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