chris_gerrib | Bergdahl, Links About

Current Mood: busy

Entry tags:

Bergdahl, Links About

Still busy (and alas, can't do certain tasks at work) but a few links about Bowe Bergdahl and his release.

A) Bergdahl may have walked off base more than once, including in Afghanistan.

B) Dear Soldier: We need some information in case you're captured. Such as: 2) Do you believe in The Mission? We actually don’t care whether you believe in the mission you’re assigned to do. You’re a soldier/airman/seaman/Marine, and you do what you’re told. However, to assist in determining your worthiness for rescue, please let us know now if you think you might at any point in the future express doubts about the morality of any cause you may be sent to support, or whether you anticipate any experiences while deployed might cause you to see said deployment in a negative light. Again, your answer in the space provided will be checked against future statements you may make.

C) America, What The Hell is Wrong With Us? Money quote: But the bottom line is that if you see a woman standing in the middle of the road and a Mack Truck bearing down on her, you don't stop to grill her on whether she just used heroin or left her child on a stoop somewhere. You pick her up and swoop her out of the street, and deal with the rest later.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Guantanamo needs to be emptied. Since God forbid we put them on trial, the President has been trying to persuade other countries to take them. Only, it’s difficult to get assurances that they won’t be allowed to fight us again or be summarily executed. Qatar just offered to take five.

“Deal with the rest later?” Okay, here it is: You're under arrest. You will not receive a trial. By court order, you are now a Sex Offender™. As such, you've lost your job and are permanently blacklisted. Your name is on a list. You may not move from your county without permission, and your name will be given to the local police. God help you if you are pulled over for any reason, ever. Your life is effectively destroyed. Congratulations.

Why? You, a male, touched a woman without her permission. Moreover, you did so in a forcible and aggressive manner. (Actually, 'why' is unnecessary and prone to contumacy, as it gives the victim something to argue. You are because a woman - or more accurately, her feminist-jurisprudence-trained lawyer - says so, is 'why.')

No, it's not the point of Mr Bunch's article, but his example was badly chosen. Sad, tragic, terrible as it is - and it is, very deliberately! - in the situation described you'd be far, far better off to notice a blue-tailed loon flying away overhead and turn to follow it - and only then hear the screams from the street you weren't looking at just then, so sorry, gosh golly…

The purpose of feminism is social destruction. The purpose of “feminist jurisprudence,” openly stated (in the name of “fairness”) is to uproot the concepts of equal protection under the law, procedural protection, and the rule of law itself. Avoidance equals common sense equals survival - if you see a woman standing alone by the side of her broken-down car, just drive on by, brother. Call the Highway Patrol if you're feeling charitable: They've got dashboard-mounted recorders, and when he perceives the situation the officer will immediately call for backup - i e witnesses. Thus they are now trained, and for good reason!

- This, I'm sorry to say, is not a joke. A case that made headlines a few years ago involved a girl who obliviously bicycled right out in front of an oncoming car, which just avoided turning her into street pizza. The driver, furious and badly rattled, jumped out and grabbed her by the arm and yelled at her for being a stupid careless nitwit -

grabbed her by the arm - He is now a registered sex offender, a status with no expiration. Because he, second-class citizen, DARED to lay a finger on one of the New Aristocracy, his life is as thoroughly destroyed as if he hadn't touched the brake pedal. Doubtless he wishes he hadn't.

Edited 2014-06-06 13:43 (UTC)

Gordon, dude, you really need to get a grip on reality.

Well, no, as I said, it was a bad example. If you saw a child running after a ball, or a blind man, or fill-in-the-blank… If you saw a dog. His idea was sound; his example, regrettably and I hope temporarily, wasn't.

I'll let my wife know that her desire to get paid the same as her male co-workers and generally be treated the same as men get treated is destroying society.

Because, frankly, if society can only function by treating women as baby incubators then it's probably due a bit of destruction.

This, I'm sorry to say, is not a joke. A case that made headlines a few years ago involved a girl who obliviously bicycled right out in front of an oncoming car, which just avoided turning her into street pizza. The driver, furious and badly rattled, jumped out and grabbed her by the arm and yelled at her for being a stupid careless nitwit -

And if you believe this, let me tell you about this bridge I have for sale in Brooklyn...

I do apologize - my comment was unnecessary and inappropriate to the subject.

You pay the shipping cost of that bridge.

http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-molest01.html

Fitzroy Barnaby said he had to swerve to avoid hitting the 14-year-old Des Plaines girl who walked in front of his car.

She said he yelled, "Come here, little girl," before getting out of his car and grabbing her by the arm.

He said he simply lectured her.

She said she broke free and ran, fearful of what he'd do next.

In a Thursday ruling, the Appellate Court of Illinois said the 28-year-old Evanston man must register as a sex offender.

<=\\=\\=\\=\\=>

http://overlawyered.com/2005/07/he-grabbed-girls-arm-now-hes-a-sex-offender/

“He grabbed girl’s arm — now he’s a sex offender”
by Walter Olson on July 3, 2005

The judge agreed that 28-year-old Fitzroy Barnaby of Evanston, Ill. probably didn’t have any sexual intention when he grabbed a 14-year-old girl’s arm to chastise her (he says) for walking in front of his car. But unlawful restraint of a minor, the offense of which Barnaby was convicted, automatically qualifies as a sex offense under Illinois law. “Now, [Barnaby] will have to tell local police where he lives and won’t be able to live near a park or school.” “I don’t really see the purpose of registration in this case. I really don’t,” said Cook County judge Patrick Morse. “But I feel that I am constrained by the statute.” (Steve Patterson, Chicago Sun-Times, Jul. 1).

<=\\=\\=\\=\\=>

http://www.foxnews.com/story/2006/04/04/did-pedophilia-hysteria-cause-child-death/

Last summer, an Illinois man lost an appeal on his conviction as a sex offender for grabbing the arm of a 14-year-old girl. She had stepped directly in front of his car, causing him to swerve in order to avoid hitting her.

The 28-year-old Fitzroy Barnaby jumped out his car, grabbed her arm and lectured her on how not to get killed. Nothing more occurred. Nevertheless, that one action made him guilty of "the unlawful restraint of a minor," which is a sexual offense in Illinois. Both the jury and judge believed him. Nevertheless, Barnaby went through years of legal proceedings that ended with his name on a sex offender registry, where his photograph and address are publicly available. He must report to authorities. His employment options are severely limited; he cannot live near schools or parks.

Arguably, the law would have punished Barnaby less had he hit the girl or not cared enough to lecture her… [Emphasis mine - BW]

Again, Barnaby is an extreme case. But ordinary people make decisions on how to interact with children based on such high profile stories…

/======//======/

Please observe that I'm still wrong in ascribing motivation - the sex of the minor is irrelevant. There was a guy who compelled a 17-year-old boy to accompany him to collect a drug debt - this, too, was deemed 'unlawful restraint of a minor,' and zang, he's a “sex offender,” even though sex wasn't involved!

Edited 2014-06-08 17:58 (UTC)

Having wasted two hours of my life on "Fitzroy Barnaby" I conclude that this is a case of "the problem with stupid. (http://chris-gerrib.livejournal.com/162713.html)" As near as I can tell, the only original source is a Sun-Times article that's no longer available. Thus, not answered are questions like:

1) what time of the day or night did this occur?
2) Did Barnaby have any reasonable business being there, or did it look like he was cruising around for something?
3) Did he "just" grab her arm or did he try to pull her into his vehicle?
4) Why exactly did he feel the need to grab her arm AFTER he DIDN'T hit her? If she doesn't feel the need to stick around and get a lecture from him, this is a problem how?

Lastly, why exactly should a single obscure case hold more weight than the larger matter at hand? It's very much like saying "a commercial airliner crashed 10 years ago, so don't fly."

So you concede the event occurred. If I believed that it had, you said, there was a bridge you wanted to sell me. It did occur. Thus, my point.

I do not concede that the facts are as you presented them. I also remind you that your original post said "no trial." Except you now claim a trial and an appeal.

The facts are probably not what you think they are.

Edited 2014-06-09 14:27 (UTC)

(http://i62.tinypic.com/2nsuw40.gif)

[Anyway, I DO concede that my original reason for mentioning it at all is invalid, so I'll give you best, here.]

Edited 2014-06-09 17:22 (UTC)

I have been witnessing some extreme stupidity over the releases recently including a lovely link to who these guys are. So they're now 5 mid to late 40 somethings, who've been in captivity since 2001 and 2002... that's 12-13 years with, I presume, extremely limited access to intelligence of any kind.

Yes, I am sure they're going to slot right back into the battlefield/intelligence operation without a hitch.

"NO! I know, quick, get the doctor he'll get in touch with Osama.... eh? What do you mean he's dead? What about X? Dead too? Well who the fuck is in charge????"

Not to mention, unless the Taliban/Al Queda are more clueless than I think they are (always possible) after this time in US captivity they're going to be more toxic than the shit they store at Hanford.

Never mine - skip it. Naught to be gained.

Edited 2014-06-09 14:22 (UTC)

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Bergdahl, Links About

What? A captured soldier gets released too? Yay!

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

By the way -

Re: By the way -

Re: Bridges of Belief

no subject

Great Bolshy yarbles!

no subject

no subject