[Hanging this at the top of the site for a while. What, me pissed? Nevah happen, G.I.]

See previous: “If they’re going to support us, support us all the way.”

A hearty F*** You to William Arkin 
"Uncle Jimbo" Hanson

Apologies for the F bombs bursting in air, but...well just read on.

Wow, William Arkin has just dropped a stellar entry in the biggest asshole in America contest. I was stunned by the incredible amount of disgusting, deranged, disrespectful drivel the wanker was able to cobble together in one hearty F U to the troops. Well Mr. Arkin in true blogospheric fashion F U right back atcha'. Ymarkasar, who could explain his handle, already whacked him around pretty good in the comments to Matt's post, but I gotta bring out the big guns for this douchebag. Prepare for a full-frontal fisking with airborne envelopments and plenty of precision strike rhetoric. ...

I don't remember a thing in the enlistment contract I signed 37 years ago about waiving my First Amendment rights and I haven't heard anything about any changes. I guess when you don't have what it takes to be a real man all that's left is to try to drag down those who do.  It's beginning to smell way too much like the '60s again.

Our Mercenaries? 
Ed Morrissey

It seems that William Arkin has had enough of supporting the troops, now that a few of them told NBC that they believe that Americans should support the mission as well. In his Washington Post blog, Arkin suddenly feels that the troops should just shut up and retreat:

So, we pay the soldiers a decent wage, take care of their families, provide them with housing and medical care and vast social support systems and ship obscene amenities into the war zone for them, we support them in every possible way, and their attitude is that we should in addition roll over and play dead, defer to the military and the generals and let them fight their war, and give up our rights and responsibilities to speak up because they are above society? ...

But it is the United States and instead this NBC report is just an ugly reminder of the price we pay for a mercenary - oops sorry, volunteer - force that thinks it is doing the dirty work. ...

Of course, the worst part of this -- besides the incoherent writing style -- is the characterization of the NBC report. Not one of the soldiers in the clip remotely suggested that Americans "give up their rights and responsibilities". They didn't say that George Bush should make everyone who opposes the war shut up, or else. They were asked about their take on people who say they support the troops but oppose the war, and they expressed their views. ...

Blackfive and Allahpundit have more.

***

The Peril of Newspaper Blogs...
John Hinderaker

...is that a reporter might say what he actually thinks before an editor catches up with him and makes him stop. A case in point: William Arkin writes on "national and homeland security" for the Washington Post. This morning, in his blog titled Early Warning on the Post's website, Arkin wrote a post that has to be read to be believed. Titled "The Troops Also Need to Support the American People," the post comments on an NBC program in which soldiers expressed dismay at the lack of support for their mission manifested by some people back home. Arkin appears to take the position that the U.S. military is not worthy of the nation that it protects. Some highlights:

[...]

Arkin's indulgence, for one, is apparently stretched pretty thin. One thing I don't understand, though. If Abu Ghraib and Haditha were the result neither of "bad apples" nor of a "command order," what did cause them? Is Arkin suggesting that they manifest an inherent or widespread depravity among the troops? If not that, then what is his point?

So, we pay the soldiers a decent wage, take care of their families, provide them with housing and medical care and vast social support systems and ship obscene amenities into the war zone for them, we support them in every possible way, and their attitude is that we should in addition roll over and play dead, defer to the military and the generals and let them fight their war, and give up our rights and responsibilities to speak up because they are above society?

Yes, I think that's a fair characterization of what our soldiers have in mind when they ask for our support. I'd be curious to know, too, what Arkin has in mind when he refers to "obscene amenities." Serving in Iraq and Afghanistan--how cushy can you get?

If you can understand this next paragraph, you're smarter than I am: ...

***

WaPo math: Troops=mercenaries
Michelle Malkin

Here's Washington Post national security reporter/blogger William Arkin's screed against NBC's report, which quoted troops who want Americans to support their mission. An excerpt from Arkin's unhinged diatribe:

So, we pay the soldiers a decent wage, take care of their families, provide them with housing and medical care and vast social support systems and ship obscene amenities into the war zone for them, we support them in every possible way, and their attitude is that we should in addition roll over and play dead, defer to the military and the generals and let them fight their war, and give up our rights and responsibilities to speak up because they are above society? ...

Is he auditioning for a Daily Kos diarist spot? Is he jealous of Joel Stein?

"Obscene amenities?" What the...?!?!?! Amenities like this? [image]

***

Arkin, the War and Gymnastics 
Fuzzybear Lioness

I'm trying to be patient and to see things from alternate points of view, but I just can't escape the feeling that the leftist/anti-war types are doing increasingly intricate mental gymnastics to justify their position. This time it's from William Arkin.

Mr. Arkin and I have a history. Last year he linked little ol' me and my under 100 visitors a day as an example of blogs he implied were "bought" by the Army, bypassing bigger blogs deeply "plugged in" to the miltary world. That led to far more trollish and DoD attention than I ever wanted [Check the links/comments above and you'll see Mr. Arkin doesn't have a track record of grasping the essential elements of things military].

Now to his latest inanity:

I've been mulling over an NBC Nightly News report from Iraq last Friday in which a number of soldiers expressed frustration with opposition to war in the United States.

I'm sure the soldiers were expressing a majority opinion common amongst the ranks - that's why it is news - and I'm also sure no one in the military leadership or the administration put the soldiers up to expressing their views, nor steered NBC reporter Richard Engel to the story.

Good. Maybe there's hope of the NBC story being taken seriously.

I'm all for everyone expressing their opinion, even those who wear the uniform of the United States Army. But I also hope that military commanders took the soldiers aside after the story and explained to them why it wasn't for them to disapprove of the American people. ...

Read the whole thing. There's no one on this planet who cares about our troops more than Fuzzybear and she doesn't pull her punches.

***

Arkin: The Troops need to Shut Up and Take the Insults 
Kim Priestap

A man named William Arkin writing at a Washington Post blog says that the troops need to support anti-war Americans and their views. He writes this in reference to the NBC Nightly News video of US troops asking that Americans support them all the way. Arkin's essay is nothing more than a string of insult after insult. Here's just a few: ...

Everything in this essay is complete bunk, not to mention arrogant and patronizing.

If you're wondering who William Arkin is, check out Hugh Hewitt's piece at The Weekly Standard.  ...

***

FbL has a good roundup started here and Blue Crab Boulevard  is also worth a visit.

***

Jackass, The Columnist 
Jules Crittenden

William Arkin of the Washington Post is tired of hearing American soldiers griping about  support:

These soldiers should be grateful that the American public, which by all polls overwhelmingly disapproves of the Iraq war and the President’s handling of it, do still offer their support to them, and their respect.

I nominate Arkin for a combat embed.  On the peacenik chickenhawk theory that, if you want to talk about something, you have to do it.  He should be able to tell those GIs to their faces what ingrates they are.

Or, ...

***

WaPo's William Arkin digs in 
Michelle Malkin

The title of his latest post: "The arrogant and intolerant speak out."

He's talking about you, not himself:

The Arrogant and Intolerant Speak Out

Well, one thing's abundantly clear about who will actually defend our rights to say what we believe: It isn't the hundreds who have written me saying they are soldiers or veterans or war supporters or real Americans -- who also advise me to move to another country, to get f@##d, or to die a painful, violent death.

Contrary to the typically inaccurate and overstated assertion in dozens of blogs, hundreds of comments, and thousands of e-mails I've received, I've never written that soldiers should "shut up," quit whining, be spit upon, or that they have no right to an opinion.

I said I was bothered by the notion that "the troops" were somehow becoming hallowed beings above society, that they had an attitude that only they had the means - or the right - to judge the worthiness of the Iraq endeavor. ...

***

***

Audio: William Arkin supports the troops in his own funny little way 
Allahpundit

Here’s the man of the hour, playing softball last night with Alan Colmes about the WaPo column heard ’round the blogospheric world. Well, the right side of the blogospheric world, anyway.

N.B.: The clip has been heavily edited.

Update: He’s got a new post up at WaPo. I wonder what Maureen Dowd and the rest of the patriotic dissent crew who granted Cindy Sheehan absolute moral authority because her son died in Iraq would say about this?

Contrary to the typically inaccurate and overstated assertion in dozens of blogs, hundreds of comments, and thousands of Emails I’ve received, I’ve never written that soldiers should “shut up,” quite whining, be spit upon, or that they have no right to an opinion.

I said I was bothered by the notion that “the troops” were somehow becoming hallowed beings above society, that they had an attitude that only they had the means - or the right - to judge the worthiness of the Iraq endeavor.

And then the crux of it: creeping military dictatorship by authoritarian robots, whom he’s certainly not calling authoritarian robots even though he pretty much is. ...

***

A Calmer Look At Arkin's Piece
Dan Riehl

Arkin posted another item which may have been taken down. But it should be available here. The Arrogant and Intolerant Speak Out

Allah has audio of Arkin being coddled by Alan Colmes.

Michelle has comments and additional links here.

Update: It seems Arkin claims to be an activist with a habit of leaking secrets.

I was writing a hopefully more reflective reaction piece last night - see below.

The fundamental flaw with Arkin's position is that the troops are under the command of a twice democratically elected civilian leader using his constitutional authority to wage a formally declared war. So, despite Arkin's right to say what he will, any notion that the troops are not entitled to our support is logically wrong. We have bound them by oath and law to perform precisely as they are performing. Consequently, for the government and the population to deny them our support is a civil betrayal of the first order and a gross moral failing. One could equate it to any number of instances where a person or group in authority commands someone to do his or her bidding, then cuts them off at the knees behind their back.

A day later and still, as a blogger, presumably several dollars short of what the Washington Post's William M. Arkin is paid to write items like this, let's take a calmer look at what, if any, truths Arkin might have revealed. I mention dollars only because it goes to one of Arkin's points: ...

***

Arkin's Pulled Piece
Dan Riehl

The Arkin piece referenced here isn't opening. If it's gone - here it is.

[...]

***

Two More of Arkin’s Ingrates 
Jules Crittenden

Sgt. Keith A. Callahan.

“He was always willing to take a punch,” said Callahan’s uncle, Richard Haverty, recalling how his nephew had been willing since his high school wrestling days to put himself on the line.

On his fourth tour of duty in Iraq, Callahan, a father of four, positioned himself at an especially dangerous outpost to protect his platoon on the day he died after being wounded by an explosive device. ...

Sgt. Alexander Henry Fuller.

Sgt. Alexander Henry Fuller wanted nothing more than to be a hero and a husband, and he died as both, his pregnant wife said. ...

“He was fearless,” said his wife, Anastacia Fuller, 19. She said he recently turned down a safer desk job as a radio operator. ...

***

James Joyner has choice comments here.

***

William Arkin video beatdown
Posted By Uncle Jimbo 

Yesterday I let clownasaurus erectus William Arkin have it right in the mouth for his pitiful troop-hating garbage in the WaPo. After posting it I felt good, but not as light-hearted and fuzzy as I wanted. So I grabbed the camera and let loose with the same bit, only all profanity de-euphemized. Yeah baby!

So if you could use a little verbal abuse of a certain sorry lefty enjoy the video. I am re-vamping unclejimbo.com so that when these kinds of rants are necessary I don't have to sully the noble environs of Blackfive. But in the meantime, with a strong f-bomb warning, and the video and audio fritz apart midway for some reason, I think it's because meter maids eat their young.

***

Billy, Billy, Billy- Arkin just won't stop
Posted By Uncle Jimbo

I don't want to make a hobby of this, but Billy's back at it so I offer you his ass on a platter. I think some correspondence to the WaPo is in order, please be polite with these, but let's show them what we think of their hosting a hater like Billy. executive.editor@washingtonpost.com Back to the clown.

Well, one thing's abundantly clear about who will actually defend our rights to say what we believe: It isn't the hundreds who have written me saying they are soldiers or veterans or war supporters or real Americans -- who also advise me to move to another country, to get f@##d, or to die a painful, violent death.

You write a post telling the troops they ought to hush and just die in a proficient military manner and you're surprised you got told maybe you ought to hush you cakehole. I guess it's possible you are that naive, but I think you are playing. Heck it probably stroked your puny little ego to get this much attention from your betters.  ...

*** 

Changing Opinions
Confederate Yankee

...  I think that perhaps what Mr. Arkin needs now, more than anything, is a supportive environment, where he can face his phobias and apparent disgust for our military. He would probably be much more willing to change his opinion were he to spend more time with those he derides, to better understand them.

But where could he find such an environment?

If recent dispatches from elsewhere in the blogosphere may be a worthy guide, I'd suggest that he partake of the opportunity shared by bloggers such as Bill Ardalino, Bill Roggio, Michelle Malkin, Bryan Preston, and of course, Michael Yon. Perhaps what would go the furthest in changing his opinion of our soldier is a simple, short embed with our military in Iraq. ...

***

Boycott The Washington Post Until Arkin Gone
A J Strata

I have to admit the insensitivity (not to mention self absorbtion) of Bill Arkin is stunning. The guy basically wrote our troops should be honored to die for all of us back here in the US after all we have given them. I first saw this story yesterday at Powerline and was so disgusted I felt like someone had just thrown excrement everywhere. Arkin is an emotionally stunted wannabe adult, that has been clear for a while. But this is just too much. He has a bright mind which he has never learned to manage so he goes off on these wild imaginitive tangents of fantasy - constantly. I have never understood why the Washington Post lowers their standards so far to keep him. But to add insult to insult, Arkin is now out ranting that people disagree with him are too dumb to know better.

Well, he crossed the line twice so it is time to remind the Washington Post of their civic and corporate duties. Their civic duty is to show some restraint and control their yippy little dog Arken and regain control their image. The Washington Post has NEVER been for belittling our troops. But yet there is no grosser demeaning act than to imply someone should be greatful they get to die to protect such an arrogant a-hole like Arken. Arken actually DEMANDS they be grateful for protecting is big butt sitting in front of a computer insulting them and trivializing their sacrifices. If the Washington Post doesn’t expunge itself of this troll then we must conclude they are embracing his madness.

Secondly, if the Washington Post is going to let Arken call their customers who disagree with him “Arrogant and Intolerant” then I am taking my money elsewhere. ....

***

Has The Media's Red Queen's Race Begun?
Ed Driscoll

What's gotten into the water supply in America's two biggest newspapers? Stephen Spruiell writes, "I think we're witnessing a very public meltdown over on WashingtonPost.com":

Earlier today William Arkin published a new post responding to those who took issue with his characterization of U.S. troops as bloodthirsty and ignorant mercenaries. But while the post can still be found by following the direct link, it has vanished from Arkin's home page. Did someone at the Post direct him to take it down? Or did he himself have second thoughts about certain passages, like this one:

These men and women [in the military] are not fighting for money with little regard for the nation. The situation might be much worse than that: Evidently, far too many in uniform believe that they are the one true nation. They hide behind the constitution and the flag and then spew an anti-Democrat, anti-liberal, anti-journalism, anti-dissent, and anti-citizen message that reflects a certain contempt for the American people.

The best reaction so far is John's from OpFor: "If there is a war that's unwinnable, it's the war on this type of horrid ignorance."

So far the Blogosphere has spotted Chernobyl-style meltdowns in credibility by CBS, the Washington Post, Newsweek, AP, and on numerous occasions, the New York Times and Reuters.

When I interviewed Glenn Reynolds last year for my TCS Daily article on An Army Of Davids, he quoted a passage from Vernor Vinge's Rainbows End that "utopia was a Red Queen’s Race with extinction". Glenn added, "Even if things are going terribly, it will seem like it’s going well, right up until the end". ...

Have the mainstream media quietly begun some sort of Red Queen's Race of their own? Or is the Blogosphere merely getting increasingly better at catching the media's worst moments and publicizing them? By and large, I believe the general public has come to believe that the vast majority of old media outlets lean to the left, despite the exponentially diminishing claims of objectivity. And since half the country does as well, newspapers and television have a wide audience to aim their content. So does that mean that Blogosphere complaints about the MSM are being read as mere partisan sniping? ...

***

A Response and a Disappearance 
John Hinderaker

The Washington Post's William Arkin posted this response to his critics earlier today, but apparently it has now been removed from Arkin's site.

Arkin's reply continued to manifest the deaf ear and puzzling logic that characterized his original post. Like so many whose writings are subjected to criticisms that they can't answer, Arkin postured himself as a hero of free speech who is being told to "shut up." But the whole flap arose because Arkin took such extreme offense at statements made by soldiers who were asked questions by NBC News, and had the temerity, in Arkin's view, to answer them--in a much milder and more balanced manner than Arkin's own screed.

It isn't worth dissecting Arkin's latest salvo in any detail; these are the key paragraphs:

I was dead wrong in using the word mercenary to describe the American soldier today.

That was the one gracious thing Arkin said. But he immediately took it back: ...

As I said, completely bizarre. I suspect that it was too much for the editors at the Post, who finally caught up with Arkin and, I would speculate, removed his response to his critics. Arkin's future with the Post is anyone's guess, but in the meantime, this episode provides a revealing glimpse into the thought processes of a columnist and reporter for one of America's most respected newspapers. ...

***

Don't miss James Lileks's response here. (You'll have to scroll down a little.) It's too good to even attempt to excerpt.

***

Video: Blackfive rips William Arkin on “The Big Story” 

***

Michelle Malkin: Advantage: Blackfive.

***

I think I finally figured out what it is about the situation that upsets me the most. As far as I'm concerned by letting something like that be posted on their site al-WaPo's management gave their stamp of approval to treating our Iraq vets like my fellow Namvets and I were treated. I want blood. I want heads on a platter. Being too sick to travel that far is probably the only thing keeping me out of jail right now.

***

Senators Challenge Post on Arkin Column
John Hinderaker

This afternoon, three Republican Senators--Cornyn, Kyl and Inhofe--sent the following letter to the Publisher of the Washington Post, Donald Graham; click to enlarge: [image]

It reads, in part:

Many Americans have concerns about the war in Iraq. Yet we are confident that almost every American would disagree with Arkin's reference to our country's troops as "a mercenary force." We think they would share our disgust with Mr. Arkin's contention that "through every Abu Ghraib and Haditha, through every rape and murder, the American public has indulged those in uniform." ...

We would be curious to know who at the Post, if anyone, was the editor of such a piece--and what standards of conduct Mr. Arkin and other columnists are held to, if any.

Ouch. It would be nice if at least one Democrat would express concern about Arkin's attack on our troops, especially since the Post is widely seen as a house organ of the Democratic Party.

***

Johnny Dollar has audio of this idiot's interview on on John Gibson's show this afternoon. He doesn't come across any smarter on the radio than he does in print.

***

William Arkin wrote a post....
Anitmedia

....in WaPo online that created a firestorm of tirades attacking him and attacking the Post for allowing him to write it. The article begs to be fisked.

These soldiers should be grateful that the American public, which by all polls overwhelmingly disapproves of the Iraq war and the President's handling of it, do still offer their support to them, and their respect.

Through every Abu Ghraib and Haditha, through every rape and murder, the American public has indulged those in uniform, accepting that the incidents were the product of bad apples or even of some administration or command order.

Apparently Arkin is completely ignorant of the incidence of criminal behavior in the military versus the incidence of criminal behavior in society. Else he would know that the percentage of criminals in society, where he parks his butt, is much higher than in the military.

For example, ...

*** *** ***

Hanging this at the top of the site for a while. What, me pissed? Nevah happen, G.I.
Original timestamp 2007.01.31.19:17