoa on my Neocon Diary about “this man is not a newcon, he’s a rep. and why did you even write this dairy”, then on my Iraq friends last week diary, Qui immediately wrote, this can’t be an Iraqi person, she sounds like an American and went so far as to examine her letter over and over, for clues, I guess as to her fraud.
I guess you two are not open to any discussions or members outside your narrow frame of who is acceptable to you or not. This is not DK where no one is allowed to be outside of the group think or off with their head.
Now I’ll say again, I have had private correspondence, since Lt. C. was here, and you are way out of line on this.
What do you think these people are doing, subverting us, what. I just don’t get why you Qui, would go to these lengths, to try to cast doubt on anyone, what’s your beef.
I have made plenty of posts on Conservative sites, and I never had anyone say to me you are not a real Liberal, nor did they attack me for posting a comment.
And Alhoa, Another Perspective’s comments were more informative that your numerous comments on the debate with a newcon ‘which were just about whether I should have done the diary at all and that he wasn’t what? a repub.or a neocon.’
I just don’t get yours or Qui’s line of reasoning here at all.
to the contrary. I made a comparison with Bryant Suits who was also National Guard and became involved with PsyOps. His assignment was to be interviewed by the media as a battlefield soldier, which he wasn’t.
The media has repeatedly been manipulated, recall the captivity of Jessica Lynch, and the action to set her free from the hospital in Nasiriyah. See media story: Jessica Lynch: Media Myth-Making in the Iraq War.
Trying to keep a healthy dosis of skepticism when the Iraq war is broadcast through the media. Especially gratifying are the many personal documentaries aired in Europe, the real life stories of the wounded men and women returning by the hundreds.
Then I am wondering about the “feel good” stories I read about the Iraq war. That is my beef, nothing else.
Nothing wrong with weighing the comments in diaries differently, it’s not a principle to be in full agreement. Leave room for other life experiences and interpretations.
Oui – Liberté – Egalité – Fraternité
Qui, could you make your pics a little smaller as this page is really hard to load, just now took me 2min, 11 sec. on my very fast cable connection. Most load in less than 20 sec.
If you question the ‘feel good’ stories as you call them does it not also apply by that your criteria that the feel bad stories might be suspect as well.
Or do you deny that anything good is happening in Iraq, whatsoever.
Lt. C in the diary in question was baited by some here into forming his answers the way he did, just like all of us our prone to in the same situation.
He did not come here to discuss politics in the first place, but rather conditions in Iraq, but right off the bat, people threw political questions at him and not in so nice a way, I might add.
Do you recall him saying that internet activity was monitered but not censored and do you not think that he was limited in what he could say as a member of the service in a largely republican army. Hawks you know are generally Republican.
FWIW Last year during the election I had email communication with a soldier who was anti Bush, and he was very afraid of what he said in emails, and warned me also to be careful. Eventually his emails just stopped coming and I do not know what happened.
Booman, could you please answer the question of did you invite him here? If you did I cannot believe that this soldier was planted in hopes that one day Booman would find him and invite him over and then he would have his chance to infiltrate this site and then what, to disinform us, because we can’t think for ourselves.
To me the fact that you did this investigation at all is difficult to understand, when there are many, many real issues to investigate.
Also if I were him and saw the attitude expressed in this diary I would not come back here and comment just to get more of the same and to prove that he is what he says he is and then to have you attack him. DK and Booman are not the center of the universe, you know and not everyone in the world even cares what is said here.
Sorry typo, and maybe I can’t spell.
One of the biggest problems in taking anything at face value that comes out of a war zone is that it is Hotel Journalism (in the case of the media), or it is censored (self or otherwise). There are few reporters I would trust (e.g. Robert Fisk, Ryszard Kupuscinski..), but they spend an enormous amount of time amongst the people.
As to individuals, it is often important to read between the lines. As in the case of ‘Diva’ (hope you don’t mind the abbreviation) the opening paragraph, which you posted on this site, certainly caused me some confusion as well. (In that she seemed staunchly pro invasion.) When I went to read her letter in it’s entirety a few other things struck me: that she is very innocent (an American spy would never be able to duplicate this – for instance) and that her anger surfaces towards the end of her posting in a way that certainly makes her seem very wary about how she phrases things. If her goal is to come here and leave the war zone behind her, she must be careful.
As to Lt. C, I think any discrepancies need to be pointed out, whether or not they can be disproven. That is the point of this site as well, is it not? To be sure I missed the initial exchange, so I can’t comment on that, but there are few of us here who haven’t checked out conspiracy theories on virtually everything surrounding 911 – from the Israeli spy ring, to who knew what when, to what plane crashed into the Pentagon, etc… We make of these things what we will, but it’s all information and if it fits to our liking or not is beside the point. I for one am very skeptical about information coming from a soldier in the war zone for all the reasons I listed.
Your comments are well made and well taken.
The Lt. C matter is entirely different as he was invited here by Booman to speak of Iraq, not politics, and I think it would be hard to understand if you had not seen the origional discussion.
All I’m trying to point out here, is that the case made by Oui is without merit IMHO and is questionable that he would present it in the first place with his supposed conclusion that Lt. C is a ‘reporter shill’ title, which seems to me to be highly inflamatory and unfounded based on evidence he supplied.
I cannot stand idly by and allow this man to be castigated in the way he has been in this diary.
It is one thing to be suspicious, but another to investigate a man simply because you did not like or care for what he has to say and then to make sloppy case leading to unfounded conclusions that he is a ‘shill.’
Hope my comment is understandable and is not seen as ‘offensive and agressive’ as I have just been accused of by Alohaleezy.
Personally I try to stay away from making things personal since once tempers rise all reason gets tossed aside and people will defend their position regardless. I like to think about what I write before I post it since I don’t want something I regret to be in print (this is why I came here, Kos was a bit to fast paced for me – though I still get a big kick out of reading all the comments). What others do is their business.
I will say however, to you this is personal since you feel you know him, as with Diva or anyone else you feel you have a connection to on this site or otherwise. Not that that is a bad thing, and you are certainly entitled to make a defense, but others are also entitled to air their suspicions. I don’t know that Oui investigated him solely because he didn’t like or care for what he said. As I said, I take with reservation those things spoken from a war zone, and I would be surprised if this were not part of it, as well as the fact that the army is not known for its openness. I’d be counting the days for a soldier that spoke out against the cause while in Iraq.
I enjoy the interaction here with you, Alohaleezy and others, but I’d really think it strange to get stuck on a site that has a weekly David incident – since I miss his 2c (even if he managed to make quite a few people feel personally snubbed – the things he said in his diary were taking it to the extreme).
Thank you for your thoughtful comment.
I would like to ask Oui however, just what his motivation was for investigating him in the first place?
I just don’t get why anyone would be suspicious of him in the first place, and to go so far as to imply and attempt to substantiate allegations that he was psyops, a plant or a shill.
I consider this diary to be in the area of attempting to defame this man and for what reason, ‘he dared to post here.’ That is a little more than airing ones suspicions, I would think.
What is everyone afraid of with posters that are not obviously Dems.?
I was going to invite Diva to participate here, but now I cannot, as I do not want her to be subject to this type of thing. She does not need that added on to what she already has to contend with and endure.
I agree with you, Oui, about media manipulation. I agree we should have a healthy dose of scepticism.
But I’m afraid that this is an unsatisfactory response to the several people who have questioned the allegations made in your diary. While it may be true that you have “never implied Lt C isn’t a soldier”, your diary heading says he is a ‘shill reporter’. You were called on this by a comment on your cross-posted diary at DKos where someone said “ummm – who does he report for…”
So far you have not responded to the substance of any of the questions or criticisms of the allegations you make in this diary.
I don’t want to make a crusade out of this, but your diary is at the top of the recommended list at the moment and several members of the BT community I usually respect gave initial favourable comments. It worries me to think that unsubstantiated allegations get such currency.
for the US to assign some assets to tasks such as going to speak at schools and civic groups, meet with the media and what-not to present a particular point of view regarding the crusade that the Pentagon wishes to disseminate.
Whether you call such individuals virals, shill reporters, or brave clarions of America’s noble truth is a matter of, sorry to say it again, perspective.
What does it matter whether posting on message boards and blogging are part of Lt. C’s duties or not?
There is no reason to doubt his sincerity, or that his views are other than he says they are.
Those who admire him have no reason to admire him less, and those who do not have no reason for astonishment.
There is a difference of judgement, but in fact both sides have merit.
Very well stated! Thank you.
Oui – Liberté – Egalité – Fraternité
while I agree people are quite capable of viewing the same facts from different perspectives, nobody has presented one shred of evidence in this diary and the discussion that follows it to show that Currie is assigned “to tasks such as going to speak at schools and civic groups, meet with the media and what-not to present a particular point of view regarding the crusade that the Pentagon wishes to disseminate.”
I’m sure the US military does have people employed in these roles. But there’s no evidence so far that Lt C is one of them.
Oui may be pleased with your ‘UN solution’ as a way out of debate, but s/he has not responded to any of the questions or criticisms about the allegations and innuendo in the diary. I don’t think any one should get away with pointing the finger at someone else and alleging “you are a shill reporter” (and a whole lot of less clear and specific allegations and innuendo) and then, when challenged, say “oh, it’s all a matter of your perspective”.
What are Oui’s specific allegations and where is the evidence?
That he has expressed the same views elsewhere that he expressed here.
Whether he has done so as part of his duties, or in an unusual abundance of spare time and internet access for a man in his occupational category and duty station, there is no reason for his admirers to feel wronged in any way.
If anything, their faith in him should be affirmed.
I think the anger at Oui is unwarranted. He has not come back with links that Lt. C moonlights as an organizer of anti-war protests, or a Green party activist. If such were the case, it would be understandable that his champions would feel both betrayed and indignant at he who revealed the feet of clay.
On the contrary, Oui’s excellent work has cleared up any doubts anyone may have had about Lt. C’s sincerity.
So, if spending lots of time on the net is evidence that something is awry, would you say that Jerome a Paris – who has a job as a banker and has a family unfortunately suffering more than its fair share of medical problems – must therefore be trying to deceive us on behalf of his bank or the French Government?
Don’t get me wrong: I love Jerome’s work dearly.
But what I’m trying to point out is that Oui has made an attack on Lt C without any evidence to back up the case.
As far as I can see nobody has expressed anger at Oui, as you suggest.
Too many people have responded emotionally to Oui’s allegations/innuendo without stopping to review the ‘evidence’ (of which there is almost none). I suggest that has occurred because they are diametrically opposed to Lt C’s views, and either want to or are willing to believe that he must be motivated by some factor other than simply being a misguided Republican soldier with a very different world view.
I am diametrically opposed to Lt C’s views, too. I am also concerned about the consequences if this site gets diverted into hysteria and baseless conspiracy-theory allegations.
Forgive me for repeating from a previous post, but the practice of assigning assets to present and promote the Pentagon’s point of view is neither a new thing, a secret thing, nor a conspiracy, whether the venue is a high school in Peoria, a cable news network in New York, or the internet.
Yes it would be quite unusual for a US gunman stationed in Iraq to enjoy the same internet access and working conditions as a banker in Europe.
And once again, the “attack” that you refer to is that Lt. C. has expressed similar views elsewhere as he did here. I cannot fathom why this is so disturbing to his admirers, or considered to be an attack.
Yes there is a conspiracy theory. The implication of Oui’s diary is that Lt C is employed by the US military to run internet psyops and that in this capacity he targetted BT to spread propaganda.
The main point of Oui’s efforts is not, as you suggest, to point out that Lt C has expressed the same views elsewhere. That fact has never been in question. The main point of the diary is to suggest that Lt C is not who he claims to be and that he is acting for sinister reasons. With innuendo but no evidence about addresses, the identity of someone else in the US with the same surname, and Lt C’s connection with intelligence functions, he is labelled a ‘shill reporter’.
Anyhow, I’ll stop making myself a target and allowing you, Ductape, the opportunity to keep labelling me and others as Lt C’s admirers. The misguided gun-loving Republican militarist never deserved any support from me. I only tried to point out that there was no evidence that he wasn’t who he said he was.
There comes a point where I think it’s best to agree to disagree. I’ll just retire hurt and with a lower opinion of some BT users than I had before.
in this context. In my opinion, all the crusaders are in Iraq for sinister reasons. It is hard to get more sinister than murdering, torturing and raping people, not to mention destroying irreplaceable cultural and historic sites.
However, crusade supporters would disagree with that. They do not see it as sinister at all. Many of them may still be hoping that they will receive a benefit, others simply believe very strongly that Iraq, like any other country, is the property of the US, and that the US thus has the right to do what it will with the people and the resources.
If anyone is being made a target here, I am. I am being forced into the position of defending a crusader!
How in the world can anyone suggest that this crusader is not who he says he is simply because he expresses the same opinions elesewhere? Whether he does it as a hobby or part of his job is irrelevant.
Unless Oui, or you, or somebody can come up with some indication that Lt. C. does not hold the opinions he expresses, that he is in fact a close personal friend and supporter of Peter Camejo, or that he does not work for the Pentagon, but is an employee of Wal-Mart, or a secret avatar of Paris Hilton, I do not understand what upsets you so much about this.
What would you expect him to spread, here or elsewhere, on your dime or his?
I am a “crusade supporter” and neither of the above are true about my beliefs or hopes.
Alan
Maverick Leftist
I think we agree 110%. Something very odd is going on here, Ductape.
You may not agree with me though that Oui has tried to use the existence of the blog where Currie expresses those same views as ‘evidence’ that he is not who he says he is.
Having now read the entry more closely, I agree that it’s thin on hard evidence in support of the title line (“Lt C is a shill reporter!”).
Based upon what we know, Lt C is most likely a military intelligence officer in Iraq. However, it may well be the case that posting on leftist blogs and boards is a current assignment of his. While corroborated by the amount of time he apparently spends online, even this is unproven, however. So I am agnostic, but skeptical, about this lieutenant’s claim to be blogging on his own time and initiative.
Anyhow, even if he is in fact engaged in psy-ops, it doesn’t follow that debating him is pointless. It only means that any information he offers must be treated with even more caution than otherwise.
My $0,02.
He did not just ramble by and decide to blog on this site, he was invited here by booman, who found him.
Just wanted to let you know that, if you have not seen that mentioned in comments here.
I linked to his site in an article I wrote, and a lot of you went a checked out his site.
He got curious about the traffic, and wrote me an email.
I wrote him back.
Then he became a member and made some comments.
Then I invited him to answer questions.
Just so we’re clear on the sequence of events.
.
Your respect for those members should not suffer, no one has prerogative of righteousness.
Persons have different bagage of knowledge on a variety of issues, perhaps we conclude to have irreconcilable difference on judgement on Lt C. It’s not a court of law, diary is part of discussion on merit of opinion. You haven’t explained to me Lt C.’s discrepancy “now Admiral Highfill and General Humble”.
I found the reference to Pax Romana in period of Augustus very enlightening to present state of world affairs. Considering Augustus in act by Bush, representing the New World and the axis Antony and Cleopatra, being Europe who envisioned an US-EU partnership. The last alinea reads:
Augustus’ narrower view, although modified by an informed admiration of Greek civilization, was based on his small-town Italian origins. These were also partly responsible for his patriotic, antiquarian attachment to the ancient religion and for his puritanical social policy.
Any recognition?
Oui – Liberté – Egalité – Fraternité
I don’t know, of course, but I have a feeling that “Highfill” and “Humble” may be ironic type nicknames or something. Sounds like it to me, at least the Humble one. Am not sure what Highfill would signify.
Okay, so I’m probably wrong.
I thought that one strange as well. There is an Admiral Highfill, (or at least was through 1999) but the guy in this photo is clearly wearing an Army uniform.
That was my take on it, too. Don’t see this is a serious misrepresentation by Currie.
Quite frankly I am tired of having to defend my views with you Diane. You call me “narrow Minded” and not willing to listen to other views. I can say the same for you. Your “how dare you” attitude is astonishing. I am also tired of you blasting about dkos. I came here because I liked Booman’s diaries on dkos so I thought I would give his blog a shot. I would love to stick around but quite frankly Diane, you turn me off. You think your opinion and your judgement is the only one of importance here. I am offended by your more than aggressive style when someone isn’t in step with what you accuse dkos of and that is group think.
I was brought up to think for myself and that is what I will continue to do. I am willing to always look at all sides of an issue and then make up my mind. AND if I may be wrong, which is often will admit it but this is just crazy.
comment you have made regarding me. On the contrary you have continually forced me to defend my just writing a diary that you did not approve of.
When ever did I say that my opinion was the only one of importance here, instead I have repeatedly asked others to hear all opinions.
You wrote comment after comment asking me why I even did the diary,(debate with a neocon) do you not call that disruptive.
I do not think I ever called you narrow minded, I said ‘narrow frame’of reference, I believe. You have surely been more abusive of me in other comments than I ever have been to you.
And quite frankly you turn me off as well, I have tried to be pleasant thus far with you, but you make it difficult with your constant attacks on me.
Your comment below is hardly accurate, because I am constantly trying to bring discussions out of the area of group think and you are certainly calling for group think in your comments made to me.
“”I am offended by your more than aggressive style when someone isn’t in step with what you accuse dkos of and that is group think.””
And your reference to ” I am offended by your more than aggressive style when someone isn’t in step with what you accuse dkos of and that is group think.”” so now you are calling my style of commenting ‘offensive and agressive’, and what do you call your comments, sweet and non agressive? I think not, they seem to be rather agressive to me.
Lt C.
Oui – Liberté – Egalité – Fraternité
.
Was the new home of Dutch World War II hero Erik Hazelhoff Roelfzema — see portrayal in film “Soldier of Orange”. A young student at Leiden University caught up in the occupation of Holland by German forces. He immediately joined the underground movement, and arranged to escape to Great Britain by crossing the North Sea in a small boat.
After 9/11, Dutch TV had an interview with him, still a remarkable man. The changes in US foreign policy, the Patriots Act and the deliberate spreading of fear, were intolerable for him. The attack on personal freedom, banishing international commitments and treaties, he expressed his great concern. He lived through the period 1940-1945, losing comrades and fighting alongside the allied forces from London to regain freedom. Erik Hazelhoff Roelfzema remained a close personal friend to Prins Bernard and the Dutch Royal family.
His concern on the developments in the US made a deep impression on me.
Oui – Liberté – Egalité – Fraternité
I think the reactions to both Lt. Currie and Another Perspective are a result of their being sort of invited special guests of the site, one official, one not. I, personally, didn’t see the point of either one of them, but I have no reason to believe they are not who they say they are (to some extent). I have no way of knowing, and while this diary is interesting, it also provides no proof either way.
I don’t think curious and thoughtful Republicans shouldn’t be welcomed to the site… I think if they do come they should join in the regular conversations and comments, debate their views, etc. When they are presented as guests of some sort, the expectation is there that they will have something compelling to say. They didn’t… they just said what every other Republican says, and I think that was a source of frustration (and suspicion), only because of their invited status. I can kind of understand the Lt. Currie thing, because he presented himself as a soldier in Iraq, and he may be one for all I know, but even then he said nothing new or different, and wouldn’t/couldn’t say much of anything at all besides talking points.
Anyway, I’m not at all against invited guests or anything (go take the poll in this diary, by the way), it’s just that I think there should be a clear point to them. Or something like that.
With all due respect, in your comment above referring to my debate with a neocon, the purpose to me was not to expect him to say something different that you have never heard before, it was a debate of views and opinion.
My own personal goal, was and is to convert him to our side. In fact to convert all the Reps I can. I did a diary on this, converting the red to purple and folks face it, we need converts, a lot of them, and then we have a chance to win. But You can’t convert someone you simply refuse to lend any credence to.
By the way, he was already a member of this site when I did that diary, and he had already made numerous comments on other diaries here before that and he is a frequent commenter on DK.
He was having a debate with me as well as others on the other diary and I simply took the debate to a new page to continue it.
Hey, Dems have their talking points too and that’s pretty evident from the comments I see on DK and here and are just as much guilty of group think as the Reps.
There are many issues that some of both parties can agree on and instead of building on those to achieve any kind of understanding (and possibly conversion to Dem.), commenters will simply attack the views.
You will just drive them away, not gather them in.
So if all one wants to do is talk to the choir of your own selection, then I guess shutting all other dialogue out will be fine.
Not so for me.
One cannot always be compelling, do you think if you went to a Rep site, they would find your words compelling or enlightening, no, I fear they would say you were just using Dem talking points.
For goodness sakes folks, rise above the fray and present a picture of reasonable people who are willing to listen and to discuss all sides of an issue, not just your side.
What would be the good news if Iran invaded and occupied the United States, and followed the American playbook in its activities?
If Iranian gunmen bulldozed your home, hauled your children off to be “interrogated,” murdered your husband, maimed your mother, and left you shamed, beaten, and lying in the mud, what would be your response to a fellow American who suggested that the Iranian presence was really for the most part a very positive development for the US and expressed disappointment and frustration with people like you, who simply refused to discuss all sides of the issue?
Would you be able to understand the pain of an Iranian woman whose shame for what her tax dollars had paid for was simply unable to cope, and agreed with Ayatollah Khomenei that Iran had indeed brought true freedom to the US, and would spare no effort in putting down the anti-Iranian insurgency?
Could you share the joy of the Iranian businessman, who thanks to the occupation of the US, was finally able to purchase a villa in Tuscany?
Or would you only see the ashes and the blood, the scars on your own body, and the stumps where your little daughter’s feet used to be?
For what price would you join the Iranians, and inform them of any neighbors, or relatives you suspected of harboring anti-Iranian sentiment?
Discussing all sides of the issue is dependent on perspective. Every issue has more sides for some people than for others.
Ductape, trust me, you are speaking to the choir (me) on this one above. I agree with most everything you have said,
I was merely pointing out that despite the whole war thing, which I find was wrong from the beginning, badly handled if not criminally handled from the first, despite everything, there are a few stories that are ‘good’ ones that are real and are happening.
I am not saying in any way that this makes up for all the tons of bad, I am simply saying it just is.
It would be just as wrong to not report any ‘good ‘stories as it would be and is not to report any bad.
Believe me, no one was or is more against the occupation of Iraq than I, and no one thinks is has more been badly managed than I, and no one is angrier than I at what we have done and continue to do there.
I have a blog pretty much devoted to the Iraq war and the Iraq people and have posted as well as written many comments and articles to that effect. I could not have more sympathy for their plight, and in fact it is personal for me because of my Iraqi friend.
That however does not preclude the fact that there are some ‘good’ stories albeit not many , but still there are some.
Are we to hope for no good stories, are we to hope for no solution or resolution, just because we were against and continue to be against this war and occupation.
For the sake of the Iraq people, I surely do hope that there are more good stories and that more good stories will come in the future, and that really is what I hope for the future. Don’t know if it’s possible, but surely I can’t hope for the opposite, nothing good.
How one feels regarding the war itself is an entirely different matter, than the issues discussed concerning this diary.
This diary as you know Ductape, since you commented there, is on DK, and the same sentiments I expressed here are expressed by others there.
I urge others who have given this diary a reccommend, to reconsider that, in light of the unfounded and unsubstantiated claims, which boil down to just conjecture and innuendo.
The issue of conjecture and innuendo I have addressed here in this thread.
I will also point out, and forgive me if it has been mentioned, but the internet access situation in Iraq is worth considering, with regard to any and all communications originating there, regardless of viewpoint expressed.
Regarding good and bad, I stand by my assertion that it is a matter of perspective. Every war of aggression, every invasion, every crime against humanity, benefits somebody.
The most horrific tales of depravity from Iraq, from Chechnya, from Palestine, from Afghanistan, all were viewed by somebody as “good,” all brought a benefit, material or psychological, to somebody. At one point, the US was paying the Pak police $50 a head for warm bodies to haul off to Gitmo. $50 is not an inconsiderable sum to the cop on the beat in Pashtunistan, and there are undoubtedly children who had a better supper, or even obtained electric light as a result of the project, and learned a little something about entrepreneurship and capitalism in the process.
If you read an account of the same incident, for instance in the US corporate media, and in the Resistance media, you will see different headlines:
“Coalition forces kill 30 suspected insurgents in clean up operation” This will be considered a “good news” story by Washington loyalists.
“American gunmen murder 30 Iraqis in assault on village” This will be considered “bad news” by the inhabitants of the village, and those who loved each of the 30.
I have no problem with your having the debate or your goals of attempting to bring Republicans to our side and all that. I just said that to me, personally, it was pointless. I didn’t participate in either that diary or the Lt. Currie one (besides a greeting). Others did, and that’s a good thing, good conversations and etc.
I talk to/debate with Republicans almost daily, so it’s not a novel thing to me or anything. I have no common ground with Republicans that support this admin, nor they with me, for the most part, but that doesn’t stop me or them from conversing and having a good time doing so. I just think that the expectations, whether they should be or not, are greater when you set up someone as a special type guest/debate. And that the frustration of finding the same old, same old (which actually could have and should have been anticipated) is one of the things that have caused people to be suspicious of the backgrounds/goals of the participants.
Anyway, I was just giving my personal opinion, and certainly no condemnation of you or BooMan. I think opening up the debate and conversation is a good thing. Sometimes the outcome may be less stellar than expected though, as with anything.
I quite understand your position and have no problem with it.
.
I became aware, as more comments were written today, that a lot of emotions of the past two years were aroused. Even anger was relived for the false motives and a light-hearted decision to “invade and occupy” another nation 10,000 miles away, resulting in deaths of more than 30,000 innocent victims, 1550 US deaths and more than 20,000 severely wounded US servicemen and women.
I had expected to keep this diary within bounds of topic on Lt. C and the right-wing propaganda on the Iraq war. I noticed today as time went on, it became increasingly more difficult.
I do not believe in “conversion” of die-hard republicans, nor do republicans need to attempt to convert me. Conversion as referenced to religion only bears fruit when it passes from within.
At BT I hope to find unison in developing political activities towards a clearly defined goal — helping to build grass-roots organisations to do well in Election 2006. IMO we should not engage in too many activities that increases division in the community.
In my diary, I stated an opinion based on findings, observations and discrepancies found, the judgement call I leave to the readers.
Within the democratic party there are many divisions on policy, ultimate goal and even aspirations. My preference, [humble request], to Booman would be to invite a special guest for diary or commentary from within the democratic party organisation. It is better to UNITE than to DIVIDE.
Oui – Liberté – Egalité – Fraternité
what you had to do and should not feel the need to apologize or water-down opinions that you feel strongly about.
I want to apologise for this diary getting somewhat hijacked, that was not my intent. Oui, I have great respect for the work that you’ve done here and the time and effort put into it. Keep digging.
They just sit around moping all day, wishing they could go back to the days of Saddam. Is that about right, Oui?
Alan
Maverick Leftist
Lotsa disapprobation expressed via the ratings there (even the Republican only gave me a 3! LOL). But no actual replies? C’mon, people–what was it about that statement that deserved a “WARNING”? If you don’t agree with my perspective, come back at me, tell me why I’m all wet! But silently downrating the comment? That’s kinda lame.
Alan
Maverick Leftist
I was rather surprised at all the ‘warning’ ratings, too.
I thought your comment was sarcastic and rather caustic, but definitely a witty response to the passage in Oui’s diary you have highlighted downthread.
It’s a bit much to say it’s a personal attack on another member of the community.
I found that comment rather tasteless, true, but I felt it deserved no comment. A rebuttal would have opened the Iraqi invasion can of worms again – so I for one did not want to go there on this diary.
Just wondering what it was about Slacker’s comment that warranted “2”s, when there seem to be many inflammatory comments on this thread. (I’m just trying to get a better understanding of the “warning” he was just given.) Thanks
I am not sure either. I can’t help but imagine a group of wizards swooping down to defend against the Dark Arts, pointing their wands and…
“2!” “a 2!” “a 2!” “a..
… okay, well I guess there is such a thing as too much Harry Potter.
exits to find an excuse for reading the first Harry Potters
my rating since I was the first to give a ‘2’.
Usually, I ignore comments which break rule #2. But when it comes to #1 then I draw the line. If we allow them, it takes little time for conversations/debates to turn into insults which subsequently break up any “community”.
Oui never claimed that he objected to little girls smiling. Slacker used the old trick of “projection” (usually employed by the right-wing ideologues) to put the writer in a defensive position and/or make him respond to an irrational argument.
examples:
— Against the war?…. Must be a “Saddamite”!
— Pro-choice?…. Must enjoy watching “babies” die.
— Remove the tube from Schiavo?… Starve someone to death.
My comment was in no way a “personal attack” unless any disagreement expressed with sarcasm qualifies as same (and that is way too low a bar for “personal attack” in my opinion). In the original diary, Oui wrote:
My post stands, as a perfectly legitimate response to the above. Disagree all you like, but to call it a “personal attack” is bogus.
Just to understand your definition better: is this post a personal attack as well (on you, on Oui, on the others who rated me 2)?
Alan
Maverick Leftist
I don’t always agree with you but on this one I do.
Thanks, Diane.
Alan
Maverick Leftist
You have expressed my feelings to the fullest. I NEVER give troll ratings, allow more leeway on my own diary because that is the responsibility when you author a diary. The discussion by the readers should have free movement, without author diametrically opposing all comments.
I felt deeply offended by this comment, in fact placing my work on same line as being a friend of Saddam.
To answer to such a comment would have given it credence. Lack of empathy even exists 24 hours later, to no surprise.
Oui – Liberté – Egalité – Fraternité
perhaps you could explain why my statement was not a valid inference, albeit a sarcastic one.
Alan
Maverick Leftist
here are some “counterexamples” that I’ve seen plenty of:
— For the war?…. Must be a “Bushite”!
— For restrictions on abortion?…. Must hate women and want to oppress them.
— Keep Schiavo’s feeding tube in place?… Must be a right wing Bible thumper.
Are those “offensive” too? Should I give a “2” to anyone who characterises me that way?
Alan
Maverick Leftist
But those statements were clearly intended as “compliments”. 🙂
The smiley is a bit ambiguous…did you mean it to be a wink?
Alan
Maverick Leftist
For the love of God, Alan, are you accusing me of inappropriate emoticon use? Well, are you?
(Oh yeah, in response to your question, that would be a yes 😉
Lt C summarizes in his blog of Mon March 28 2005, his meeting of the Booman Tribune community as follows.
――――――――――――――
A DAY LIKE EVERY OTHER
――――――――――――――
Apparently yesterday was a holiday, well if it was I missed it. I am getting closer to going home for “Enviornmental Leave”. Whatever they call it this week, I am glad to be going. Many of you have asked what my typical day is like. I really can’t answer that, because there is no such thing as normal here. Allow me to qualify that, by saying this. Anytime that there exists the possibility that a mortar, IED, VBIED, or suicide attack against you, that kind of kicks normal in the gut. So there is no normal here.
[…]
Boomantribune…(a nice blog type site from Ohio. It is left of center (often way left), but some good readings nonetheless)
I saw a hit from this site on my blog, so I went to check it out, turns out there are some really smart and dialed in people there. So I posted a comment and offered to answer questions about “the war” from my perspective. Here is a sample of the shots I took “center mass”.
[Who invited who? – Ed]
Ok, so my basic response was, those questions are above my pay grade. And man did I continue to get shot up. It was the comparrison to the Nazis that really annoyed the hell out of me. There were many more such questions I didn’t answer, again above my paygrade, and I was getting tired of being beat up by the intelligencia. The intellectual elite who become so “seemingly” enamoured by their own intellectual prowess that they simply cannot be wrong thus there is no need to listen to the other side. I am fortunate here in Iraq, in that we can deal with those here who cannot be reasoned with. But in the US the 1st ammendment guarantees freedom of speech, even when the ability to know when to shut up is lost by diarhea of the mouth and mind. But, there are some very smart people I came in contact with there, so I shall take my licks and stay in contact with them. I got beat up in there, but I am still here. Sucking dust in Iraq, with a perspective on this war, that they the arm chair pundits will never have, but it’s easy to second guess what we do here, when you’re always right.
I did ask one of them, a very intelligent man, and veteran who has a chip on his shoulder, overshadowed by his enourmous brain. He is a self proclaimed pascifist. Where he sees the need for the existance of soldiers as a sad commentary on our society. Bummer, anyway I asked him if (and I dumbed way down for this one I put it in grunt terms. I love the infantry these kids are as real as Americans get) any way, I asked him if I punched him in the face, would he just take it? I am still waiting for an answer…
Well, he can sit on the fence and fight his intellectual fight, me and my guys will just wait for him to fix the worlds problems with talk… Because bullies just love to talk don’t they. In simplistic terms, that’s what Germany did to Poland in 39… “Say Uncle!!!”
7 days until I’m home…
Oui – Liberté – Egalité – Fraternité
Wow, “cannot be reasoned with”!
Wonder how they are ‘dealt with’?
I must say, that statement by Lt. Currie is appalling. Even if he was joking, I can’t countenance it. I hope he is reading this, because I can’t emphasise strongly enough how awful it is for someone in his position to throw rhetoric like this around, especially after atrocities like Abu Ghraib. Ugh!
Alan
Maverick Leftist
“”I am fortunate here in Iraq, in that we can deal with those here who cannot be reasoned with.”””
I have searched the blog of the Lt. 3 times and I cannot find any mention of this phrase, if someone has it please post a link to exactly where he says this.
on diary entry dated 2005-03-28(A Day Like Every Other) and is the 3rd paragraph from the end or second if you don’t count his last sentence on entry as a paragraph.
I already found that, it was told to me on the other diary, and I’ve written to Lt. C and asked him to clarify this statement.
to remind anyone who needs a reminder that it is a good idea to keep personal contact info private when web surfing or communicating with internet acquaintances.
It’s a smart practice for teens, and for their parents and grandparents, too!
If you can’t suppress the urge to meet an online pal “in real life,” choose group activities in public places, attend the event accompanied by trusted real life friends, leave with the group, don’t go straight home, and keep on keeping that contact info as “classified information!”
I conduct fraud investigations and have worked on hundreds of cases involving individuals who haven’t been who they presented themselves to be (whether in identity or character). Even in the most innocuous terms, every one of us presents to our audience only what we choose – and what we present is bound to paint us in the best of lights.
Last night Eleanora very graciously offered to help me offline with a project that’s been causing me a great deal of stress. In spite of the fact that she is a top notch contributor and a known entity on these sites, should I choose to accept her offer I will set up an anonymous e-mail address, and redact quite a bit of information from my work. Heck – for all I know, she’s competing against me for the project I’m bidding on – or she(?) may be the focus of my investigation. (Likely? No. Possibly? Yes)
On top of the personal safety issues mentioned by Ductape, please, please, please conduct as much due diligence as possible on anyone with whom you enter a relationship – particularly relationships that begin online. (Just a public service announcement from someone who cares. . .or for all you know. . .maybe I don’t. . .)
this particular individual, “who he says he is” is a US “interrogator” in Iraq, so this might be one of those times when the person’s being exactly who he says he is could call for even more stringent security measures than when one fears that “CuteGir18” is in reality a 45 year old insurance salesman named Earl with a penchant for, um, US-style “interrogation” activities! 😉
I used to be pretty careful about revealing my full name or even the town I live in online. Then I got interviewed in the Washington Post, and I couldn’t (and still can’t) resist bragging about that, LOL. So that cover’s blown.
I actually violated all the suggestions in your last paragraph about four different times. The last time, the woman in question is who I’ve been married to for almost eight years now. <g>
Alan
Maverick Leftist
One of my friends has a peculiar perspective on pretty much everything, and I desperately feel the need to self-medicate after most of our conversations. Having said that,
She recently called me to share the results of her first date through an online service. But before she shared the details, she made me promise to let her tell the full story before I started yelling at her. (Because she knew damn well what my reaction would be)
Turns out she met the man at his home, without any prior knowledge of him other than his name, address age and occupation. And she wanted the ability to tell the full story, because she didn’t think I’d rip her a new one when I found out the man was a police officer. When I proceeded to rip her a new one (much to her surprise), she defended herself by telling me she knew he was an officer because she saw uniforms hanging on the closet doorknob. HUH? Okay, let me get this straight. . .it’s okay to throw all caution to the wind because a police officer would never do anything wrong. Nope. Not a police officer. And hey! She had proof of his occupation through the uniforms on the doorknob. What could be safer than going to the home of a strange police officer?
(runs off to scream into a pillow so as not to frighten the cat)
I haven’t been able to find a listing for Alan Slackerinc in any directory. 😉