|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:30 PM September 26th, 2005 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
There's been no sentencing yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Albeit the abuse was something she personally took great pleasure in, it was obviously widespread, and more senior people should be in the Dock - even at government level.
Looking at her photo, I am amazed that this 22 yr old sports more medals than Audie Murphy acquired for his part in WWII . . and for what exactly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:54 AM September 27th, 2005 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
"Looking at her photo, I am amazed that this 22 yr old sports more medals than Audie Murphy acquired for his part in WWII . . and for what exactly."
Good question. That one at the bottom left looks like a Cold War Commemorative ribbon, which is not issued by the Gov't as far as I know. Cold War Commerative Issued by who???
The red and yellow ribbon is ths national defense service ribbon (top right).
National Defense Service ribbon
Everyone who serves in a time of national crisis gets that (read everyone breathing or dead).
The top left looks like an Army Commendation ribbon Army Commendation ribbon Is that a little hard to believe? I think my eyes are failing.
Good look trying to figure the rest out.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by johnnyp on 06:50 AM September 27th, 2005 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
Now that you mention it - she does have an awful lot of ribbons. I guess her guard unit gives them away at company picnics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Baniadam on 07:37 AM September 27th, 2005 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
“The defense argued that England suffered from depression and that she has an overly compliant personality, making her a heedless participant in the abuse”
I am surprised they didn’t acquit her and give her an option to sue the army. She was depressed and in a patriarchal structure.
The problem with the US army is they have no shame. They have no shame and to boot a self-deluded righteous “dignity”. I probably get hammered for this; but I believe it is the case. It is an army where men beat other men as a sort of acceptance into the male pack; there is something seriously wrong here.
Read this article:
'Sex is key to a woman's experience in the US military'
In Iraq, some male comrades dismiss Williams as a "slut", others drunkenly grope her. She describes a game in which soldiers throw stones at her breasts and each other's genitals. For Williams, this does not necessarily reflect badly on them. "By and large, soldiers have no shame and they are open about that. They are more honest about what is in all of us. They don't hide the fact that they make mistakes and have base desires.
"The guys would have been throwing stones at each other's genitals even if I wasn't there. It might sound strange but by throwing them at my boobs, they were including me. There is harassment in the army, but there are ways to deal with it. I was empowered by the military, physically and mentally, and I'm a stronger person for my time there."
Throwing stones at her breasts while the men had stones thrown at their gonads. ???? It is a ritual to pass the time. Sorry they are sick. Then there is the issue of rape within American army (men raping American female soldiers). This is further exasperated by the feminist by pushing co-ed.
Some people might give them excuse. They are under pressure. But I doubt this happened in the second world war; even in the trenches. Men were men; they may have had issues but they also had a sense of dignity and responsibility.
Here is another quote from the article.
Nor does Williams hide her involvement in the humiliation of an Iraqi prisoner. She is told to mock a weeping, naked man in Arabic. "Do you think you can please a woman with that thing?" she asks him. Her role went no further and she confronted the interrogator about breaching the Geneva Conventions, but still she feels guilty.
People no longer have a sense of responsibility. They no longer take account for their own actions. If you believe that you “superior” is wrong; then do not follow action. They are not going to live with you for the rest of your life; you on the other hand have no choice. You will wake up each day knowing the wrongs you did. If you have moral fibre you would regret it for the rest of your life. If you are like that Lynndie England maybe you are spared from it because your just plain sick.
There are no longer absolute truths and moral rights. The feminists and some of the more crazed liberals helped create this. It changes according to the passing whims of not the many but the few. But like everything else when it is enact into law it eventually becomes the will of the many. One day paedophilia will become the norm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:00 PM September 27th, 2005 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
>"One day paedophilia will become the norm."
Of that I have NO doubt, at all.
It may be sooner than we like to believe that paedophiles will indeed be clamouring on to Washington demanding that the age of consent be lowered (probably to 2 years old) and demanding the right to marry children. AND it will literally get frank discussion!
Just wait and see. Already there is talk in the wings for people who want multiple wives and/or husbands.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:14 PM September 27th, 2005 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
>"One day paedophilia will become the norm."
Yes, it is definitely on the feminazi agenda.
Hotspur
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:21 PM September 27th, 2005 EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe so, but note their defense of LeTorneau and other teacher tramps who prey on boys?
Could there be ulterior motives here?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:45 AM September 28th, 2005 EST (#18)
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the case of "teacher tramps", it's no mystery. It's because those teachers are WOMEN. So, self-evidently, they can do no wrong. (Sarcasm!) It's the same reason that feminists were swift to the defense of Andrea Yates for example. Not to mention Lynndie. (I've never heard the feminist take on LeTourneau.)
(Not to say they honestly give a shit about the welfare of young lads. And I certainly wouldn't doubt that some of them have got a hankering for tender booty, z.b. Germaine Greer!!!)
In the case of man-boy perversions, feminism's attack motive is (in my opinion) two-fold:
1. It's just another group of MEN for them to maul -- and in this case with no objection from virtually anybody, so, they slug away with gusto! Moreover, we see here a situation where men are asserting their independance of women, which leads to the next item, below:
2. Man-boy "relations" are another male-only space, and feminists are keen to destroy male-only space. They are fanatically keen to destroy male-only space! Wow, are they ever keen to destroy male-only space!! (i.e, any situation where male bonding might occur, even if it takes a perverted form.)
-Fidelbogen-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:01 PM September 28th, 2005 EST (#24)
|
|
|
|
|
>"From what I've seen they come down mighty hard on NAMBLA, for example."
True but that is because NAMBLA is an organization of MALE paedophiles.
FEMALE paedophilia or dating underage boys is PERFECTLY acceptable to the feminists. It's even MORE acceptable when older women date underage girls.
Y' can see where this is going...!
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 04:24 PM September 28th, 2005 EST (#27)
|
|
|
|
|
I have seen feminists supporting the sexual abuse of boys by homosexual male adults. They argued that the abuse will produce psychological destruction of the boys involved and they will grow into crippled men. This ,feminists feel, is a desirable outcome for feminaziism.
My view is that feminazis support sexual abuse of male children by both genders and the sexual abuse of female children by women.
Hotspur
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:10 AM September 29th, 2005 EST (#29)
|
|
|
|
|
That's weird, because lesbian feminists see heterosexual MEN as competition, as well.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:33 PM September 27th, 2005 EST (#14)
|
|
|
|
|
What's so bad about having multiple young wives?
Bleed? Can breed.
Fuck traditionalism.
Death To women's Rights.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:03 PM September 28th, 2005 EST (#25)
|
|
|
|
|
Uhm..., Oookayyy...,
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:23 PM September 27th, 2005 EST (#16)
|
|
|
|
|
"The feminists and some of the more crazed liberals helped create this."
The Bush administration ordered it, crazed conservative.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Baniadam on 07:10 AM September 28th, 2005 EST (#19)
|
|
|
|
|
I was talking about co-ed. Liberals and Conservatives do not have fixed ideas they differ from person to person.
As to republicans and democrats; they can both die for all I care. They are both the same; only the devils money speaks to (most of) them.
That goes double for Tories and Labour; because you can hardly notice it here. Both crooks & scum bags.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:03 PM September 28th, 2005 EST (#23)
|
|
|
|
|
"The feminists and some of the more crazed liberals helped create this."
Absolutely, 100% on target.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:51 AM September 27th, 2005 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
...I've always been partial to Bettie Page, myself.
Yeah, those were the days. Men were men and women were women.
Not like now a days, where women are men and men are women, "and cats and dogs living together..."*
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
*Quote from "Ghost Busters".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:38 PM September 27th, 2005 EST (#12)
|
|
|
|
|
Today's pin up girl, is right.
Today's pin up girl wears leather and sports a whip and she is posed with a man on his knees with a rubber ball shoved in his mouth, on a leash.
God bless America......,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by robrob on 01:46 PM September 27th, 2005 EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
she has an overly compliant personality, making her a heedless participant in the abuse
I've heard it all now. Even with overwhelming photographic evidence, her gleeful smile, the numbers of photos - she is completely unaccountable for her actions.
Unf*ckingbelievable. I am just bemused how women and feminists in particular can ever be taken seriously or regarded as "equal" while there is such a widespread belief that personal responsibility is a male only requirement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:20 PM September 27th, 2005 EST (#13)
|
|
|
|
|
I'm shocked she was convicted.
I thought this trial would be used to expose and exploit misogyny in the volunteer military.
Now I understand that I underestimated the stakes.
An acquittal for Lynndie would have led to months of further investigations about whether her behavior was in any way condoned by higher ups, or even a typical part of what U.S. soldiers in Iraq are conditioned to accept.
By convicting Lynndie, the military brass are declaring their own innocence, making a statement that "this is not policy as usual..."
And, most importantly, slamming the lid shut on any proposed future investigations of Abu Ghraib and similar situations.
Everyone with a clue knows that the White House has used executive privilege to suppress the release of videotapes of prisoner abuse in Iraq that go well beyond what the Lynndie still photos showed.(We're talking male children being sodomized, and girls being sexually assaulted.)
Lynddie's conviction will help to bury this evidence and it will never see the light of day, because the "culprit" has now been convicted.
Mission accomplished ... again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:08 PM September 28th, 2005 EST (#26)
|
|
|
|
|
I thought this trial would be used to expose and exploit misogyny in the volunteer military.
Yeah - 'cos that was the only important part of the whole affair.
Utterly, utterly delusional. Beggars Belief.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:22 PM September 27th, 2005 EST (#17)
|
|
|
|
|
Gender Feminism is the belief that the organ of responsibility is the penis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Baniadam on 07:35 AM September 28th, 2005 EST (#20)
|
|
|
|
|
Only three bloody years. Disgusting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:27 PM September 28th, 2005 EST (#21)
|
|
|
|
|
Okay, let's say it all together now...; "If she were a man..."
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:00 PM September 28th, 2005 EST (#22)
|
|
|
|
|
Okay, so Ray's not a prophet. He was only kind of close. In this misandrist country, you'd have to be blind, deaf and dumb not to see this coming.
Abu Ghraib and American Misandry
"I have little doubt that all of the females implicated at Abu Ghraib will have little trouble finding jobs in the multibillion dollar VAWA (Violence Against Women Act) domestic violence industry, just as soon as "American, gender feminist justice" rationalizes away all their misbehavior, and gives them a token “slap on the wrist.” After all, the domestic violence industry teaches that it's all about “power and control,” and in their eyes that’s a “Patriarchal” (male) prerogative only. According to them, men use “power and control” over women so all those females involved at Abu Ghraib must have been “helpless victims” of the "male patriarchal system." Accordingly, they must have actually been “battered women” who were “unable to flee” the “male cycle of violence.”'
Hey Ray, I'd say that was good ole' American "Chivalrous Justice" as much as "gender feminist justice." Judicial Chivalry Empowers Female Criminality Click "View Larger"
R
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
The five men on Lynndie England's jury 