Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#12
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 07:49:16 -0700, Frank Gilliland
wrote: Got lots of work today so I'll only make a few comments: On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 23:17:50 -0400, wrote in : snip abu graib is another topic than frank and so The soldiers at Abu Gharib shold have REPORTED THE INFRACTIONS via the chain of command. no they should have refused to prefrom them and then informed the chain of comand the "orders" were unlawfull and they should have had the gut to refuse them Quite right. The oath requires you to perform any -LEGAL- order given to you by your superiors. This was the issue during the Iran-Contra scam when Ollie claimed he was just following orders and didn't care if his actions were legal or not (although I'm sure he knew they were illegal). That's blind obedience and it's wrong. and dangerous as well even were he tried and found guilty (it being found that the orders were not illegal) thais does not prove he was lying or in any way violated his oath or stole his rightfull pay Markie...He WAS tried and found guilty! Twice! Indicted, tried and CONVICTED! your source? Me, but Dudly didn't have all the facts. I pled guilty at the first court-martial and so was never tried. snip Mind you that the Marines would much rather send a "junior trooper" to Office Hours, whichn in the Marine Corps are Article 15 proceedings. In other words, letting the commander of the unit handle the incident at the lowest echelon. Something I would only advise a soldier to try if they are guilty of something but likely he reufsed Art 15 as I did many times And that's exactly what I did for the second infraction. I forced a summary court-martial so the facts regarding the case would be a matter of record. snip He WAS found guilty. not according to him not after apeal was it but that does not count with you For once Dudly is right. There were no appeals and both convictions stand. The vindication of my second infraction was the result of a seperate entry made as the result of a review that I requested after my discharge. The violation leading to the conviction was found to have "mitigating circumstances that should have been considered [by the presiding officer] but were not," and that I "was denied evidence, and the opportunity to gather and present certain evidence" relevant to my defense. The conviction was not overturned (since it was not an appeal) but my conduct marks were adjusted accordingly, and my discharge upgraded to Honorable. well thanks for clearing it up Id say it was an appeal of sorts but then try not to quible when I can snip USMC attitudes on this are that if you let those four guys carry that fifth guy off the battlefield, there will be five guys to worry about later. Better to kill them all now than to ahve to face them a second time. The USMC attitude on this is simple: "Accomplish the Mission". snip he has expressed his opinion you did not serve holding that opinion even if it may be contary to fact is not a lie Sure it's a lie. nope it is an opinion Frank holds and stets that he doesn't believe you sered that is no lie Oh, I'm sure he served alright. And I'm sure he served all of 18 years as he claimed. But I'm also sure that his time was spent almost entirely in garrison, that nothing on his record is outstanding, that he probably got a few Page 11 entries, and that his discharge was not an honorable retirement but a general discharge, probably for medical reasons (suggested by his current career in the medical field, which, according to statistics gathered by psychologists, happens to be the preferred occupational field for hypochondriacs). he claims that his discharge is medical he also denies that it was for a physical cuase which leaves ..... In other words, he served 18 years as a sick-bay commando. Certainly nothing to be proud of, nothing to brag about, and nothing he will ever publically admit. Hence his silence about his "military career". And the epitath that will be imprinted on his tombstone will be, "I Told You I Was Sick", just like the one I saw on a PBS special last night. so your thought run pretty close to mine if not in the same mold interesting as I suspect we are rather different but we share the noton that at least when lie under our tombstones an eitaff can read "well at least we lived out lives" Just let Dudly keep running his mouth -- the more he talks the more he proves that he's a socially isolated misfit with serious psychological issues. He's like a cat in a box: shake the box and he thrashes around for a while. Let him calm down then shake the box again. Heck, that's better entertainment than anything on TV!!! Forgiveme if I wish I could call you liar on that one ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- _________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 140,000 groups Unlimited download http://www.usenetzone.com to open account |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Frankie of Silliland: A Coward Who Lied To And Stole From His Country Lectures About "Integrity" | Policy |