Posted on 11/16/2004 1:07:33 PM PST by nothernlights
Was not the reporter under the duty to hand over this tape to military authorities,under the rules of imbeds? If that's the case then strong measures should be taken against Sites. Also has Sites been removed from that Marine unit,because at this point i"m sure his presence is a distraction to the Marines and therefore endangers their lives. Sites has to be removed from that unit at the very least.
Showing what they're doing--assuming that it's on the up-and-up--is betraying their confidence?
Did Sites agree to omerta? I don't recall the USMC being a Mob outfit.
And you still have yet to justify extrajudicial killing of an American citizen--i.e., murder--by persons employed the Federal Government.
Once upon a time at FR, we opposed Janet Reno and other practitioners of Arkanicide.
Now we cheer them on...
your points been made are you going to challenge everyone here?
What is you axe to grind?
Perhaps you are Mr. Sites himself!
It is in my nature to challenge mob ideology.
What is you axe to grind?
I am genuinely skeptical of angry mobs' motives; a large number of FReepers are acting as if this is some sort of shameful act that must be concealed from view at all costs, including killing the journalist who filmed it.
Perhaps you are Mr. Sites himself!
Nope. Just a former Marine who's watching the reactions with some suspicion.
And you use the metaphor you did. Get lost.
blah, blah, blah.
He's an effin traitor. He is aiding the enemy. He should be tried and killed.
And he'll have to answer some tough questions about it.
Don't compare him to a mobster.
I'm not. But a bunch of FR wants the Marines to act like the Mob and snuff witnesses.
I'm far more interested in how FReepers are demanding that the journalist be put to death, without trial, for shooting this footage and passing it to NBC.
Now, if the tape is as open-and-shut as you describe, the Marine's got nothing to worry about, and there shouldn't be any heartburn about showing it.
But, instead, everyone's acting as if this is some horrible sin, and must not see the light of day, even as they cheer this Marine on.
The duality is really interesting.
Please explain, in detail, how his conduct meets the definition of treason given in Article III, Section 3 of the United States Constitution. Please show the relevant case law that supports your assertion.
He sure behaved like a Judas didn't he? He certainly is doing the leg work for our Islamofascist enemies -- giving good film footage to Al Jazeera,et. al, giving good anecdotal support to the moulahs as they incite the mobs for the deaths of our troopers. Of course, there are those who wont believe it until you run down to your local law library and look up the applicable case law that pertains to treason. The rest of us can use common sense.
Please cite specific law to support your case.
Arguing that he's a "Judas" because his reporting displeases you--that it showed an ugly side of war that disturbs you--isn't sufficient.
He certainly is doing the leg work for our Islamofascist enemies -- giving good film footage to Al Jazeera,et. al, giving good anecdotal support to the moulahs as they incite the mobs for the deaths of our troopers.
My guess: it's more likely to show the likely recruiting pool "hey, kids, go shooting at Americans, they're not likely to be happy."
Of course, there are those who wont believe it until you run down to your local law library and look up the applicable case law that pertains to treason. The rest of us can use common sense.
If you are arguing that Sites committed treason, you had better be arguing the law, because the law is king here. Treason is the only crime specifically identified in the Constitution, and the standard is extremely high for a very good reason.
And he'll have to answer some tough questions about it......Poohbah
If there is one thing that this war is known for, it is the sheer number of suicide attacks by innocent looking jihadis wearing explosive vests.
Earlier in the war, 3 soldiers lost their lives by approaching a pregnant women crying for help who exploded when they got close.
In the Battle of Fallujah, such deaths have already occurred.
I envision justice for Sites as follows:
A squad of Marines checks out a building with supossedly dead or wounded jihadis inside.
"What do you think, Smitty? Are they really dead or are they just playing possum with wired C4 explosives under their bellies."
"Hell, if I know but we need to find out."
"Mr. Sites, you fancy yourself as being pretty good at knowing who's harmless and who's not. Go in there and find out if those jihadis are harmless. We'll wait for you across the street."
Why the demand that the press not show allegedly OK acts? Why the demand for retaliation? Why the expenditure of all this energy on hoping for Sites' death?
BTW...the hard questions would come whether or not the camera was present.
"You're about the only one expressing that attitude"
If anything happens to that slug, the left is going to blame the military. Good idea to change his assignment...say The Village Voice.
Fine...
But there's a BUNCH of folks demanding that Sites be tried and executed, or simply executed on the spot by the USMC.
Hey, guess what? If I'm on camera doing something that was righteous, I don't have a problem.
Why does everyone else have a problem?
Kevin Sites is a traitor. He shouldn't be allowed to get away with this. What was his intent? Promotion? In exchange for the lives of our soldiers which he has put in danger of retaliation?
IT is if he is in breach of imbed rules and thereby endangers the life of military personel.
Please show the rules in question.
Please explain how this endangers the lives of military personnel.
And the f***ing jihadists were going to be playing nice with wounded soldiers and Marines before this>
Good grief, that's as idiotic as it gets!
NBC/General Electric & their employee are a pieces of sh*t.
The USMC is protecting their greedy execs who sell shoddy crap and defective military products.
The point is you have no idea and it should not be up to yiu or anybody in the media to make that dcision. That footage should have been given to the proper military authorities if the concern was truly that a war crime was committed. But it is obvious to all that the main concern of Sites was to put his sorry face on the news.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.