Lorie Byrd makes an interesting point about the Marine now "accused" by the media of killing a (supposedly) unarmed Iraqi insurgent (I am skeptical because these charges are being made before any investigation of the event):
Today I missed the national talk radio shows I regularly listen to, but caught a local NC radio show. The host, Bill LuMaye, compared the recent video of a Marine shooting an apparently wounded, unarmed insurgent to that of an American serviceman 30 years ago shooting a fleeing, wounded young man in Vietnam. That man was so proud of his action that he not only requested a medal for it, but cited it as one of the qualifications for his fitness to serve as commander-in-chief. Maybe if there had been a video of that incident 30 years ago things would have been different.
Of course, the incident requires investigation and possibly discipline of the Marine in question if his actions were in violation of the rules of war. But, if the media can cut John Kerry some slack on this issue (as they have done for 30 years), I think the least they can do is the same until all the facts are in for the Marine in Iraq. Let's wait and see what really happened.
And while we're waiting, how about some reporting on things like this, or this--or are the atrocities commited by the enemy not to be commented on except in passing?