Remember Leash Girl?

Aryylas · Post by **Aryylas** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 11:15 am

I can go to church, does not mean I'm religous.

I think Mindia is Satan in disguise.

Post by **Arlos** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 11:23 am

Every single ex-military I know, including those who served in Gulf 1, was absolutely sickened and disgusted at what happened at Abu Gharib, and wanted to see justice done. Most of them agree with me and Lyion, that the punishments stopped way way too low.

Anyone see the Rumsfeld press conference where he was questioned on the internal pentagon investigation on the scandal? He looked enraged that anyone would dare ask him actual questions, especially ones like, "How can the Pentagon conduct an impartial investigation when it's investigating itself?" and finally stonewalled by saying he hadn't yet read the report. Absolutely infuriating. RUMSFELD is where the punishment should start, it was on his watch, it's his responsibility.

-Arlos

The Kizzy · Post by **The Kizzy** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 11:35 am

Here you go Mindia, its not the whole thing, but just the first 3 articles of the 1st part. I will highlight the appropriate passages for your viewing pleasure, and comprehension, my friend.

PART I
GENERAL PROVISIONS

Article 1

The High Contracting Parties undertake to respect and to ensure respect for the present Convention in all circumstances.

Article 2

In addition to the provisions which shall be implemented in peace time, the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them.
The Convention shall also apply to all cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party, even if the said occupation meets with no armed resistance.

Although one of the Powers in conflict may not be a party to the present Convention, the Powers who are parties thereto shall remain bound by it in their mutual relations. They shall furthermore be bound by the Convention in relation to the said Power, if the latter accepts and applies the provisions thereof.

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.

Ginzburgh · Post by **Ginzburgh** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 11:59 am

Yeah, I'm not a religous man at all... I only go to church and Bible study and tithe every week for the fun of it

Wow, what a waste of time for your Church and bible study teacher.

Stabfase · Post by **Stabfase** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 12:02 pm

Mindia wrote:Yeah, I'm not a religous man at all... I only go to church and Bible study and tithe every week for the fun of it.

everyone's gotta eat

Tuggan · Post by **Tuggan** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 12:03 pm

mindia is just really old school christian, like... the crusades old school.

Adivina · Post by **Adivina** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 12:06 pm

Mindia...you love to play Devil's advocate eh?

Post by **Gidan** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 12:36 pm

Lyion wrote:Anyone who has ever served in the military knows that accountability goes from the top down. My problem with Abu Ghraib is accountability is going from the bottom up.

None of the people convicted were Officers or NCOs. Why not? What about the Intel people who were in charge of these people?

Make no mistake, The real culprits here got away, and the E-nothings got creamed. It is a travesty.

These people needed to be punished, but they should have gotten smaller charges, with the larger penalties going to those in charge who ran this circus

You are 100% correct, the problem is shit travels down hill. Its the same just about everywhere, blame will never goto the people who should actually get it, they always pass it off to the people down below.

They should start with Rumsfeld and whom ever the commanding officer was at the location. They are the top 2 responsible for this, its a disgrace to Americans.

Eziekial · Post by **Eziekial** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 1:09 pm

Rumsfeld is way too high to have any true understanding of what happened at that prison. The CO and XO of that unit is where I would have focused investigations. From there, you can quickly move a step up or down the chain to find out who was making this happen.

Zanchief · Post by **Zanchief** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 1:10 pm

I think Mindia's gone over the deep end.

Post by **Lyion** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 1:29 pm

In the military shit does not travel downhill. If there's a fuckup, then the people in charge are 'responsible'. That is why there are officers and senior NCOs, as well as senior officers. They have the authority and they are the ones who should be liable. That is how it is supposed to be.

If a ship wrecks, or if a sub grounds the Commanding Officer is held accountable.

The people we see being strung up are nobodies. They dont have the authority to do jack.
Where is the watch officer? Where is the Commanding Officer? Where are the Intelligent agents who directed these events? The General who was responsible should be court martialed and sent to jail. The Officers and Agents should also be tried as they are no less responsible than their minions.

While I dislike Rumsfeld, he is a politician and they are never responsible for anything, they are there solely to take credit for things the military does. He should be fired for other reasons, mainly his inability to manage and move the military forward and provide adequate vision.

Snero · Post by **Snero** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 1:29 pm

how anybody can defend that is beyond me

Diekan · Post by **Diekan** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 1:40 pm

Oh I stopped believing Mindia was "religious" long ago... it's pretty obvious he isn't.

Anyway, you can bet your ass the CO / XO / and First SGT knew exactly what was going on the whole time. They should also have been investigated and tried.

Diabolik · Post by **Diabolik** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 3:31 pm

Diabolik wrote:That brings up a question... why do you think that people running wild and acting like perverted S&M dungeon masters is acting in the defense of our country? Iraq war, pacifism aside... when is this behavior patriotic or even acceptable?

Well?

Scoota McGee · Post by **Scoota McGee** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 9:44 pm

Mindia wrote:
Scoota McGee wrote:
Mindia wrote:6 1/2 years for protecting her country. That's just great.

I take it you've never served. If you had you would have some concept of what it is to protect your country. Anyone who had served honorably in the military would be repulsed and embarrassed by the behavior the Abu Ghraib guards exhibited. I know I am.

Yes, I have served... I was in the Air Force. You obviously have no idea what it's like being in a true combat zone. I haven't been in a combat zone either, but I know a lot about it from my brother-in-law and a couple friends who were in those situations, and we have discussed it in depth.

The stress levels are mounting, people are on edge... That place could have been stormed by Al Qeida at any moment. Our soldiers were scared. Some people, when faced with this kind of fright and nervousness, will act up to overcome their fears and inhibitions. I read a book about Vietnam where a soldier was going around shooting the Vietnamese' beasts-of-burden. Just killing the oxen or whatever they were for fun and self-gratification. Point is... people do stupid things in war time. But to give her 6 1/2 years is ludicrous. I honestly don't know what a proper punishment for her would be. It just seems to me that embarrassing some prisoners of war is deserving of something much lighter than 6 1/2 years in prison.

You're really not worth responding to Mindia.

Narrock · Post by **Narrock** » Sun May 01, 2005 12:08 am

Scoota McGee wrote:
Mindia wrote:
Scoota McGee wrote:
Mindia wrote:6 1/2 years for protecting her country. That's just great.

I take it you've never served. If you had you would have some concept of what it is to protect your country. Anyone who had served honorably in the military would be repulsed and embarrassed by the behavior the Abu Ghraib guards exhibited. I know I am.

Yes, I have served... I was in the Air Force. You obviously have no idea what it's like being in a true combat zone. I haven't been in a combat zone either, but I know a lot about it from my brother-in-law and a couple friends who were in those situations, and we have discussed it in depth.

The stress levels are mounting, people are on edge... That place could have been stormed by Al Qeida at any moment. Our soldiers were scared. Some people, when faced with this kind of fright and nervousness, will act up to overcome their fears and inhibitions. I read a book about Vietnam where a soldier was going around shooting the Vietnamese' beasts-of-burden. Just killing the oxen or whatever they were for fun and self-gratification. Point is... people do stupid things in war time. But to give her 6 1/2 years is ludicrous. I honestly don't know what a proper punishment for her would be. It just seems to me that embarrassing some prisoners of war is deserving of something much lighter than 6 1/2 years in prison.

You're really not worth responding to Mindia.

so why did you bother?

Narrock · Post by **Narrock** » Sun May 01, 2005 12:11 am

Diekan wrote:Oh I stopped believing Mindia was "religious" long ago... it's pretty obvious he isn't.

Anyway, you can bet your ass the CO / XO / and First SGT knew exactly what was going on the whole time. They should also have been investigated and tried.

LOL riiiiight.

Narrock · Post by **Narrock** » Sun May 01, 2005 12:12 am

snero wrote:how anybody can defend that is beyond me

I'm not defending her, Einstein... I'm saying during war time people do stupid things because of psychological reasons, and that 6 1/2 years imprisonment is too harsh.

Tuggan · Post by **Tuggan** » Sun May 01, 2005 12:46 am

so what kinda time should she serve in your opinion mindia?

i dont think 6.5 years is nearly long enough. those soldiers in a police state type of rule are a representation of america as a people, even these idiots in abu gharib. six and a half my ass. :-x

Narrock · Post by **Narrock** » Sun May 01, 2005 1:11 am

Tuggan wrote:so what kinda time should she serve in your opinion mindia?

i dont think 6.5 years is nearly long enough. those soldiers in a police state type of rule are a representation of america as a people, even these idiots in abu gharib. six and a half my ass.

Dude, I know it's hard to believe... but you do have a brain. People who rape, commit murder, and commit crimes much more heinous than embarrassing somebody and insulting their dignity are getting less time in prison than that. Next you're going to ask me to cite examples. Do your own googling. You'll find it.

Like I said in an earlier post in this thread... I don't know what her punishment should be. I just think 6 1/2 years is too harsh.

Should I repeat all this again? Or will it sink in now that I've mentioned it for the 3rd time?

Post by **Martrae** » Sun May 01, 2005 7:21 am

Are you referring to military justice or civilian?

The Kizzy · Post by **The Kizzy** » Sun May 01, 2005 10:26 am

Mindia, thanks to the acts these soldiers committed, some people are believing that is how WE as a whole in America are.

Ginzburgh · Post by **Ginzburgh** » Sun May 01, 2005 11:18 am

Not to mention her kid is probably the anti-christ.

Post by **Mop** » Sun May 01, 2005 1:05 pm

Mindia wrote:Hey Arlos, why don't you start another thread about how you're getting outsourced by Indians and not making enough money .

haha hwhy dont you make more statements about mexicans taking your jobs LOL ZING ROFLES HAHAHAHHAHA OMGZ

Narrock · Post by **Narrock** » Sun May 01, 2005 3:11 pm

Mop wrote:
Mindia wrote:Hey Arlos, why don't you start another thread about how you're getting outsourced by Indians and not making enough money .

haha hwhy dont you make more statements about mexicans taking your jobs LOL ZING ROFLES HAHAHAHHAHA OMGZ

I adapted and overcame. I left the construction business altogether. I will build spec homes on the side, but I'm now in the Health Insurance field, and I'm not the one who's coming to the board crying like a little girl because foreigners are taking my job and that I'm not making enough ducats.

Owned.