(original segment from July 20th)

Scumbag Ralph Peters, a retired Lt. Colonel turned Fox News "analyst" made some nasty statements about captured U.S. soldier Bowe Berdahl earlier this week, calling him a deserter and basically saying the Taliban should execute him:

Now look, Julie, I want to be clear. If, when the facts are in, we find out that through some convoluted chain of events, he really was captured by the Taliban, I'm with him. But, if he walked away from his post and his buddies at wartime... I don't care how hard it sounds, as far as I'm concerned, the Taliban can save us a lot of legal hassles and legal bills.

Now a bipartisan group of House veterans led by Ohio Democrat, John Boccieri has sent a letter to Fox News' Roger Ailes, demanding an apology.

As members of Congress and veterans of the United States Armed Forces, it was with incredulity and disgust that we watched Fox News Strategic Analyst Lt. Colonel Ralph Peters (Ret.) suggest on your airwaves that Private First Class Bowe Bergdahl, "abandoned his buddies, abandoned his post, and just walked off," and stated that, if this is true, "the Taliban can save us a lot of legal hassles and legal bills."

Mr. Peters' comments are so far beyond the pale that they don't even approach the decorum and respect deserved by a member of the United States Armed Forces. Mr. Peters' indefensible comments call into question, without any supporting evidence whatsoever, PFC Bergdahl's patriotism and commitment to his country, and suggest in a non-subtle way that he deserved to be captured. The events surrounding the capture of PFC Bergdahl are irrelevant at this point. The only priority should be his safe and immediate release to U.S. forces. Read on...

Peters attempted to backtrack, but according to Think Progress, he's still using Fox News to attack the captured U.S. soldier. Will Ailes do the right thing by firing Peters and publicly apologizing to Bergdahl's family? I wouldn't count on it.

Paul Rieckhoff from IAVA gave me a heads up on this yesterday. Ralph Peters is one of those wacko military hawks that FOX News uses to ramp up the Rambo style militia movement they hold so dear to their hearts. He was prattling on (almost spitting up as he spoke) about how this soldier might be a deserter and if that was the case--he should be executed by the Taliban. Yea, real sane analysis by Peters.

Peters: Now look, Julie, I want to be clear. If, when the facts are in, we find out that through some convoluted chain of events, he really was captured by the Taliban, I'm with him. But, if he walked away from his post and his buddies at wartime... I don't care how hard it sounds, as far as I'm concerned, the Taliban can save us a lot of legal hassles and legal bills.

Antman11 has more:

I couldn't believe my ears, but just minutes ago on "America's News HQ," guest pundit Ralph Peters suggested something to the effect that the Taliban should "save us the headache" and execute captured 23 year-old American soldier Bowe Bergdahl, because "it looks like" Bergdahl deserted his unit. While prefacing his comments by stressing that a military decision should not be made until all of the facts surrounding Bergdahl's capture are determined, Peters then ignored his own advice and encouraged the Taliban to kill this young man. Fox News' Julie Banderas was visibly shocked at the words coming out of Peters' mouth, but did not challenge any of his statements before awkwardly ending the segment.

You might have forgotten that Ralphie boy also thinks the media should be murdered by our troops too. He's a real psycho. Just the kind of pundits FOX loves.

Peters: Rejecting the god of their fathers, the neo-pagans who dominate the media serve as lackeys at the terrorists’ bloody altar.

Pretending to be impartial, the self-segregating personalities drawn to media careers overwhelmingly take a side, and that side is rarely ours. Although it seems unthinkable now, future wars may require censorship, news blackouts and, ultimately, military attacks on the partisan media.

DOWNLOADS: (2212)

PLAYS: (5621)

Embed

We already had reached the conclusion, after watching his "kill them all" solution to the terrorist-detainee problem, that Fox News talker Col. Ralph Peters had a serious ethics-and-basic-decency deficit problem.

Then one of our readers pointed out, via Muzzlewatch, that Peters recently wrote a piece for the neocon publication Security Affairs that suggests our soldiers begin shooting and killing not just terrorists, but members of the media as well.

He calls the media "The killers without guns":

While the essence of warfare never changes—it will always be about killing the enemy until he acquiesces in our desires or is exterminated—its topical manifestations evolve and its dimensions expand. Today, the United States and its allies will never face a lone enemy on the battlefield. There will always be a hostile third party in the fight, but one which we not only refrain from attacking but are hesitant to annoy: the media.

While this brief essay cannot undertake to analyze the psychological dysfunctions that lead many among the most privileged Westerners to attack their own civilization and those who defend it, we can acknowledge the overwhelming evidence that, to most media practitioners, our troops are always guilty (even if proven innocent), while our barbaric enemies are innocent (even if proven guilty). The phenomenon of Western and world journalists championing the “rights” and causes of blood-drenched butchers who, given the opportunity, would torture and slaughter them, disproves the notion—were any additional proof required—that human beings are rational creatures. Indeed, the passionate belief of so much of the intelligentsia that our civilization is evil and only the savage is noble looks rather like an anemic version of the self-delusions of the terrorists themselves. And, of course, there is a penalty for the intellectual’s dismissal of religion: humans need to believe in something greater than themselves, even if they have a degree from Harvard. Rejecting the god of their fathers, the neo-pagans who dominate the media serve as lackeys at the terrorists’ bloody altar.

Of course, the media have shaped the outcome of conflicts for centuries, from the European wars of religion through Vietnam. More recently, though, the media have determined the outcomes of conflicts. While journalists and editors ultimately failed to defeat the U.S. government in Iraq, video cameras and biased reporting guaranteed that Hezbollah would survive the 2006 war with Israel and, as of this writing, they appear to have saved Hamas from destruction in Gaza.

Pretending to be impartial, the self-segregating personalities drawn to media careers overwhelmingly take a side, and that side is rarely ours. Although it seems unthinkable now, future wars may require censorship, news blackouts and, ultimately, military attacks on the partisan media. Perceiving themselves as superior beings, journalists have positioned themselves as protected-species combatants. But freedom of the press stops when its abuse kills our soldiers and strengthens our enemies. Such a view arouses disdain today, but a media establishment that has forgotten any sense of sober patriotism may find that it has become tomorrow’s conventional wisdom.

Where does Fox find these people, exactly?

d r i f t g l a s s: From A to Z in the G-Dub alphabet

The Gaelic Starover: Apparently, the National Review believes that aversion among Catholics to blowing up other human beings, their villages, market places, houses of worship, bridges and general infrastructure is found solely on the “Left”. Meanwhile, the hacktacular Murdoch mouthpiece, Ralph Peters has graciously relieved "The Left" of responsibility for the Iraq debacle.

Pandagon: The "feminized" classroom causes "gay bullying."

MaxSpeak, You Listen! Would you prefer to live in 1967 with today’s real median household income ($46,326) or live today with 1967’s real median household income ($35,379)?

The Heretik: Wait Til He Gets His Haynes On You

Liberal Country Fan: The Country Music Association demonstrates that politics are more important than quality of music or even popular success in its nomination process.