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.
As far as I can tell the marine did nothing wrong. But the only thing I see Sikes doing wrong is not getting the video cleared for any sensitive information. Nothing in the video betrayed confidential information. He should be punished for violating the rules, but he is no traitor. The difference between Sikes and Kerry is that Sikes is describing what DID happen, while Kerry described stuff that DIDN'T happen.
Those of you comparing Sikes to Kerry are implicitly endorsing that Kerry wasn't lying and slandering in Congress.
Kerry is definitely worse. In proper context or not, Sites is using footage of stuff that actually occurred. Kerry flat-out lied to the US Congress about Vietnam.
Sites may be many things, but he's not John Kerry.
Sites betrayed those who were protecting him with their lives and that is no overstatement. Also, none of this would have come to light had Sikes not played the dirty card.
I really hope and pray that the military brass has had the smarts of removing him from that unit,otherwise it would be cruel and unusual punishment to subject them to his filthy presence.
Ah, yes. "I didn't like what he showed me, so I want to do physical injury to him."
Are you employed in the loansharking business, perchance?
Second, Sites knew what the reaction of the MSM would be over this footage, because he's a member of their fraternity. I object to his betrayal of our troops. Kevin Sites is a traitor.
Oh, I get it. Because others described his video in a fashion you like, therefore he's a traitor.
If this was a righteous deed, then why are so many braying for Sites to be maimed or killed for filming it?
Righteousness need not fear being shown. Evil, on the other hand, needs the black masks.
It's fascinating to watch the reactions. There's a basic conflict between "I think the Marine was right to do this" and "But it should not be shown and Sites is a traitor to the military for giving them a bad image." Those who wanted this deed to not be shown must have, at some fundamental level, serious questions about whether this was a morally right deed.
BTW, for the record: I saw the footage. There was no problem, IMO, with the Marine's actions. And there's no problem with showing the footage. Those who have a problem with seeing it and hyperventilate about it probably should give up watching war footage in general.
I take it that I'm not on your Christmas Card list this year.
I reserve the "self-righteous sanctimonious little prick" description for those who are having such emotional distress over this video being shown.
Here are our Marines going to battle in awful circumstances so you can sit on your fat ass behind your computer and pontificate.
I pontificate from my own USMC experience.
I also pontificate from a viewpoint of how the audience is reacting. It's fascinating to watch FReepers demand that Sites be maimed or murdered for shooting this footage.
You are no FReeper.
Yeah, I'm not calling for murdering or maiming Sites because he shot this footage.
If this was a righteous shooting on this Marine's part (and I do believe it is), why in the Seven Unprintable Names of Ghu are so many people upset about it being shown?
Righteous deeds need not be concealed. Only evil deeds.
So what does that say about the beliefs of those who wanted this deed concealed? Do they really believe their own claims that the Marine was right in doing this? Or is their opposition to the tape being shown rooted in a subconscious belief that the Marine was in the wrong?
Kindly note that she is not charged with treason.
The Founding Fathers made it extremely difficult to sustain a charge of treason. This was because King George and his agents had an annoying habit of treating anything they didn't like as "treason."
Kind of like how a bunch of FReepers are reacting.
Showing this video displeases you, even as you say the Marine was justified. Righteousness need not be hidden. Which one is it? Was the act shown this video righteous, or do you really think, deep down, that it was evil?
I saw the tape; it was a righteous shooting. I have no problem seeing it. If you have a problem, then perhaps you should stop watching war footage.
Carolyn
First, I think any war crimes trial in war is a joke. I have a feeling the army will make this soldier a scapegoat to appease the already increasing Arab backlash against the Fallujah assault and this incident. But, you can't apply such standards to a combat zone. Soldiers are trained to kill. Period. That is their job description and it is about time the US accepted that instead of wanting to believe somehow war can be made sanitary and safe.
However, it is very important the press report all sides of the war, and that includes the incredibly unpleasant realities that sometimes wounded people get shot for no other reason then they are there. Why? Because events such as this happen, and the American Public needs to be aware of all sides, not just those that make us look good.
This is the holdover attitude from the Clinton administration ala Vietnam. Thankfully, George W. has removed the last resistor in his cabinet and replaced him with a loyalist. Perhaps now both the State Department and Defense Department can be cleansed of those who think like you.
The action of the Marine was correct.
Sites took the video and gave it to his bosses.
The MSM loathes the American military when it is under command from a conservative president. Especially one who claims loyalty not only to country but to Jesus Christ overall. Scary stuff, that.
The MSM did as anyone outside the MSM would have predicted and immediately siezed on it as a potential war crime.
The action of the Marine was correct.
That hasn't been established. That's why there's a JAGMAN investigation underway.
Sites took the video and gave it to his bosses.
After giving it to the Marines, who pulled the unit offline and began the investigation.
The MSM loathes the American military when it is under command from a conservative president. Especially one who claims loyalty not only to country but to Jesus Christ overall. Scary stuff, that.
Irrelevant.
The MSM did as anyone outside the MSM would have predicted and immediately siezed on it as a potential war crime.
Again, irrelevant.
Here, let me put it to you this way:
We have so-called "Christians" essentially praying that someone will murder Sites for the crime of offending them.
Once upon a time at FR, we opposed Janet Reno and other practitioners of Arkanicide.
Now we cheer them on...
How did that 1993 Clinton inauguration quote go... "Why are there jets here?" "They're ours now!"
I believe the dichotomy is the result of frustration at holding a minority belief - that is, the indiscriminate slaughter of Iraqis and indeed all Muslims is justified.
This belief is opposed by all right-thinking people who rightly recoil at the thought, and FReepers are frustrated that those right-thinking people include President Bush and officers of the United States military.
That sets an incredibly dangerous standard. What information gets into the public dialog should not be decided by a few people.
If the same incident happened to Clinton during Kosovo, I am sure you would be adamently arguing for the story to hit the airwaves with as much force as possible.
LOL! I can't believe it actually worked. You finally exposed your true character.
I support our military and believe they should be given as much leeway as possible to accomplish their mission. They don't require armchair generals or media parasites peering over their shoulders every minute to make sure they have executed their duty in accordance with U.N. regulations.
I'm no expert, but it sounds like you two may need to renew your loyalty oath.
I have not problem with the soldier's actions. As I previously mentioned, combat zone = killing. There is no time for asking questions.
But, the press should be reporting the killing in whatever its manifestations. One of my big problems with the US is we think war can be sanitary. It can't be. That does not mean we should shy away from it. But we should know the exact nature of what we are getting into so we can decide what actions are available.
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.