Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Canadian sniper cleared of desecrating al-Qaeda body
National Post ^ | February 8, 2003 | Stewart Bell

Posted on 02/08/2003 10:11:24 AM PST by Clive

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 501-520 next last
To: Byron_the_Aussie
You're slipping.

"the same way a Britney Spears thread might be bring out their sexual fantasies."

That's called projection. It happens when shallow minds talk [or in this case type] too much.

81 posted on 02/10/2003 2:18:20 PM PST by VaBthang4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Byron_the_Aussie
some war crime apologists

What war crime? There was an accusation of a war crime, followed by a trial, followed (in this particular case) by an acquittal. That's how we do things here in the civilized world.

82 posted on 02/10/2003 2:23:46 PM PST by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: VaBthang4
Turn yourself in. Then, we'll talk.

To report a suspected phony: This is an epidemic - we get reports DAILY!! Please be patient with the process of investigation. The NETWORK's MISSION is education on the P.O.W. issue and maintaining the history of our Vietnam POWs and MIAs. Exposing phonies is an unexpected and sad result of attempting to complete the Vietnam bio project.

83 posted on 02/10/2003 2:25:09 PM PST by Byron_the_Aussie (Hey Kellog's : hands off OUR chocolate crackles!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Byron_the_Aussie
>>Canadian soldiers desecrating enemy dead.

The guy was acquitted. So the 'desecration' 'war crimes' charge does not hold.
84 posted on 02/10/2003 2:25:37 PM PST by swarthyguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: steve-b
...what war crime?....

The one shown in the photo.

85 posted on 02/10/2003 2:26:14 PM PST by Byron_the_Aussie (Hey Kellog's : hands off OUR chocolate crackles!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Byron_the_Aussie
I wouldn't even crap on one of those A-holes.
86 posted on 02/10/2003 2:28:09 PM PST by justshutupandtakeit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Byron_the_Aussie
Evidently the court examining the evidence did not find the photo to be convincing.
87 posted on 02/10/2003 2:28:37 PM PST by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit
...I wouldn't even crap on one of those A-holes...

Good!

Thanks for your support. :)

88 posted on 02/10/2003 2:29:29 PM PST by Byron_the_Aussie (Hey Kellog's : hands off OUR chocolate crackles!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: steve-b
..evidently the court examining the evidence did not find the photo to be convincing...

Where does it say that?

Steve, before you get too excited at the thought of a rematch with ol' By, I suggest you actually read the story.

89 posted on 02/10/2003 2:31:14 PM PST by Byron_the_Aussie (Hey Kellog's : hands off OUR chocolate crackles!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Taffini
It's probably the most horrific video I've ever seen...I'm sorry I ever watched it.
90 posted on 02/10/2003 2:31:32 PM PST by New Horizon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: swarthyguy
He finally figured out the incompetence of his position concerning the decorated Canadian Sniper...he's abandoned that line off twisted logic...he has moved on to opposing our treatment of the 600+ Terrorists at GITMO.

91 posted on 02/10/2003 2:32:08 PM PST by VaBthang4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: VaBthang4
I agree with him about disagreeing with our treatment of the gitmo jihadis. I think we're being way too nice.
92 posted on 02/10/2003 2:33:20 PM PST by swarthyguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: swarthyguy
WAIT ONE!

He's back on the first imagined offense.
93 posted on 02/10/2003 2:33:35 PM PST by VaBthang4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: VaBthang4
Jihadis should be thankful they have to deal the military and not with the civilians of the countries they have been killing.
94 posted on 02/10/2003 2:34:47 PM PST by swarthyguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: VaBthang4
Let's compare Perry, to the Reverend John Weir Foote:

Citation 'At Dieppe on 19th August 1942, Honourary Captain Foote, Canadian Chaplain Services, was Regimental Chaplain with the Royal Hamilton Light Infantry. Upon landing on the beach under heavy fire he attached himself to the Regimental Aid Post which had been set up in a slight depression on the beach, but which was only sufficient to give cover to men lying down. During the subsequent period of approximately eight hours, while the action continued, this officer not only assisted the Regimental Medical Officer in ministering to the wounded in the Regimental Aid Post, but time and again left this shelter to inject morphine, give first-aid and carry wounded personnel from the open beach to the Regimental Aid Post. On these occasions, with utter disregard for his personal safety, Honourary Captain Foote exposed himself to an inferno of fire and saved many lives by his gallant efforts. During the action, as the tide went out, the Regimental Aid Post was moved to the shelter of a stranded landing craft. Honourary Captain Foote continued tirelessly and courageously to carry wounded men from the exposed beach to the cover of the landing craft. He also removed wounded from inside the landing craft when ammunition had been set on fire by enemy shells. When landing craft appeared he carried wounded from the Regimental Aid Post to the landing craft through heavy fire. On several occasions this officer had the opportunity to embark but returned to the beach as his chief concern was the care and evacuation of the wounded. He refused a final opportunity to leave the shore, choosing to suffer the fate of the men he had ministered to for over three years. Honourary Captain Foote personally saved many lives by his efforts and his example inspired all around him. Those who observed him state that the calmness of this heroic officer as he walked about, collecting the wounded on the fire-swept beach will never be forgotten.'

95 posted on 02/10/2003 2:40:29 PM PST by Byron_the_Aussie (Hey Kellog's : hands off OUR chocolate crackles!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Byron_the_Aussie
I didn't add " because he smells too bad."

Since I am not concerned with a dead body I would condone such activities only if it served the purpose of reducing the effectiveness of our enemies or increasing the effectiveness of us. The sacred part of a human is gone with death. Not being a materialist my only concern is if performing such an action demeans the living and diminishes their spirit.
96 posted on 02/10/2003 2:41:26 PM PST by justshutupandtakeit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: swarthyguy
Yep.

Point blank...I would have zero problem with any US Soldier dropping a surrendering Al Qaeda or Taliban terrorist. 1-10,000....wouldnt bother me one bit. Other than the intel they could provide, they have no redeemable value in today's World.

I'd shake his hand and buy him dinner...and subtly mourn his not killing more. I dont like it but there are times when killing the enemy is the only way to defeat him. This is one of those times.

I dont make the rules in life, but I sure as heck aint gonna try and transpose some Liberal effeminate ideology [hiding under the guise of civility] over the top of them.
97 posted on 02/10/2003 2:41:49 PM PST by VaBthang4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: VaBthang4
..he finally figured out...he's abandoned...he has moved on to....

No, Vab. Still on the core issue; the treatment, of enemy dead.

You're the one that, by big-noting yourself with a fake military connection, has muddied the waters.

98 posted on 02/10/2003 2:43:45 PM PST by Byron_the_Aussie (Hey Kellog's : hands off OUR chocolate crackles!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit
..not being a materialist my only concern is if performing such an action demeans the living and diminishes their spirit...

...and is there any question, that it does?

99 posted on 02/10/2003 2:45:26 PM PST by Byron_the_Aussie (Hey Kellog's : hands off OUR chocolate crackles!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Byron_the_Aussie
Haha...what...now you're taking the religious angle of approach? Thank you Holy Spirit. Fortunately your religious convictions [which I suspect is nothing more than humanistic dogma] dont apply to me. That wasnt even a nice try.
100 posted on 02/10/2003 2:45:34 PM PST by VaBthang4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 501-520 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson