US Marine shoots unarmed wounded combatant in the head
SwiftB...@mailinator.com
Marines had left a group of
prisoners in the mosque
A marine can be heard saying on the pool footage provided to Reuters
Television: "He's [expletive] faking he's dead. He faking he's
[expletive] dead."
"The marine then raises his rifle and fires into the man's head. The
pictures are too graphic for us to broadcast," Sites said. No images
of the shooting were shown in the footage provided to Reuters.
The report said the marine, who had returned to duty after being shot
in the face a day earlier, had been removed from the field and was
being questioned by the US military.
Sites said the shot prisoner "did not appear to be armed or
threatening in any way".
source: NBC news
Tony
"SwiftB...@MoveOnForAmerica.org" <SwiftB...@mailinator.com> wrote in
message news:d6e20f33.04111...@posting.google.com...
And your point being? We the human race do this kind of shit. Every Where,
Every Day.. You should be used to it by now it's been going on since the
dawn of civilization..And It will continue... until we've raped this planet
to a dead place. God I hope we don't get the technology to venture someplace
else to keep this fucked up lineage going!
Hev
news:VfednRWDVY1...@gvtc.com...
You blame it on "being human'!! You fucking schmuck.
--
-Hev
find me here:
www.michaelSCREWspringerROBOTS.com
Vampi Fangs
>
>"SwiftB...@MoveOnForAmerica.org" <SwiftB...@mailinator.com> wrote in
>message news:d6e20f33.04111...@posting.google.com...
>> He said one marine noticed one of the prisoners was still breathing.
>>
>> Marines had left a group of
>> prisoners in the mosque
>> A marine can be heard saying on the pool footage provided to Reuters
>> Television: "He's [expletive] faking he's dead. He faking he's
>> [expletive] dead."
>>
>> "The marine then raises his rifle and fires into the man's head. The
>> pictures are too graphic for us to broadcast," Sites said. No images
>> of the shooting were shown in the footage provided to Reuters.
>>
>> The report said the marine, who had returned to duty after being shot
>> in the face a day earlier, had been removed from the field and was
>> being questioned by the US military.
>>
>> Sites said the shot prisoner "did not appear to be armed or
>> threatening in any way".
>>
>> source: NBC news
>
>And your point being? We the human race do this kind of shit.
itym the mad people of the human race
--
V--V
http://www.intellnet.org/resources/american_terrorism/index.html
"I believe that if we had and would keep our dirty, bloody, dollar
soaked fingers out of the business of these [Third World] nations so
full of depressed, exploited people, they will arrive at a solution of
their own. And if unfortunately their revolution must be of the
violent type because the "haves" refuse to share with the "have-nots"
by any peaceful method, at least what they get will be their own, and
not the American style, which they don't want and above all don't want
crammed down their throats by Americans."
General David Sharp, former United States Marine Commandant, 1966
Docky Wocky
"You blame it on "being human'!! You fucking schmuck..."
______________________________
Liberal tear-jerkers will always side with the son of a bitches. It is a
safe corallary in our modern world that assholes will tend to support
assholes - even if they have absolutely nothing in common.
Case in Point: Western liberal left-wingers cannot believe the
fundamentalist moslem nut cases they have made the conscious decision to
support have nothing in common with Western liberal left-wing assholes.
Fundamentalist moslem assholes have made it very clear that they are only
interested in slaughtering anything remotely Western. This includes Western
liberal assholes.
As usual, our Western liberal assholes have made the mistake of believing
islamic fundametalists can peacefully co-exist with the finest Western
liberal asshole psychologies.
It is going to take another serious culling of the gene pool to eliminate
this automatic tendency toward self-destruction again.
Oh, it keeps popping up from time to time, and our ancestors have always
been able to keep it relatively in check by various techniques.
Funny. Our best allies in this educational experience could be the Russians,
who have vast experience in dealing best with moslem extremism.
Mr Wizzard
"SwiftB...@MoveOnForAmerica.org" <SwiftB...@mailinator.com> wrote in
message news:d6e20f33.04111...@posting.google.com...
> He said one marine noticed one of the prisoners was still breathing.
Not no more!
The guy could have been booby trapped.
The dude was there to get killed, and thats
what he got - he got "dead". What the hell
do they *expect*, the marines to cook them
a hot meal?
Captain Compassion
(SwiftB...@MoveOnForAmerica.org) wrote:
Shit Kerry shot an "unarmed wounded combatant" in the back and he
almost became president.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Why would I listen to losers?" -- Arnold Schwarzenegger
"Long term commitment in relationships is only necessary because it takes
so damn long to raise children. Marriage may well be some kind of trick
to keep the males around beyond sexual satiation." -- Captain Compassion
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
res0...@NOSPAMverizon.net
Tony
"Hev" <audio...@michaelspringerSUCK.com> wrote in message
news:LM6dne6PiYt...@comcast.com...
And if there was someone to blame? Let's see would that be the birds or no
perhaps the monkey's yes I see them going around with weapons killing each
other over something as stupid as luxury..
Yeah your right I am a Fucking Scmuck..
jet
>
> "SwiftB...@MoveOnForAmerica.org" <SwiftB...@mailinator.com> wrote in
> message news:d6e20f33.04111...@posting.google.com...
>
> > He said one marine noticed one of the prisoners was still breathing.
>
> Not no more!
>
> The guy could have been booby trapped.
He wasn't booby trapped when the Marines shot him and left him there.
> The dude was there to get killed, and thats
> what he got - he got "dead". What the hell
> do they *expect*, the marines to cook them
> a hot meal?
>
He was a wounded prisoner, waiting to be moved for medical attention.
I hope the Marine is fucking court-martialed, as is required by the UCMJ.
jet
> hev sez:
>
> "You blame it on "being human'!! You fucking schmuck..."
> ______________________________
> Liberal tear-jerkers will always side with the son of a bitches.
We also side with the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the Geneva
Convention. The Marines do, too, unless Bush has turned them into
dishonorable cowards in the last 4 years.
Tony
(SNiP)
Interup me ya maggot
~NortH~
"Mr Wizzard" <w...@muffy-mail.com> wrote in message
news:zYgmd.101777$R05.95681@attbi_s53...
>
> "SwiftB...@MoveOnForAmerica.org" <SwiftB...@mailinator.com> wrote in
> message news:d6e20f33.04111...@posting.google.com...
>
>> He said one marine noticed one of the prisoners was still breathing.
>
> Not no more!
>
> The guy could have been booby trapped.
> The dude was there to get killed, and thats
> what he got - he got "dead". What the hell
> do they *expect*, the marines to cook them
> a hot meal?
>
can you tell me what laws are to be followed for prisoners of war under the
geneva convention?
i am not positive on this... but i don't believe they are allowed to be
assassinated.
i am not up on these laws/rules so please explain that to me... and, then
also, since you seem to feel it is okay to do what they did... would it also
be ok then for Iraqi/Palestinian/... any of the people at war right now with
the USA to go around and kill injured/wounded US Military personnel?
in reality, it must be fair if the US does it... then so should it be fine
for the persons opposing the US
~NortH~
i marked and made note of important areas.......... mainly ----
and wizzy, you complete and totally inhumane and complete moron who would
scream bloody murder if this were the otehr way around (hypocrite), pay
*VERY* close attention here............
"the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any
place whatsoever"
with the above in mind, here is the main and pertinent info....
"(a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds,
mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
(b) Taking of hostages;
(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading
treatment;
(d) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without
previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all
the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized
peoples.
2. The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for. "
Wizzy... are you REALLY that fucking stupid? or have you succumbed to the
emotional side now... the type of post you so vehemtly go against.
war is bad enough.. no question there... and right now the USA isn't getting
the most glowing review worldwide... what do you truly think this does to
their image... and what kind of support do you think they will get?
slowly but surely they are going to lose because no one wants to be
associated with people who are as bad or worse than the supposed terrorists
they are fighting - the US should be setting the example, since they are the
ones in the spotlight... they are shooting themselves in the foot with this
shit... Abhu Graibh (sp) ring a bell?
i guess the old saying IS true, and the US military is proving on an almost
daily basis now...
"Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster"
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
here is some very good reading for you from the Geneva Convention... which i
may add... the US is supposed to follow, without question.
"Article 3
In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in
the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each party to the
conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:
1. Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of
armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat
by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all
circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded
on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other
similar criteria.
To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time
and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:
**********
(a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds,
mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
**************
(b) Taking of hostages;
(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading
treatment;
***********
(d) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without
previous
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the
judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized
peoples.
***********
2. The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.
*************
An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the
Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict.
The Parties to the conflict should further endeavour to bring into force, by
means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the
present Convention.
The application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal
status of the Parties to the conflict.
"
Article 13
Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated. Any unlawful act or
omission by the Detaining Power causing death or seriously endangering the
health of a prisoner of war in its custody is prohibited, and will be
regarded as a serious breach of the present Convention. In particular, no
prisoner of war may be subjected to physical mutilation or to medical or
scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical,
dental or hospital treatment of the prisoner concerned and carried out in
his interest. "
"~NortH~" <no...@south.east.west> wrote in message
news:osimd.8980$rc.7...@news20.bellglobal.com...
Chuck Lysaght
This happens all the time in combat. Why not focus that rage when an
American soldier is shot dead, or blown up?
K. A. Cannon
in rec.arts.poems on Tue, 16 Nov 2004 06:04:29 GMT:
Hey Dumb ass...if we start summarily executing their wounded guess
what the insurgents are going to do to *our* wounded?
Obviously you don't know fuck about the military and military law.
--
K. A. Cannon
kcannon at insurgent dot org
(change the orgy to org to reply)
http://www.insurgent.org - Sponsored by Carlyle Group
Try not to let your mind wander...
It is too small and fragile to be out by itself.
On Tue, 27 May 2003 12:19:08 I was Wollkooked:
This spammer is full of shit. Get out of my mail or face legal action.
I have no such email addresses listed nor would I remove them if I did. The
spammer in question is a spammer--that's it, he has harassed and defamed me
and my companies for 7 years now and I really don't care what you want.
The ISP sending me this threat is hosting a defamation website that is
being sued and will be removed from the net+ damages. <boink>--I have
already requested at least THREE times that this abuser cease and desist
mailing me, therefore I ask that you take action to kill this offending
account immediately.
K. A. Cannon
<zYgmd.101777$R05.95681@attbi_s53> in rec.arts.poems on Tue, 16 Nov
2004 06:18:08 GMT:
>
>"SwiftB...@MoveOnForAmerica.org" <SwiftB...@mailinator.com> wrote in
>message news:d6e20f33.04111...@posting.google.com...
>
>> He said one marine noticed one of the prisoners was still breathing.
>
>Not no more!
>
>The guy could have been booby trapped.
>The dude was there to get killed, and thats
>what he got - he got "dead". What the hell
>do they *expect*, the marines to cook them
>a hot meal?
You are an idiot.
Shooting a helpless wounded man.
Besides being against the UCMJ it's against the Geneva Convention and
decent civilized human being don't do that.
<snip>
PlainBill
crap he is. I knew he was stupid, but he seems to have reached new
depths today.
PlainBill
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 06:18:08 GMT, "Mr Wizzard" <w...@muffy-mail.com>
wrote:
He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression, for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.
-Thomas Paine
PlainBill
guys.
PlainBill
On 16 Nov 2004 04:28:54 -0800, chuckl...@mail.com (Chuck Lysaght)
wrote:
He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression, for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.
-Thomas Paine
PlainBill
you consider a grenade launcher a weapon?
PlainBill
He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression, for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.
-Thomas Paine
DropCloth
> >
> >Oh, it keeps popping up from time to time, and our ancestors have always
> >been able to keep it relatively in check by various techniques.
> >
> >Funny. Our best allies in this educational experience could be the
Russians,
> >who have vast experience in dealing best with moslem extremism.
>
>
> Hey Dumb ass...if we start summarily executing their wounded guess
> what the insurgents are going to do to *our* wounded?
>
> Obviously you don't know fuck about the military and military law.
>
1) The argument that if we treat terrorist prisoners/wounded nice they will
treat our prisoners/wounded nice is false. You need only look back at the
contractors killed and hung in Fallugha to see how terrorists treat
prisoners. Of course you could also look at all of the people they have
beheaded as well. So, while in a country vs country conflict that idea
applies, when dealing with terrorists it does not.
2) As far as military law goes, at this point you have no idea what the
actual circumstances were in this incident so making any judgments about
guilt or innocent are way too premature. The only evidence presented is
that of a reporter and we all know how unbiased reporters are when they have
a chance to break a name making story. How much information has been left
out (if any), what happened just prior to and just after this 10 second
little film clip?
3) If this Marine did shoot an unarmed, wounded prisoner with no
justification then his command and the UCMJ will deal with it accordingly.
Of course there are those (usually the same ones who rush to judgment) who
will not accept that the military can actually police their own and will do
the right thing. Hmmm, they're also usually the same people who think
doctors and lawyers can police themselves no matter how many cases of abuse
and favoritism crop up.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
DropCloth
news:osimd.8980$rc.7...@news20.bellglobal.com...
>
The real question is does the Geneva Convention apply to
terrorists/insurgents. Technically in this case I do not believe it does
yet we still operate under rules of engagement that apply the conventions
even though these people are not POWs in the sense described in them So,
no, by our own rules, assassination of a prisoner is not legal.
As for your other assumption about if it's okay for us then is it okay for
them...well, why don't you turn that around? If it's okay for them to
kidnap and behead people is it okay for us? Is it okay for us to kidnap
people, kill them and then hang their bodies from a bridge? Of course not,
which is why such an argument falls apart from the outset.
People however should not rush to judgment in this or any other case. We do
not know all of the circumstances surrounding what happened here and will
not until an investigation is done. How would you feel about this Marine if
it was discovered that the "prisoner" was actually laying on a satchel
charge and he was reaching to pull the lanyard on it when the Marine shot
him? If he didn't shoot everyone in that room, including the cameraman and
the other wounded would have been killed. You see? Without knowing all of
the details we are in no position to judge his actions.
Captain Compassion
wrote:
>Check your facts, asshole. The enemy combatant was armed. Or don't
>you consider a grenade launcher a weapon?
>
An empty grenade launcher is a piece of pipe.
red state xian flag waver
"jet" <j...@untool.net> wrote in message
news:RpCdnXMU-rD...@adelphia.com...
(Bush has done that.....and more.....)
Those of you desiring may see/download the UN-EDITED VIDEO
of the Iraqi in the faluja mosque gettin bits of his skull and brains
blown onto the adjoining wall (in color - yeeeee haaaa!!!!) at the
following sites (shortly...) at the following great sites:
K. A. Cannon
rec.arts.poems on Tue, 16 Nov 2004 10:54:48 -0500:
><silly stuff snipped>
>
>> >
>> >Oh, it keeps popping up from time to time, and our ancestors have always
>> >been able to keep it relatively in check by various techniques.
>> >
>> >Funny. Our best allies in this educational experience could be the
>Russians,
>> >who have vast experience in dealing best with moslem extremism.
>>
>>
>> Hey Dumb ass...if we start summarily executing their wounded guess
>> what the insurgents are going to do to *our* wounded?
>>
>> Obviously you don't know fuck about the military and military law.
>>
>
>1) The argument that if we treat terrorist prisoners/wounded nice they will
>treat our prisoners/wounded nice is false. You need only look back at the
>contractors killed and hung in Fallugha to see how terrorists treat
>prisoners. Of course you could also look at all of the people they have
>beheaded as well. So, while in a country vs country conflict that idea
>applies, when dealing with terrorists it does not.
SO that makes it A-OK for us to act like barbarous fuckheads just like
the terrorists.
The Geneva convention and the UCMJ don't mean a damn thing?
Their terrorists and they wouldn't give us the time of day so we
should treat them exactly how they treat us...Right?
Should we start flying passenger airliners into Mecca tomorrow?
From what I understand this guy was hit by a sniper in the face the
day before...so maybe he was a bit off when he did this. If he was
mentally unstable then that is a poor reflection upon his chain of
command because he should never had been put back in the line if he
was unstable.
>2) As far as military law goes, at this point you have no idea what the
>actual circumstances were in this incident so making any judgments about
>guilt or innocent are way too premature.
I dunno...They have the Marine in custody. That's certainly has to
portend something.
>The only evidence presented is
>that of a reporter and we all know how unbiased reporters are when they have
>a chance to break a name making story. How much information has been left
>out (if any), what happened just prior to and just after this 10 second
>little film clip?
It really doesn't matter....if the Marine shot a wounded, unarmed man
then he's no better than the SS troopers that had all that fun at
Malmedy.
>3) If this Marine did shoot an unarmed, wounded prisoner with no
>justification then his command and the UCMJ
<snip hypocrisy>
Didn't you write in the beginning of your response....
"The argument that if we treat terrorist prisoners/wounded nice they
will treat our prisoners/wounded nice is false.... So, while in a
country vs country conflict that idea applies, when dealing with
terrorists it does not."
Therefore...according to your first statement the UCMJ doesn't apply.
He's a member of the Armed Forces of The United States.
His actions reflect poorly upon all past and present members.
His actions reflect poorly upon the citizens of the United States and
the government of the United States.
If anything The United States Armed Forces should be held to a higher
standard. Trying to justify any summary execution of anyone on the
battlefield by rationalizing it as "just a terrorist" and "standard
Geneva Convention/UCMJ doesn't apply because they are terrorists" is
bullshit. That is not what our Armed Forces are about and it certainly
isn't what the US is about.
And I am no bleeding heart liberal...I am a Vet.
Vampi Fangs
wrote:
><silly stuff snipped>
>
>> >
>> >Oh, it keeps popping up from time to time, and our ancestors have always
>> >been able to keep it relatively in check by various techniques.
>> >
>> >Funny. Our best allies in this educational experience could be the
>Russians,
>> >who have vast experience in dealing best with moslem extremism.
>>
>>
>> Hey Dumb ass...if we start summarily executing their wounded guess
>> what the insurgents are going to do to *our* wounded?
>>
>> Obviously you don't know fuck about the military and military law.
>>
>
>1) The argument that if we treat terrorist prisoners/wounded nice they will
>treat our prisoners/wounded nice is false. You need only look back at the
>contractors killed and hung in Fallugha to see how terrorists treat
>prisoners.
another stupid septic git who doesn't remember that the above
contractors were killed and hung in fallujah in retaliation for dumb
fucken yanks on the 28th April, 2003, firing into a group of 200
unarmed civilians including children protesting other dumb fucken
yanks occupying said children's school
15 innocent unarmed civilians were killed by dumb fucken yank troops
also worthy of consideration as relevant background and more evidence
of dumb fucken yankery in relation to fallujah:
"Fallujah was one of the most peaceful areas of the country just after
the fall of Saddam. There was very little looting and the new mayor of
the city — Taha Bidaywi, selected by local tribal leaders — was
staunchly pro-US. When the US Army entered the town in April 2003,
they located themselves at the vacated Ba'ath Party headquarters — an
action that erased some goodwill, especially when many in the city had
been hoping the US Army would stay outside of the relatively calm
city."
http://www.brainyencyclopedia.com/encyclopedia/f/fa/fallujah.html
thereactionary
Yeah, amazing isn't it? We've got 12,000 of our boys
there fighting about 3,000 insurgent. All of our units
have embedded reporters watching every move that our
boys make and we only have one instance of this kind of
thing happening. This has got to be one of the cleanest
and most considerate group of military people that has
ever fought in the history of mankind. I've also seen
film of our guys going up to wounded insurgents and
giving them medical treatment when there was a very good
chance of those insurgents being booby trapped.
~NortH~
"thereactionary" <thereac...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:831523e4.04111...@posting.google.com...
> SwiftB...@mailinator.com (SwiftB...@MoveOnForAmerica.org) wrote in
> message news:<d6e20f33.04111...@posting.google.com>...
>
> Yeah, amazing isn't it? We've got 12,000 of our boys
> there fighting about 3,000 insurgent. All of our units
> have embedded reporters watching every move that our
> boys make and we only have one instance of this kind of
> thing happening. This has got to be one of the cleanest
> and most considerate group of military people that has
> ever fought in the history of mankind.
yup... considerate people they are... they were *so* considerate at Abu
Ghraib too, weren't they.
there are many many instances like this.... personally, i don't care if the
insurgents get killed... but once you have a person who is injured and/or
under control and now a prisoner of war... which they/he/it was... and yes,
whether they are terrorists or insurgents or freedom fighters or whatever...
it is a war and anyone fighting against the USA over there would be at war
with them and therefore when captured be a prisoner of war and be entitled
to everything the Geneva Convention allows for... as you can clearly see in
the video... which is now online... the *whole video* not the cut and
censored one... there is NO need to just kill/murder/assassinate people...
whether they are the enemy or NOT.
I've also seen
> film of our guys going up to wounded insurgents and
> giving them medical treatment when there was a very good
> chance of those insurgents being booby trapped.
which is what they are *supposed* to do.. not indescriminately murder for
the sake of killing... all prisoners of war are to be tried by proper and
legal means, not by some young kid swinging an AK47 who just happens to be
in a pissy mood at the time.... you can not justify murder... and if you do,
then by that you also justify the actions of the suicide bombers and
terrorists... as the US military is acting no different.
DropCloth
news:cnda3s$i5g$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com...
If you don't understand the point of what I said, reverting to swear words
and foolishness only make you look that much worse. For One, I did not say
it was okay I simply pointed out that our treatment of terrorist/insurgent
prisoners is not going to have any effect on how these same
terrorists/insurgents are going to treat anyone they capture. That is not a
moral judgement, it is simply an opinion that is backed up by the actions of
these terrorists/insurgents. For another, you are assuming that the Geneva
Convention applies, which in the case of terrorists/insurgents, it does not.
Even so, I did not say or imply that the convention or the UCMJ did not
apply, those are words you are trying to put into my mouth with no backing
from me.
You are the one making assumptions here whereas as was calling for people
not to rush to judgement since none of us knows the FACTS surrounding this
situation. You imply that the Marine is guilty in your post, you just
debate if it was because he was a murderer or because he was unstable or his
chain of command was incompetent. I am not prepared to make any such
charge, nor am I implying it, again, we don't know the facts and useless
conjecturing does nothing but expose extreme opinions.
>
> >2) As far as military law goes, at this point you have no idea what the
> >actual circumstances were in this incident so making any judgments about
> >guilt or innocent are way too premature.
>
> I dunno...They have the Marine in custody. That's certainly has to
> portend something.
Hmm, that implies that you believe that just because someone gets arrested
there's a good possibility they are guilty, at least of something. Also, no
one has said the Marine was in "custody", he has in fact been "withdrawn
from combat" pending an Article 32 investigation. Once again you have made
an assumption without any facts.
>
> >The only evidence presented is
> >that of a reporter and we all know how unbiased reporters are when they
have
> >a chance to break a name making story. How much information has been
left
> >out (if any), what happened just prior to and just after this 10 second
> >little film clip?
>
> It really doesn't matter....if the Marine shot a wounded, unarmed man
> then he's no better than the SS troopers that had all that fun at
> Malmedy.
And of course, your bottom line finally comes out. "It really doesn't
matter...". Right, as long as you have an opinion I guess the facts just
don't matter. This Marine kileld someone in a war zone and it got caught on
TV and since the media is blowing this thing up into an attrocity without
knowing exactly what happened then it obviously must be true and the Marine
who a day before was wounded and returned to combat is no better than an SS
trooper. Thank you for so showing us all just how objective you can be.
God help anyone if you are ever on their jury.
>
> >3) If this Marine did shoot an unarmed, wounded prisoner with no
> >justification then his command and the UCMJ
> <snip hypocrisy>
>
> Didn't you write in the beginning of your response....
> "The argument that if we treat terrorist prisoners/wounded nice they
> will treat our prisoners/wounded nice is false.... So, while in a
> country vs country conflict that idea applies, when dealing with
> terrorists it does not."
>
Yes I did and it is a different point that my point 3 if you would take the
time to read the words I wrote instead of trying to insert your emotional
interpretation. One is an opinion backed up by events on the ground that
our treatment of terrorist/insurgent prisoners will not have any effect on
how the terrorists/insurgents will treat any prisoners they take. The other
is an opinion based on the UCMJ that if the Marine did do something wrong
then he should be prosecuted for the crime. Does that make it clear enough
for you now?
> Therefore...according to your first statement the UCMJ doesn't apply.
Wrong, I did not say that, you did. I never even implied that.
>
> He's a member of the Armed Forces of The United States.
> His actions reflect poorly upon all past and present members.
> His actions reflect poorly upon the citizens of the United States and
> the government of the United States.
Assume the Marine noticed the man "playing dead" on the ground was reaching
to activate a satchel charge he was lying on that would have killed everyone
in the room. With only a split second to react he did the only thing he
thought reasonable to save everyone's life, he put a round in the guy's
head. So, now, did his actions reflect poorly on everyone, on anyone?
Quite the contratry, he might be awarded a medal for his actions. Now,
since you have no more facts about what REALLY happened there than I do, the
fantasy scenario I just put forth is equally as valid as your assumption
that this is either a confused/deranged Marine or a Waffen SS Storm Trooper
who just shot an unarmed, "innocent" man. In other words, neither
"assumption" is worth anything at all. Hence, my repeated call not to rush
to judgement until the facts are know.
>
> If anything The United States Armed Forces should be held to a higher
> standard. Trying to justify any summary execution of anyone on the
> battlefield by rationalizing it as "just a terrorist" and "standard
> Geneva Convention/UCMJ doesn't apply because they are terrorists" is
> bullshit. That is not what our Armed Forces are about and it certainly
> isn't what the US is about.
>
> And I am no bleeding heart liberal...I am a Vet.
>
As a Vet you know as well as I do (I am retired Navy) that the Armed Forces
ARE held to a higher standard of conduct than civilians. You should also be
the last to leap in and without any basis in fact beyond a 10 second video
clip leap to condemning a fellow Service Member of committing a summary
execution. What our armed forces and our country is about is something
called "innocent until proven guilty" and "due process". Even though you
have so blithy thrown both concepts out the window in your zeal to convict a
fellow soldier in combat fortunately, they still do apply and are being put
into action despite your unfounded accusations.
So our armed forces are obviously holding themselves to a much higher
standard than you hold yourself..
DropCloth
news:cnda3s$i5g$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com...
If you don't understand the point of what I said, reverting to swear words
and foolishness only make you look that much worse. For One, I did not say
it was okay I simply pointed out that our treatment of terrorist/insurgent
prisoners is not going to have any effect on how these same
terrorists/insurgents are going to treat anyone they capture. That is not a
moral judgement, it is simply an opinion that is backed up by the actions of
these terrorists/insurgents. For another, you are assuming that the Geneva
Convention applies, which in the case of terrorists/insurgents, it does not.
Even so, I did not say or imply that the convention or the UCMJ did not
apply, those are words you are trying to put into my mouth with no backing
from me.
You are the one making assumptions here whereas as was calling for people
not to rush to judgement since none of us knows the FACTS surrounding this
situation. You imply that the Marine is guilty in your post, you just
debate if it was because he was a murderer or because he was unstable or his
chain of command was incompetent. I am not prepared to make any such
charge, nor am I implying it, again, we don't know the facts and useless
conjecturing does nothing but expose extreme opinions.
>
> >2) As far as military law goes, at this point you have no idea what the
> >actual circumstances were in this incident so making any judgments about
> >guilt or innocent are way too premature.
>
> I dunno...They have the Marine in custody. That's certainly has to
> portend something.
Hmm, that implies that you believe that just because someone gets arrested
there's a good possibility they are guilty, at least of something. Also, no
one has said the Marine was in "custody", he has in fact been "withdrawn
from combat" pending an Article 32 investigation. Once again you have made
an assumption without any facts.
>
> >The only evidence presented is
> >that of a reporter and we all know how unbiased reporters are when they
have
> >a chance to break a name making story. How much information has been
left
> >out (if any), what happened just prior to and just after this 10 second
> >little film clip?
>
> It really doesn't matter....if the Marine shot a wounded, unarmed man
> then he's no better than the SS troopers that had all that fun at
> Malmedy.
And of course, your bottom line finally comes out. "It really doesn't
matter...". Right, as long as you have an opinion I guess the facts just
don't matter. This Marine kileld someone in a war zone and it got caught on
TV and since the media is blowing this thing up into an attrocity without
knowing exactly what happened then it obviously must be true and the Marine
who a day before was wounded and returned to combat is no better than an SS
trooper. Thank you for so showing us all just how objective you can be.
God help anyone if you are ever on their jury.
>
> >3) If this Marine did shoot an unarmed, wounded prisoner with no
> >justification then his command and the UCMJ
> <snip hypocrisy>
>
> Didn't you write in the beginning of your response....
> "The argument that if we treat terrorist prisoners/wounded nice they
> will treat our prisoners/wounded nice is false.... So, while in a
> country vs country conflict that idea applies, when dealing with
> terrorists it does not."
>
Yes I did and it is a different point that my point 3 if you would take the
time to read the words I wrote instead of trying to insert your emotional
interpretation. One is an opinion backed up by events on the ground that
our treatment of terrorist/insurgent prisoners will not have any effect on
how the terrorists/insurgents will treat any prisoners they take. The other
is an opinion based on the UCMJ that if the Marine did do something wrong
then he should be prosecuted for the crime. Does that make it clear enough
for you now?
> Therefore...according to your first statement the UCMJ doesn't apply.
Wrong, I did not say that, you did. I never even implied that.
>
> He's a member of the Armed Forces of The United States.
> His actions reflect poorly upon all past and present members.
> His actions reflect poorly upon the citizens of the United States and
> the government of the United States.
Assume the Marine noticed the man "playing dead" on the ground was reaching
to activate a satchel charge he was lying on that would have killed everyone
in the room. With only a split second to react he did the only thing he
thought reasonable to save everyone's life, he put a round in the guy's
head. So, now, did his actions reflect poorly on everyone, on anyone?
Quite the contratry, he might be awarded a medal for his actions. Now,
since you have no more facts about what REALLY happened there than I do, the
fantasy scenario I just put forth is equally as valid as your assumption
that this is either a confused/deranged Marine or a Waffen SS Storm Trooper
who just shot an unarmed, "innocent" man. In other words, neither
"assumption" is worth anything at all. Hence, my repeated call not to rush
to judgement until the facts are know.
>
> If anything The United States Armed Forces should be held to a higher
> standard. Trying to justify any summary execution of anyone on the
> battlefield by rationalizing it as "just a terrorist" and "standard
> Geneva Convention/UCMJ doesn't apply because they are terrorists" is
> bullshit. That is not what our Armed Forces are about and it certainly
> isn't what the US is about.
>
> And I am no bleeding heart liberal...I am a Vet.
>
As a Vet you know as well as I do (I am retired Navy) that the Armed Forces
ARE held to a higher standard of conduct than civilians. You should also be
the last to leap in and without any basis in fact beyond a 10 second video
clip leap to condemning a fellow Service Member of committing a summary
execution. What our armed forces and our country is about is something
called "innocent until proven guilty" and "due process". Even though you
have so blithy thrown both concepts out the window in your zeal to convict a
fellow soldier in combat fortunately, they still do apply and are being put
into action despite your unfounded accusations.
So our armed forces are obviously holding themselves to a much higher
standard than you hold yourself..
TNSAF
<snip>
> Assume the Marine noticed the man "playing dead" on the ground was
> reaching
> to activate a satchel charge he was lying on that would have killed
> everyone
> in the room. With only a split second to react he did the only thing
> he
> thought reasonable to save everyone's life, he put a round in the
> guy's
> head. So, now, did his actions reflect poorly on everyone, on anyone?
> Quite the contratry, he might be awarded a medal for his actions.
> Now,
> since you have no more facts about what REALLY happened there than I
> do, the fantasy scenario I just put forth is equally as valid as your
Now lets assume they found WMD, or proof that Iraq had a link to the 9/11
attacks then this conquest would be a justified "War" and have legitimacy in
the world...
...but 51% of Americans get confused with the "truth" and "facts"!
DropCloth
news:r3smd.235164$nl.42597@pd7tw3no...
Unfortunately, the whole point of an "assumption" is that it makes an ass of
u and me and is totally worthless unless you get lucky. I am willing to
admit that my "assumption" above is nothing more than a possibiliy (even a
fantasy), but those who are so quick to judge the guilt of this Marine
refuse to see that they are doing so based solely on an assumption that has
no more validity than the fantasy I put forth.
As for WMD and a legitimate war...remember (as so many who oppose the war
have forgotten) that WMD was only ONE reason for the war. They conveniently
forget the 1991 cease fire agreement and all of the violations that in and
of themselves were enough to make this a "legitimate" war, they forget the
17 UN resolutions that he routinely violated, they want to ignore that
Saddam paid money to the families of terrorists and harbored several well
known and internationally wanted terrorists in his country, they ignore the
fact that the level of mass killings under Saddam's rule reached the level
of genocide (hmm sound like Milosovich?) and on and on and on.
As for 51% of Americans having trouble with truth and facts, well, the other
49% are entitled to their opinions. The difference is that I don't try to
force them to believe the way I do, nor do I call them names because they do
not have the same opinions I do.
DropCloth
news:65ckp05rlq5jc2s66...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 10:54:48 -0500, "DropCloth" <dele...@gsiwave.com>
> wrote:
>
> ><silly stuff snipped>
> >
> >> >
> >> >Oh, it keeps popping up from time to time, and our ancestors have
always
> >> >been able to keep it relatively in check by various techniques.
> >> >
> >> >Funny. Our best allies in this educational experience could be the
> >Russians,
> >> >who have vast experience in dealing best with moslem extremism.
> >>
> >>
> >> Hey Dumb ass...if we start summarily executing their wounded guess
> >> what the insurgents are going to do to *our* wounded?
> >>
> >> Obviously you don't know fuck about the military and military law.
> >>
> >
> >1) The argument that if we treat terrorist prisoners/wounded nice they
will
> >treat our prisoners/wounded nice is false. You need only look back at
the
> >contractors killed and hung in Fallugha to see how terrorists treat
> >prisoners.
>
> another stupid septic git who doesn't remember that the above
> contractors were killed and hung in fallujah in retaliation for dumb
> fucken yanks on the 28th April, 2003, firing into a group of 200
> unarmed civilians including children protesting other dumb fucken
> yanks occupying said children's school
Ah yes, so eloquently put that it makes your point worthless. If you can't
figure out how to speak in a civilized manner don't expect anyone to treat
you with civility.
In any case, your tit for tat reasoning is both childish and nonproductive,
just look at the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Who shot the first person
that resulted in someone else retaliating that continued until no one can
remember who started what with whom.
But your language still says it all. Obviously an intelligent, well read
and worldly wise person. By the way, can you spell sarcasm?
>
<snipped due to useless swearing>
DropCloth
>
> "thereactionary" <thereac...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:831523e4.04111...@posting.google.com...
> > SwiftB...@mailinator.com (SwiftB...@MoveOnForAmerica.org) wrote in
> > message news:<d6e20f33.04111...@posting.google.com>...
> >
> > Yeah, amazing isn't it? We've got 12,000 of our boys
> > there fighting about 3,000 insurgent. All of our units
> > have embedded reporters watching every move that our
> > boys make and we only have one instance of this kind of
> > thing happening. This has got to be one of the cleanest
> > and most considerate group of military people that has
> > ever fought in the history of mankind.
>
> yup... considerate people they are... they were *so* considerate at Abu
> Ghraib too, weren't they.
First of all, Abu Ghraib was not the Marines, it was a different service
altogether.
Second, while the media seems to think this was so horrendous treatment of
captives, and while I agree it was improper treatment, it was nowhere near
the equivalent of how these terrorists/insurgents treat their prisoners (nor
how many countries in the world treat theirs). I'm not justifying the
behavior, I'm just pointing out a bit of perspective here.
>
> there are many many instances like this.... personally, i don't care if
the
> insurgents get killed... but once you have a person who is injured and/or
> under control and now a prisoner of war... which they/he/it was... and
yes,
> whether they are terrorists or insurgents or freedom fighters or
whatever...
> it is a war and anyone fighting against the USA over there would be at war
> with them and therefore when captured be a prisoner of war and be entitled
> to everything the Geneva Convention allows for... as you can clearly see
in
> the video... which is now online... the *whole video* not the cut and
> censored one... there is NO need to just kill/murder/assassinate people...
> whether they are the enemy or NOT.
First, these are not people whofall under the defenition of the Geneva
Convention, please read up on it before making such a statement. Secondly,
even though they do not, our forces operate under the conditions that DEMAND
they be treated as if they did, no matter what their own behavior has been
like. third, you are jumping to conclusions concerning the Marine involved
without having any facts beyond a short video. Why not wait until the
investigation is done before you decide this young Marine who has been
risking his life should be drawn and quartered? How about due process and
innocent until proven guilty? Why not hold your own judgments about the
incident to these standards instead of condemning someone?
>
> I've also seen
> > film of our guys going up to wounded insurgents and
> > giving them medical treatment when there was a very good
> > chance of those insurgents being booby trapped.
>
> which is what they are *supposed* to do.. not indescriminately murder for
> the sake of killing... all prisoners of war are to be tried by proper and
> legal means, not by some young kid swinging an AK47 who just happens to be
> in a pissy mood at the time.... you can not justify murder... and if you
do,
> then by that you also justify the actions of the suicide bombers and
> terrorists... as the US military is acting no different.
>
Prisoners of war are not "tried". Our Marines do not use AK-47's. One
Marine in a single incident (you say there are many but you offer no
evidence) does not justify the terrorists/insurgents randomly shooting
mortars into cities, kidnapping people, beheading them, torturing, etc.
Nothing justifies that.
So, bottom line, wait for the fact of the incident to be investigated as a
good, civilized person would do and when you do make statements try to get
the facts you do have correct, it will make you sound like you actually know
what you're talking about.
jet
> these terrorists/insurgents. For another, you are assuming that the Geneva
> Convention applies, which in the case of terrorists/insurgents, it does not.
As of March 2003, the President of the US declared that the American
military would observe the Geneva Conventions with regard to the conflict
in Iraq.
netuser
> In article <zYgmd.101777$R05.95681@attbi_s53>, "Mr Wizzard" <w...@muffy-mail.com> wrote:
> >
> > "SwiftB...@MoveOnForAmerica.org" <SwiftB...@mailinator.com> wrote in
> > message news:d6e20f33.04111...@posting.google.com...
> >
> > > He said one marine noticed one of the prisoners was still breathing.
> >
> > Not no more!
> >
> > The guy could have been booby trapped.
>
Really? And why exactly would you suppose he was shot to begin with;
selling flowers? breeding kittens? He WAS a goddamn terrorist you
dumbass.
This is war - is that word too big for you? It's only three letters,
w-a-r.
These aren't innocent civilians on their merry way to work in a couple
of skyscrapers in New York; they're fucking terrorists. I know
"terrorists" is a fairly long word for someone with your displayed
lack of intelligence – so try typing it into your Mattel Speak and
Spell for help.
You don't reason or bargain with terrorists, you kill them. This
particular terrorist was supposed to be dead; the heroic Marine simply
facilitated the matter.
> > The dude was there to get killed, and thats
> > what he got - he got "dead". What the hell
> > do they *expect*, the marines to cook them
> > a hot meal?
> >
>
> He was a wounded prisoner, waiting to be moved for medical attention.
> I hope the Marine is fucking court-martialed, as is required by the UCMJ.
Were you oh sooOOOOoo indignant and whiney about Kerry running around
the jungle like Rambo shooting fleeing little teenaged "Gooks" in the
back? What a bunch of self-righteous hypocrites! You should be
ashamed of yourselves - or you would be if you had any shame left.
What do you suppose would have happened if the situation were
reversed? hmm, I wonder.
Do you think the terrorists would oblige by the UCMJ? NO! You stupid
shit, because they're fucking terrorists! they would have taken the
Marine hostage, bagged his head, tortured him, made him confess to all
sorts of bullshit, and if he was lucky, IF he was lucky, they would
use a *sharp* blade to cut his head off on videotape - and that's a
big fucking "IF", because if pussys you would bother to look up how
these terrorist bastards treat enemies, you would see that a couple of
bullets to the head is goddamn merciful treatment compared to the
torture, mutilation, and hacking at the throats that they perform on
their enemies. And not just soldiers; these sons of bitches kill any
and everyone they deem an enemy; women, children, contractors,
soldiers, AID providers, anyone.
Pussys like you are never happy - even if this piece of shit terrorist
were to have remained a POW, then what? Oh yeah, he would get the
best medical attention on the planet, he would end up in a cell
somewhere getting three square meals a day - and not just ANY fucking
meals! Oh nooOOoo, they get custom prepared terrorist-approved meals!
Because we have to make them comfortable don't we? - So let's also
give them nice clean cots and blankets to sleep on, a terrorist
approved Koran, and cute little prayer rugs so they can all be nice
and comfortable during their stay and get well prepared for when they
get released to go and fight and try to murder more innocent people.
He may have gotten all that, and you would STILL bitch about it!
"What about air conditioning?" "The poor prisoners are SO hot."
Boo-fuckin-hoo.
Fact is you should be thanking and praising this Marine for;
- For saving the American Tax Payer money in not supporting yet
another terrorist behind bars.
- For saving the American Tax Payer money by having the sense to kill
that animal and not allowing himself to be killed and wasting the
money used for his training and equipment.
- For saving his family from the grief of losing a son, father,
relative and friend.
- For saving his Military Brothers in Arms from the threat of harm and
possible death.
- And for saving innocent American Lives which may have been lost
should the terrorist animal he put down been allowed to live, fight
and murder another day.
So go whine to someone who gives a rat's ass; like fellow terrorists,
their supporters or the useless fucking French.
netuser
> "Docky Wocky" <mrc...@lst.net> posted <NLgmd.9496$d96.5276@trnddc01>
> in rec.arts.poems on Tue, 16 Nov 2004 06:04:29 GMT:
>
>
> what the insurgents are going to do to *our* wounded?
"Hey Dumb ass..." and what the fuck do you think they've BEEN doing
to "their wounded"?
Have you SEEN the terrorist POW camps? The terrorist hospitals with
"wounded" US Troops? I'm sure you have links to photos, websites, and
News Reports about the fine fucking care OUR boys are getting from the
terrorists - So go right ahead, please post your links. I can't wait
to see them. Dumbass.
~NortH~
"DropCloth" <dele...@gsiwave.com> wrote in message
news:419a5...@127.0.0.1...
"As of March 2003, the President of the US declared that the American
military would observe the Geneva Conventions with regard to the conflict
in Iraq."
please read up on it before making such a statement. Secondly,
> even though they do not, our forces operate under the conditions that
> DEMAND
> they be treated as if they did, no matter what their own behavior has been
> like. third, you are jumping to conclusions concerning the Marine
> involved
> without having any facts beyond a short video. Why not wait until the
> investigation is done before you decide this young Marine who has been
> risking his life should be drawn and quartered? How about due process and
> innocent until proven guilty? Why not hold your own judgments about the
> incident to these standards instead of condemning someone?
>
i have no problem with that.... but you seem to be missing the post that
started this thread... where it was said it did not matter... it was just
another *Pali* dead and they deserve to all be shot etc. etc. etc.
>>
>> I've also seen
>> > film of our guys going up to wounded insurgents and
>> > giving them medical treatment when there was a very good
>> > chance of those insurgents being booby trapped.
>>
>> which is what they are *supposed* to do.. not indescriminately murder for
>> the sake of killing... all prisoners of war are to be tried by proper and
>> legal means, not by some young kid swinging an AK47 who just happens to
>> be
>> in a pissy mood at the time.... you can not justify murder... and if you
> do,
>> then by that you also justify the actions of the suicide bombers and
>> terrorists... as the US military is acting no different.
>>
>
> Prisoners of war are not "tried". Our Marines do not use AK-47's. One
> Marine in a single incident (you say there are many but you offer no
> evidence) does not justify the terrorists/insurgents randomly shooting
> mortars into cities, kidnapping people, beheading them, torturing, etc.
> Nothing justifies that.
it is a war - it is all basically justified... but... being judge, jury and
executioner to what is being reported as an a person who was still alive,
but rendered no threat is inexcusable
> So, bottom line, wait for the fact of the incident to be investigated as a
> good, civilized person would do and when you do make statements try to get
> the facts you do have correct, it will make you sound like you actually
> know
> what you're talking about.
>
i have not had a problem with what you have stated, but you should, for your
own sake, go back and read the post that started this thread and then you
will get the gist of why it is going this way.
the post by Mr. Wizzard.
Dave
doing the correct thing during battle.
~NortH~
"netuser" <netuse...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:a622b668.0411...@posting.google.com...
> j...@untool.net (jet) wrote in message
> news:<RpCdnXAU-rC...@adelphia.com>...
>> In article <zYgmd.101777$R05.95681@attbi_s53>, "Mr Wizzard"
>> <w...@muffy-mail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > "SwiftB...@MoveOnForAmerica.org" <SwiftB...@mailinator.com> wrote
>> > in
>> > message news:d6e20f33.04111...@posting.google.com...
>> >
>> > > He said one marine noticed one of the prisoners was still breathing.
>> >
>> > Not no more!
>> >
>> > The guy could have been booby trapped.
>>
>> He wasn't booby trapped when the Marines shot him and left him there.
>
> Really? And why exactly would you suppose he was shot to begin with;
> selling flowers? breeding kittens? He WAS a goddamn terrorist you
> dumbass.
>
> This is war - is that word too big for you? It's only three letters,
> w-a-r.
> These aren't innocent civilians on their merry way to work in a couple
> of skyscrapers in New York; they're fucking terrorists. I know
> "terrorists" is a fairly long word for someone with your displayed
> Spell for help.
>
> You don't reason or bargain with terrorists, you kill them. This
> particular terrorist was supposed to be dead; the heroic Marine simply
> facilitated the matter.
fair enough... so then by *your* reasoning... since the US is in *their*
country and at war with them.... the same goes for them wounding American
Military persons and then coming back and shooting them and killing them...
because to them, the good ol' US of A are the terrorists and if we go by
your wisdom then they should be allowed to do the same and there should be
no outrage about it, like you advocate with this situation.
so - so try typing it into your Mattel Speak and
Spell for help
>
>> > The dude was there to get killed, and thats
>> > what he got - he got "dead". What the hell
>> > do they *expect*, the marines to cook them
>> > a hot meal?
>> >
>>
>> He was a wounded prisoner, waiting to be moved for medical attention.
>> I hope the Marine is fucking court-martialed, as is required by the UCMJ.
>
> Were you oh sooOOOOoo indignant and whiney about Kerry running around
> the jungle like Rambo shooting fleeing little teenaged "Gooks" in the
> back? What a bunch of self-righteous hypocrites! You should be
> ashamed of yourselves - or you would be if you had any shame left.
>
you would be kicking up quite a fuss if it were the other way around i
bet... but since it is just one of *them*... it doesn't matter huh?
> What do you suppose would have happened if the situation were
> reversed? hmm, I wonder.
> Do you think the terrorists would oblige by the UCMJ? NO! You stupid
> shit, because they're fucking terrorists! they would have taken the
> Marine hostage, bagged his head, tortured him, made him confess to all
> sorts of bullshit, and if he was lucky, IF he was lucky, they would
> use a *sharp* blade to cut his head off on videotape - and that's a
> big fucking "IF", because if pussys you would bother to look up how
> these terrorist bastards treat enemies, you would see that a couple of
> bullets to the head is goddamn merciful treatment compared to the
> torture, mutilation, and hacking at the throats that they perform on
> their enemies. And not just soldiers; these sons of bitches kill any
> and everyone they deem an enemy; women, children, contractors,
> soldiers, AID providers, anyone.
lead by example... ever heard of it?
being a nation of morals and njustice... is that *NOT* what the USA is?
or are they lowering themselves to the same standards as the terrorists?
yup... since it isn't an American we are talking about.. it doesn't matter.
it's a life plain and simple... and all persons deserve at least a semblance
of respect and decency - i'm sure if it were one of your family in the
position of that dead person, you would be whining and crying to beat all...
screaming for rights and justice... that is what i would call the perfect
definition of a hypocrite. you seem to fit that description very well.
jet
> The man should be proud of his actions. He deserves a promotion for
> doing the correct thing during battle.
Where are all you chickenshit chickenhawks coming from? You seem to have
crawled out of the woodwork since Bush was elected.
Odd that I've yet to see a real vet say it's correct to shoot an unarmed,
wounded prisoner. Whatdya say, Marines? Is that how it's done?
The Real Diddy Pop
> "SwiftB...@MoveOnForAmerica.org" <SwiftB...@mailinator.com> wrote in
> message news:d6e20f33.04111...@posting.google.com...
> > He said one marine noticed one of the prisoners was still breathing.
> >
> > prisoners in the mosque
> > A marine can be heard saying on the pool footage provided to Reuters
> > Television: "He's [expletive] faking he's dead. He faking he's
> > [expletive] dead."
> >
> > "The marine then raises his rifle and fires into the man's head. The
> > pictures are too graphic for us to broadcast," Sites said. No images
> > of the shooting were shown in the footage provided to Reuters.
> >
> > The report said the marine, who had returned to duty after being shot
> > in the face a day earlier, had been removed from the field and was
> > being questioned by the US military.
> >
> > Sites said the shot prisoner "did not appear to be armed or
> > threatening in any way".
> >
>
> And your point being? We the human race do this kind of shit. Every Where,
> Every Day.. You should be used to it by now it's been going on since the
> dawn of civilization..And It will continue... until we've raped this planet
> to a dead place. God I hope we don't get the technology to venture someplace
> else to keep this fucked up lineage going!
Do us a favor: quit whining and end your lineage if your so ashamed to be human.
Hank Ball
>
> Marines had left a group of
> prisoners in the mosque
> A marine can be heard saying on the pool footage provided to Reuters
> Television: "He's [expletive] faking he's dead. He faking he's
> [expletive] dead."
>
> "The marine then raises his rifle and fires into the man's head. The
> pictures are too graphic for us to broadcast," Sites said. No images
> of the shooting were shown in the footage provided to Reuters.
>
> The report said the marine, who had returned to duty after being shot
> in the face a day earlier, had been removed from the field and was
> being questioned by the US military.
>
> Sites said the shot prisoner "did not appear to be armed or
> threatening in any way".
>
> source: NBC news
Sounds just like what John F. Kerry did in Vietnam and was given a
Silver Star. Perhaps this marine needs to be decorated also.
hball
DeadMeat
I saw the film as well and there needs to be some severe looking into it.
Wonder why the Camera went blank but the voice continued at the point just
before the first shot was fired? We owe getting this straightened out to
ourselves.
jet
Spanky
> i have no problem with that.... but you seem to be missing the post that
> started this thread... where it was said it did not matter... it was just
> another *Pali* dead and they deserve to all be shot etc. etc. etc.
>
Thats why its called WAR.. The only way to ensure ones survival is to ensure
the enemy does not.
More than likely a video fake anyway set up and used for purpose to rattle
the insurgants. Just a reminder that we, the nice nice Americans are not so
far removed in attitude concerning dealing with an enemy. After all what
squad would allow an active camera in that situation. That film would be
toast in reality.
Just another dead Gook.. EOS
Mike P
"DeadMeat" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:cne0qn$rd9$1...@news.chatlink.com...
No one owes you anything except to kick your ass when they see you. You know
nothing about the Military, and esp.. Combat. Now go play with your self
somewhere else fake.
Mike
daryl hunt known also as deadshit, deadmeat, smellymeat is a Military
Imposter trying to pass himself off as Retired Air Force, and Navy Intel. A
simple google search will show what he is. A Fake.
I own you, and you wait on me.
Felmer
>
> "SwiftB...@MoveOnForAmerica.org" <SwiftB...@mailinator.com> wrote in
> message news:d6e20f33.04111...@posting.google.com...
> >
> > Marines had left a group of
> > prisoners in the mosque
> > A marine can be heard saying on the pool footage provided to Reuters
> > Television: "He's [expletive] faking he's dead. He faking he's
> > [expletive] dead."
> >
> > "The marine then raises his rifle and fires into the man's head. The
> > pictures are too graphic for us to broadcast," Sites said. No images
> > of the shooting were shown in the footage provided to Reuters.
> >
> > The report said the marine, who had returned to duty after being shot
> > in the face a day earlier, had been removed from the field and was
> > being questioned by the US military.
> >
> > Sites said the shot prisoner "did not appear to be armed or
> > threatening in any way".
> >
> > source: NBC news
>
> Every Day.. You should be used to it by now it's been going on since the
> dawn of civilization..And It will continue...
I guess that means we should excuse every crime that's ever committed,
and empty all the prisons. Hey, they only did what humans everywhere
always do anyway, right? Sure. Fuck it, just let everybody run rampant
and do whatever the hell they want, consequences be damned.
Felmer
> <silly stuff snipped>
>
> > >
> > >Oh, it keeps popping up from time to time, and our ancestors have always
> > >been able to keep it relatively in check by various techniques.
> > >
> > >Funny. Our best allies in this educational experience could be the
> Russians,
> > >who have vast experience in dealing best with moslem extremism.
> >
> >
> > what the insurgents are going to do to *our* wounded?
> >
> >
>
> treat our prisoners/wounded nice is false.
So what? How the US military acts reflects on the USA as a whole, and
affects how the rest of the world (and history) views the whole country.
If the US soldiers treat people humanely and IAW the laws of war -- even
if the enemy treats US soldiers like complete shit -- then it makes US
soldiers (and by extension the whole USA) look like saints while making
the enemy look like shit. On the other hand, resorting to abhorrent
behavior like that used by the enemy just drops US soldiers to their
level and makes all Americans look like assholes in the eyes of the
world.
Yes, that's right: When people everywhere see shit like that on the TV
or read about in a newspaper, they think of YOU as a terroristic asshole
just because you're the same nationality as the soldier in the story
(regardless of what he did was legally justified or not).
Thus endeth your lesson in international relations, DUMBASS.
jet
>
> "DeadMeat" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:cne0qn$rd9$1...@news.chatlink.com...
> >
> > "jet" <j...@untool.net> wrote in message
> > news:1J6dndmns-5...@adelphia.com...
> >> In article <1df8243a.0411...@posting.google.com>,
> >> someda...@hotmail.com (Dave) wrote:
> >> > The man should be proud of his actions. He deserves a promotion for
> >> > doing the correct thing during battle.
> >>
> >> Where are all you chickenshit chickenhawks coming from? You seem to have
> >> crawled out of the woodwork since Bush was elected.
> >>
> >> Odd that I've yet to see a real vet say it's correct to shoot an unarmed,
> >> wounded prisoner. Whatdya say, Marines? Is that how it's done?
> >
> > I saw the film as well and there needs to be some severe looking into it.
> > Wonder why the Camera went blank but the voice continued at the point just
> > before the first shot was fired? We owe getting this straightened out to
> > ourselves.
> >
>
> No one owes you anything except to kick your ass when they see you. You know
> nothing about the Military, and esp.. Combat. Now go play with your self
> somewhere else fake.
>
wounded or not? What about civilians? Kill 'em and let god sort it out?
gaffo
> hev sez:
>
> "You blame it on "being human'!! You fucking schmuck..."
> ______________________________
> Liberal tear-jerkers will always side with the son of a bitches. It is a
> safe corallary in our modern world that assholes will tend to support
> assholes - even if they have absolutely nothing in common.
>
> Case in Point: Western liberal left-wingers cannot believe the
> fundamentalist moslem nut cases they have made the conscious decision to
> support have nothing in common with Western liberal left-wing assholes.
>
> Fundamentalist moslem assholes have made it very clear that they are only
> interested in slaughtering anything remotely Western. This includes Western
> liberal assholes.
>
> As usual, our Western liberal assholes have made the mistake of believing
> islamic fundametalists can peacefully co-exist with the finest Western
> liberal asshole psychologies.
>
> It is going to take another serious culling of the gene pool to eliminate
> this automatic tendency toward self-destruction again.
>
> Oh, it keeps popping up from time to time, and our ancestors have always
> been able to keep it relatively in check by various techniques.
>
> Funny. Our best allies in this educational experience could be the Russians,
> who have vast experience in dealing best with moslem extremism.
I guess we just have higher standards of conduct for American Soldiers
than you do.
Guys like you always strive for the lowest moral standards.
Result is your side is no better that those they are killing.
Give Himmler my regards.
--
If the jury feels the law is unjust, we recognize the undisputed power
of the jury to acquit, even if its verdict is contrary to the law as
given by a judge, and contrary to the evidence...If the jury feels that
the law under which the defendant is accused is unjust, or that exigent
circumstances justified the actions of the accused, or for any reason
which appeals to their logic or passion, the jury has the power to
acquit, and the courts must abide by that decision.
4th Circuit Court of Appeals, United States v. Moylan, 1969
[The jury has an] unreviewable and irreversible power...to acquit in
disregard of the instructions on the law given by the trial judge...The
pages of history shine on instances of the jury's exercise of its
prerogative to disregard uncontradicted evidence and instructions of the
judge; for example, acquittals under the fugitive slave law.
D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, Unites States v. Dougherty, 1972
It is not only [the juror's] right, but his duty...to find the verdict
according to his own best understanding, judgment, and conscience,
though in direct opposition to the directionof the court.
John Adams, 1771
.....it is usual for the jurors to decide the fact, and to refer the law
arising on it to the decision of the judges. But this division of the
subject lies with their discretion only. And if the question relate to
any point of public liberty, or if it be one of those in which the
judges may be suspected of bias, the jury undertake to decide both law
and fact.
Thomas Jefferson, "Notes on Virginia," 1782
It is presumed, that juries are the best judges of facts; it is, on the
other hand,presumed that courts are the best judges of law. But still
both objects are within your power of decision.....you have a right to
take it upon yourselves to judge of both,and to determine the law as
well as the fact in controversy.
Chief Justice John Jay, Georgia v. Brailsford, 1794
Jurors should acquit, even against the judge's instruction...if
exercising their judgement with discretion and honesty they have a clear
conviction that the charge of the court is wrong.
Alexander Hamilton, 1804
The jury has the power to bring a verdict in the teeth of both the law
and the facts.
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Horning v. District of Columbia, 1920
gaffo
> "DropCloth" <dele...@gsiwave.com> posted <419a2...@127.0.0.1> in
> rec.arts.poems on Tue, 16 Nov 2004 10:54:48 -0500:
>
>
>><silly stuff snipped>
>>
>>>>Oh, it keeps popping up from time to time, and our ancestors have always
>>>>been able to keep it relatively in check by various techniques.
>>>>
>>>>Funny. Our best allies in this educational experience could be the
>>
>>Russians,
>>
>>>>who have vast experience in dealing best with moslem extremism.
>>>
>>>
>>>Hey Dumb ass...if we start summarily executing their wounded guess
>>>what the insurgents are going to do to *our* wounded?
>>>
>>>Obviously you don't know fuck about the military and military law.
>>>
>>
>>1) The argument that if we treat terrorist prisoners/wounded nice they will
>>treat our prisoners/wounded nice is false. You need only look back at the
>>contractors killed and hung in Fallugha to see how terrorists treat
>>prisoners. Of course you could also look at all of the people they have
>>beheaded as well. So, while in a country vs country conflict that idea
>>applies, when dealing with terrorists it does not.
>
>
> SO that makes it A-OK for us to act like barbarous fuckheads just like
> the terrorists.
> The Geneva convention and the UCMJ don't mean a damn thing?
> Their terrorists and they wouldn't give us the time of day so we
> should treat them exactly how they treat us...Right?
>
> Should we start flying passenger airliners into Mecca tomorrow?
>
> From what I understand this guy was hit by a sniper in the face the
> day before...so maybe he was a bit off when he did this. If he was
> mentally unstable then that is a poor reflection upon his chain of
> command because he should never had been put back in the line if he
> was unstable.
>
>
>>2) As far as military law goes, at this point you have no idea what the
>>actual circumstances were in this incident so making any judgments about
>>guilt or innocent are way too premature.
>
>
> I dunno...They have the Marine in custody. That's certainly has to
> portend something.
>
>
>>The only evidence presented is
>>that of a reporter and we all know how unbiased reporters are when they have
>>a chance to break a name making story. How much information has been left
>>out (if any), what happened just prior to and just after this 10 second
>>little film clip?
>
>
> It really doesn't matter....if the Marine shot a wounded, unarmed man
> then he's no better than the SS troopers that had all that fun at
> Malmedy.
>
>
>>3) If this Marine did shoot an unarmed, wounded prisoner with no
>>justification then his command and the UCMJ
>
> <snip hypocrisy>
>
> Didn't you write in the beginning of your response....
> "The argument that if we treat terrorist prisoners/wounded nice they
> will treat our prisoners/wounded nice is false.... So, while in a
> country vs country conflict that idea applies, when dealing with
> terrorists it does not."
>
> Therefore...according to your first statement the UCMJ doesn't apply.
>
> He's a member of the Armed Forces of The United States.
> His actions reflect poorly upon all past and present members.
> His actions reflect poorly upon the citizens of the United States and
> the government of the United States.
>
> If anything The United States Armed Forces should be held to a higher
> standard. Trying to justify any summary execution of anyone on the
> battlefield by rationalizing it as "just a terrorist" and "standard
> Geneva Convention/UCMJ doesn't apply because they are terrorists" is
> bullshit. That is not what our Armed Forces are about and it certainly
> isn't what the US is about.
>
> And I am no bleeding heart liberal...I am a Vet.
>
>
>
> --
> K. A. Cannon
> kcannon at insurgent dot org
> (change the orgy to org to reply)
>
> http://www.insurgent.org - Sponsored by Carlyle Group
>
> Try not to let your mind wander...
> It is too small and fragile to be out by itself.
>
> On Tue, 27 May 2003 12:19:08 I was Wollkooked:
>
> This spammer is full of shit. Get out of my mail or face legal action.
> I have no such email addresses listed nor would I remove them if I did. The
> spammer in question is a spammer--that's it, he has harassed and defamed me
> and my companies for 7 years now and I really don't care what you want.
> The ISP sending me this threat is hosting a defamation website that is
> being sued and will be removed from the net+ damages. <boink>--I have
> already requested at least THREE times that this abuser cease and desist
> mailing me, therefore I ask that you take action to kill this offending
> account immediately.
Well said Sir!
We need more of folks of your character and less Nazis in this land of
ours ;-/.
Mike P
Where do I stand? As a Combat Vet with more than twenty years in the Army I
would stand ten feet back, and say I wasn't there. Then wait for the
investigation to figure it out. I would blame no one or shoot my mouth off
unless I was right there at that time and place. As far as Combat it depends
on the factors. How long with out sleep or rest. How heavy was the fighting,
does the person have an weapon or act like they do. Does the person react
fast or slow. Is the person facing me or away from me, and is his arms up or
down. There is no cut and dryed in combat. Just the old soldier, and those
getting older by the minute. Remember you have a split second to make a
judgement call before you or someone else may be killed. Can you make the
wrong call? Sure, but remember he had to make it faster than the blink of an
eye, and this is a war zone.
Mike
Felmer
>
> getting older by the minute. Remember you have a split second to make a
> judgement call before you or someone else may be killed. Can you make the
> wrong call? Sure, but remember he had to make it faster than the blink of an
> eye
Yeah, because that wounded soldier had the reflexes of a cat and a mind
like a steel trap, huh? Those guys can bleed and cry and just lay
there, but we all know they're capable of unleashing instant death if
they want to. You betcha.
> and this is a war zone.
War zone? I thought Bush officially declared an end to hostilities a
long time ago. "Mission accomplished," he said.
gaffo
nope - WMD was the ONLY reason for war.
........you a Rushbot?
> They conveniently
> forget the 1991 cease fire agreement and all of the violations that in and
> of themselves were enough to make this a "legitimate" war,
those violations were never stated for the case for War - only a
JUSTIFICATION AFTER THE INVASION.
I false and UnConstitutional justification - in direct violation of
International Law and Article 6 of the United States Constitution.
Since only the UN has the authority to enforce her own resolutions.
Unilateral and un sanctioned enforcement of UN resolutions by a UN
member is a violation of Law. (both International and US)
> they forget the
> 17 UN resolutions that he routinely violated,
Israel has violated more. When do we invade Israel?
- really the number of UN res violations is a pathetic defense, and when
Reichbots use it and then claim the UN is irrelivant in the same
breath........such hypocracy turns my stomach.
> they want to ignore that
> Saddam paid money to the families of terrorists and harbored several well
> known and internationally wanted terrorists in his country,
so? - no threat to the US and no link to 911........do try to stay on
target doofus.
> they ignore the
> fact that the level of mass killings under Saddam's rule reached the level
> of genocide (hmm sound like Milosovich?) and on and on and on.
............irrelivant if the events occured 20 FUCKING YEARS AGO -
.......why didn't you Reichwingers scream and howel when REAGAN gave him
the means to kill DURING HIS WATCH!!!!!!!!!!!
IDIOT!!!!! and HYPOCRITE!
or do you beleive in bodily resurrection?............while why have they
not been resurrected?
> As for 51% of Americans having trouble with truth and facts, well, the other
> 49% are entitled to their opinions. The difference is that I don't try to
> force them to believe the way I do, nor do I call them names because they do
> not have the same opinions I do.
no you just have a brown limberger nose from not thinking for yourself
in years.
all your talking points are Limberger verbatum.
> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
> ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
--
gaffo
your defense of Nazism would not put you in the "civilized" catagory of men.
~NortH~
"Felmer" <fel...@lamp.stand> wrote in message
news:text23...@lamps.network.domain...
exactly what i have been thinking and trying to get across... but to no
avail... and the biggest problem and reason it doesn't get across has been
proven now to be very simple... it is basic and complete racism... "the
raghead deserved it" and comments like that - because of *who* they are and
where they live etc. they are worth less and it is no different than
shooting rats in the subway.
personally i think that first and foremost they are humans doing what they
believe and fighting for what they believe.. same as what the USA is
doing... who is right and wrong all depends on which side of teh fence you
sit on i guess.
but without a discussion of right and wrong.. they are humans and have a
right to be treated fairly and humanely under the Geneva Convention and the
Laws of War. Indescriminate assassination and rogue justice is against all
the laws and rules and completely inhumane.. and the light it sheds on teh
US is not a very good one... there have been enough black marks already...
the US is becoming as much a terrorist group over there as the people they
are at war with.
battle not with monsters, lest you become the monster
gaffo
> j...@untool.net (jet) wrote in message news:<RpCdnXAU-rC...@adelphia.com>...
>
>>In article <zYgmd.101777$R05.95681@attbi_s53>, "Mr Wizzard" <w...@muffy-mail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>"SwiftB...@MoveOnForAmerica.org" <SwiftB...@mailinator.com> wrote in
>>>message news:d6e20f33.04111...@posting.google.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>>He said one marine noticed one of the prisoners was still breathing.
>>>
>>>Not no more!
>>>
>>>The guy could have been booby trapped.
>>
>>He wasn't booby trapped when the Marines shot him and left him there.
>
>
> Really? And why exactly would you suppose he was shot to begin with;
> selling flowers? breeding kittens?
irrelivant.
only thing relivant is course of action when man was found wounded and
unarmed.
> He WAS
so? - no shit sherlock! WTF do you think he was shot in the first place?
irrelivant........see above.
> a goddamn terrorist you
> dumbass.
Dumbass? - no, that is YOURSELF! there is no evidence that the man
illegally murdered by the USSR Nazi Marine was a "terrorist".
repeat - only a fool like you thinks that anyone who shoots at illegally
occupying thugs are all "terrorists".
> This is war - is that word too big for you? It's only three letters,
> w-a-r.
no, it is Occupation. Only "War" in Iraq is one of our own making.
> These aren't innocent civilians on their merry way to work in a couple
> of skyscrapers in New York; they're fucking terrorists.
idiot. most likely they were civilians, until the USSA Stormtroopers
illegally invaded their land, and squatted in it.
I know
> "terrorists" is a fairly long word for someone with your displayed
> lack of intelligence – so try typing it into your Mattel Speak and
> Spell for help.
Very few "terrorists" in Fallugah brickbrain.
> You don't reason or bargain with terrorists, you kill them.
indeed - so why the fuck are we in Iraq?
> This
> particular terrorist was supposed to be dead; the heroic Marine simply
> facilitated the matter.
No terrorist in that room - just a Nazi thug Marine.
> What do you suppose would have happened if the situation were
> reversed? hmm, I wonder.
relivance? none.
We hold ourselves to a higher standard - not because it is easy, but
because it is honourable.
but what would a thug like you know of honour?
> Do you think the terrorists would oblige by the UCMJ? NO!
nope. relivance?........none - except you emmulate the terrorist's moral
standards.
make America proud!
> You stupid
> shit, because they're fucking terrorists! they would have taken the
> Marine hostage, bagged his head, tortured him, made him confess to all
> sorts of bullshit, and if he was lucky, IF he was lucky, they would
> use a *sharp* blade to cut his head off on videotape - and that's a
> big fucking "IF", because if pussys you would bother to look up how
> these terrorist bastards treat enemies, you would see that a couple of
> bullets to the head is goddamn merciful treatment compared to the
> torture, mutilation, and hacking at the throats that they perform on
> their enemies. And not just soldiers; these sons of bitches kill any
> and everyone they deem an enemy; women, children, contractors,
> soldiers, AID providers, anyone.
again - irrelivant, since we are better than them AND since the man
killed by the Nazi Marine was most probably not a Terrorist.
why do you talk about these Terrorists so much? Do you worship them or
some sick thing like that? You seem to want to be just like them.
There you go again - talking about these Terrorists (relivance to the
murder?). If you want to be like them so much, why don't you just go out
and blow away some Ragheads in your hometown.
It'll make you feel better and your heros will take notice of your moral
standards are their own.
Have fun killing, jackass.
Billzz
This situation does not need sarcasm. It is not good for anyone and
detracts from understanding.
I was on the DMZ in Korea well after they had declared an end to
hostilities, and the 1st Cavalry Division lost 13 KIA in the year I was
there and when I got back to the states no one had heard of any of it.
In Vietnam I was on over fifty ground operations (and another fifty air
operations) and went to known Vietcong villages, where once a booby trap
went off and we were milliseconds from a "mad minute." I had my hands out,
palms down, meaning, not yet, waiting for one second, two seconds, nothing.
It was a shotgun shell, planted in the ground, in front of a Buddist shrine,
and as intended, drew in one of the curious soldiers, who lost some toes,
and we almost wasted a village.
And what of this Marine? Was he well-rested? How much sleep had he had.
He was shot in the face the previous day. Was he spooky?
Have you been on a combat operation with someone who is spooky? I have.
They are on a hair-trigger. Their eyes constantly move. They drum ther
fingers on their weapon. As someone once said, in another time, "I do not
know if he scares the enemy, but he sure scares the hell out of me."
I knew a sergeant who received the Medal of Honor from President Reagan. I
watched as the president pinned on the medal. But I could see in the
sergeant's eyes the "thousand-yard stare" and I knew that he was not there.
If you have not been there you are not qualified to judge anything. You
think that you are, but you are not. That is all I have to say.
gaffo
> "~NortH~" <no...@south.east.west> wrote in message
> news:RFqmd.23501$Ho4.8...@news20.bellglobal.com...
>
>>"thereactionary" <thereac...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>news:831523e4.04111...@posting.google.com...
>>
>>>SwiftB...@mailinator.com (SwiftB...@MoveOnForAmerica.org) wrote in
>>>message news:<d6e20f33.04111...@posting.google.com>...
>>>
> Convention, please read up on it before making such a statement. Secondly,
> even though they do not, our forces operate under the conditions that DEMAND
> they be treated as if they did, no matter what their own behavior has been
> like. third, you are jumping to conclusions concerning the Marine involved
> without having any facts beyond a short video. Why not wait until the
> investigation is done before you decide this young Marine who has been
> risking his life should be drawn and quartered? How about due process and
> innocent until proven guilty? Why not hold your own judgments about the
> incident to these standards instead of condemning someone?
>
>
>> I've also seen
>>
>>>film of our guys going up to wounded insurgents and
>>>giving them medical treatment when there was a very good
>>>chance of those insurgents being booby trapped.
>>
>>which is what they are *supposed* to do.. not indescriminately murder for
>>the sake of killing... all prisoners of war are to be tried by proper and
>>legal means, not by some young kid swinging an AK47 who just happens to be
>>in a pissy mood at the time.... you can not justify murder... and if you
>
> do,
>
>>then by that you also justify the actions of the suicide bombers and
>>terrorists... as the US military is acting no different.
>>
>
>
> Prisoners of war are not "tried". Our Marines do not use AK-47's. One
> Marine in a single incident (you say there are many but you offer no
> evidence) does not justify the terrorists/insurgents randomly shooting
> mortars into cities, kidnapping people, beheading them, torturing, etc.
> Nothing justifies that.
> So, bottom line, wait for the fact of the incident to be investigated as a
> good, civilized person would do and when you do make statements try to get
> the facts you do have correct, it will make you sound like you actually know
> what you're talking about.
>
>
>
>
> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
> ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
why do Nazi always use the Senator Imhofe moral rule:
"We are better than Saddam - so shut the fuck up"
why do you sir - lower the American Moral Standard to that of the
Terorist Moral Standard?
You and Imhofe are thugs.
Many Americans beleive in following the Highest Moral Standards, and if
we cannot - we end the War by leaving (instead of losing our Soul as a
Nation).
give Himmler my regards chump.
Vampi Fangs
wrote:
>"Vampi Fangs" <va...@nwglfo.org> wrote in message
>news:65ckp05rlq5jc2s66...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 10:54:48 -0500, "DropCloth" <dele...@gsiwave.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> ><silly stuff snipped>
>> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Oh, it keeps popping up from time to time, and our ancestors have
>always
>> >> >been able to keep it relatively in check by various techniques.
>> >> >
>> >> >Funny. Our best allies in this educational experience could be the
>> >Russians,
>> >> >who have vast experience in dealing best with moslem extremism.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Hey Dumb ass...if we start summarily executing their wounded guess
>> >> what the insurgents are going to do to *our* wounded?
>> >>
>> >> Obviously you don't know fuck about the military and military law.
>> >>
>> >
>> >1) The argument that if we treat terrorist prisoners/wounded nice they
>will
>> >treat our prisoners/wounded nice is false. You need only look back at
>the
>> >contractors killed and hung in Fallugha to see how terrorists treat
>> >prisoners.
>>
>> another stupid septic git who doesn't remember that the above
>> contractors were killed and hung in fallujah in retaliation for dumb
>> fucken yanks on the 28th April, 2003, firing into a group of 200
>> unarmed civilians including children protesting other dumb fucken
>> yanks occupying said children's school
>
>Ah yes, so eloquently put that it makes your point worthless. If you can't
>figure out how to speak in a civilized manner don't expect anyone to treat
>you with civility.
noted that you choose to dodge the point
you made the wild statement that "if we treat terrorist
prisoners/wounded nice they will treat our prisoners/wounded nice is
false. You need only look back at the contractors killed and hung in
Fallugha to see how terrorists treat prisoners."
if you bothered to apply your 'logic' honestly, you would realise that
to understand the killing of the military contractors, you need only
look back at the innocent people gunned down in Fallujah in April 2003
to see how yank terrorists treat those they occupy
git it?
--
V--V
http://www.intellnet.org/resources/american_terrorism/index.html
"I believe that if we had and would keep our dirty, bloody, dollar
soaked fingers out of the business of these [Third World] nations so
full of depressed, exploited people, they will arrive at a solution of
their own. And if unfortunately their revolution must be of the
violent type because the "haves" refuse to share with the "have-nots"
by any peaceful method, at least what they get will be their own, and
not the American style, which they don't want and above all don't want
crammed down their throats by Americans."
General David Sharp, former United States Marine Commandant, 1966
la n.
So well stated. Even I, as a civilian who watched the video
several times could not feel malice for that young Marine nor
judge him strongly for his act. Who is to say how any one of
us would act after several hours of persistent unrelenting
battle trauma.
I feel the same way about this incident as I did during the
so-called "mutiny" of some weeks ago. It does no good to
rush to judgement, much less make it a political issue,
before a comprehensive investigation is completed.
Whether or not this young marine is indicted for this act,
he will never be the same fellow as he was when he "signed
up".
- nilita
Vampi Fangs
wrote:
>"Vampi Fangs" <va...@nwglfo.org> wrote in message
>news:65ckp05rlq5jc2s66...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 10:54:48 -0500, "DropCloth" <dele...@gsiwave.com>
>> wrote:
>Ah yes, so eloquently put that it makes your point worthless. If you can't
>figure out how to speak in a civilized manner don't expect anyone to treat
>you with civility.
>In any case, your tit for tat reasoning is both childish and nonproductive,
>just look at the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Who shot the first person
>that resulted in someone else retaliating that continued until no one can
>remember who started what with whom.
>But your language still says it all. Obviously an intelligent, well read
>and worldly wise person. By the way, can you spell sarcasm?
>
>>
><snipped due to useless swearing>
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=583322
"The footage showed several Marines with a group of prisoners who were
either lying on the floor or propped against a wall of the bombed-out
building. One Marine can be heard declaring that one of the prisoners
was faking his injuries.
"He's fucking faking he's dead. He faking he's fucking dead," says the
Marine. At that point a clatter of gunfire can be heard as one of the
Marines shoots the prisoner. Another voice can then be heard saying:
"He's dead now.""
Captain Compassion
And the Marine that fired did the right thing. The first
responsibility of a soldier in battle is to neutralize threat. Would
you be willing to risk your life and those of your fellows on the bet
that the combatant didn't have a gun or explosives under that blanket?
He should get at least a Silver Star. Kerry did for doing the same
fucking thing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Why would I listen to losers?" -- Arnold Schwarzenegger
"Long term commitment in relationships is only necessary because it takes
so damn long to raise children. Marriage may well be some kind of trick
to keep the males around beyond sexual satiation." -- Captain Compassion
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
res0...@NOSPAMverizon.net
Vampi Fangs
the first responsibility of a soldier (of a civilised country) is to
adhere to the Geneva Conventions
>Would
>you be willing to risk your life and those of your fellows on the bet
>that the combatant didn't have a gun or explosives under that blanket?
>
>He should get at least a Silver Star. Kerry did for doing the same
>fucking thing.
PPOSTFU and i want a reliable source, thank you
Captain Compassion
NO!
>>Would
>>you be willing to risk your life and those of your fellows on the bet
>>that the combatant didn't have a gun or explosives under that blanket?
>>
>>He should get at least a Silver Star. Kerry did for doing the same
>>fucking thing.
>
>PPOSTFU and i want a reliable source, thank you
Read his fucking book.
Felmer
no...@south.east.west says...
The problem is that this pisses off people in Muslim countries that see
it or hear about it. Piss off enough of those people, and some of them
will choose to support al Qaeda and other terrorist networks.
(Remember, OBL and his global asshole network is still alive and well.
The whole Iraq thing hasn't changed that.)
Felmer
billzz...@starband.net says...
> >
> >> and this is a war zone.
> >
> > War zone? I thought Bush officially declared an end to hostilities a
> > long time ago. "Mission accomplished," he said.
>
> This situation does not need sarcasm. It is not good for anyone and
> detracts from understanding.
That wasn't sarcasm.
Mr Wizzard
> In article <zYgmd.101777$R05.95681@attbi_s53>, "Mr Wizzard"
<w...@muffy-mail.com> wrote:
> >
> > "SwiftB...@MoveOnForAmerica.org" <SwiftB...@mailinator.com> wrote
in
> > message news:d6e20f33.04111...@posting.google.com...
> >
> > > He said one marine noticed one of the prisoners was still breathing.
> >
> > Not no more!
> >
> > The guy could have been booby trapped.
>
> He wasn't booby trapped when the Marines shot him and left him there.
He didn't know that - how was he to know that?
The marines are there to kill insurgents, this isn't
Romper Room. Just next door, the insurgents
that escape fire take the weapons from the dead,
and dieing, bobby trap the dead, and move on to
the next building - thats that they do.
>
> > The dude was there to get killed, and thats
> > what he got - he got "dead". What the hell
> > do they *expect*, the marines to cook them
> > a hot meal?
> >
>
> He was a wounded prisoner, waiting to be moved for medical attention.
> I hope the Marine is fucking court-martialed, as is required by the UCMJ.
Why? - because your liberal-commy ass is
crying inside for the insurgent(s) that was shooting
at our marines. You sick fuck. The only mistake
made was by the FIRST marines that went thru
and didn't fully do the job and completly killing him.
These aren't people who were surrendering, these
are militants that are fighting to their death to kill
the marines, and other Iraq's, if anything, we are
doing the fuckers a favor in getting them to see
Ala quicker. And no more brovo's for the fucker
who failed to finish him off the FIRST go-around.
Mr Wizzard
"gaffo" <ga...@usenet.net> wrote in message
news:cVxmd.30236$bP2....@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...
> K. A. Cannon wrote:
> > Should we start flying passenger airliners into Mecca tomorrow?
I think that would be effective. Maybe even the Concord.
If anything, it would give the poor Pali's a chance to visit
Mecca where they were never able to visit there before.
Billzz
"Felmer" <fel...@lamp.stand> wrote in message
You cut everything that I said. Have you been in combat?
Here is what I said....
This situation does not need sarcasm. It is not good for anyone and
detracts from understanding.
I was on the DMZ in Korea well after they had declared an end to
Colin Campbell
wrote:
>So well stated. Even I, as a civilian who watched the video
>several times could not feel malice for that young Marine nor
>judge him strongly for his act. Who is to say how any one of
>us would act after several hours of persistent unrelenting
>battle trauma.
The thing that will make this case so hard to judge are the Marine's
comments that indicate that he felt that the person he shot was a
threat.
--
"Saddam was found cowering in his little hole
in the ground. Supposedly, his goal was to remain
in hiding until all the shooting stopped. Well,
hey, it worked for the French." Jay Leno
Vampi Fangs
<res0...@NOSPAMverizon.net> wrote:
i await your direct quote proving your accusation
DropCloth
> In article <419a4...@127.0.0.1>, "DropCloth" <dele...@gsiwave.com>
wrote:
>
> > these terrorists/insurgents. For another, you are assuming that the
Geneva
> > Convention applies, which in the case of terrorists/insurgents, it does
not.
>
> As of March 2003, the President of the US declared that the American
> military would observe the Geneva Conventions with regard to the conflict
> in Iraq.
Yes, we have agreed, as we always do to observe the Geneva convention, even
if the combatants involved do not fall under the definitions in the
convention itself, which, in this case they do not. That does not obviate
that they do not fall under the convention, it just is more evidence that
the US isn't the evil monster that people like to try and paint it as.
LibsDruwl
"DropCloth" <the...@mail.clis.com> wrote in message
news:419b3f25$1...@127.0.0.1...
>
> "jet" <j...@untool.net> wrote in message
> news:wLednRWqx88...@adelphia.com...
>> In article <419a4...@127.0.0.1>, "DropCloth" <dele...@gsiwave.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> > these terrorists/insurgents. For another, you are assuming that the
> Geneva
>> > Convention applies, which in the case of terrorists/insurgents, it does
> not.
>>
>> As of March 2003, the President of the US declared that the American
>> military would observe the Geneva Conventions with regard to the conflict
>> in Iraq.
>
> Yes, we have agreed, as we always do to observe the Geneva convention,
> even
> if the combatants involved do not fall under the definitions in the
> convention itself, which, in this case they do not. That does not obviate
> that they do not fall under the convention, it just is more evidence that
> the US isn't the evil monster that people like to try and paint it as.
The drooling libruls apparently remain ignorant that said "combatant" was
out of uniform and thus did not fall under the rules of the Geneva
convention pertaining to wartime combatants.
Three cheers for that brave Marine who shot that MFer dead, thereby saving
the rest of his platoon from possible ambush!!!
DropCloth
> >>Now lets assume they found WMD, or proof that Iraq had a link to the
9/11
> >>attacks then this conquest would be a justified "War" and have
legitimacy
> >
> > in
> >
> >>the world...
> >>
> >>...but 51% of Americans get confused with the "truth" and "facts"!
> >>
> >
> >
> > Unfortunately, the whole point of an "assumption" is that it makes an
ass of
> > u and me and is totally worthless unless you get lucky. I am willing to
> > admit that my "assumption" above is nothing more than a possibiliy (even
a
> > fantasy), but those who are so quick to judge the guilt of this Marine
> > refuse to see that they are doing so based solely on an assumption that
has
> > no more validity than the fantasy I put forth.
> >
> > As for WMD and a legitimate war...remember (as so many who oppose the
war
> > have forgotten) that WMD was only ONE reason for the war.
>
>
>
>
> nope - WMD was the ONLY reason for war.
>
> ........you a Rushbot?
No actually I am just a person who like to point out facts to those who
refuse to listen. Check the news articles and the stories leading up to the
war and to Collin Powell's statements before the UN. Also read the various
speaches by the President and by members of Congress and you will see that
there were a variety of reasons for removing Saddam Hussein from power given
PRIOR to going to war. The fact that the media focused n on WMD and the
administration later (as we got closer to war) went along down that path
with more emphasis does not negate the FACT that many other reasons existed
AND were articulated prior to the invasion of Iraq.
Now, if you want to believe that WMD was the only reason for going to war
and it was the only reason given then you are simply ignoring the facts and
refusing to see the truth which makes you deaf and dumb as a post.
>
>
>
>
> > They conveniently
> > forget the 1991 cease fire agreement and all of the violations that in
and
> > of themselves were enough to make this a "legitimate" war,
>
> those violations were never stated for the case for War - only a
> JUSTIFICATION AFTER THE INVASION.
They were stated before the UN by President Bush and were stated many times
as a reason by the Defense Department. Don't you remember all of the video
of Iraqi SAMs shooting at aircraft that were shown prior to the war? Those
were not attempts to describe the SAMs as WMD, they were pointing out the
violation of the no-fly zone and the 1991 cease fire agreement.
>
> I false and UnConstitutional justification - in direct violation of
> International Law and Article 6 of the United States Constitution.
>
> Since only the UN has the authority to enforce her own resolutions.
>
> Unilateral and un sanctioned enforcement of UN resolutions by a UN
> member is a violation of Law. (both International and US)
Please provide the chapter of the UN charter that you are refering to.
Also, the resolution WAS passed that called for "serious consequences" if
Iraq did not comply, which they did not. Now, since there's not a single,
upstanding politician at the UN who would be willing to say something like
"if you don't comply we will use military force to either make you comply or
remove you from power", "serious consequences" is about as strong a phrase
as they will ever use. Consider that with Darfur they argued that even
threatenting the threat of sanctions was too strong to put into a
resolution.
>
> > they forget the
> > 17 UN resolutions that he routinely violated,
>
> Israel has violated more. When do we invade Israel?
Typical misdirection. If you want to discuss Israel, then fine, start a
topic on it and we can run through the entire history of why's, who's,
wherefore's, etc. Throwing it in as part of this arguement is just like
saying "why don't we invade N. Korea, Iran, Cuba, Sudan, etrc. etc. etc."
You argue that you feel one war is illigitimate and try to make your point
by asking why we don't have a dozen wars going on at the same time. The rea
son you don't is becasue every situation is different and requires an
individual approach. From the way you asked if I was in the Bush camp I
assume you are not, which makes me wonder if you are in the party that
espouses so much individual freedom, but when you argue, you refuse to
consider individual situations.
>
> - really the number of UN res violations is a pathetic defense, and when
> Reichbots use it and then claim the UN is irrelivant in the same
> breath........such hypocracy turns my stomach.
First, I am not a "bot" of any kind since I am not spouting some kind of
party line but am simply putting forth facts and personal opinions.
Secondly, I never said the UN was irrelivant. Personal opinion about the UN
however is that they have lost most of their credibility in the world.
That's why in Bosnia the local forces just marched in past UN peace keepers
and took back their armored vehicles when they decided they wanted them and
in Africa time and again peace keepers are either ignored at best or
kidnapped at worst. People do not respect the blue helmets because they
know they have no power or authority to enforce anything.
>
> > they want to ignore that
> > Saddam paid money to the families of terrorists and harbored several
well
> > known and internationally wanted terrorists in his country,
>
> so? - no threat to the US and no link to 911........do try to stay on
> target doofus.
Terrorism IS part of the topic no matter how much you think you can ignore
or dismiss it by calling people names. Do you really believe that Hammas
and Hezbulah operate in a total vaccuum with no contacts to other terrorist
organizations? Are you one of those people who believe that Al Queda is the
only terrorist group in the world? Let me remind you that Al Queda is not
even a terrorist "group". It is in fact a loose collection of cooperating
groups that has ties into dozens of different and individual terrorist
organizations. It provides money, training and some direction to these
other organizations with it's "leadership".
>
> > they ignore the
> > fact that the level of mass killings under Saddam's rule reached the
level
> > of genocide (hmm sound like Milosovich?) and on and on and on.
>
> ............irrelivant if the events occured 20 FUCKING YEARS AGO -
> .......why didn't you Reichwingers scream and howel when REAGAN gave him
> the means to kill DURING HIS WATCH!!!!!!!!!!!
The slaughter of the Shiite muslims in the south occured in 1991-92. The
killings of entire families and the rape and torture of families continued
to occur right up until the invasion of Iraq. Fo all you know I DID
complain during the Reagen years and the Bush Sr. years AND the Clinton
years. In fact when I was surge deployed when Clniton decided to start
lobbing some cruise missiles around you can bet I complained about how we
weren't doing enough. So hold back on the swearing and name calling and get
your facts straight, it will help make you at least appear as if you have an
arguement to make.
>
>
> IDIOT!!!!! and HYPOCRITE!
>
> or do you beleive in bodily resurrection?............while why have they
> not been resurrected?
>
Hmmm, I am the one who has put forth facts. You are the one who has
responded only with emotion, oh yes, and incorrect information but you
consider me to be the idiot. Interesting. I have laid out my position
whcih since it is something different from yours you obviously feel it
deserves not only no respect but no consideration. I'm assuming you are
typicall of the party of tolerance displaying once again your inability to
tolerate anything but your own rhetric no matter how many facts are
available to disabuse the position.
As for ressurection...what does that have to do with anything?
>
> > As for 51% of Americans having trouble with truth and facts, well, the
other
> > 49% are entitled to their opinions. The difference is that I don't try
to
> > force them to believe the way I do, nor do I call them names because
they do
> > not have the same opinions I do.
>
> no you just have a brown limberger nose from not thinking for yourself
> in years.
Once again, a classic example of the party of tolerance showing what they
are truly made of. Since I disagree with you I must therefore be <insert
your childish insult here>. When you don't have a leg to stand on you
revert to insults, a very informed and pratical debate technique.
>
> all your talking points are Limberger verbatum.
>
Sigh, how many more examples can you provide of your own intolerance.
DropCloth
Actually I did not dodge the point. I ignored the emotional inuendo you
tried to put on the words I had written. The statement was first of not not
"wild" it is well understood and well documented throuought history, which
is why the Geneva Convention was written in the first place. It was an
attempt to "civilize" the treatment of captives. Keep in mind that not
every country in the world has signed the conventions and people like these
terroists do not recognize it. We still abide by it, as all signatories are
supposed to do, even if their opponentsd are not signatories.
Now, do you honestly, in your heart, believe that if these terrorists see
that we treat their wounded with dignity and respect that they will suddenyl
decide that kidnapping and beheading are bad things and stop? Or that if
they captured an American soldier they would suddenly decide to follow the
Geneva conventions and allow the Red Cross to come in and see him, maybe
bring him a Christmas package? Do you really believe that?
And I know you're about to bring up Abu Ghraeb and this recent shooting as
examples of how we are not treating them with dignity and respect. Well,
all I can tell you is that of the thousands of wounded and captured enemy
combatants the vast majority ARE treated with dignity and respect and
because there are a couple of bad situations that crop up does not negate
that.
>
> if you bothered to apply your 'logic' honestly, you would realise that
> to understand the killing of the military contractors, you need only
> look back at the innocent people gunned down in Fallujah in April 2003
> to see how yank terrorists treat those they occupy
>
> git it?
>
Right. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth right? That's your
justification. I am so impressed with your civilized approach. I wonder
how many of the innocent people kileld in Iraq before the invasion would
agree with your opinion that this was an illegal war?
> V--V
DropCloth
Yes and what is your point? Consider that these terrorists have faked
injury and death in order to get Marines and Corpsmen to get within range of
an attack in the past. Consider that some of these wounded terrorists have
been booby trapped so that when a Corpsman tries to give them aid they get
blown up.
Again, I have not justified what happened, but I have not condemned either.
I have and continue to call for patience until the facts are known.
Everything else is useless and in many cases hurtful speculation.
By the way, two shots is not a "clatter". Typically it is called a "double
tap".
DropCloth
> In article <1df8243a.0411...@posting.google.com>,
> someda...@hotmail.com (Dave) wrote:
> > The man should be proud of his actions. He deserves a promotion for
> > doing the correct thing during battle.
>
> Where are all you chickenshit chickenhawks coming from? You seem to have
> crawled out of the woodwork since Bush was elected.
>
> Odd that I've yet to see a real vet say it's correct to shoot an unarmed,
> wounded prisoner. Whatdya say, Marines? Is that how it's done?
As retired military I'll say it again, you don't know the facts surrounding
this incident so both of your are just making assumptions without evidence.
You don't know if the, now, dead guy was a threat but you don't know that he
wasn't either. So why not just wait and see what the FACTS are and then you
can either jump all over the Marine for screwing up or raise him on your
shoulders as a hero. At least then you can do it with some justification.
DropCloth
> In article <L2ymd.5622$h15.2656@trnddc07>, res1...@verizon.net says...
> >
> > getting older by the minute. Remember you have a split second to make a
> > judgement call before you or someone else may be killed. Can you make
the
> > wrong call? Sure, but remember he had to make it faster than the blink
of an
> > eye
>
> Yeah, because that wounded soldier had the reflexes of a cat and a mind
> like a steel trap, huh? Those guys can bleed and cry and just lay
> there, but we all know they're capable of unleashing instant death if
> they want to. You betcha.
>
>
> War zone? I thought Bush officially declared an end to hostilities a
> long time ago. "Mission accomplished," he said.
GET THE FACTS STRAIGHT! He declared an end to "major combat", not an end to
hostilities! There is a BIG difference between the two and guess what, the
mission WAS accomplished for the sailors and Marines onboard the carrier as
it returned which is what the sign represented.
As for "unleashing instant death"...just remember that two days before one
of the Marines in this squad was killed when one of those who was just
laying there bleeding and crying (as you put it) blew himself up to kill him
and wound others in the unit who were trying to help what they thought was a
wounded man. So, yes, they CAN unleash instant death.
But, since none of us knows the FACTS in this case why not just hold your
tongue until you know what really happened before you either vilify or
praise what this Marine did?
DropCloth
>
> Dumbass? - no, that is YOURSELF! there is no evidence that the man
> illegally murdered by the USSR Nazi Marine was a "terrorist".
>
> repeat - only a fool like you thinks that anyone who shoots at illegally
> occupying thugs are all "terrorists".
This is the kind of statement I always find so amazing. here you have
someone who argues that the other person shouldn't have called the dead man
a terrorist because he has no evidence yet he/she turns right around and
calls the Marine a USSR Nazi and a murderer with equally as little proof.
Of course you will probably come back with "we've got it on tape" or some
such thing. but, we also have plenty of eye witness accounts that these
"alleged" (do you prefer that?) terrorists were involved in a fire fight
with the Marine. Now, if they were innocent civilians they probably
wouldn't have been shooting at the Marines so that's at least as good
evidence they were "terrorists" as the film is that the Marine is a
murderer.
DropCloth
> > without having any facts beyond a short video. Why not wait until the
> > investigation is done before you decide this young Marine who has been
> > risking his life should be drawn and quartered? How about due process
and
> > innocent until proven guilty? Why not hold your own judgments about the
> > incident to these standards instead of condemning someone?
> >
>
> i have no problem with that.... but you seem to be missing the post that
> started this thread... where it was said it did not matter... it was just
> another *Pali* dead and they deserve to all be shot etc. etc. etc.
You are probably right since I didn't get into this until it had become an
"RE". I do not support an opinion that any single group of people all
deserve to die, well, unless it's a group of people who are shooting at me
at the time of course. :-)
<back and forth smipped>
> > Prisoners of war are not "tried". Our Marines do not use AK-47's. One
> > Marine in a single incident (you say there are many but you offer no
> > evidence) does not justify the terrorists/insurgents randomly shooting
> > mortars into cities, kidnapping people, beheading them, torturing, etc.
> > Nothing justifies that.
>
> it is a war - it is all basically justified... but... being judge, jury
and
> executioner to what is being reported as an a person who was still alive,
> but rendered no threat is inexcusable
The point is that we don't KNOW if there was no threat. That's where this
all breaks down. It's easy to sit back and watch a few seconds of video and
say, oh that Marine is a murderer. Easy, but not necessarily accurate. You
don't know "his" reasoning for shooting that man and until you hear his side
of the story you can't condemn or praise what he did. As I've pointed out
in other posts, I could come up with numerous scenarios that I could support
with solely the video as evidence that would make this Marine a hero, but
they would be no more valid than the condemnation.
>
> > So, bottom line, wait for the fact of the incident to be investigated as
a
> > good, civilized person would do and when you do make statements try to
get
> > the facts you do have correct, it will make you sound like you actually
> > know
> > what you're talking about.
> >
>
> i have not had a problem with what you have stated, but you should, for
your
> own sake, go back and read the post that started this thread and then you
> will get the gist of why it is going this way.
>
> the post by Mr. Wizzard.
Sorry but I don't have the original any more but I will continue to call for
both those who condemn and those who priase to wait for more information.
Thanks for an intelligent response however, they tend to be so rare
now-a-days.
DropCloth
> >
> > i have no problem with that.... but you seem to be missing the post that
> > started this thread... where it was said it did not matter... it was
just
> > another *Pali* dead and they deserve to all be shot etc. etc. etc.
> >
>
ensure
> the enemy does not.
>
> More than likely a video fake anyway set up and used for purpose to rattle
> the insurgants. Just a reminder that we, the nice nice Americans are not
so
> far removed in attitude concerning dealing with an enemy. After all what
> squad would allow an active camera in that situation. That film would be
> toast in reality.
>
> Just another dead Gook.. EOS
>
Actually the embeds are right there with the squads who don't get a say in
if they can come along or not.
I also seriously doubt this is faked just to send some kind of subtle
message to the terrorists. Consider that these are people who are not
dealing with subtlety (they cut heads off) so such a message would be lost.
No, the Marines are sending them the best and most easily understood
message, lead moving at high velocity.
As for your final statement, that kind of attitude over there would only
result in our own failure. Keep that in mind.
DropCloth
> In article <419a2...@127.0.0.1>, dele...@gsiwave.com says...
> >
> > > >
> > > >Oh, it keeps popping up from time to time, and our ancestors have
always
> > > >been able to keep it relatively in check by various techniques.
> > > >
> > > >Funny. Our best allies in this educational experience could be the
> > Russians,
> > > >who have vast experience in dealing best with moslem extremism.
> > >
> > >
> > > Hey Dumb ass...if we start summarily executing their wounded guess
> > > what the insurgents are going to do to *our* wounded?
> > >
> > > Obviously you don't know fuck about the military and military law.
> > >
> >
> > 1) The argument that if we treat terrorist prisoners/wounded nice they
will
> > treat our prisoners/wounded nice is false.
>
> affects how the rest of the world (and history) views the whole country.
> If the US soldiers treat people humanely and IAW the laws of war -- even
> if the enemy treats US soldiers like complete shit -- then it makes US
> soldiers (and by extension the whole USA) look like saints while making
> the enemy look like shit. On the other hand, resorting to abhorrent
> behavior like that used by the enemy just drops US soldiers to their
> level and makes all Americans look like assholes in the eyes of the
> world.
Here we go again. I did not imply that I condoned treating prisoners
poorly, that is your emotional slant on what I wrote. i simply pointed out
what has been proven time and again throughout history (hence why the geneva
Convention rules were written). By jumping to such conclusions about what i
wrote you are demonstrating that you cannot rationally look at this issue.
Besides, the arguement to treat prisoners humanely should have nothing to do
with how the world sees us vs our enemies, the reason for treating prisoners
well "should" be becuase it's the right thing to do, plain and simple.
>
> Yes, that's right: When people everywhere see shit like that on the TV
> or read about in a newspaper, they think of YOU as a terroristic asshole
> just because you're the same nationality as the soldier in the story
> (regardless of what he did was legally justified or not).
>
> Thus endeth your lesson in international relations, DUMBASS.
Perhaps you should take some lessons yourself in reading comprehension and
etiquette since your final word seems to sum up how you present an argument.
Very mature and very telling about how you would deal if called on to work
on any kind of relations.
DropCloth
Right, it wasn't. It was simply a misstatement of facts.
la n.
> On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 03:44:48 GMT, "la n." <nilita20...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>>So well stated. Even I, as a civilian who watched the video
>>several times could not feel malice for that young Marine nor
>>judge him strongly for his act. Who is to say how any one of
>>us would act after several hours of persistent unrelenting
>>battle trauma.
>
>
> The thing that will make this case so hard to judge are the Marine's
> comments that indicate that he felt that the person he shot was a
> threat.
>
>
This was the topic of a panel on CNN this morning when
I woke up and turned on the teevee. They were reading
emails, including many from Canada, from people who
in the majority believed that this Marine should be
cut some slack.
- nilita
~NortH~
"DropCloth" <dele...@gsiwave.com> wrote in message
news:419b57e6$1...@127.0.0.1...
well to give you an example of the original posters thoughts.. here is a
recent post by him on this subject -
"Why? - because your liberal-commy ass is
crying inside for the insurgent(s) that was shooting
at our marines. You sick fuck. The only mistake
made was by the FIRST marines that went thru
and didn't fully do the job and completly killing him.
These aren't people who were surrendering, these
are militants that are fighting to their death to kill
the marines, and other Iraq's, if anything, we are
doing the fuckers a favor in getting them to see
Ala quicker. And no more brovo's for the fucker
who failed to finish him off the FIRST go-around."
the OP is nothing but a racist who posts to inflame and argue... he likes to
cause turmoil or throw gas on a fire so to speak. it is his only intent...
and he has done well with this thread
joeturn
> The man should be proud of his actions. He deserves a promotion for
> doing the correct thing during battle.
left him unattended put this Marine and his cameraman in harms way and
should be ran back through the basics of S&D!! Now to show how
dangerous he was .The Palastines released him earlier as a POW and
what does he do goes right back to terroism! Take-No-Prisoners is the
safest and most secure way of ridding the pollutants,I mean
insergents&*^%$#"
netuser
> "netuser" <netuse...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:a622b668.0411...@posting.google.com...
> > j...@untool.net (jet) wrote in message
> > news:<RpCdnXAU-rC...@adelphia.com>...
> >> In article <zYgmd.101777$R05.95681@attbi_s53>, "Mr Wizzard"
> >> <w...@muffy-mail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > "SwiftB...@MoveOnForAmerica.org" <SwiftB...@mailinator.com> wrote
> >> > in
> >> > message news:d6e20f33.04111...@posting.google.com...
> >> >
> >> > > He said one marine noticed one of the prisoners was still breathing.
> >> >
> >> > Not no more!
> >> >
> >> > The guy could have been booby trapped.
> >>
> >> He wasn't booby trapped when the Marines shot him and left him there.
> >
> > selling flowers? breeding kittens? He WAS a goddamn terrorist you
> > dumbass.
> >
> > This is war - is that word too big for you? It's only three letters,
> > w-a-r.
> > These aren't innocent civilians on their merry way to work in a couple
> > of skyscrapers in New York; they're fucking terrorists. I know
> > "terrorists" is a fairly long word for someone with your displayed
> > lack of intelligence - so try typing it into your Mattel Speak and
> > Spell for help.
> >
> > You don't reason or bargain with terrorists, you kill them. This
> > particular terrorist was supposed to be dead; the heroic Marine simply
> > facilitated the matter.
>
>
> fair enough... so then by *your* reasoning... since the US is in *their*
> country and at war with them.... the same goes for them wounding American
> Military persons and then coming back and shooting them and killing them...
> because to them, the good ol' US of A are the terrorists and if we go by
> your wisdom then they should be allowed to do the same and there should be
> no outrage about it, like you advocate with this situation.
Are you for real? Please ween yourself from the Liberal media spooned
pablum and see what IS happening, not only to their (ahem) POW's but
to anyone they deem a threat. I asked elswhere and no one seems to
have the info, perhaps someone as smart and intelligent as yourself
does; show us all where the terrorists are holding their POW's - show
us all the military hospitals where our wounded boys are being held
and nursed back to health only to be placed in a cell with a clean
cot, blankets, three meals a day, and Bibles and prayer mats - go
right ahead.
Post ALL those links to News Reports and photos, here,
________________________________
> so - so try typing it into your Mattel Speak and
> Spell for help
Aww - I'm sorry, were you close to your Speak and Spell? LOL!
> >> > The dude was there to get killed, and thats
> >> > what he got - he got "dead". What the hell
> >> > do they *expect*, the marines to cook them
> >> > a hot meal?
> >> >
> >>
> >> He was a wounded prisoner, waiting to be moved for medical attention.
> >> I hope the Marine is fucking court-martialed, as is required by the UCMJ.
> >
> > Were you oh sooOOOOoo indignant and whiney about Kerry running around
> > the jungle like Rambo shooting fleeing little teenaged "Gooks" in the
> > back? What a bunch of self-righteous hypocrites! You should be
> > ashamed of yourselves - or you would be if you had any shame left.
> >
>
> you would be kicking up quite a fuss if it were the other way around i
> bet... but since it is just one of *them*... it doesn't matter huh?
What the hell are you talking about? It IS the other way around!
FYI lame brain, the terrorists aren't the ONLY ones getting killed
over there. The U.S. loses soldiers practicaly everyday - Too bad
you're not complaining about our boys getting shot and killed as much
as you are this one disgusting terrorist animal.
> > What do you suppose would have happened if the situation were
> > reversed? hmm, I wonder.
> > Do you think the terrorists would oblige by the UCMJ? NO! You stupid
> > shit, because they're fucking terrorists! they would have taken the
> > Marine hostage, bagged his head, tortured him, made him confess to all
> > sorts of bullshit, and if he was lucky, IF he was lucky, they would
> > use a *sharp* blade to cut his head off on videotape - and that's a
> > big fucking "IF", because if pussys you would bother to look up how
> > these terrorist bastards treat enemies, you would see that a couple of
> > bullets to the head is goddamn merciful treatment compared to the
> > torture, mutilation, and hacking at the throats that they perform on
> > their enemies. And not just soldiers; these sons of bitches kill any
> > and everyone they deem an enemy; women, children, contractors,
> > soldiers, AID providers, anyone.
>
> lead by example... ever heard of it?
Oh sure, because we all saw how well that worked during the Clinton
years and up to Sept.11. Do you even read what you right?
> being a nation of morals and njustice... is that *NOT* what the USA is?
> or are they lowering themselves to the same standards as the terrorists?
Good grief - you act like the Marine took a dull fucking machete and
hacked and sliced the terrorist's head off. The Marine was looking
out for himself and his Unit; he was 100% in the right, and a Military
Court will acknowledge that - watch.
It's called War. It's called protecting innocent American lives. This
may come as a shock to you, but taxing the working class to give it to
career welfare cases is not what the U.S. Government is supposed to do
- operating a strong Military to protect innocent American lives is.
> > Pussys like you are never happy - even if this piece of shit terrorist
> > were to have remained a POW, then what? Oh yeah, he would get the
> > best medical attention on the planet, he would end up in a cell
> > somewhere getting three square meals a day - and not just ANY fucking
> > meals! Oh nooOOoo, they get custom prepared terrorist-approved meals!
> > Because we have to make them comfortable don't we? - So let's also
> > give them nice clean cots and blankets to sleep on, a terrorist
> > approved Koran, and cute little prayer rugs so they can all be nice
> > and comfortable during their stay and get well prepared for when they
> > get released to go and fight and try to murder more innocent people.
> > He may have gotten all that, and you would STILL bitch about it!
> > "What about air conditioning?" "The poor prisoners are SO hot."
> > Boo-fuckin-hoo.
> > Fact is you should be thanking and praising this Marine for;
> > - For saving the American Tax Payer money in not supporting yet
> > another terrorist behind bars.
> > - For saving the American Tax Payer money by having the sense to kill
> > that animal and not allowing himself to be killed and wasting the
> > money used for his training and equipment.
> > - For saving his family from the grief of losing a son, father,
> > relative and friend.
> > - For saving his Military Brothers in Arms from the threat of harm and
> > possible death.
> > - And for saving innocent American Lives which may have been lost
> > should the terrorist animal he put down been allowed to live, fight
> > and murder another day.
> >
> > So go whine to someone who gives a rat's ass; like fellow terrorists,
> > their supporters or the useless fucking French.
>
> yup... since it isn't an American we are talking about.. it doesn't matter.
No, since it IS a Terrorist "we are talking about.. it doesn't
matter."
> it's a life plain and simple... and all persons deserve at least a semblance
> of respect and decency - i'm sure if it were one of your family in the
> position of that dead person, you would be whining and crying to beat all...
> screaming for rights and justice... that is what i would call the perfect
> definition of a hypocrite. you seem to fit that description very well.
What the hell are you talking about? Where do you get "hypocrite"?
Show me where, I am "hypocritical" about anything. Go ahead, I'll be
sure to check back and kiss your ass when you post my "hypocritical"
statements - in the meantime, you can kiss mine.
It's you who has shown yourself as a terrorist sympathizer.
Where are you posts condemning the terrorists? I also bet you got
your panties in a bunch over those Abhu Grabe prison photos - your
type would;
"Oh no! Look at that! They've put women's panties on his head!! Oh,
the Horror!!" Boo-Hoo!
Pull your head out of your Liberal ass and take a look at the Nick
Berg, Daniel Perl, Eugene Armstrong, Jack Hensley, etc. etc.
et-fucking-cetra. videos and tell me how much worse a swift bullet to
head is than what happened to them - and they were civilians!
No wonder the pugs kicked ass in the election - they were running
against total dimwits.
netuser
> netuser wrote:
>
> > j...@untool.net (jet) wrote in message news:<RpCdnXAU-rC...@adelphia.com>...
> >
> >>In article <zYgmd.101777$R05.95681@attbi_s53>, "Mr Wizzard" <w...@muffy-mail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>"SwiftB...@MoveOnForAmerica.org" <SwiftB...@mailinator.com> wrote in
> >>>message news:d6e20f33.04111...@posting.google.com...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>He said one marine noticed one of the prisoners was still breathing.
> >>>
> >>>Not no more!
> >>>
> >>>The guy could have been booby trapped.
> >>
> >>He wasn't booby trapped when the Marines shot him and left him there.
> >
> >
> > Really? And why exactly would you suppose he was shot to begin with;
> > selling flowers? breeding kittens?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> only thing relivant is course of action when man was found wounded and
> unarmed.
Bullshit. It's relevant as hell. The animal he shot was a terrorist;
What, you think he was a hotdog vendor who got caught in the
crossfire? NewsFlash! In addition to hiding in "Holy Temples", behind
innocent women and children, and convincing women and children to blow
themselves up - these sick animals tend to set booby traps and hide
bombs that will casue the severest loss of life to our Troops - most
recently, booby-trapping dead bodies or loading themselves up with
explosives to take out as many U.S. Troops as possible on their merry
way to meet Allah. The terrorist was suppposed to be dead - he was
not, and was therefore a threat; "Not no more".
> > He WAS
>
>
> so? - no shit sherlock! WTF do you think he was shot in the first place?
>
> irrelivant........see above.
Completely relevant".......see above."
> > a goddamn terrorist you
> > dumbass.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Dumbass? - no, that is YOURSELF! there is no evidence that the man
> illegally murdered by the USSR Nazi Marine was a "terrorist".
Yup, "Dumbass" does cover you. Unless you were there (you weren't
there were you?), you have no idea what the hell "evidence" the
Marines had on this terrorist. Using your logic, or lack of it, one
could say, "That guy was just outside Fallujah Intenational Airport
selling balloon animals and flowers! Why would that bastard of a
Marine kill an innocent balloon animal and flower vendor?!!"
So much for your wonderful little rainbow-filled world of raining
Skittles and unicorns.
Now let's try using the few "facts" that we do currently know - all
innocent men, women and children have been asked encouraged and helped
to leave the city, flyers describing the pending U.S. Military actions
have been dispersed all over the city, in the final hours prior to the
actions the city was locked down, the Military closed in and made its
full intentions known, the Military is decisively striking terrorist
targets and attempting to keep collateral damage to a minimum, the
terrorist was in a Military zone, the terrorist was thought to be dead
presumeably through U.S. Military actions, terrorists are known to
plant explosives on themselves or corpses to go off at opportune times
inflicting the most damage on as many U.S. Troops and civilians as
possible, the Heroic Marine repeatedly announced that what was thought
to be a dead terrorist was in fact alive, a living terrorist is a
fatal threat to ANYONE in the near vacinity, the Marine nuetralized
the threat.
> repeat - only a fool like you thinks that anyone who shoots at illegally
> occupying thugs are all "terrorists".
And only a fool like you thinks that anyone is in Iraq is an occupying
thug. Fool.
> > This is war - is that word too big for you? It's only three letters,
> > w-a-r.
>
>
> no, it is Occupation. Only "War" in Iraq is one of our own making.
Thank you, Captain Obvious. Would you rather the fighting be here in
the United States? Given your defense of a terrorist, you probably
would.
> > These aren't innocent civilians on their merry way to work in a couple
> > of skyscrapers in New York; they're fucking terrorists.
>
>
> idiot. most likely they were civilians, until the USSA Stormtroopers
> illegally invaded their land, and squatted in it.
I've listed several "known" FACTS of the incident, all you do is call
names and whine - if you have FACTS to contradict those I have listed,
feel free to post them, otherwise you're just a Michael Moore wannabe
psuedo intellectual with a list of whiney talking points.
> > I know
> > "terrorists" is a fairly long word for someone with your displayed
> > lack of intelligence – so try typing it into your Mattel Speak and
> > Spell for help.
>
>
>
> Very few "terrorists" in Fallugah brickbrain.
It's "FalluJah" "brickbrain", come on at least get the city right -
and again, your lack of supporting evidence of this is where?
> > You don't reason or bargain with terrorists, you kill them.
>
>
>
>
> indeed - so why the fuck are we in Iraq?
LOL! Are you for real? Because you're really bordering on Troll with
this mess.
> > This
> > particular terrorist was supposed to be dead; the heroic Marine simply
> > facilitated the matter.
>
>
>
>
> No terrorist in that room - just a Nazi thug Marine.
Nope, I was right, you are a fucking Troll. Unbelievable.
> > What do you suppose would have happened if the situation were
> > reversed? hmm, I wonder.
>
>
> relivance? none.
LOL!
> We hold ourselves to a higher standard - not because it is easy, but
> because it is honourable.
>
> but what would a thug like you know of honour?
umm, "relivance? none."
> > Do you think the terrorists would oblige by the UCMJ? NO!
>
>
>
> nope. relivance?........none - except you emmulate the terrorist's moral
> standards.
>
>
> make America proud!
I'm sure I would respond, if I had any idea of what the hell you're
talking about.
> > You stupid
> > shit, because they're fucking terrorists! they would have taken the
> > Marine hostage, bagged his head, tortured him, made him confess to all
> > sorts of bullshit, and if he was lucky, IF he was lucky, they would
> > use a *sharp* blade to cut his head off on videotape - and that's a
> > big fucking "IF", because if pussys you would bother to look up how
> > these terrorist bastards treat enemies, you would see that a couple of
> > bullets to the head is goddamn merciful treatment compared to the
> > torture, mutilation, and hacking at the throats that they perform on
> > their enemies. And not just soldiers; these sons of bitches kill any
> > and everyone they deem an enemy; women, children, contractors,
> > soldiers, AID providers, anyone.
>
>
>
>
> again - irrelivant, since we are better than them AND since the man
> killed by the Nazi Marine was most probably not a Terrorist.
Um yeah. Just like all the little Lib Sheeple; Keep repeating it and
perhaps the Tooth Fairy will leave you a present.
> why do you talk about these Terrorists so much? Do you worship them or
> some sick thing like that? You seem to want to be just like them.
LOL!! You're SO funny - ok, no you're not.
> There you go again - talking about these Terrorists (relivance to the
> murder?). If you want to be like them so much, why don't you just go out
> and blow away some Ragheads in your hometown.
>
> It'll make you feel better and your heros will take notice of your moral
> standards are their own.
>
> Have fun killing, jackass.
I'll give you this, 'gaffo' - You're the most dissapointing pussy I've
ever seen.
~NortH~
you ability to be so single tracked and see nothing but your own view is
amazing... what *are* you arguing for?? is it so simple as you feel that
because of who and what they are, the military should just go in an kill
first, ask questions later?
i said this earlier, and you avoid it or will not acknowledge it..... from
*their* side... the US is the terrorists that invaded *their* country.
so from their point of view, what they are doing is right also... you say it
is wrong because you believe in the side of the US, others beleive on the
side of Iraq - neither is right in my point of view... this war should never
have started... the terrorists as has been proven, is NOT Iraq... the war on
terror should have and still should be fought in Afghanistan... but hmmm...
that's not where the oil is now is it?
this is a senseless war and all that has changed to date is who the dictator
is... now it is the US... the fighting and killing and terrorist activities
have not changed... it is just more publicized now that the USA is the
controlling dictator.
unless they plan on making Iraq another US state... they should be out of
there and let the country live the way they want... if it is under a
dictator... fine.. their choice, they can live with it.
PlainBill
seconds.
PlainBill
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 16:25:39 GMT, Captain Compassion
<res0...@NOSPAMverizon.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 08:01:38 -0700, PlainBill <Plain...@yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Check your facts, asshole. The enemy combatant was armed. Or don't
>>you consider a grenade launcher a weapon?
>>
>An empty grenade launcher is a piece of pipe.
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>"Why would I listen to losers?" -- Arnold Schwarzenegger
>
>"Long term commitment in relationships is only necessary because it takes
>so damn long to raise children. Marriage may well be some kind of trick
>to keep the males around beyond sexual satiation." -- Captain Compassion
>
>"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
>--Will Durant
>
>Joseph R. Darancette
>res0...@NOSPAMverizon.net
He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression, for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.
-Thomas Paine
PlainBill
>The man should be proud of his actions. He deserves a promotion for
>doing the correct thing during battle.
Wrong on both counts. Even his companions admit his actions were
wrong - they say he should be excused because of stress. Personally,
I think he should be transfered to Bush's honor guard.
PlainBill
PlainBill
you had actually served in the military. Seems to me you would have
been rejected at boot camp on mental grounds.
PlainBill
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 16:39:49 -0500, Adam Henry <ah...@here.com> wrote:
>On 15 Nov 2004 20:53:56 -0800, SwiftB...@mailinator.com
>(SwiftB...@MoveOnForAmerica.org) wrote:
>
>>He said one marine noticed one of the prisoners was still breathing.
>>
>>Marines had left a group of
>>prisoners in the mosque
>>A marine can be heard saying on the pool footage provided to Reuters
>>Television: "He's [expletive] faking he's dead. He faking he's
>>[expletive] dead."
>>
>>"The marine then raises his rifle and fires into the man's head. The
>>pictures are too graphic for us to broadcast," Sites said. No images
>>of the shooting were shown in the footage provided to Reuters.
>>
>>The report said the marine, who had returned to duty after being shot
>>in the face a day earlier, had been removed from the field and was
>>being questioned by the US military.
>>
>>Sites said the shot prisoner "did not appear to be armed or
>>threatening in any way".
>>
>>source: NBC news
>
>who gives a fuck if the muslim pig was armed or not. the only thing i
>would have done different would have been to shove my m16 into his
>islam cakehole before letting it rip.
PlainBill
PlainBill
On 16 Nov 2004 14:02:30 -0800, hb...@sbcglobal.net (Hank Ball) wrote:
>SwiftB...@mailinator.com (SwiftB...@MoveOnForAmerica.org) wrote in message news:<d6e20f33.04111...@posting.google.com>...
>> He said one marine noticed one of the prisoners was still breathing.
>>
>> Marines had left a group of
>> prisoners in the mosque
>> A marine can be heard saying on the pool footage provided to Reuters
>> Television: "He's [expletive] faking he's dead. He faking he's
>> [expletive] dead."
>>
>> "The marine then raises his rifle and fires into the man's head. The
>> pictures are too graphic for us to broadcast," Sites said. No images
>> of the shooting were shown in the footage provided to Reuters.
>>
>> The report said the marine, who had returned to duty after being shot
>> in the face a day earlier, had been removed from the field and was
>> being questioned by the US military.
>>
>> Sites said the shot prisoner "did not appear to be armed or
>> threatening in any way".
>>
>> source: NBC news
>
>
>
>
>Sounds just like what John F. Kerry did in Vietnam and was given a
>Silver Star. Perhaps this marine needs to be decorated also.
>
>hball
DropCloth
Unfortunately, that same intolerant attitude is displayed on both sides of
this issue. Sad commentary on our society if you ask me, of course no one
did :-)
Vampi Fangs
wrote:
your "fucking" double standards are flapping on the clothes line, and
it looks like the stains aren't gonna come out
>I have and continue to call for patience until the facts are known.
>Everything else is useless and in many cases hurtful speculation.
>By the way, two shots is not a "clatter". Typically it is called a "double
>tap".
did you see the video?
Vampi Fangs
wrote:
the USSA has several times breached geneva conventions and other areas
of international law in regard to its illegal invasion of iraq, and if
that is not apparent to you, it is apparent to those who suffer by its
stupidities
>Now, do you honestly, in your heart, believe that if these terrorists see
>that we treat their wounded with dignity and respect that they will suddenyl
>decide that kidnapping and beheading are bad things and stop?
leading question/strawman ignored
>Or that if
>they captured an American soldier they would suddenly decide to follow the
>Geneva conventions and allow the Red Cross to come in and see him, maybe
>bring him a Christmas package? Do you really believe that?
leading question/strawman ignored
>And I know you're about to bring up Abu Ghraeb and this recent shooting as
>examples of how we are not treating them with dignity and respect. Well,
>all I can tell you is that of the thousands of wounded and captured enemy
>combatants the vast majority ARE treated with dignity and respect and
>because there are a couple of bad situations that crop up does not negate
>that.
time for you to enlist, boi, and experience this:
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/11/15/1100384495279.html?from=storylhs
>> if you bothered to apply your 'logic' honestly, you would realise that
>> to understand the killing of the military contractors, you need only
>> look back at the innocent people gunned down in Fallujah in April 2003
>> to see how yank terrorists treat those they occupy
>>
>> git it?
>>
>
>Right. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth right? That's your
>justification. I am so impressed with your civilized approach.
au contraire ... i am against all such acts of violence and unprovoked
acts like the illegal USSA invasion which incite insurgency
however, the USSA cannot claim moral superiority or encourage iraq
towards adopting supposed western morals and values of democracy
without first practising what it preaches and which it claims to hold
dear
as gandhi said
"Liberty and democracy become unholy when their hands are died red
with innocent blood."
the USSA appears to feel that it is above international law, is in a
class of its own, a class with which the rest of the world nowadays is
mostly ashamed to be associated with
> I wonder
>how many of the innocent people kileld in Iraq before the invasion would
>agree with your opinion that this was an illegal war?
do you use your ouija board often?
PlainBill
have on relations between the non-insurgent population and the
coalition forces.
One of the local soldiers serving in Iraq has written reports for the
local newspapers. He described how the Iraqi children looked up to
the soldiers, and were always glad to see them - probably because the
soldiers would give them candy. After Abu Ghraib, the kids would run
and hide when they saw a soldier. This is going to cause even more
distrust of the American soldiers, and help the insurgents recruit
more fighters.
Stupid, Stupid, Stupid!
PlainBill
On 15 Nov 2004 20:53:56 -0800, SwiftB...@mailinator.com
(SwiftB...@MoveOnForAmerica.org) wrote:
>He said one marine noticed one of the prisoners was still breathing.
>
>Marines had left a group of
>prisoners in the mosque
>A marine can be heard saying on the pool footage provided to Reuters
>Television: "He's [expletive] faking he's dead. He faking he's
>[expletive] dead."
>
>"The marine then raises his rifle and fires into the man's head. The
>pictures are too graphic for us to broadcast," Sites said. No images
>of the shooting were shown in the footage provided to Reuters.
>
>The report said the marine, who had returned to duty after being shot
>in the face a day earlier, had been removed from the field and was
>being questioned by the US military.
>
>Sites said the shot prisoner "did not appear to be armed or
>threatening in any way".
>
>source: NBC news
He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression, for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.
-Thomas Paine
~NortH~
very sad... each side makes a conscious decision to NOT at least see the
other side and therefore there is always ONLY one single answer.
typical, yet non-productive... nothing can be accomplished without
acknowledging the rights, reasons and understandings of all sides