Tea Party opts to put former Marine who killed two unarmed Iraqis on their ticket

[removeduser_487563287433]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010...aqis-tea-party

Pretty shocking stuff when you consider what he did.

The basic facts are undisputed: on 15 April 2004 Ilario Pantano, then a second lieutenant with the US marines, stopped and detained two Iraqi men in a car near Falluja. The Iraqis were unarmed and the car found to be empty of weapons.

Pantano ordered the two men to search the car for a second time and then, with no other US soldiers in view, unloaded a magazine of his M16A4 automatic rifle into them, before reloading and blasting a second magazine at them – some 60 rounds in total.

Over the corpses, he left a placard inscribed with the marine motto: "No better friend, No worse enemy."

To have this man put on a pedestal seems to be in character with the Tea Party and their extremist beliefs. To see him actually in contention for a Congressional seat is alarming.

[justicar5]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010...aqis-tea-party

Pretty shocking stuff when you consider what he did.

The basic facts are undisputed: on 15 April 2004 Ilario Pantano, then a second lieutenant with the US marines, stopped and detained two Iraqi men in a car near Falluja. The Iraqis were unarmed and the car found to be empty of weapons.

Pantano ordered the two men to search the car for a second time and then, with no other US soldiers in view, unloaded a magazine of his M16A4 automatic rifle into them, before reloading and blasting a second magazine at them – some 60 rounds in total.

Over the corpses, he left a placard inscribed with the marine motto: "No better friend, No worse enemy."

To have this man put on a pedestal seems to be in character with the Tea Party and their extremist beliefs. To see him actually in contention for a Congressional seat is alarming.

Wait the 1st marine division, US marine corps took the (misquoted) epitaph of Sulla the Dictator as it's motto? Seriously? Had they read anything about the man? (The real quote being: No friend ever served me, and no enemy ever wronged me, whom I have not repaid in full.)

I have seen it the 'no better friend no worse enemy' way alot of time sattributed to Sulla so...

[Darth Red]

The defence countered that weapons had been found in the house from where the Iraqis were fleeing. The men had turned on Pantano unexpectedly as he was guarding them. He shouted "Stop!" but they didn't respond and he opened fire in self-defence.

Defence lawyers highlighted inconsistencies in the accounts of the prosecution witnesses and portrayed the main witness, who had been demoted by Pantano, as a soldier with an axe to grind. Forensic evidence was said to conflict with the prosecution case.

In the event, all charges against Pantano were dropped on grounds of insufficient evidence. But the officer presiding over the hearing recommended that Pantano be given non-judicial punishment for having displayed "extremely poor judgment", adding that by desecrating the Iraqi's bodies with his placard he had brought disgrace to the armed forces.

Knowing nothing of the actual case other than this article, the explanation at least seems plausable, no? I am just saying it does look a bit like sour grapes.

Either way I would agree with the Judge that this was "poor judgement" puting the placard on the bodies.

[removeduser_487563287433]

I've stopped at calling this man a murderer, Darth Red, but even if we give him a huge benefit of the doubt, he is a grossly inappropriate candidate for an office. This is a test of the local electorate, no doubt about that.

[SigniferOne]

I've stopped at calling this man a murderer, Darth Red, but even if we give him a huge benefit of the doubt, he is a grossly inappropriate candidate for an office. This is a test of the local electorate, no doubt about that.

If he's not a murderer, then what makes him grossly inappropriate?

That a man is willing to act extremely, and without guilt, is the very fact that makes him unqualified in your eyes? And then you complain about corrupt politicians and weasely compromising political system? You're disqualifying the very people that would clean up the house. Every man should be willing to act extremely, and without guilt (as long as it's within the law). Men who don't act extremely are precisely the evil of your political system. Looks like you need to look in the mirror to find out who put the weak-kneed compromisers into office.

[Darth Red]

If he's not a murderer, then what makes him grossly inappropriate?

The fact that a man is willing to act extremely, and without guilt, makes him unqualified in your eyes? And then you complain about corrupt politicians and weasely compromising political system? You're disqualifying the very people that would clean up the house. Every man should be willing to act extremely, and without guilt (as long as it's within the law). Men who don't act extremely are precisely the evil of your political system. Looks like you need to look in the mirror to find out who put the weak-kneed compromisers into office.

I don't think that's really the issue here. I don't even have a problem with his acting in the line of duty making a split second decision when every second matters. He percieved a thread and acted swiftly. The problem I am seeing is after the situation was resolved he went out of his way to put a (trolling) placard on the two enemy combatants.

[Phier]

I don't think that's really the issue here. I don't even have a problem with his acting in the line of duty making a split second decision when every second matters. He percieved a thread and acted swiftly. The problem I am seeing is after the situation was resolved he went out of his way to put a (trolling) placard on the two enemy combatants.

Its a time honored military tradition.

[Darth Red]

Its a time honored military tradition.

True, does that make it right though? I am sure this happen in much more graphic detail 80 years ago during WWII in Europe but we weren't really fighting a counter insurgency where we wanted the help and sympathies of the Iraqi's in fighting terrorism there.

I don't think that gesture helped that MO at all.

[justicar5]

If he's not a murderer, then what makes him grossly inappropriate?

That a man is willing to act extremely, and without guilt, is the very fact that makes him unqualified in your eyes? And then you complain about corrupt politicians and weasely compromising political system? You're disqualifying the very people that would clean up the house. Every man should be willing to act extremely, and without guilt (as long as it's within the law). Men who don't act extremely are precisely the evil of your political system. Looks like you need to look in the mirror to find out who put the weak-kneed compromisers into office.

so you want extreme demagogues back in power? Like the 1920-30s? Don't get me wrong I want there to be strong politicians, but compromise is not a bad thing, if thats what the majority of voters want, a centre ground.

[removeduser_487563287433]

If he's not a murderer, then what makes him grossly inappropriate?

That a man is willing to act extremely, and without guilt, is the very fact that makes him unqualified in your eyes? And then you complain about corrupt politicians and weasely compromising political system? You're disqualifying the very people that would clean up the house. Every man should be willing to act extremely, and without guilt (as long as it's within the law). Men who don't act extremely are precisely the evil of your political system. Looks like you need to look in the mirror to find out who put the weak-kneed compromisers into office.

That's not what makes him inappropriate in my eyes. Being willing to kill needlessly and desecrate the victims? Just the latest bizarre Tea Party candidate, but more concerning than The Witch because he has a chance of winning.

[bigfootedfred]

If he's not a murderer, then what makes him grossly inappropriate?

That a man is willing to act extremely, and without guilt, is the very fact that makes him unqualified in your eyes? And then you complain about corrupt politicians and weasely compromising political system? You're disqualifying the very people that would clean up the house. Every man should be willing to act extremely, and without guilt (as long as it's within the law). Men who don't act extremely are precisely the evil of your political system. Looks like you need to look in the mirror to find out who put the weak-kneed compromisers into office.

Have you not seen cameron just lately?

He was busy begging the EU not to take more of our money, oh and he promised a referendum before he was elected for any 'future changes' such as those being proposed now to the lisbon treaty.

Of course he recently said he has no intention of honouring that promise...

That my freind, is a leader with strength of conviction in his heart ..

Yes the sarcasm was rather 'extreme' there on my part, it seems this country thinks the weaker, more lilly livered the leader the better. Its called being 'PC', or being 'a tactician' or whatever cosy word they can think of.



"oh? whats that? you want me to bend over? shall i touch my toes?"

[frontier-auxilia]

If he's not a murderer, then what makes him grossly inappropriate?

That a man is willing to act extremely, and without guilt, is the very fact that makes him unqualified in your eyes? And then you complain about corrupt politicians and weasely compromising political system? You're disqualifying the very people that would clean up the house. Every man should be willing to act extremely, and without guilt (as long as it's within the law). Men who don't act extremely are precisely the evil of your political system. Looks like you need to look in the mirror to find out who put the weak-kneed compromisers into office.

Ok a man who goes by his values and never compromise at the face of odds in politics is an admirable trait. A man who comitted man slaughter and freely desecrate his victim's corpse is a monster. By your standard, war-criminals, dictators and amoral scum bags in the middle of Rwanda who murder, pillage and rape a village like its a walk in a candy bar must be fine material for politicians then?

Disgusting.

[Yosemite]

Ok a man who goes by his values and never compromise at the face of odds in politics is an admirable trait. A man who comitted man slaughter and freely desecrate his victim's corpse is a monster. By your standard, war-criminals, dictators and amoral scum bags in the middle of Rwanda who murder, pillage and rape a village like its a walk in a candy bar must be fine material for politicians then?

Disgusting.

dude you've never raped anyone did you?

how can you criticize the warlords of rwanda?

[Simon Cashmere]

I've stopped at calling this man a murderer, Darth Red, but even if we give him a huge benefit of the doubt, he is a grossly inappropriate candidate for an office. This is a test of the local electorate, no doubt about that.

Remember the presumption of innocence that applies to terrorists? Also applies to the people on our side too.

CAROLINA BEACH, N.C., May 26 - A Marine Corps officer accused of murdering two Iraqis suspected of being insurgents last year was cleared of criminal wrongdoing Thursday, by the same two-star general who ordered a formal inquiry into the matter.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/27/na...=3&oref=slogin

So he was cleared. But according to you, he is guilty and shouldn't run. If it was a former accused terrorist who was cleared, youd be screaming about the presumption of innocence and this man has committed no crime, but because it is a marine..different standard applies.

[removeduser_487563287433]

Remember the presumption of innocence that applies to terrorists? Also applies to the people on our side too.

Innocent of what? Killing two people in cold blood and desecrating the bodies? These facts are not in dispute, Simon.

[austin.weathers]

Innocent of what? Killing two people in cold blood and desecrating the bodies? These facts are not in dispute, Simon.

And again:

When my uncle was on Bagram AFB a couple months ago, he took a picture of a man herding sheep along the fenceline around the base, which he showed me 2 weeks ago when he got back. Uncle sat there in his bunker watching for awhile and then decided to walk to his vehicle and go back to his hangar. While he was walking to his vehicle, a Spec Ops drove up, called the sheep herder over to the fence, and put a 9mm round through the man's forehead. The "sheep herder" had been timing the takeoffs of the planes leaving Bagram AFB. The Spec Ops guy had been watching him for hours.

Moral of the story: Things aren't always how they might seem when the enemy doesn't wear a uniform.

what happened to his sheep?

They just kept walking around.

[removeduser_487563287433]

And again:

When my uncle was on Bagram AFB a couple months ago, he took a picture of a man herding sheep along the fenceline around the base, which he showed me 2 weeks ago when he got back. Uncle sat there in his bunker watching for awhile and then decided to walk to his vehicle and go back to his hangar. While he was walking to his vehicle, a Spec Ops drove up, called the sheep herder over to the fence, and put a 9mm round through the man's forehead. The "sheep herder" had been timing the takeoffs of the planes leaving Bagram AFB. The Spec Ops guy had been watching him for hours.

Moral of the story: Things aren't always how they might seem when the enemy doesn't wear a uniform.

?

He killed in danger, hence the dropped murder charges.

Um, incorrect. It's clear you didn't read the article.

[Kurtz]

His actions were justified because they were brown. Now if he killed a white person that would be different.

[★Bandiera Rossa☭]

His actions were justified because they were brown. Now if he killed a white person that would be different.

Obviously, it's just like the Neo-Nazis in Arizona who murdered Latinos (including children). The Tea Party wouldn't be backing them up if they had killed a little white girl and her family instead.

[SigniferOne]

That's not what makes him inappropriate in my eyes. Being willing to kill needlessly and desecrate the victims?

If they were the enemy, they weren't the victims. If they were victims, then they weren't the enemy. Based on the facts as I have them at the moment, he wasnt found of killing and desecrating victims.

I don't think that's really the issue here. I don't even have a problem with his acting in the line of duty making a split second decision when every second matters. He percieved a thread and acted swiftly. The problem I am seeing is after the situation was resolved he went out of his way to put a (trolling) placard on the two enemy combatants.

The most important part of war is not the physical killing, but the psychological warfare of taking away the opponent's intent to win. If they were the enemy and not the victims, theres nothing wrong with what he did. If you heard of what he did HERE, across the ocean, then the enemies surely did even more so, over there. And no one would be comfortable receiving such a message.

Again this man is willing to act extremely, and without guilt, which, if within the law, sets him above many other men; he may lose because of political novitude, but thats different.