PoliticAlex

Netherlands Euthanizing babies...horrifying...

According to this story (ht: Drudge), the Netherlands has drafted guidelines for the euthanization of terminally ill infants, and had, in fact, already begun the practice.  As sad as it is to see terminally ill babies suffer, allowing euthanasia in patients who are unable to express their own desires is one step down the "slippery slope" - where will the line be drawn?

AMSTERDAM, Netherlands (AP) - A hospital in the Netherlands - the first nation to permit euthanasia - recently proposed guidelines for mercy killings of terminally ill newborns, and then made a startling revelation: It has already begun carrying out such procedures, which include administering a lethal dose of sedatives.

The announcement by the Groningen Academic Hospital came amid a growing discussion in Holland on whether to legalize euthanasia on people incapable of deciding for themselves whether they want to end their lives - a prospect viewed with horror by euthanasia opponents and as a natural evolution by advocates.

In August, the main Dutch doctors' association KNMG urged the Health Ministry to create an independent board to review euthanasia cases for terminally ill people "with no free will," including children, the severely mentally retarded and people left in an irreversible coma after an accident.

The Health Ministry is preparing its response, which could come as soon as December, a spokesman said.

What's next? Newborn abortions for inconvenient children? Horrifying.

Maureen Dowd finally gets it right (well, her brother does anyway...)

Although I know that she intended to make her brother look like a dolt, I rather enjoyed this clip from Maureen's op-ed Sunday at the New York Times -and I doubt I will ever use a phrase akin to "I rather enjoyed Maureen's op-ed" ever again after this, as much as it applies today (thx mom for the tip):

People often ask me why President Bush inspires such passionate support. My brother Kevin, a salesman who lives in Montgomery County, Md., can answer that; here is a recent e-mail message, trimmed for space, he sent to friends:

"Ladies and Gentlemen,

Now, just as four years ago, I breathe a huge sigh of relief and rejoice in the common sense of the American voting public. Congratulations to President Bush for winning re-election in a poker game played with a stacked deck. No candidate, including Richard Nixon, ever had to endure the biased and unfair tactics of our major media in their attempt to influence the outcome of an election. ... He never complained, just systematically set about delivering the same consistent message. You may remember that four years ago, I felt physically ill watching the Democrats try to legislate their way to the presidency. ...

A very big thank you to Michael Moore, Susan Sarandon, Rob Reiner, Bill Maher, Barbra Streisand, Alec Baldwin, Al Franken and Jon Stewart for your involvement. You certainly energized the base. Now, please have the courage of your convictions and leave the country.

To Bob Shrum - Cut your fee.

To Mike McCurry, Joe Lockhart and Paul Begala - You don't seem quite as smart without a great candidate.

To The New York Times and The Washington Post - If Bush and Reagan were so stupid, how did they both go four for four in elections involving two of our biggest states and the presidency without your endorsement?

We do not live in a secular country. There are all sorts of people of faith that place moral values over personal freedoms. They are not all 'wacky evangelicals.' They are people who don't like Howard Stern piping a hard porn show over the airwaves and wrapping himself in the freedom of the First Amendment. They don't like being told that a young girl does not have to seek her mother's counsel about an abortion. They don't like seeing an eight-month-old fetus having his head punctured and his brains sucked out. They don't like being told the Pledge of Allegiance, a moment of silent prayer and the words 'under God' are offensive to an enlightened few so nobody should be allowed to use them. ... My wife and I picked our sons' schools based on three criteria: 1) moral values 2) discipline 3) religious maintenance - in that order. We have spent an obscene amount of money doing this and never regretted a penny. Last week on the news, I heard that the Montgomery County school board voted to include a class with a 10th-grade girl demonstrating how to put a condom on a cucumber and a study of the homosexual lifestyle. The vote was 6-0. I feel better about the money all the time.

To Dan Rather - Good luck in your retirement.

To Gavin Newsom - Thanks for all of the great shots of the San Francisco couples embracing their mates at City Hall in direct defiance of the law.

To P. Diddy - 'Vote or Die' might need a little work.

To John Edwards - Thanks for being there.

To my friends - only 1,460 days until the next election. Stay vigilant. The Democrats, CBS, the NY Times and the Post may think Hillary is the perfect antidote for all those 'stupid' voters out there.

Best regards, Kevin"

Yep, that just about sums it up. Nice job, Kevin. 

Naturally, the NYT got several letters about this op-ed, one of which is a perfect example of how some people will just never, ever get it:

To the Editor:

To the people trapped in red state families: Come to California. You won't have to be ashamed of being gay, your uterus won't be the property of the state or the minister, science is not anathema to God, France is still our oldest ally and our Constitution is not to be altered for cheap political gain.

Welcome to all the downtrodden masses from behind the red curtain. California loves and accepts you exactly as you are.

Laguna Beach, Calif., Nov. 28, 2004

Um hm. Just to pick at a few of this writers nuanced (ha ha) comments: Note the flippant use of "behind the red curtain" (as if Republicanism is akin to Communism - frankly, the liberal democratic agenda of free and overabundant social programs paid for by the middle class and the rich is much closer to the communist mantra) and the reference to the guardianship of one's own "uterus" rather than simply stating, "we respect your right to kill your unborn child here in California". Be sure not to miss the implication that it is more important for the French to like us (to really like us) than to abandon appeasement tendencies and fight our enemies on their turf - I will never understand the appeal of pandering to the European ideal of peace and socialism for all. Is this letter-writer blissfully ignorant of the failures of socialist government - including the necessarily high unemployment rates that result from such socialist agendas? Is she as ignorant of the historical facts that paint France as weak and incapable of protecting itself or other countries, should the islamic fundamentalists (such as Bin Ladin) choose to target Paris next? I can promise that we would be the first country they would run to for help, and we would once again be bestest-buddies and their "oldest ally". 

And science anathema to God? Um, is she unable to see the problem with teaching our children in public schools only evolutionary theories when a significant majority of American citizens believe in creationism? Or, as written in Gene Edward Veith's excellent article in World Magazine Online regarding op-ed columnists response to Bush's re-election, and the problems associated with the adoption of liberal democratic ideals in our government:

New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd goes so far as to say that with the reelection of President Bush "we're entering another dark age." She and others are saying that a majority of Americans have rejected science (by which they mean belief in Darwinism or support for destroying human embryos for stem cells). We have embraced superstition (by which they mean Christianity). And we have become intolerant and oppressive (by which they mean not agreeing with same-sex marriage).

and

Intellectuals think they should rule, but whenever they do, the result is disastrous. Plato's Republic imagined the perfect society ruled by philosophical "guardians," but even in theory this manifested itself in eugenics, immorality, and the elimination of freedom. Real-life states dreamed up and then implemented by the fascist intellectuals and the communist intellectuals also eliminated freedom, rejected moral absolutes that would limit what man and the state can do, and sought to design the next stage of evolution.

In a perhaps less virulent way, this is what many people fear if today's liberal intellectuals should ever get their way: Restrictions on liberties ordinary Americans prize (such as parental, private-property, and gun-ownership rights, economic liberty, religious freedom). The repudiation of morality (homosexual marriage, sexual permissiveness, abortion, cultural license). Experimentation that discards and seeks to redesign human life (the destruction of embryos for their stem cells, genetic engineering, cloning, designer babies). (All emphasis added)

That's exactly the problem. If secularism rules the day, and morality falls by the wayside, we are headed for trouble, indeed (or, if you take the word of the letter-writer above, you are headed to California). Scary, isn't it?

Pat Sajak slams Hollywood's silence over Theo van Gogh slaying...

In his excellent article, it is clear that Pat's peeved - and he's scratching his head, trying to figure out why the Hollywood crowd has stayed mysteriously silent on the brutal slaying of Theo van Gogh (an actual relative of the painter Van Gogh) on November 2 in Amsterdam (ht: Rush Limbaugh show and Drudge). Silence despite the fact that the murderer killed Mr. van Gogh because "he created a short film highly critical of the treatment of women in Islamic societies" - and this murderer also claims a jihad against the "West" and against five Dutch political leaders.

Pat wonders if the Hollywood elite are frightened of reprisal by Islamic fanatics, which is understandable given the radical fundmentalist Islamists penchant for kidnapping and murder, or he wonders if there is something else at work:

There’s another possibility; one that seems crazy on the surface, but does provide an explanation for the silence, and is also in keeping with the political climate in Hollywood. Is it just possible that there are those who are reluctant to criticize an act of terror because that might somehow align them with President Bush, who stubbornly clings to the notion that these are evil people who need to be defeated? Could the level of hatred for this President be so great that some people are against anything he is for, and for anything he is against?

As nutty as it sounds, how else can you explain such a muted reaction to an act that so directly impacts creative people everywhere? Can you conceive of a filmmaker being assassinated because of any other subject matter without seeing a resulting explosion of reaction from his fellow artists in America and around the world?

As I said, it’s a nutty-sounding explanation, but we live in nutty times.

Which reminds me, once again, of that excellent Jonah Goldberg article from last week.

An update from a soldier in Fallujah (courtesy of my father-in-law, thanks dad!)...

This is an interesting email that describes in detail the happenings in Fallujah this month:

Email from Dave - Nov 19, 04

Dear Dad -

Just came out of the city and I honestly do not know where to start.  I am afraid that whatever I send you will not do sufficient honor to the men who fought and took Fallujah. 

Shortly before the attack, Task Force Fallujah was built.  It consisted of Regimental Combat Team 1 built around 1st Marine Regiment and Regimental Combat Team 7 built around 7th Marine Regiment.  Each Regiment consisted of two Marine Rifle Battalions reinforced and one Army mechanized infantry battalion.

Regimental Combat Team 1 (RCT-1) consisted of 3rd Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion (3rd LAR), 3rd Battalion, 5th Marines (3/5); 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines (3/1)and 2nd Battalion, 7th Cavalry (2/7).  RCT-7 was slightly less weighted but still a formidable force.  Cutting a swath around the city was an Army Brigade known  as Blackjack.  The Marine RCT's were to assault the city while Blackjack kept the enemy off of the backs of the assault force.

The night prior to the actual invasion, we all moved out into the desert just north of the city.  It was something to see.  You could just feel the intensity in the Marines and Soldiers.  It was all business.  As the day cleared, the Task Force began striking targets and moving into final attack positions.  As the invasion force commenced its movement into attack positions, 3rd LAR led off RCT-1's offensive with an attack up a peninsula formed by the Euphrates River on the west side of the city.  Their mission was to secure the Fallujah Hospital and the two bridges leading out of the city.  They executed there tasks like clockwork and smashed the enemy resistance holding the bridges.  Simultaneous to all of this, Blackjack sealed the escape routes to the south of the city.  As invasion day dawned, the net was around the city and the Marines and Soldiers knew that the enemy that failed to escape was now sealed.

3/5 began the actual attack on the city by taking an apartment complex on the northwest corner of the city.  It was key terrain as the elevated positions allowed the command to look down into the attack lanes.  The Marines took the apartments quickly and moved to the rooftops and began engaging enemy that were trying to move into their fighting positions.  The scene on the rooftop was surreal.  Machine gun teams were running boxes of ammo up 8 flights of stairs in full body armor and carrying up machine guns while snipers engaged enemy shooters.  The whole time the enemy was firing mortars and rockets at the apartments.  Honest to God, I don't think I saw a single Marine even distracted by the enemy fire.  Their squad leaders, and platoon commanders had them prepared and they were executing their assigned tasks.

As mentioned, 2nd Battalion, 7th Cavalry joined the Regiment just prior to the fight.  In fact, they started showing up for planning a couple of weeks in advance.  There is always a professional rivalry between the Army and the Marine Corps but it was obvious from the outset that these guys were the real deal.  They had fought in Najaf and were eager to fight with the Regiment in Fallujah.  They are exceptionally well led and supremely confident. 

2/7 became our wedge.  In short, they worked with 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines.  We were limited in the amount of prep fires that we were allowed to fire on the city prior to the invasion.  This was a point of some  consternation to the forces actually taking the city.  Our compensation was to turn to 2/7 and ask them to slash into the city and create as much turbulence as possible for 3/1 to follow.  Because of the political reality, the Marine Corps was also under pressure to "get it done quickly."  For this reason, 2/7 and 3/1 became the penetration force into the city. 

Immediately following 3/5's attack on the apartment buildings, 3/1 took the train station on the north end of the city.   While the engineers blew a breach through the train trestle, the Cavalry soldiers poured through with their tanks and Bradley's and chewed an opening in the enemy defense.  3/1 followed them through until they reached a phase[line  deep into the northern half of the city.  The Marine infantry along with a few tanks then turned to the right and attacked the heart of the enemy defense.  The fighting was tough as the enemy had the area dialed in with mortars.  3/5 then attacked into the northwest corner of the city.  This fight continued as both Marine rifle battalions clawed their way into the city on different axis. 

There is an image burned into my brain that I hope I never forget.  We came up behind 3/5 one day as the lead squads were working down the Byzantine streets of the Jolan area.  An assault team of two Marines ran out from behind cover and put a rocket into a wall of an enemy strongpoint.  Before the smoke cleared the squad  behind them  was up and moving through the hole and clearing the house.  Just down the block another squad was doing the same thing.  The house was cleared quickly and the Marines were running down the street to the next contact.  Even in the midst of that mayhem, it was an awesome site.

The fighting has been incredibly close inside the city.  The enemy is willing to die and is literally waiting until they see the whites of the eyes of the Marines before they open up.  Just two days ago, as a firefight raged in close quarters, one of the interpreters yelled for the enemy in the house to surrender.  The enemy yelled back that it was better to die and go to heaven than to surrender to infidels.  This exchange is a graphic window into the world that the Marines and Soldiers have been fighting in these last 10 days.

I could go on and on about how the city was taken but one of the most amazing aspects to the fighting was that we saw virtually no civilians during the battle.  Only after the fighting had passed did a few come out of their homes.  They were provided food and water and most were evacuated out of the city.  At least 90-95% of the people were gone from the city when we attacked.

I will end with a couple of stories of individual heroism that you may not have heard yet.  I was told about both of these incidents shortly after they occurred.  No doubt some of the facts will change slightly but I am confident that the meat is correct.

The first is a Marine from 3/5.  His name is Corporal Yeager (Chuck Yeager's grandson).  As the Marines cleared and apartment building, they got to the top floor and the point man kicked in the door.  As he did so, an enemy grenade and a burst of gunfire came out.  The explosion and enemy fire took off the point man's leg.  He was then immediately shot in the arm as he lay in the doorway.  Corporal Yeager tossed a grenade in the room and ran into the doorway and into the enemy fire in order to pull his buddy back to cover.  As he was dragging the wounded Marine to cover, his own grenade came back through the doorway.  Without pausing, he reached down and threw the grenade back through the door while he heaved his buddy to safety.  The grenade went off inside the room and Cpl Yeager threw another in.  He immediately entered the room following the second explosion.  He gunned down three enemy all within three feet of where he stood and then let fly a third grenade as he backed out of the room to complete the evacuation of the wounded Marine.  You have to understand that a grenade goes off within 5 seconds of having the pin pulled.  Marines usually let them "cook off" for a second or two before tossing them in.   Therefore, this entire episode took place in less than 30 seconds. 

The second example comes from 3/1.  Cpl Mitchell is a squad leader.  He was wounded as his squad was clearing a house when some enemy threw pineapple grenades down on top of them.  As he was getting triaged, the doctor told him that he had been shot through the arm.  Cpl Mitchell  told the doctor that he had actually been shot "a couple of days ago" and had given himself self aide on the wound.  When the doctor got on him about not coming off the line, he firmly told the doctor that he was a squad leader and did not have time to get treated as his men were still fighting.  There are a number of Marines who have been wounded multiple times but refuse to leave their fellow Marines.

It is incredibly humbling to walk among such men.  They fought as hard as any Marines in history and deserve to be remembered as such.  The enemy they fought burrowed into houses and fired through mouse holes cut in walls, lured them into houses rigged with explosives and detonated the houses on pursuing Marines, and actually hid behind surrender flags only to engage the Marines with small arms fire once they perceived that the Marines had let their guard down.  I know of several instances where near dead enemy rolled grenades out on Marines who were preparing to render them aid.  It was a fight to the finish in every sense and the Marines delivered. 

I have called the enemy cowards many times in the past because they have never really held their ground and fought but these guys in the city did.  We can call them many things but they were not cowards.   

My whole life I have read about the greatest generation and sat in wonder at their accomplishments.  For the first time, as I watch these Marines and Soldiers, I am eager for the future as this is just the beginning for them.  Perhaps the most amazing characteristic of all is that the morale of the men is sky high.  They hurt for the wounded and the dead but they are eager to continue to attack.  Further, not one of them would be comfortable with being called a hero even though they clearly are.

By now the Marines and Soldiers have killed well over a thousand enemy.  These were not peasants or rabble.  They were reasonably well trained and entirely fanatical.  Most of the enemy we have seen have chest rigs full of ammunition and are well armed are willing to fight to the death.  The Marines and Soldiers are eager to close with them and the fighting at the end is inevitably close. 

I will write you more the next time I come in about what we have found inside the city.  All I can say is that even with everything that I knew and expected from the last nine months, the brutality and fanaticism of the enemy surprised me.  The beheadings were even more common place than we thought but so were torture and summary executions.  Even though it is an exaggeration, it seems as though every block in the northern part of the city has a torture chamber or execution site.  There are hundreds of tons of munitions and tens of thousands of weapons that our Regiment alone has recovered.  The Marines and Soldiers of the Regiment have also found over 400 IEDs already wired and ready to detonate.  No doubt these numbers will grow in the days ahead.

In closing, I want to share with you a vignette about when the Marines secured the Old Bridge (the one where the Americans were mutilated and hung on March 31) this week.  After the Marines had done all the work and secured the bridge, we walked across to meet up with 3rd LAR on the other side.  On the Fallujah side of the bridge where the Americans were hung there is some Arabic writing on the bridge.  An interpreter translated it for me as we walked through.  It read:  "Long Live the Mujahadeen.  Fallujah is the Graveyard for Americans and the end of the Marine Corps." 

As I came back across the bridge there was a squad sitting in their Amtrac smoking and watching the show.  The Marines had written their own message below the enemy's.  It is not something that Mom would appreciate but it fit the moment to a T.  Not far from the vehicle were two dead enemy laying where they died.  The Marines were sick of watching the "Dog and Pony show" and wanted to get back to work.

Dave

God Bless you, Dave, and the men and women fighting alongside you.

I'm baa-ack...

Our family was up in Tahoe during the snowstorm on Sat - beautiful, fairly heavy snowfall in the late morning/early afternoon - slow going on the roads, but a truly gorgeous sight.  And I came back to way more news than could be digested quickly - but I've got a couple of posts to add today on a variety of subjects.

And a reminder - there are only 24 days left to shop for Christmas (not including today or Christmas, of course...) - we are almost done with our shopping, and we are truly enjoying the spirit of giving this year. I've also got a bunch of stuff for our soldier in Iraq that I'll be sending off tomorrow - as I understand it, Dec 5th is the last day to mail to Iraq for Christmas, so get going on that (if you've adopted a soldier). I've got a post to put up in a few minutes that will include an email from a soldier with details on the fighting in Fallujah. Good stuff.

Getting out of town for Thanksgiving...may try moblogging...

on my cool new phone, but I can't promise success. If it doesn't work, I'll be back Sunday night.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Dan Rather out of the anchor seat in March 2005...

but are we really surprised about this? Hurricane Dan has finally burbled down to something short of light winds with a chance of drizzle. Forevermore his abdication of the anchor chair will be tainted with the forged document scandal - regardless of how he and CBS attempt to spin it. CBS news is now stuck with the moniker SeeBS, and recovery from such a blow to its credibility will not readily be forthcoming from the American public. Across the blogosphere, there is much carousing in pajamas going on - Will Collier over at Vodkapundit has a good post on this, and I agree that the spin machine is definitely on overload. Dan is certainly trying hard to downplay the National Guard story, but please:

Rather spoke of his decision to step down to more than 100 staffers in the CBS newsroom on Tuesday afternoon. In brief remarks, the newsman said that he had considered retiring since the late 1990s. He added that the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attack prompted him to put aside such thoughts.

He portrayed his decision to leave the anchor chair as a "mutual decision" made last summer.

The veteran newsman also said the decision was not influenced by the National Guard story. He said the purpose of announcing his decision now -- prior to the release of a report on the story by an outside panel -- was to separate the two events.

He acknowledged, in a vintage Ratherism, that the controversial story had become a "hippopotamus in the bathtub."

CBS even sounds dubious in its own report:

Rather has long been a target of critics who accused him of a liberal bias, and there's even a Web site devoted to that notion. The National Guard story sent those critics into overdrive. Rather's announcement Tuesday led one Republican congressman from Pennsylvania to issue a statement saying, in effect, good riddance.

"Dan Rather has been a legend in media for more than a quarter-century to many people around the world, but not to me," Rep. Bill Shuster said. "For the entirety of his career, Rather has allowed his liberal bias to shape the news rather than report it."

Yes, people, this development is bigger than a hippo in the tub, although there are those who see this as less than a victory. Jim Geraughty at the Kerry Spot has some blogosphere reaction by some of my favorite bloggers here. Those who see this as not much to cheer about have got a point, but hey, I'll take one step down the ladder at at time. It gives me great pleasure to know that I will not accidentally click on CBS news and hear his smarmy voice again. (Life's simplest of pleasures). And everyone I know stopped watching 60 minutes ages ago anyway. I certainly can't imagine that Rather will bring any new viewers to the possibly irreparably damaged program.

Ding Dong, the Dan is Gone!

Racist talk show host issues apology re Condi Rice remarks, but doesn't actually apologize...

as reported earlier on yahoo news:

John "Sly" Sylvester, the program director and morning personality on WTDY-AM, wrote a letter of apology to local newspapers.

"I'm concerned that I have offended many African-Americans by using a crass term to describe an incompetent, dishonest political appointee of the Bush administration. I apologize," wrote Sylvester, who is white.

Sylvester wrote he would not, however, apologize for criticizing Rice, saying "she has allowed herself to be used as a black trophy by an administration."

Somehow, that just doesn't sound like an apology. He reminds me of someone's kid apologizing by saying "I apologize for calling your jerky stupid brother an idiot."

I just watched Sylvester spewing his vitriol on Hannity & Colmes tonight (Fox news channel) and he just couldn't make any of his arguments sound remotely intelligent or legitimate. There simply is never an acceptable excuse for using such terms as "Aunt Jemima" or "black trophy" to describe men or women of color, whether they are public figures or not.  Just as I don't think racist cartoons are ever appropriate or funny.

Perhaps I am naive to wonder why there are people who still believe that any political prominence earned by people of color must surely be bought and paid for, rather than earned? Accusing Condi Rice of being a parrot or a "yes" woman for the President says as much, because it implies she was chosen simply because the President thinks she will agree with anything he says.  Once again, we find ourselves back in a no-win situation - if the President picks a loyal cabinet that will help him move forward with his agenda, he's only picking "yes" men/women; if there is conflict (such as is going on within the CIA, with Porter Goss at the helm) then pundits wonder why there isn't peace and harmony in the ranks. 

Then there are those like Mr. Sylvester, who accuse people like Condi Rice of pandering to the whims of the White House, rather than entertaining the idea that, after intelligent analysis of the facts of any given situation, she might independently come to the decision that she actually agrees with the administration, based on the merit of the position. Nah, that's logical.

And someone actually gives this guy a paycheck to hear his opinion? I think his bosses need to take him into the boardroom...

Jonah Goldberg has a great article today at NRO...

addressing President Bush's omnipresent problem - whatever he does is wrong, wrong, wrong... For example, here is Jonah's description of the hullabaloo over the nomination of Condi Rice as Secretary of State:

Or consider the wailing from all quarters about the proposed replacement of Colin Powell with Condoleezza Rice. Editorial boards across the country have been wringing their hands over the fact that President Bush is replacing his "dissenting" secretary of state with a Bush "loyalist." The San Francisco Chronicle warns of the dangers of "groupthink." The Washington Post, New York Times, Dallas Morning News, The New Republic, and countless others fret that replacing Powell with Rice signals that Bush's new secretary of state will — gasp! — actually agree with the president's foreign policy! "The president and vice president are dispatching their toadies to the agencies to quell dissent," Maureen Dowd writes with her usual restraint.

Read the whole article, it's full of great discussion points for your next conversation with those annoying liberals who just can't seem to name a single accomplishment of George Bush (those same liberals who just couldn't seem to find a single good reason to support John Kerry for President either, except for the fact that he was running against Bush).

Yet another report of insurgents waving the white flag then blowing up our soldiers...

as reported by the New York Times yesterday (ht: Rich Lowry, the Corner). Key phrase:

Two marines were killed and four wounded in an ambush on Friday in which an insurgent deceived the Americans by waving a white flag, military officials said Saturday.

and:

American commanders in Falluja say they are seeing an increasing number of guerrillas using white flags to pose as unarmed civilians.

So those who insist our soldiers should go blindly to the aid of Iraqis waving white flags, or insurgents playing possum/appearing dead or wounded, armed solely with the hope that they don't get blown up, need to sit down and shut up, let our guys do what they have to do. This is war.