That's not making an assertion about what General Pershing did, just telling us to go study something. Is that really enough to get a "Pants on Fire" rating from Politifact?
Politifact merges the new tweet with something Trump said back in February 2016:
"They were having terrorism problems [in the Philippines], just like we do," Trump said, according to a February 2016 account in the Washington Post. "And he caught 50 terrorists who did tremendous damage and killed many people. And he took the 50 terrorists, and he took 50 men and he dipped 50 bullets in pigs’ blood — you heard that, right? He took 50 bullets, and he dipped them in pigs’ blood. And he had his men load his rifles, and he lined up the 50 people, and they shot 49 of those people. And the 50th person, he said: You go back to your people, and you tell them what happened. And for 25 years, there wasn’t a problem. Okay? Twenty-five years, there wasn’t a problem."Is that story true? How would we know? If it were true, it might be denied, and if it were false, it might be claimed.
The best evidence U.S. troops used pigs as a tactic against Muslims comes from a memoir by Pershing titled My Life Before the World War, 1860-1917, which was republished in 2013 by the University Press of Kentucky. In the memoir, Pershing writes that another commanding officer in the Philippines, Col. Frank West, had in at least one case seen to it that bodies of Muslim insurgents "were publicly buried in the same grave with a dead pig. It was not pleasant to have to take such measures, but the prospect of going to hell instead of heaven sometimes deterred the would-be assassins."The interesting thing is that Trump is choosing to waft this myth right now. That is, he's thinks its a good idea to let radical Muslim terrorists know we might mess with their dead bodies in a way that he (presumably) thinks they think will wreck their afterlife. He might think that threat will influence the terrorists, but not necessarily. He might just think that he had a cheeky tweet to entertain his fans and confound his MSM antagonists. It's a new topic: Pershing!
In a footnote, the editor of the 2013 edition, John T. Greenwood, cited a letter about the incident from Maj. Gen. J. Franklin Bell, the commander of the Philippines Division, to Pershing: "Of course there is nothing to be done, but I understand it has long been a custom to bury (insurgents) with pigs when they kill Americans. I think this a good plan, for if anything will discourage the (insurgents) it is the prospect of going to hell instead of to heaven. You can rely on me to stand by you in maintaining this custom. It is the only possible thing we can do to discourage crazy fanatics."
While these writings do provide strong evidence that United States forces used pigs as a tactic against Muslim insurgents, there is no evidence that Pershing himself committed these acts.
It gets rid of whatever the old topic was.
Purging with Pershing.
But, seriously, the bodies of the enemy dead should not be desecrated.
Remember: "Horror at Fallujah / SAVAGE ATTACK: Bodies dragged through street, hung from bridge 4 U.S. contractors killed in ambush hours after 5 soldiers slain in Iraq."
And the respect the previous administration showed to the body of our arch-enemy bin Laden:
"Traditional procedures for Islamic burial was followed," the May 2 email from Rear Admiral Charles Gaouette reads. "The deceased's body was washed (ablution) then placed in a white sheet. The body was placed in a weighted bag. A military officer read prepared religious remarks, which were translated into Arabic by a native speaker. After the words were complete, the body was placed on a prepared flat board, tipped up, whereupon the deceased's body slid into the sea.''AND: From 2013: "One of the U.S. Marines who was caught on video urinating on the corpses of suspected Taliban fighters has broken his silence to say that he's not sorry for what he did and he'd do it again."
"These were the same guys that were killing our family, killing our brothers," Sgt. Joseph Chamblin told ABC News affiliate WSOC in his first interview since the 2011 incident. Chamblin said he did regret any repercussions it may have had on the Marines, "but do I regret doing it? Hell no."
पोस्ट्स
१३८ टिप्पण्या:
I think we should treat the vanquished with respect. I'm being told lately I'm wrong though.
It got very Belmont Club all of a sudden.
This is a rational and fair response to Trump's presidency by a Trump voter.
I Voted for Trump. And I Sorely Regret It.
"But, seriously, the bodies of the enemy dead should not be desecrated."
Why?
The aggressor sets the rules. When they show up in uniforms with ranks and commanders following the rules of war, then we should follow the rules of war. When they show up and kill large numbers, civilian targets, then they have thrown the rules out and they are making their own rules.
Lets build statues of them in our public squares. Thats the conservative way, right?
Trump sure is one to lecture us about history. I guess fake facts are better than the tweets he deleted.
I guess it would depend on whether you actually want to stop islamism.
I can tell you there is only one thing that they respond to. They will back the strong horse every time. They will not follow you or work to help you for any other reason.
If shooting them with bullets soaked in pigs blood works and my guess is it would work on some do it. I think wrapping them in pigskin for burial would work better.
I don't need Trump talking about Pershing right now.
But he didn't *say* anything about pig's blood yesterday, but many news outlets are saying he did.
Blogger AReasonableMan said...
"This is a rational and fair response to Trump's presidency by a Trump voter."
Actually a rational and fair response would be to look at the braying mob waving a bloody shirt around burning statues of Lincoln wearing black masks and carrying baseball bats and shooting up softball games and calling for the assasination of trump and realize they are up against a bunch of barbarians who care nothing about civil society and will burn everything down in order to seize power.
Then after every election the braying mob loses it goes more and more out of control. At some point you can no longer tolerate a rabid dog running around the neighborhood attacking people.
But seriously, I am quite happy to dip our bullets in pig fat if that adds to the fear of Muslims being killed by us.
Until World War II, rebellions by the Moros against American rule persisted long after 1914, and then the Moros then proceeded to fight against the Japanese invaders. Violence between the occupying forces and Moro Maranao broke out from 1921-1928. It was written that twenty five years of guerilla fighting have not solved the Moro Problem. in The New Republic in 1931. Troops with weapons had to guard the American school superintendent in certain Lanao districts.
Dates, leaders, and locations of armed insurrections...
Let's just say that It's a long list.
Is there anything bacon won't do?
The U.S. war against the Philippines was conducted with the scorched earth policies, forced resettlement, and casual slaughter of civilians that we associate with our worst enemies.
I don't believe that Bin Laden story for a minute.
The "hearts and minds" approach obviously doesn't work.
" the scorched earth policies, forced resettlement, and casual slaughter of civilians"
So was WWII. Unfortunately, when you have an enemy that is dedicated to your total destruction, it takes that level of aggression to make them consider if they want to continue or not.
50 bullets for 50 men? BS.
It's bravado to agitate the media.
These are fascinating times. We certainly have had news media supporting their party with vicious attacks on the oppostion before - starting with Jefferson and Hamilton - but this is surely the first time the media have gone to war against a president by themselves - nevermind the party!
In Venice the tomb of St Mark has a panel explaining that his remains were smuggled out of Egypt by covering them with a pig carcass which the authorities would not lift to look beneath. That was about a thousand years ago.
The fools and leftist who say that terrorists are "not real Muslims" convince themselves this sort of thing is ineffective.
By the way, bullets with pig blood on them desecrate the Muslims when they are, briefly, alive, not dead. That's a few seconds later.
The most humane way to deal with Muslim terror is to keep it out of the country.
Matthew nailed it with the first comment.
I've long been in favor of the bacon bomb. Althouse's last points showed that our respect has done nothing to stop or mollify them, so why bother? We don't have to do the full Roman, however.
I'm skeptical they washed Bin Ladens body. They most likely just dumped him
Eradicating is not persuading.
And yes there was that in WWII. You can be the Russians.
Yes, I know, Dresden, etc. etc. But the difference in degree is not debatable.
There is the Indian Mutiny of 1857, allegedly touched off by the pig fat used to grease the rifle cartridges of the native Muslim troops.
If you think this idiotic pig fat idea will be persuasive you should study the Sepoy Rebellion.
@Ralph L -- I see we thought of the same example.
Henry,
Nice strawman. Did anyone say Muslims should be eradicated?
"Eradicating is not persuading." No, but significant amounts of destruction, and the threat of more, is. And typically taking significant, violent action early results in less damage and casualties for BOTH sides than a piecemeal, gradually incrementing approach.
"But, seriously, the bodies of the enemy dead should not be desecrated."
Why?
Because very bad juju, that's why.
"But he didn't *say* anything about pig's blood yesterday..."
You are right and my post is clear about that.
But it is a reference back to a story that he's told before. This is beyond a dog whistle. We're encouraged to look it up and figure out what he's talking about. If he didn't mean the pig blood story, he should have been clear. It's obvious he did. There's no way out of that. But points for subtlety? MSM will never give him points for subtlety.
Pershing taught at the University of Nebraska. Go Big Red!
"Remember: Horror at Fallujah"
Yes. And maybe take an additional moment to remember the decency of the left, and the sincerity of their "support the troops" disclaimers, and which side they actually empathize with.
Kos himself on the dead Americans: "I feel nothing. ... Screw them."
I'm skeptical of Politifact's Pants on Fire label. When someone is lying rarely are their pants actually on fire.
I give Politifact four Pinocchios.
The self–immolation of the Left and their MSM lapdog is something to see. And smell. It couldn't have happened without Trump.
I think Scott Adams has the best explanation. We are in a Mass Hysteria Bubble.
On November 8th of 2016, half the country learned that everything they believed to be both true and obvious turned out to be wrong. The people who thought Trump had no chance of winning were under the impression they were smart people who understood their country, and politics, and how things work in general. When Trump won, they learned they were wrong. They were so very wrong that they reflexively (because this is how all brains work) rewrote the scripts they were seeing in their minds until it all made sense again.
The rest of it sounds about right, too.
"I don't believe that Bin Laden story for a minute."
But it's the story the Obama administration chose to tell. You have to believe that it was their narrative. America respects Islam and does not judge the whole group by the parts within the group that are terrible. Bush II did the same thing. Very tactful. Even when we barged in on the guy's home and shot him in the head. We want to show how respectful we are, where we can. That's the Obama message. But he still killed him, and he bragged that he was good at killing guys (good at pointing to a name on the list and causing the guy to be dead).
Trump is choosing to tell different stories.
Who knows who told more true stories and who lied more? Even if we don't know, we can still have opinions about the narratives they chose, the values they posed in.
"I'm skeptical they washed Bin Ladens body. They most likely just dumped him."
-- We may have done it to try and ensure that the other side didn't use disrespecting his corpse as propaganda. And to show our Muslim allies that we respect their traditions, even for the worst of our enemies. Because decency to the defeated is an American trademark (witness how quickly we reconciled with the British, how many Americans still are trying to make amends for our horrible historic treatment of Native Americans, our pushing the Marshal Plan, and our assistance to Germany/Japan after WWII. And, you know, the whole "with malice for none" thing.)
Since history begins each morning for the Left, how disingenuous it is to try to link Trump's remarks with something he said months ago. Politifact = Politifiction.
That's why you can't trust "fact checkers" and these are the same people who think they are qualified to enforce who gets the right to free speech and who doesn't.
I used to use Google. They have mixed this kind of partisan fact checking into their searches. One of the many reasons I use a different search engine. You know, like DuckDuckGo, that works fine, and forgets your user information instantly.
exhelodrvr1 -- In the context of the U.S. war in the Phillippines my description -- " the scorched earth policies, forced resettlement, and casual slaughter of civilians" -- is historically accurate.
The war was brutal on both sides. U.S. forces at times burned villages, implemented civilian reconcentration policies, and employed torture on suspected guerrillas, while Filipino fighters also tortured captured soldiers and terrorized civilians who cooperated with American forces. Many civilians died during the conflict as a result of the fighting, cholera and malaria epidemics, and food shortages caused by several agricultural catastrophes.
Eradication.
Even as the fighting went on, the colonial government that the United States established in the Philippines in 1900 under future President William Howard Taft launched a pacification campaign that became known as the “policy of attraction.” Designed to win over key elites and other Filipinos who did not embrace Aguinaldo’s plans for the Philippines, this policy permitted a significant degree of self-government, introduced social reforms, and implemented plans for economic development. Over time, this program gained important Filipino adherents and undermined the revolutionaries’ popular appeal, which significantly aided the United States’ military effort to win the war.
Conciliation.
Taft did far better than Pershing.
BTW, this thumbnail sketch of the war is from the U.S. State department. It barely touches the surface of the atrocities committed. Atrocities committed on both sides, you may claim, but that's not the question that Trump raises. Trump's claim is that atrocities work.
"Trump has us studying General Pershing"
Maybe more of us should be studying Islam. And the role that terrorism plays in the practice of Jihad which is playing out across the globe.
But to listen to politicians and the MSM these things are only about trucks and cars going out of control, not a world-wide movement to bring us to the heel of Islam.
To be clear Pershing's operation was in the Moro province years later. Taft's approach is better contrasted with Generals Otis and Bell.
Your President once again puts on display his unsuitability to lead the nation and be a among the leaders in the world. Incompetent, ignorant, and "questionable stability" a term used by Senator Corker to describe Trump. Does Trump not think that we depend on Muslim nations around the world to help us eradicate ISIS? We depend on Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan to fight alongside our troops. How would it make for better relations with non ISIS Muslims for Trump to keep repeating this stupid pig blood story, which is untrue, BTW. Would Trump mention pig's blood to the King of Jorden? He doesn't think that Muslim leaders around the world that we need to have as allies wouldn't have read or heard of his unhinged tweet?
He's been rope-a-doping forever. He shit talks, trashes the news cycle, people focus on it, repudiate it, overreach, find grains of truth.
I think I remember something about Pershing and pig's blood cited in the 1927 Chicago Daily. I'll have to see if I can Google that up.
Trump claims that Pershing directed actions that ended muslim terrorism in the area of action for decades.
"There was no more Radical Islamic Terror for 35 years!,"
I've already provided a link. This is demonstrably false. There is nothing true about it. Muslim guerrilla action in Moro continued.
More evidence of the tactics of the Deep State in a Kimberly Strassel column today.
Peggy Noonan has her usual blather of platitudes but this is reporting.
In a better world, Americans would never hear the name Samantha Dravis. She wouldn’t be pictured on the front page of the New York Times or added to environmentalist “watch lists.”
This is no knock on Ms. Dravis, who is a talented attorney. Rather, it’s an acknowledgment that in the grand scheme of the federal government, she’s one of hundreds upon hundreds of “staffers.” As associate administrator for policy at the Environmental Protection Agency, she didn’t need Senate confirmation. She’s no cabinet secretary and never chose a public role.
But in today’s anti- Trump “resistance,” that counts for nothing. The left lost the election, lost the argument, and is losing President Obama’s precious legacy. Its response is a scorched-earth campaign against not only EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, but anyone who works for him.
I'm not if this is the reason why staffing has gone so slow but it might be. This is part of the coup d'etat being attempted by the left and the permanent DC establishment of both parties.
The only thing I've ever known about Pershing is that he was nicknamed Black Jack (don't really know why though) and that upon arriving in Paris during World War I, he proclaimed "Lafayette, we are here" except he didn't really say that himself, somebody else did.
So who knows how any of this is going to be remembered decades from now when all the main players are dead. We don't even get it straight now, who's really saying what and what any of it is supposed to mean.
Re: Henry:
The U.S. war against the Philippines was conducted with the scorched earth policies, forced resettlement, and casual slaughter of civilians that we associate with our worst enemies.
Yes . . . the media are being typically misleading when they say Trump is now bringing up the pigs blood bullet thing (though I wouldn't be surprised if in the next five minutes he does bring it up), but it's not like the other tactics we used in in the Philippines wouldn't get us indicted for war crimes today. Contemporary news reports reflect use of torture by US troops -- not the waterboarding we use today but actually drowning the subject and then pumping all the water out for the next round.
The Moros of the southern Philippines have gone on fighting with each other for centuries as Muslims are always fighting and killing.
The terrorism OUTSIDE the traditional Muslim areas is probably what he meant.
@Michael K -- If Trump is going to use an analogy, it should actually analogize.
The history of Pershing and the Moros is the opposite of what Trump claims.
Perhaps Drumpf was referring Pershing's failed attempt to get Pancho Villa in Old Mexico.
While I hate the idea of desecrating bodies, did we gain any brownie points in the Muslim world for giving bin Laden a respectful burial at sea?
Henry is the expert on Philippine history. I salute you, Sir.
Howard's head could be filled with pig's fat.
And we'd never know.
'I'm not talking to the president after what he said about my child': Heather Heyer's mother hits out at President Trump's reaction to Charlottesville
"Susan Bro said she'll never forgive the president for equating her daughter and other counter-protesters with hate groups."
"'You can't wash this one away by shaking my hand and saying I'm sorry. I'm not forgiving for that,' Bro said."
Her concern that the President might apologize is misplaced.
It got very Belmont Club all of a sudden.
Heh! I see what you did there.
RE: Henry:
If you think this idiotic pig fat idea will be persuasive you should study the Sepoy Rebellion.
The Mutiny? The British Empire won decisively and they continued to rule India for almost another century (1858 to 1947). That wasn't a century in which they had to fight a bunch of military campaigns against the independence movement. It wasn't even a century in which they had to deal with a bunch of assassinations by independence activists (Lord Mayo, assassinated in 1872, was assassinated by a convict unhappy at being jailed). It was mostly peaceful, apart from the occasional famine.
The Moros in Philippines are a much better example. The Indian Mutiny teaches us that strapping people to the mouths of cannons and blowing them apart works really, really well.
Alternately, the wars in Afghanistan would work.
@Balfegor -- The point being that the rumors of beef tallow and/or pig fat being on the bullets didn't stop the Sepoys from using their guns. It just gave them more cause to hate the British.
Daily Kos on Ms Heyer:
https://m.dailykos.com/stories/1689104
IWW organizer
Burying terrorists with pigs would be maybe a 5 on the outrage meter. Talking about it is a 1.
Re: Michael K:
The Moros of the southern Philippines have gone on fighting with each other for centuries as Muslims are always fighting and killing.
They've been fighting the government of the Philippines whoever it is for quite some time. Although it seems like ultra-hardliner Duterte may have made some progress, recently he has been less optimistic. First it was MNLF, and MNLF was pacified, then it was MILF, and MILF reached some kind of peace agreement, but then it was the Mautes. There's always someone who won't agree to lay down arms -- their will to fight is not yet exhausted. Duterte put Mindanao under martial law back in May.
Ray said...
IWW organizer
So, her murder was justified?
@Michael K -- I defer to Balfegor.
But really, this isn't hard. An interest in U.S. History and a modicum of curiosity is all it takes.
Probably the first book I read about the U.S.-Philippine war was Barbara Tuchman's The Proud Tower.
Sometimes you have to play their game. When you do, you sure as fuck don't apologize or make a big show of phony hand-wringing.
DJT is reminding us he is a realist, and that is what war constantly demands from Commanders no matter how many Fake News stories are cranked out daily.
This seems like a key month in the Deep State's Coup attempt to remove Trump. If the Fake News can't do it right away, the Scalise method is up next. Because every day Trump gives cover to investigations of Obama/Soros/Clinton operations, the closer the Deep State comes to defeat.
On the GOPe person who voted for Trump and regrets it.
My gut feeling is any Republican who won, would have the same legislative results.
And would be called a Nazi, idiot, racist, Etc.
Look what was done to Bush 2.
And Romney and McCain in the presidential elections.
And nobody but Trump could have won.
Respect for the bodies of the fallen, especially the enemy dead, is vital to the psychological and spiritual well-being of the victor.
I'm surprised no one here has articulated this point.
Such respect is critical to the process of psychological and spiritual regeneration and redemption that warriors must undergo after the fighting ends.
The cultural taboos, sometimes observed only in the breech but nonetheless firmly established, against desecrating enemy corpses (and graves) did not develop -- where they did develop -- as an expression of some vague notion that treating the dead with respect is merely the right thing to do.
It is, as I said in a previous post, a very ancient theme. The ancients were very conscious of the implications and consequences of corpse desecration and the damage such acts do to the desecrator. It is a secondary albeit very important theme in the Iliad, for instance. Achilles, in dragging Hector's body around Troy behind his chariot, has broken a strong and salutary cultural taboo. He only recovers his humanity after his meeting and reconciliation with Priam, in what is certainly one of the most powerful scenes in the canon of Western literature.
Re: Henry:
@Balfegor -- The point being that the rumors of beef tallow and/or pig fat being on the bullets didn't stop the Sepoys from using their guns. It just gave them more cause to hate the British.
I don't see the parallel at all, really -- the British weren't putting about the rumours to keep the Sepoys from using their guns. The Sepoys were their troops until they mutinied. They wanted them to use their guns!
(Just not on, you know, Company troops and British civilians)
Also, I'm not sure how the mutineers handled the issue of the animal fat -- British military officers had come up with a number of ways of avoiding or eliminating the grease before the mutiny (which were taken as confirmation that the rumours were true) so it was apparently possible to operate the rifles without any of the suspect grease. I wouldn't be surprised if those mutineers who actually cared about it (as the causes of the Mutiny were numerous and not limited to the pork/beef fat issue) just used other different oils to grease their cartridges.
The point isn't to desecrate their bodies but to hook into their, theirs not ours, belief that pig contamination keeps them from getting into heaven. No virgins for you.
Re: expertise on Philippine history, we should be waiting for buwaya puti to show up in the thread -- isn't he Filipino?
Was the throwing of acid in Baked Alaska face justified?
And my understanding in the US is a person is considered innocent until proven guilty...
Here is the deepest dive I've seen on the specific topic of Pershing yet:
https://twitter.com/ThomasWictor/status/898405167527116801
"Probably the first book I read about the U.S.-Philippine war was Barbara Tuchman's The Proud Tower."
I've read that and a number of other books about the Philippines but don't want to argue with you.
The Moros have been violent and lived by kidnaping none Muslims for decades. The southern islands are Muslim and avoided by tourists,.
Blogger AReasonableMan said...
Ray said...
IWW organizer
So, her murder was justified?
I really think you are getting worse with time.
She was blocking the street with a mob shouting "Whose street ? Our street!" when the car, driven by a schizophrenic who may have been attacked farther up the street, drove into two cars blocked by the protestors.
If you block a street in a protest, a number of cases have held you are assuming the risk.
I agree he may have done this as a deliberate act but it will be determined if he was of sound mind.
Loughner, who shot Gabby Gifford and six others, was not.
Re: Michael K:
She was blocking the street with a mob shouting "Whose street ? Our street!" when the car, driven by a schizophrenic who may have been attacked farther up the street, drove into two cars blocked by the protestors.
I am not keen on watching the video, but apparently there is video . . . is it true that Antifa were bashing in the windows of his car with bats? IF true, that really puts a very different complexion on the incident.
ARM
Didn't you mother teach you not to play in traffic?
My bad if she allowed you to do it.
Any. Gotta love the Marines.
ARM is here on behalf of the hack press(D)
"He might just think that he had cheeky tweet to entertain his fans and confound his MSM antagonists. It's a new topic: Pershing!"
Sometimes when Trump tweets, the smart response is, "Are you fucking with us?"
(The video at the link is NSFW)
is it true that Antifa were bashing in the windows of his car with bats?
That tape wouldn't be shown on the MSM, if it existed anyway. Like Hillary's election loss tantrum that wasn't filmed, even though there were CNN cameramen right there. They even turned away, according to witnesses, so that no one could ever point a finger at them.
Althouse- sorry, yes your post is very clear.
I've just seen everywhere that he said it yesterday, even from reporters. And he obviously did not.
Not desecrating the corpses of enemy soldiers is a good, noble, and possibly even practical thing. Enemy spies and enemy war criminals (terrorists are both) -- it's less clear.
"Ray said...
IWW organizer"
"So, her murder was justified?"
You are assuming facts not yet in evidence- that her death was "murder". That is a legal determination made by a jury of her peers interpreting the evidence before her in view of their jury instructions. All we have so far is homicide.
There are two interrelated aspects of her having been an IWW organizer. She very likely came to rumble. Or at least to organize and lead the fighting. That is what the IWW does and has done for better than a half a century. She very, very, likely wasn't an innocent bystander there. Not even close. So, yes, her death may be legally justified. It's called self defense. The same rules that apply if you shoot someone, apply here. If she had been a mere onlooker, or someone inadvertently caught in the crowds, then self-defense would likely not apply. But in her case, she wasn't apparently an innocent bystander but part of a conspiracy, an illegal endeavor, to intimidate through the use of violence, some of such violence including the use of lethal weapons such baseball bats.
This may ultimately turn out to be like trying to portray Trayvon Martin and Big Mike Brown as victims and martyrs. They weren't - they were the problem instead. They were violent thugs who died while trying to commit murder.
Rusty said...
Didn't you mother teach you not to play in traffic?
She shouldn't have - you can't blame the victim.
"I am not keen on watching the video, but apparently there is video ."
I've looked at a half dozen videos posted on Blue Lives Matter's web site.
It's hard to see but there was some damage to his car in back. I did not see video of an attack.
He is probably schizophrenic and that was probably the reason for his Army discharge. He has a long history of violence in his own family.
Normally that would be grounds to disqualify him for the military but he may have concealed the anti-psychotic meds part.
Maybe they found out and booted him out.
The neo-Nazi stuff was probably part of the psychosis.
I personally think Dylan Roof was also psychotic but I think he confessed.
"That tape wouldn't be shown on the MSM, if it existed anyway."
But it will be seen I court, if it exists, and if the driver gets a competent defense attorney for his trial. It probably would be highly relevant as to his state of mind and whether his claim of fear of imminent death or great bodily injury was reasonable.
Pershing has his monuments too. The point in Atlanta where Peachtree Street and West Peachtree Street merge was made into a park with a memorial to Pershing and listed names of Fulton County's WWI vets who died in service. Behind it was the Pershing Point Hotel where we often ate Sunday dinner. As a boy I wondered why so many people revered Pershing, but that was universal.
"She shouldn't have - you can't blame the victim."
In Carlottsville last weekend, an IWW organizer was very likely not an innocent victim of the violence, but, rather, one of the people behind it.
Trump should have said read Pershing's memoir backwards like the White Album.
As a boy I wondered why so many people revered Pershing, but that was universal.
Because when American soldiers first saw action under French generals, they were used to charge machine guns to exhaust ammunition so that the French could charge. Black Jack put a stop to that.
"Trump has us studying General Pershing."
It's nice to see that in their retirements Meade and Althouse are furthering their learning: going back to school. Lucky for them, TU no longer charges for admission.
BTW, if Meadehouse is angling for a student discount on a new Mac, I don't think this counts.
Trump is pushing fake history but maybe he is conflating this with the rumors that the British East Indian Company was issuing gunpowder cartridges for the Enfield rifle that was made from cow and pig fat and which had to be opened with one's teeth. I recalled reading a poem about a Muslim officer who stepped up and showed the troops that he could do this and some of the sepoys followed suit.
Balfegor said...
I am not keen on watching the video, but apparently there is video . . . is it true that Antifa were bashing in the windows of his car with bats? IF true, that really puts a very different complexion on the incident.
There is video of them attacking his car immediately after the crash. You can't see the vehicle approaching clearly [video focused elsewhere, then a minivan blocking the view] so you can't tell if he was already under attack. He's moving pretty quickly so it seems unlikely although attackers could have been chasing him. There are reports (but no video I've seen) he was attacked a couple of blocks earlier.
It's time for Obama, Biden, Bush 43, Cheney, Carter, Mondale, Bush 41, Quayle, Clinton, et al to join Gore in calling on Trump to resign
~ Laurence Tribe
Former Speaker of the House and longtime Trump supporter Newt Gingrich is seriously worried about the future of Donald Trump’s presidency.
Gingrich, who has consistently been one of Trump’s most optimistic supporters, said Friday morning that Trump is more isolated than he realizes and needs to make “serious changes” if he’s going to have a stable presidency.
daily caller
It's time for Obama, Biden, Bush 43, Cheney, Carter, Mondale, Bush 41, Quayle, Clinton, et al to join Gore in fucking the fuck off.
--Spirit Jeane Kirkpatrick
Remember our fights (me, versus many of you) more than a year ago on this issue?
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2016/03/i-will-not-order-military-officer-to.html
What I was saying back then was never resolved by Trump. Trump didn't just "waft" a "rumor" about General Pershing. Trump's claim was that if people merely bothered to read their history books, they'd find out about the General Pershing-dipping-bullets-in-pigs'-blood story.
That was never true. And while I agree with the Althouse characterization of Trump engaging in the "wafting" of rumors, it wasn't the way that Trump brought it up. Serious military historians regard the matter as a defamation of General Pershing by Trump, since it all implies a gross dereliction on the part of General Pershing (a genuine hero) deserving of a court martial.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/trump-tells-story-of-executing-muslim-terrorists-with-bullets-dipped-in-pigs-blood/article/2001183
This was and still is a filthy and sociopathic lie on the part of Trump. I don't disagree with Althouse's characterization of it being "the wafting of rumors," but while Althouse is content to leave it there, I regard it as a monstrous thing requiring condemnation. Not because of some difference of opinion or some obscure nuance; but rather because it is a lie on Trump's part. ("You could look it up in the history books.")
Trump astutely uses words to make me – study – that 14 have died so Trump may have yet another chance to talk about a pig with blood coming out of her “whatever,” because without -- Trump -- making me study, I’d surely be as lost as all my other studies at Trump University.
I wonder how Trump's friends in Saudi Arabia like it when he speaks of pigs blood in relation to Islam?
I wonder how Hillary's friends in Saudi Arabia felt about her throwing that champagne bottle through their gifted one-of-a kind OLED TV monitor that was said to cost over a $million.
The way I originally heard the story, Pershing wrapped captured Moro terrorists in bloody pig skins before hanging them. Snopes, back when it was still an honest web site, debunked it -- which makes sense because obviously Moros would have preferred to fight to the death instead of risking being captured and killed in a manner that guarantees an eternity in Muslim hell.
"Ray said...
IWW organizer
So, her murder was justified?"
Typical (i.e. inflammatory, stupid and non-sequitur).
(Shorter answer) No.
But at every turn the left wing victim is portrayed as a "gentle giant" a 13 year old choir boy - yet preparing to attend college, a peace loving person only caring about equal rights. Then, after the violence has flared, the real picture comes out.
It should not matter. A "thug" deserves the full protection of the law. A wobbly does not deserve to die just for her beliefs (I hope to God even ARM understands NO ONE is saying so).
But, does the false portrayal by the left serve a purpose? They must think so. In fact it seems to do so. Perhaps, just perhaps the right feels the need to balance that false image purpose with a little reality.
Or course that's not the absolute worst spin you could put on it, so ARM comes to save the day from rational thought.
The practice of desecrating Moro bodies was intermittently in vogue with several US and local units. And this happened before and after Pershing was proconsul there (he had authority there twice). I dont think its accurate to say that Pershing implemented this practice, though he tolerated it.
Pershing was noted not for bloodiness - that was Leonard Wood, who massacred Moros whenever he had a pretext, but Pershing did command at one of the notable massacres (there were dozens of massacres). Pershing was a notably conciliatory proconsul.
I wonder how Trump's friends in Saudi Arabia like it when he speaks of pigs blood in relation to Islam?
Why?
Justice ARM has again declared it a "murder"! He's so precious when he's unglued.
Does it matter whether the story is true or not? "When the legend becomes fact, print the legend"
Do the Isis folks have access to Snopes? Will they look it up to see if it is true or not? Will they think "Oh, OK, Snopes says it is false for Pershing, therefore we don't have to worry about President Trump doing it."
Or might they think, "This guy is batshit crazy. What difference does it make if the story is false. He just might do it! I'm willing to die for Allah. Not willing to give up my 73 virgins, though."
I think shooting them with bacon coated bullets, or even burying them with pigs is a pussy move. Let's go all out and feed them to the pigs. That way they can spend all eternity as pig shit.
Instructions here: https://youtu.be/bb84fZGnXDw?t=1m
John Henry
How successful was the Sepoy rebellion? Not very, as someone else noted. The Brits continued to rule India for another 100 years.
Not only that, they did it with never more than 20,000 or so Brits, military and civilian, in the country at any given time.
One story I have seen, not sure it is true, is that after independence a newspaper went out to survey Indians on how they felt now that the Brits were gone. Some very large portion of those surveyed didn't even know the Brits had ever been there.
John Henry
I always thought bin laden's body was treated with far more respect than it deserved. We should have burned it and flushed the ashes down a toilet that hadn't been flushed since its last use.
It's time for Obama, Biden, Bush 43, Cheney, Carter, Mondale, Bush 41, Quayle, Clinton, et al to join Gore in calling on Trump to resign
~ Laurence Tribe
I think, I think, he will resign pretty quickly. Bannon is said to be out the door today. There were a lot of rumors that some White House staff were almost at the point of resigning but just couldn't do it. They probably won't last through another of Trump's terrible performances such as Charlottesville.
I think the Presidents and VEEPs would not want to publicly call on him to resign. I would think they'd make a private appeal before doing so publicly.
We'll see, but I doubt we'll have to wait long to see.
Dan Carlin does a Hardcore History podcast that takes deep dives into history. For example, 9 hours on WWI. 12 hours on Ghengis Khan. Really great stuff, though he only posts a couple times a year.
He did a relatively short one on the Philipine insurrection and the US involvement 4 years ago. Relatively short for him means a single 4 hour episode. Really good and pulls no punches about either side.
http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-49-the-american-peril/
It's a downloadable MP3 file.
John Henry
deserving of a court martial.
Why?
If they had dipped bullets in pig fat that would have been one of the less horrible things US troops did in the Philipines.
John Henry
Blogger Brookzene said...
I think, I think, he will resign pretty quickly. Bannon is said to be out the door today.
I think you are as full of shit as a Ramadan turkey, Brookzene.
I opine that you are misspelling the word "hope". If you really think President Trump will resign, how about make it interesting? I'll bet $5 he is still president in Jan 2020. I'll pay off if he leaves office before then. You pay off if he is still prez. All bets are off in the event of his death for whatever cause. You know where to find me to collect, I can track you down if need be.
I suspect and hope that he will get re-elected and still be there in 2020. I know he will finish his presidential term.
As for Bannon, no bets but he has been on his way out the door daily for 3-4 months now and yet he is still there. I suspect he will be there for a while yet. (I also hope so)
For anyone else, I'll bet $2 that Brookzene doesn't take my bet on President Trump.
John Henry
For anyone else, I'll bet $2 that Brookzene doesn't take my bet on President Trump.
I'll accept this gentlemen's bet: if you are right I'll put in $5 to cystic fibrosis jar at my local pizzeria (I never give to that), quietly in your honor. I'll tell you when I do it. You find a good charity to put your $5 in my honor when I win - let me know who it was.
Predictions are pretty crazy these days - I was here when Trump won in November, so I know things don't always play out the way you think they will. The pressure is so enormous on Trump, and has been growing from day one, so I still think mine is the safer bet.
Same with the Bannon situation. I think offloading Bannon might be the first best thing Trump could do to save himself at this point, but it's risky to either keep him or be rid of him.
I do understand Bannon has no duties or responsibilities that can be passed on to anyone else in the administration, other than maintaining the geopolitical wall hangings he works on in his office, so that's good.
And the respect the previous administration showed to the body of our arch-enemy bin Laden:
Was Bin Ladin really such an arch-enemy of the previous administration?
I always felt his capture was more of a "screw you" to Bush than an intense desire to punish him for 9/11. Certainly, Obama's remarks and attitude afterward were more "we accomplished what Bush didn't" than "this man was evil and we did whatever we could to stop him". Not to mention the repeated meme of how "risky" it was to go after him for Obama and how "gutsy" the call was.
Frankly, if he were really Obama's arch-enemy the risk would not matter and guts would not be required.
I took the whole thing as "we captured him as humanely as possible and disposed of his remains in as respectful a way as possible, so not to incite those misguided Muslims who think we aren't sufficiently respectful of their religion".
Can you imagine the US President giving Hitler a similar treatment?
"President Truman today buried the body of Adolf hitler in accordance with his Aryan beliefs. No gays, Jews, non-whites or non-Germans were allowed into the ceremony. Nazi salutes were accorded when the casket entered and exited the hall."
Me either.
As for Bannon, no bets but he has been on his way out the door daily for 3-4 months now and yet he is still there. I suspect he will be there for a while yet. (I also hope so)
Well there you go. Drudge now says he's gone, thank God. Another day of Bannon and I was going to start using #Resist.
Save some tax $, too.
It's time for Obama, Biden, Bush 43, Cheney, Carter, Mondale, Bush 41, Quayle, Clinton, et al to join Gore in calling on Trump to resign
~ Laurence Tribe
This is so silly! The "group think/herd mentality" is strong with this one. Does anyone think Dan Quayle and Dick Cheney are going to call for Trump's resignation??!!
I'm sure Obama, Biden, Carter, Mondale, Clinton and Gore would. The Bushes might be tempted though!
David French (former Reserve Army Major and former active-duty JAG Corps officer) at NRO rips into Trump over the Pershing falsehoods:
Trump isn’t just spreading falsehoods, he’s doing so in a context that puts a presidential stamp of approval on war crimes. Even worse, he’s doing it in direct defiance of the warrior ethos of the American military. There is no possible way that any of Trump’s generals would approve of this sentiment. I’ve never met an American officer who would carry out an order to commit an atrocity like this.
Trump is careening out of control. He says what he wants, when he wants, and neither truth nor consistency nor wisdom nor prudence dictates a single syllable that comes out of his mouth. By many accounts he’s taken to directly defying his advisers simply for the sake of declaring that he’s in charge. This isn’t leadership. It’s a collection of temper tantrums. Unfortunately, those tantrums have consequences."
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/450574/donald-trump-tweet-fake-history-libel-war-crime
If you want to know what Pershing thought, did and wrote in his own diary, I recommend Pershing: A Biography by Jim Lacy.
This is so silly! The "group think/herd mentality" is strong with this one. Does anyone think Dan Quayle and Dick Cheney are going to call for Trump's resignation??!!
I don't know about Quayle but yeah, I think Cheney would call on Trump to resign. He's probably itching to. Just knows it wouldn't be good form (yet).
Thanks chuck. French is a rabid NeverTrumper.
I am really, really interested in his opinion.
Like yours.
From page 66 of Jim Lacey's Pershing: A Biography
"Until now the historical verdict was that this [the pig burial practice] is a vicious rumor, and while it may have happened on occasion, Pershing neither knew about it nor, given his humane outlook, would he have condones such action. That verdict is wrong, as Pershing's own unpublished autobiography states:
These juramentado attacks were materially reduced in number by a practice the army had already adopted, one that the Mohammedans held in abhorrence. The bodies were publicly buried in the same grave with a dead pig. It was not pleasant to have to take such measures but the prospect of going to hell instead of to heaven sometimes deterred the would be assassins"
Ann wrote:
"But, seriously, the bodies of the enemy dead should not be desecrated."
No, the bodies of the honorable enemy dead should not be desecrated.
Terrorists are, by definition, not honorable. They are fair game for anything we can do to them that will actually stop them.
Chuck (and D. French, if thats you Chuck?)
What Trump said was not a falsehood.
US troops and their Filipino auxiliaries (Scouts and Constabulary) did do these things. How effective they were is uncertain.
Maybe Leonard Wood's many massacres had primed the place to be receptive to a new hand with a less bloody approach. Who knows. But if it did it only ever worked for a while, the suppression was temporary.
The Moro culture is extraordinarily violent, and this was so before American or Spaniard ever appeared. Theirs was a society of cottas, or fortified villages, even in places where no Christian had ever set foot. In some fertile valleys around Lanao there were almost continuous chains of these.
An ancestor of ours once took one of these cottas (by siege and bombardment).
They were built to protect the Moro inhabitants from their Moro neighbors. Communal strife - opportunistic raids, feuds and inter-clan power struggles, besides just plain spur of the moment murder, were constant. And are constant even today. The stuff that gets on the foreign news are just the more egregious incidents.
And, of course, there is the long war against their Christian neighbors that has been ongoing, intermittently, for 400 years.
If you (or Mr. French) actually do care about the question, I recommend:
"The Moro War" - James Arnold
Available on Kindle and Audio
I also recommend Vols. II-IV or so of Blair and Robertson "Philippine Islands", free online here -
http://philhist.pbworks.com/w/page/16367055/ThePhilippineIslands
This is a translated compilation of original Spanish sources. The early volumes largely cover the reports of Legaspi's expedition, 1565-1572, in these cases mainly letters from Legaspi and his successor, to the King.
The acts of the Moros recorded there are the same sort of thing familiar to us today.
buwaya said...
Chuck (and D. French, if thats you Chuck?)
What Trump said was not a falsehood.
US troops and their Filipino auxiliaries (Scouts and Constabulary) did do these things. How effective they were is uncertain.
No; what Trump said was indeed a falsehood. Trump said that General Pershing dipped bullets in pigs' blood and then used them to execute all but one Muslim prisoner. And, Trump said that we could all "look it up in the history books."
There is no book of any kind that suggests Pershing dipping bullets in pigs' blood and then personally overseeing an execution.
I am not talking about whether Trump said something that might, if stretched, vaguely resembles one version of possible facts. I am talking about what Trump actually said. Trump said General Pershing did it. Trump said that everyone can confirm the truth of his story by reading history books. None of that is true. What is undoubtedly true is that Trump heard this story from one of his own sketchy sources, Trump liked the story for its cowboy-level appeal, and Trump (in his own sociopathic way) convinced himself of the truth of it such that he began to repeat it in public statements. You can be sure that Trump never looked at any ordinary history books.
If the New York Times had engaged in an anti-Trump story with the level of falsehood that Trump is engaging in, Trump would have declared it to be "fake news." Althouse would have Fisked it, and Fox News hosts would have raked it over to expose the inaccuracies for a main stream audience. Conservative bloggers would have been writing pages about it.
"There is no book of any kind that suggests Pershing dipping bullets in pigs' blood and then personally overseeing an execution."
This is plain autism. You are creating an absurdly precise meaning, or rather demanding an absurd precision, in order to object to it. This is not the text of commercial contracts.
The truth is the US conducted an extraordinarily brutal policy against the Moros, of which desecrating bodies was the least of it, only some of which was on Pershings watch. Pershing himself did command during some of these episodes.
As in this case -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Bud_Bagsak
If you do things that evoke revenge, you are not doing it right.
To chucky wucky, Brookzene and all you other anti-Trumpers; I believe buwayi is a Filipino, and is, therefore, more than likely more knowledgeable than you pantywaists. I would also like to hear Richard Fernandez's opinion. He, like buwaya, is from the Philippines.
Chuck argues: Trump said General Pershing did it. Trump said that everyone can confirm the truth of his story by reading history books. None of that is true.
You are wrong, Chuck. Take some time to read history, yourself. But you're too busy bashing Trump.
I think Cheney would call on Trump to resign.
Would the lefties be cheered because Cheney called for his resignation? Or despondent to find themselves on the same side as Cheney?
Keeping in mind, of course, that Cheney was very clear he thought Obama unfit for the office, would that make his call for Trump's resignation less spectacular? Or does it make his non-call that much more glaring to the left?
Mockturtle, which standard-issue history book supports the notion that General John J. Pershing dipped bullets in pigs' blood, to use those bullets to execute all but one of 50 (Trump's own stated number, don't ask me) prisoners, to terrorize that one prisoner to go back and tell his compatriots to lay down arms?
I don't want to hear anything from you other than a specific answer to that question. I am only holding you to what Trump said. It may not be fair to ask you to back up Trump. But Trump isn't doing it. So if you want to defend Trump, you must do what Trump hasn't done.
Again I say Trump lied when he claimed what General Pershing did, AND that 'anybody could look it up in the history books.'
I say that's a lie. Prove me wrong, with a standard history book that recounts that particular Pershing story. Do that, or shut up about this.
"Keeping in mind, of course, that Cheney was very clear he thought Obama unfit for the office, would that make his call for Trump's resignation less spectacular?"
Obama was unfit for office. But then, so was Cheney. (So is Trump, certainly, and so would have been Hillary Clinton.) They both belong in prison for war crimes.
Chuck, I quoted the passage. 'Nuff said.
Cookie: Who do you think is fit for office? Whom would you like to see elected President?
mockturtle, you quoted something that makes no mention whatsoever of personal orders from Pershing. Nothing about dipping bullets in blood. Nothing about standard history books.
Meanwhile, historians whose personal specialty is Pershing and the era of U.S. military/policing actions in the Philippines in the early 20th century say that even the main thrust of your notion (your having supplied not one of the relevant details) is wrong.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/retropolis/wp/2017/08/18/after-barcelona-attack-trump-said-to-study-general-pershing-heres-what-the-president-got-wrong/?utm_term=.6dd0964db970
I asked you for the history book that tells Trump's story about Pershing dipping bullets in pigs' blood. You ought to admit that you don't have such a book. And that having claimed that such books are readily available, Trump was lying about the existence of the story and books that support the story.
we should be waiting for buwaya puti to show up in the thread
Are buwaya, and buwaya puti the same person? Asking for a friend.
Are buwaya, and buwaya puti the same person? Asking for a friend.
Yes. He once explained that it depends on whether he's using his cell phone or not.
Leave it to Chuck to trust the WaPo over Pershing's personal account.
Cookie: Who do you think is fit for office? Whom would you like to see elected President?
That's a very good question, and a very hard one to answer. First, most Washington politicians are fatally compromised by their reliance on campaign donations from big-money interests, Wall Street and the big banks. Second, given the inertia and influence exerted by the Deep State on Washington politics, even a person with the best intentions and principles to admire would have an exceedingly difficult time to effect significant change. I'm not thinking of Obama, didn't have principles at all, much less principles to admire; he was just a smooth-talking con man. This adds to the difficulties: how could one discern beforehand whether one who seems suited for the office is genuine or a fake? I mean...Obama gave signs before his first election, such that I changed my grudging intention of voting for him and voted (yet again) for a 3rd party candidate.
I suppose I'd have to look closely at any candidate once they've announced before I could be convinced to vote for them. Of the two mainstream parties, the only prominent person I can think of who I might be convinced to support--though I have definite qualms about her--would be Elizabeth Warren, (or someone like Warren). I voted for Jill Stein in two succeeding elections, and for Ralph Nader in several succeeding elections before that.
The candidate I would support would have to call for a drastic cut in our military budget, (at least half or more), the closing of most or all of our military bases overseas, and the immediate cessation and withdrawal of the USA from all of our aggressive wars of occupation and long-distance drone assassination abroad. There's more, but any candidate not committed to a serious dismantling of our wasteful, corrupt, and murderous war machine would never be able (or willing) to do any of the other things I would like to see.
"Nothing about standard history books."
There are remarkably few standard history books on this subject. Or even many decent ones. Its a very under-researched series of subjects. Actually its a very unresearched country, on the whole.
There is no US official history (or one worth the name) of the US role in the Spanish-American war in the Philippines, in the Philippine Insurrection (or the Philippine-American War, for Filipinos), in the guerilla wars that followed, and the Moro wars. At best you are left trawling through memoirs and diverse original sources. And there is no consensus in the Philippines either, and there is a long tradition of historical controversy.
For that matter the entire campaign of 1941-42 and the following guerilla wars are very poorly documented. There is an official history of the 1941-42 campaign, the "Green Book" by Lewis Morton, which is excellent - but Morton implicitly acknowledges that he lacked the sources to explain how any number of critical events went down. Perhaps that is why, of all the "green books", his is the best written, and the only one that waxes poetic.
And the Philippine Army straggles past,
Obsolete rifle without a sling,
And a bolo tied with a piece of string,
Coconut hat and canvas shoes,
And shoddy dust white denim blues.
These are the men who have fought and fled
And have fought again and left their dead ...
Who fought and died as the white man planned
And never quite learned to understand.
Abucay Withrawal, Henry G. Lee
As for the guerilla wars, the fog and mist open only to occasional glimpses. Important men show up from nowhere and then disappear, their fate no more than rumor.
Blogger Brookzene said...
I'll accept this gentlemen's bet: if you are right I'll put in $5 to cystic fibrosis jar at my local pizzeria
Nope. Send it to the Sally Anns and post the receipt or email it to me.
I'll do the same.
John Henry
mockturtle said...
Leave it to Chuck to trust the WaPo over Pershing's personal account.
What mendacious bullshit. Where in Pershing's personal account is there anything about dipping bullets in blood? Where does he say anything about executing 49 of 50 prisoners, and sending one prisoner back, to talk about the incident?
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा