Navy brass who do not want terrorist killed to resign over Trump defending Eddie Gallagher

Look simpleton the California state sales tax is 7.5 percent, groceries are exempt, Thus if an illegal made 30,000 dollars and spent it all on taxable items which can not happen they would pay 2250 per year in taxes. However much of the money goes for food UNTAXED, more goes for rent paid in cash because they are illegal to a slumlord UNTAXED, then there is the money they send home UNTAXED. All in all an illegal might if they were prosperous pay 500 dolllars a year in taxes, I pay almost twice that every pay before I even pay sales taxes. So how does 500 dollars a year in taxes paid equal free medical when 500 dollars divided by 12 equals exactly 41.66 per month in possible money spent on a health insurance premium?

The same argument could be made for most poor people. Your argument is that they didn't pay anything into the system. Clearly they do. The value of their labor exceeds the costs of the services provided.

Yo moron, if you used a fake SS number you would be arrested

We can't arrest the real criminals, much less people who commit petty violations.

Okay, Sweetie... if you are such a fucking loser that you are competing with someone with no money, no connections and a limited grasp on English, that's on you.
Illegals have no right to be here simpleton, and those poor Americans you reference are made poorer because they are guaranteed minimum wage in jobs they do not get because illegals are working those jobs and being paid less than minimum which benefits the slave driving employer and hurts the now unemployed and as you say POOR AMERICAN.

This is why Martin Luther Kings family voted for Trump

Enjoy Trump till 2024, then another Trump takes over

Wrong.
Who we call "illegal" are actually natives, and they were here before us.
We illegally either killed the natives or chased them out to Mexico or Canada.
And the 8 states that used to be part of Mexico that we bought, was with treaties saying we could not make them leave or stop them their travel back and forth from these states at least.

It is those of European descent who actually have no legal right to be here.
 
They have a serious ass whipping coming to them, but it won’t be mankind who will hand it out. Read Ezekiel 38.
Islam TEACHES that Islam will rule the world and MUST do so. That Everyone must be Muslim. That in order to get there is a never ending process. Right now the two chosen paths of HOW to GET THERE are either through assimilation or direct force. That has ALWAYS been the case. Until the modern area after the Muslims lost in holy Jihad to conquer the west in Spain and Eastern Europe. they had no way to force it now some think they do and it has nothing to do with us Radicalizing them.

RETIREDGYSGT is lying.
I have read the Quran, and it say that Judaism and Christianity are equally valid ways to God and Heaven, and that there can never be compulsion over religion.
The Quran says violence is wrong and can only be used in defense, and that one should never attack anyone else except in defense.
Jihad means a quest for religious perfection, like fasting or being celibate.
It has nothing to do with war.

The people who attacked in Spain were the Moors, and the Moslem Arabs had already been wiped out around 1200 by the Mongols. The people who attacked eastern Europe were the Turks, who were not Arabs or seriously Moslem either.
Good God you are STUPID.

Actually, if you read about the Moors entering the Iberian Peninsula, they were invited.
The Castillians and Aragons were fighting and the Moors were originally hired to defend.

Name any time when Arab Moslems ever attacked anyone?
The reality is that it is the west attacking the natives of the Mideast, like the British and Napoleon fighting over Egypt, the British and Russians fighting over the Crimea, etc.
It is Europeans who have always been the attackers and been at fault.
We have been fighting Arab Muslims since Thomas Jefferson and Tripoli. Get real man.
The Crusades were a Counter Offensive against Muslim Aggression. Can I have some of what you are smoking?

Want to hear something funny? The Bible-Prophecy lists all the armies of major end time battles where vast armies all descend upon Israel to Exterminate The Jew. Some of these Prophecies are over 2,500 years old. They were Written Before Islam ever existed. Every country named in these prophecies is an Islamic Nation that is completely wiped out by God in The Battle of Gog and Magog, The Battle of Bosra, and The Battle of Armageddon.

God said, Israel would be scattered and no longer be a Nation, but he also said He would gather up "the dry bones" and make them live again, make Israel a Nation again. That happened in 1948, and God also said before Islam even existed that all of these Islamic Nations near and during the End Times would try to destroy Israel which will end in the final battle of a series of battles imo WWIII in their destruction at Armageddon.

Care to explain how God knew thousands of years ago that Israel would be the only resurrected nation in history, and that Islam would be created and be in a state of constant war with Israel 2,500 years ago?

Answer: He is God and He does not Lie. He holds time and eternity in His hands and is The Architect of The Universe and Author of Man's Redemption. He sees all, knows all and is all.

The Purpose of the Battle of Armageddon | RevelationLogic

richardson120622_2.jpg

Patterns-and-Paths-1.png

17-Iran-attacks-Israel.jpg
 
Last edited:
I think that he should have complained to Hollywood. The ones who has conditioned the minds of the people is Hollywood. They has done studies decades ago.To see how entertainment has so much control over society. Like when the movie "Gone with the wind" first appeared. That every man that has saw the movie started saying "Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn" to their wives. And some had called the U.S. Coast guard about people being stranded on a deserted island. Which they found out that it was from citizens that has watched the show called, "Gilligan's Island" And Joan Collin was slapped by a fan of" Dynasty". The fan was mad at her for being so cruel on the show. And so Hollywood has control of our behavior. That it the purpose why they has so many sponsors that pays them to sell their products. George Soros bought Netflix for that purpose. To create his own mini Hollywood.


Richard Spencer@RichardBSpencer
I promise to make the U.S. Navy the last stand of implicit White identity.

Richard Spencer on Twitter


390

8:06 PM - Jun 2, 2017
Twitter Ads info and privacy

5 things to know about Richard Spencer, Navy secretary nominee
Life is like a box of chocolates
 
Look simpleton the California state sales tax is 7.5 percent, groceries are exempt, Thus if an illegal made 30,000 dollars and spent it all on taxable items which can not happen they would pay 2250 per year in taxes. However much of the money goes for food UNTAXED, more goes for rent paid in cash because they are illegal to a slumlord UNTAXED, then there is the money they send home UNTAXED. All in all an illegal might if they were prosperous pay 500 dolllars a year in taxes, I pay almost twice that every pay before I even pay sales taxes. So how does 500 dollars a year in taxes paid equal free medical when 500 dollars divided by 12 equals exactly 41.66 per month in possible money spent on a health insurance premium?

The same argument could be made for most poor people. Your argument is that they didn't pay anything into the system. Clearly they do. The value of their labor exceeds the costs of the services provided.

Yo moron, if you used a fake SS number you would be arrested

We can't arrest the real criminals, much less people who commit petty violations.

Okay, Sweetie... if you are such a fucking loser that you are competing with someone with no money, no connections and a limited grasp on English, that's on you.
Illegals have no right to be here simpleton, and those poor Americans you reference are made poorer because they are guaranteed minimum wage in jobs they do not get because illegals are working those jobs and being paid less than minimum which benefits the slave driving employer and hurts the now unemployed and as you say POOR AMERICAN.

This is why Martin Luther Kings family voted for Trump

Enjoy Trump till 2024, then another Trump takes over

Wrong.
Who we call "illegal" are actually natives, and they were here before us.
We illegally either killed the natives or chased them out to Mexico or Canada.
And the 8 states that used to be part of Mexico that we bought, was with treaties saying we could not make them leave or stop them their travel back and forth from these states at least.

It is those of European descent who actually have no legal right to be here.
Take your pills kid, or grab a line of fentanyl off an illegal border crosser
 
If you let Gallagher go that means YOU don't get to complain when they cut innocents heads off or set them on fire.

All his men have staged a coup, just like tramp, all the Dems have staged a coup. He is guilty of war crimes.

Gallagher killed no one, dumbass!

First of all, that is not true.
His subordinates say he killed dozens of suspected enemy who had been captured or incapacitated in some way.
Second is that even the medic who says Gallagher failed to kill this particular suspect, admits that Gallagher tried to slit the suspect's throat to kill him, but simply failed.
Third is that taking your picture with a person you thought you just killed is really, really sick, and totally illegal.
If that is true why did the navy not convict him

Technicalities.
The one documented incident, the corpsman said that when Gallighar slit his throat, he missed the arteries, so it was not fatal.
He said he euthanized the suspect himself.
The rest were not documented enough for a conviction.
But the image is a war crime against mutilation of bodies, humiliation, abuse of the dead, etc.

{...
Geneva Convention IV
Article 16, second paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides: “As far as military considerations allow, each Party to the conflict shall facilitate the steps taken … to protect [the killed] against … ill-treatment.”
fnIcon.gif

Additional Protocol I
Article 34(1) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides: “The remains of persons who have died for reasons related to occupation or in detention resulting from occupation or hostilities … shall be respected”.
fnIcon.gif

Additional Protocol II
Article 4 of the 1977 Additional Protocol II provides:
1. All persons who do not take a direct part or who have ceased to take part in hostilities, whether or not their liberty has been restricted, are entitled to respect for their person [and] honour …
2. Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, the following acts against the persons referred to in paragraph I are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever:

(e) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment …
fnIcon.gif

ICC Statute
Pursuant to Article 8(2)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii) of the 1998 ICC Statute, “[c]ommitting outrages upon personal dignity” constitutes a war crime in both international and non-international armed conflicts.
fnIcon.gif

II. Other Instruments
Oxford Manual
Article 19 of the 1880 Oxford Manual provides: “It is forbidden to … mutilate the dead lying on the field of battle.”
fnIcon.gif

Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam
Article 3(a) of the 1990 Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam provides: “In the event of the use of force and in case of armed conflict … it is prohibited to mutilate dead bodies.”
fnIcon.gif

Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and IHL in the Philippines
Article 3(4) of Part IV of the 1998 Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and IHL in the Philippines provides that “desecration of the remains of those who have died in the course of the armed conflict or while under detention” shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to persons hors de combat. Article 4(9) provides: “Every possible measure shall be taken, without delay, … [to prevent] mutilation [the dead].”
fnIcon.gif

ICC Elements of Crimes
With reference to the war crime of outrages upon personal dignity, the 2000 ICC Elements of Crimes specifies that Article 8(2)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii) of the 1998 ICC Statute also applies to dead persons.
fnIcon.gif

UNTAET Regulation No. 2000/15
The UNTAET Regulation No. 2000/15 establishes panels with exclusive jurisdiction over serious criminal offences, including war crimes. According to Section 6(1)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii), “[c]ommitting outrages upon personal dignity” constitutes a war crime in both international and non-international armed conflicts.
fnIcon.gif

...}
Customary IHL - Practice Relating to Rule 113. Treatment of the Dead

This is well known and no sane soldier would do what Gallaghar did.
The US prosecuted many cases of this in the past.
The fact we no longer do, condemns our whole military system.
 
If you let Gallagher go that means YOU don't get to complain when they cut innocents heads off or set them on fire.

All his men have staged a coup, just like tramp, all the Dems have staged a coup. He is guilty of war crimes.

Gallagher killed no one, dumbass!

First of all, that is not true.
His subordinates say he killed dozens of suspected enemy who had been captured or incapacitated in some way.
Second is that even the medic who says Gallagher failed to kill this particular suspect, admits that Gallagher tried to slit the suspect's throat to kill him, but simply failed.
Third is that taking your picture with a person you thought you just killed is really, really sick, and totally illegal.
If that is true why did the navy not convict him

Technicalities.
The one documented incident, the corpsman said that when Gallighar slit his throat, he missed the arteries, so it was not fatal.
He said he euthanized the suspect himself.
The rest were not documented enough for a conviction.
But the image is a war crime against mutilation of bodies, humiliation, abuse of the dead, etc.

{...
Geneva Convention IV
Article 16, second paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides: “As far as military considerations allow, each Party to the conflict shall facilitate the steps taken … to protect [the killed] against … ill-treatment.”
fnIcon.gif

Additional Protocol I
Article 34(1) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides: “The remains of persons who have died for reasons related to occupation or in detention resulting from occupation or hostilities … shall be respected”.
fnIcon.gif

Additional Protocol II
Article 4 of the 1977 Additional Protocol II provides:
1. All persons who do not take a direct part or who have ceased to take part in hostilities, whether or not their liberty has been restricted, are entitled to respect for their person [and] honour …
2. Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, the following acts against the persons referred to in paragraph I are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever:

(e) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment …
fnIcon.gif

ICC Statute
Pursuant to Article 8(2)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii) of the 1998 ICC Statute, “[c]ommitting outrages upon personal dignity” constitutes a war crime in both international and non-international armed conflicts.
fnIcon.gif

II. Other Instruments
Oxford Manual
Article 19 of the 1880 Oxford Manual provides: “It is forbidden to … mutilate the dead lying on the field of battle.”
fnIcon.gif

Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam
Article 3(a) of the 1990 Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam provides: “In the event of the use of force and in case of armed conflict … it is prohibited to mutilate dead bodies.”
fnIcon.gif

Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and IHL in the Philippines
Article 3(4) of Part IV of the 1998 Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and IHL in the Philippines provides that “desecration of the remains of those who have died in the course of the armed conflict or while under detention” shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to persons hors de combat. Article 4(9) provides: “Every possible measure shall be taken, without delay, … [to prevent] mutilation [the dead].”
fnIcon.gif

ICC Elements of Crimes
With reference to the war crime of outrages upon personal dignity, the 2000 ICC Elements of Crimes specifies that Article 8(2)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii) of the 1998 ICC Statute also applies to dead persons.
fnIcon.gif

UNTAET Regulation No. 2000/15
The UNTAET Regulation No. 2000/15 establishes panels with exclusive jurisdiction over serious criminal offences, including war crimes. According to Section 6(1)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii), “[c]ommitting outrages upon personal dignity” constitutes a war crime in both international and non-international armed conflicts.
fnIcon.gif

...}
Customary IHL - Practice Relating to Rule 113. Treatment of the Dead

This is well known and no sane soldier would do what Gallaghar did.
The US prosecuted many cases of this in the past.
The fact we no longer do, condemns our whole military system.
Dude a local admitted to splitting the shits throat to save him from being tortured by the local military

Fuck off and die you Islamic shit

Make sure you cut off all the little girls vaginas first
 
So should Mexicans that never paid into shit be on any waiting list?

You appear to be in denial and delusional to the democratic socialist platform. The denial part is clear

Wouldn't know. Here's the thing. If they are working here, they are probably paying into it.

If they are using a fake SSN, they are paying into Social Security and Medicare they'll probably never collect.

If they are paying state sales taxes, they are paying for medicaid services.

We could end the "Illegal" problem in five minutes. Go after the rich white people who patronize them.
Look simpleton the California state sales tax is 7.5 percent, groceries are exempt, Thus if an illegal made 30,000 dollars and spent it all on taxable items which can not happen they would pay 2250 per year in taxes. However much of the money goes for food UNTAXED, more goes for rent paid in cash because they are illegal to a slumlord UNTAXED, then there is the money they send home UNTAXED. All in all an illegal might if they were prosperous pay 500 dolllars a year in taxes, I pay almost twice that every pay before I even pay sales taxes. So how does 500 dollars a year in taxes paid equal free medical when 500 dollars divided by 12 equals exactly 41.66 per month in possible money spent on a health insurance premium?

If you could do the math which no dopokrap can you would see this

Yo moron, if you used a fake SS number you would be arrested

MORON ALERT

Wrong.
All employers always have to withhold income tax, FICA, etc., from all employees, legal or illegal.
The difference is legals can file and get most of it back, if poor enough.
Illegals get none of it back because they can not risk filing.

And yes, rent paid by illegals is income to landlords, so also gets taxed.
People use fake SS numbers all the time without being arrested, because the feds so not investigate when money is paid in. They only investigate when they think money is NOT being paid in.
Wrong stupid. Many if not most illegals work off the books often paid in cash so the employer saves as well

You live in a fake world justifying illegal behavior as legal

You are sick

Wrong.
The if the employer pays cash, then that is money has gained that he has to pay taxes on.
The employer always declares costs like wages, because then that money becomes tax exempt.
If an employer would be foolish enough to pay cash and not declare it as wages, then he pays even more tax, because he is in a higher tax bracket.
 
If you let Gallagher go that means YOU don't get to complain when they cut innocents heads off or set them on fire.

All his men have staged a coup, just like tramp, all the Dems have staged a coup. He is guilty of war crimes.

He posed for a photo you stupid fucking liberal. He didn't set anyone on fire or cut off their head.
 
If you let Gallagher go that means YOU don't get to complain when they cut innocents heads off or set them on fire.

All his men have staged a coup, just like tramp, all the Dems have staged a coup. He is guilty of war crimes.

Gallagher killed no one, dumbass!

First of all, that is not true.
His subordinates say he killed dozens of suspected enemy who had been captured or incapacitated in some way.
Second is that even the medic who says Gallagher failed to kill this particular suspect, admits that Gallagher tried to slit the suspect's throat to kill him, but simply failed.
Third is that taking your picture with a person you thought you just killed is really, really sick, and totally illegal.
If that is true why did the navy not convict him

Technicalities.
The one documented incident, the corpsman said that when Gallighar slit his throat, he missed the arteries, so it was not fatal.
He said he euthanized the suspect himself.
The rest were not documented enough for a conviction.
But the image is a war crime against mutilation of bodies, humiliation, abuse of the dead, etc.

{...
Geneva Convention IV
Article 16, second paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides: “As far as military considerations allow, each Party to the conflict shall facilitate the steps taken … to protect [the killed] against … ill-treatment.”
fnIcon.gif

Additional Protocol I
Article 34(1) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides: “The remains of persons who have died for reasons related to occupation or in detention resulting from occupation or hostilities … shall be respected”.
fnIcon.gif

Additional Protocol II
Article 4 of the 1977 Additional Protocol II provides:
1. All persons who do not take a direct part or who have ceased to take part in hostilities, whether or not their liberty has been restricted, are entitled to respect for their person [and] honour …
2. Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, the following acts against the persons referred to in paragraph I are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever:

(e) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment …
fnIcon.gif

ICC Statute
Pursuant to Article 8(2)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii) of the 1998 ICC Statute, “[c]ommitting outrages upon personal dignity” constitutes a war crime in both international and non-international armed conflicts.
fnIcon.gif

II. Other Instruments
Oxford Manual
Article 19 of the 1880 Oxford Manual provides: “It is forbidden to … mutilate the dead lying on the field of battle.”
fnIcon.gif

Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam
Article 3(a) of the 1990 Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam provides: “In the event of the use of force and in case of armed conflict … it is prohibited to mutilate dead bodies.”
fnIcon.gif

Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and IHL in the Philippines
Article 3(4) of Part IV of the 1998 Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and IHL in the Philippines provides that “desecration of the remains of those who have died in the course of the armed conflict or while under detention” shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to persons hors de combat. Article 4(9) provides: “Every possible measure shall be taken, without delay, … [to prevent] mutilation [the dead].”
fnIcon.gif

ICC Elements of Crimes
With reference to the war crime of outrages upon personal dignity, the 2000 ICC Elements of Crimes specifies that Article 8(2)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii) of the 1998 ICC Statute also applies to dead persons.
fnIcon.gif

UNTAET Regulation No. 2000/15
The UNTAET Regulation No. 2000/15 establishes panels with exclusive jurisdiction over serious criminal offences, including war crimes. According to Section 6(1)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii), “[c]ommitting outrages upon personal dignity” constitutes a war crime in both international and non-international armed conflicts.
fnIcon.gif

...}
Customary IHL - Practice Relating to Rule 113. Treatment of the Dead

This is well known and no sane soldier would do what Gallaghar did.
The US prosecuted many cases of this in the past.
The fact we no longer do, condemns our whole military system.
Dude a local admitted to splitting the shits throat to save him from being tortured by the local military

Fuck off and die you Islamic shit

Make sure you cut off all the little girls vaginas first

Wrong.
It was not a local who killed the suspect, but the corpsman.
And he did not slit the suspects throat, it was Gallaghar who did that.
He just blocked the airway.
But clearly it was Gallaghar who tried to murder the suspect, stabbed him with a knife, and took the picture with the dying suspect.

{...
Brian O’Rourke, Navy Region Southwest spokesman for Commander Rear Adm. Bette Bolivar, told the Navy Times that the Navy “will not be dropping premeditated murder charges against Chief Petty Officer Gallagher, despite Petty Officer [Corey] Scott’s testimony. The credibility of a witness is for the jury to decide.”

Scott on Thursday revealed under oath – and under the protection of immunity that was granted by the government – that he, Gallagher and others had treated the ISIS fighter when he was brought in to Seal Team 7 for about 20 minutes. The detainee appeared to be stabilized but then Gallagher stabbed the ISIS fighter below his collarbone, Scott had testified.

Then, Scott, a SEAL medic, went over and made the decision to cover the ISIS fighter’s breathing tube so he would die by asphyxiation, or suffocation, which he did.

“I knew he was going to die anyway, and I wanted to save him from waking up to whatever would happen to him,” Scott said during his testimony, the Navy Times reported.
...}
SEAL Gallagher still facing murder charges even after another SEAL confesses to the murder

And you know nothing of Islam.
Islam is a reformed version of Judaism, with the exact same Old Testament.
 
If you let Gallagher go that means YOU don't get to complain when they cut innocents heads off or set them on fire.

All his men have staged a coup, just like tramp, all the Dems have staged a coup. He is guilty of war crimes.

He posed for a photo you stupid fucking liberal. He didn't set anyone on fire or cut off their head.

While posing for a picture with the dead is an illegal war crime in itself, it is also clear he stabbed the unconscious suspect and thought he killed him as well.

Cutting off a head is recommended for executions in the Quran because it is supposed to the quickest and least painful form of execution known.
The Quran forbids setting anyone on fire.
 
Gallagher killed no one, dumbass!

First of all, that is not true.
His subordinates say he killed dozens of suspected enemy who had been captured or incapacitated in some way.
Second is that even the medic who says Gallagher failed to kill this particular suspect, admits that Gallagher tried to slit the suspect's throat to kill him, but simply failed.
Third is that taking your picture with a person you thought you just killed is really, really sick, and totally illegal.
If that is true why did the navy not convict him

Technicalities.
The one documented incident, the corpsman said that when Gallighar slit his throat, he missed the arteries, so it was not fatal.
He said he euthanized the suspect himself.
The rest were not documented enough for a conviction.
But the image is a war crime against mutilation of bodies, humiliation, abuse of the dead, etc.

{...
Geneva Convention IV
Article 16, second paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides: “As far as military considerations allow, each Party to the conflict shall facilitate the steps taken … to protect [the killed] against … ill-treatment.”
fnIcon.gif

Additional Protocol I
Article 34(1) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides: “The remains of persons who have died for reasons related to occupation or in detention resulting from occupation or hostilities … shall be respected”.
fnIcon.gif

Additional Protocol II
Article 4 of the 1977 Additional Protocol II provides:
1. All persons who do not take a direct part or who have ceased to take part in hostilities, whether or not their liberty has been restricted, are entitled to respect for their person [and] honour …
2. Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, the following acts against the persons referred to in paragraph I are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever:

(e) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment …
fnIcon.gif

ICC Statute
Pursuant to Article 8(2)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii) of the 1998 ICC Statute, “[c]ommitting outrages upon personal dignity” constitutes a war crime in both international and non-international armed conflicts.
fnIcon.gif

II. Other Instruments
Oxford Manual
Article 19 of the 1880 Oxford Manual provides: “It is forbidden to … mutilate the dead lying on the field of battle.”
fnIcon.gif

Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam
Article 3(a) of the 1990 Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam provides: “In the event of the use of force and in case of armed conflict … it is prohibited to mutilate dead bodies.”
fnIcon.gif

Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and IHL in the Philippines
Article 3(4) of Part IV of the 1998 Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and IHL in the Philippines provides that “desecration of the remains of those who have died in the course of the armed conflict or while under detention” shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to persons hors de combat. Article 4(9) provides: “Every possible measure shall be taken, without delay, … [to prevent] mutilation [the dead].”
fnIcon.gif

ICC Elements of Crimes
With reference to the war crime of outrages upon personal dignity, the 2000 ICC Elements of Crimes specifies that Article 8(2)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii) of the 1998 ICC Statute also applies to dead persons.
fnIcon.gif

UNTAET Regulation No. 2000/15
The UNTAET Regulation No. 2000/15 establishes panels with exclusive jurisdiction over serious criminal offences, including war crimes. According to Section 6(1)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii), “[c]ommitting outrages upon personal dignity” constitutes a war crime in both international and non-international armed conflicts.
fnIcon.gif

...}
Customary IHL - Practice Relating to Rule 113. Treatment of the Dead

This is well known and no sane soldier would do what Gallaghar did.
The US prosecuted many cases of this in the past.
The fact we no longer do, condemns our whole military system.
Dude a local admitted to splitting the shits throat to save him from being tortured by the local military

Fuck off and die you Islamic shit

Make sure you cut off all the little girls vaginas first

Wrong.
It was not a local who killed the suspect, but the corpsman.
And he did not slit the suspects throat, it was Gallaghar who did that.
He just blocked the airway.
But clearly it was Gallaghar who tried to murder the suspect, stabbed him with a knife, and took the picture with the dying suspect.

{...
Brian O’Rourke, Navy Region Southwest spokesman for Commander Rear Adm. Bette Bolivar, told the Navy Times that the Navy “will not be dropping premeditated murder charges against Chief Petty Officer Gallagher, despite Petty Officer [Corey] Scott’s testimony. The credibility of a witness is for the jury to decide.”

Scott on Thursday revealed under oath – and under the protection of immunity that was granted by the government – that he, Gallagher and others had treated the ISIS fighter when he was brought in to Seal Team 7 for about 20 minutes. The detainee appeared to be stabilized but then Gallagher stabbed the ISIS fighter below his collarbone, Scott had testified.

Then, Scott, a SEAL medic, went over and made the decision to cover the ISIS fighter’s breathing tube so he would die by asphyxiation, or suffocation, which he did.

“I knew he was going to die anyway, and I wanted to save him from waking up to whatever would happen to him,” Scott said during his testimony, the Navy Times reported.
...}
SEAL Gallagher still facing murder charges even after another SEAL confesses to the murder

And you know nothing of Islam.
Islam is a reformed version of Judaism, with the exact same Old Testament.

I hope he killed more than one

Have you sawed off anyone's head today scumbag
 
Look simpleton the California state sales tax is 7.5 percent, groceries are exempt, Thus if an illegal made 30,000 dollars and spent it all on taxable items which can not happen they would pay 2250 per year in taxes. However much of the money goes for food UNTAXED, more goes for rent paid in cash because they are illegal to a slumlord UNTAXED, then there is the money they send home UNTAXED. All in all an illegal might if they were prosperous pay 500 dolllars a year in taxes, I pay almost twice that every pay before I even pay sales taxes. So how does 500 dollars a year in taxes paid equal free medical when 500 dollars divided by 12 equals exactly 41.66 per month in possible money spent on a health insurance premium?

The same argument could be made for most poor people. Your argument is that they didn't pay anything into the system. Clearly they do. The value of their labor exceeds the costs of the services provided.

Yo moron, if you used a fake SS number you would be arrested

We can't arrest the real criminals, much less people who commit petty violations.

Okay, Sweetie... if you are such a fucking loser that you are competing with someone with no money, no connections and a limited grasp on English, that's on you.
Illegals have no right to be here simpleton, and those poor Americans you reference are made poorer because they are guaranteed minimum wage in jobs they do not get because illegals are working those jobs and being paid less than minimum which benefits the slave driving employer and hurts the now unemployed and as you say POOR AMERICAN.

This is why Martin Luther Kings family voted for Trump

Enjoy Trump till 2024, then another Trump takes over

Wrong.
Who we call "illegal" are actually natives, and they were here before us.
We illegally either killed the natives or chased them out to Mexico or Canada.
And the 8 states that used to be part of Mexico that we bought, was with treaties saying we could not make them leave or stop them their travel back and forth from these states at least.

It is those of European descent who actually have no legal right to be here.
This is strange. It's like you don't know that Aztecs aren't Navajo at all.
 
They have a serious ass whipping coming to them, but it won’t be mankind who will hand it out. Read Ezekiel 38.
Islam TEACHES that Islam will rule the world and MUST do so. That Everyone must be Muslim. That in order to get there is a never ending process. Right now the two chosen paths of HOW to GET THERE are either through assimilation or direct force. That has ALWAYS been the case. Until the modern area after the Muslims lost in holy Jihad to conquer the west in Spain and Eastern Europe. they had no way to force it now some think they do and it has nothing to do with us Radicalizing them.

RETIREDGYSGT is lying.
I have read the Quran, and it say that Judaism and Christianity are equally valid ways to God and Heaven, and that there can never be compulsion over religion.
The Quran says violence is wrong and can only be used in defense, and that one should never attack anyone else except in defense.
Jihad means a quest for religious perfection, like fasting or being celibate.
It has nothing to do with war.

The people who attacked in Spain were the Moors, and the Moslem Arabs had already been wiped out around 1200 by the Mongols. The people who attacked eastern Europe were the Turks, who were not Arabs or seriously Moslem either.
Good God you are STUPID.

Actually, if you read about the Moors entering the Iberian Peninsula, they were invited.
The Castillians and Aragons were fighting and the Moors were originally hired to defend.

Name any time when Arab Moslems ever attacked anyone?
The reality is that it is the west attacking the natives of the Mideast, like the British and Napoleon fighting over Egypt, the British and Russians fighting over the Crimea, etc.
It is Europeans who have always been the attackers and been at fault.
We have been fighting Arab Muslims since Thomas Jefferson and Tripoli. Get real man.
The Crusades were a Counter Offensive against Muslim Aggression. Can I have some of what you are smoking?

Want to hear something funny? The Bible-Prophecy lists all the armies of major end time battles where vast armies all descend upon Israel to Exterminate The Jew. Some of these Prophecies are over 2,500 years old. They were Written Before Islam ever existed. Every country named in these prophecies is an Islamic Nation that is completely wiped out by God in The Battle of Gog and Magog, The Battle of Bosra, and The Battle of Armageddon.

God said, Israel would be scattered and no longer be a Nation, but he also said He would gather up "the dry bones" and make them live again, make Israel a Nation again. That happened in 1948, and God also said before Islam even existed that all of these Islamic Nations near and during the End Times would try to destroy Israel which will end in the final battle of a series of battles imo WWIII in their destruction at Armageddon.

Care to explain how God knew thousands of years ago that Israel would be the only resurrected nation in history, and that Islam would be created and be in a state of constant war with Israel 2,500 years ago?

Answer: He is God and He does not Lie. He holds time and eternity in His hands and is The Architect of The Universe and Author of Man's Redemption. He sees all, knows all and is all.

The Purpose of the Battle of Armageddon | RevelationLogic

richardson120622_2.jpg

Patterns-and-Paths-1.png

17-Iran-attacks-Israel.jpg

Wrong.
The Pirates of Tripoli were Berbers, not Arab.
Libya is not an Arab country.
The Berbers were the line of Egyptian Pharaohs, and are related to the Kushites.

You bible knowledge is also wrong.
The Hebrew tribes were the invaders.
The originated from the Sinai, and spent 400 years in Egypt after a drought.
The Hebrew tribes invaded Palestine around 1000 BC, but were never native to the area.
They were defeated and made to leave by just about everyone, like the Babylonians, Assyrains, Romans, etc.
And those who defeated the Hebrew were not Arab or Moslem.

Islam has never been at war with Judaism.
All the Viziers, administrators, etc., of the Moslem Caliphates were always Jews.
How do you think so many Jews ended up in Spain, and were persecuted by the Spanish Inquisition?
It is because the Moslem Moors imported them because it was the Moslem custom to hire Jewish administrators.
Jews always went to Moslems for protection.
That is because it was the 12 Jewish tribes who defended Mohammed at Medina, and Moslems have always since had the obligation to protect them back again.
The Quaran is very clear that Jews are never to be harmed by Moslems unless after being betrayed a third time.

And by the way, Turks and Iranians are not Arab either.
 
First of all, that is not true.
His subordinates say he killed dozens of suspected enemy who had been captured or incapacitated in some way.
Second is that even the medic who says Gallagher failed to kill this particular suspect, admits that Gallagher tried to slit the suspect's throat to kill him, but simply failed.
Third is that taking your picture with a person you thought you just killed is really, really sick, and totally illegal.
If that is true why did the navy not convict him

Technicalities.
The one documented incident, the corpsman said that when Gallighar slit his throat, he missed the arteries, so it was not fatal.
He said he euthanized the suspect himself.
The rest were not documented enough for a conviction.
But the image is a war crime against mutilation of bodies, humiliation, abuse of the dead, etc.

{...
Geneva Convention IV
Article 16, second paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides: “As far as military considerations allow, each Party to the conflict shall facilitate the steps taken … to protect [the killed] against … ill-treatment.”
fnIcon.gif

Additional Protocol I
Article 34(1) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides: “The remains of persons who have died for reasons related to occupation or in detention resulting from occupation or hostilities … shall be respected”.
fnIcon.gif

Additional Protocol II
Article 4 of the 1977 Additional Protocol II provides:
1. All persons who do not take a direct part or who have ceased to take part in hostilities, whether or not their liberty has been restricted, are entitled to respect for their person [and] honour …
2. Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, the following acts against the persons referred to in paragraph I are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever:

(e) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment …
fnIcon.gif

ICC Statute
Pursuant to Article 8(2)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii) of the 1998 ICC Statute, “[c]ommitting outrages upon personal dignity” constitutes a war crime in both international and non-international armed conflicts.
fnIcon.gif

II. Other Instruments
Oxford Manual
Article 19 of the 1880 Oxford Manual provides: “It is forbidden to … mutilate the dead lying on the field of battle.”
fnIcon.gif

Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam
Article 3(a) of the 1990 Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam provides: “In the event of the use of force and in case of armed conflict … it is prohibited to mutilate dead bodies.”
fnIcon.gif

Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and IHL in the Philippines
Article 3(4) of Part IV of the 1998 Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and IHL in the Philippines provides that “desecration of the remains of those who have died in the course of the armed conflict or while under detention” shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to persons hors de combat. Article 4(9) provides: “Every possible measure shall be taken, without delay, … [to prevent] mutilation [the dead].”
fnIcon.gif

ICC Elements of Crimes
With reference to the war crime of outrages upon personal dignity, the 2000 ICC Elements of Crimes specifies that Article 8(2)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii) of the 1998 ICC Statute also applies to dead persons.
fnIcon.gif

UNTAET Regulation No. 2000/15
The UNTAET Regulation No. 2000/15 establishes panels with exclusive jurisdiction over serious criminal offences, including war crimes. According to Section 6(1)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii), “[c]ommitting outrages upon personal dignity” constitutes a war crime in both international and non-international armed conflicts.
fnIcon.gif

...}
Customary IHL - Practice Relating to Rule 113. Treatment of the Dead

This is well known and no sane soldier would do what Gallaghar did.
The US prosecuted many cases of this in the past.
The fact we no longer do, condemns our whole military system.
Dude a local admitted to splitting the shits throat to save him from being tortured by the local military

Fuck off and die you Islamic shit

Make sure you cut off all the little girls vaginas first

Wrong.
It was not a local who killed the suspect, but the corpsman.
And he did not slit the suspects throat, it was Gallaghar who did that.
He just blocked the airway.
But clearly it was Gallaghar who tried to murder the suspect, stabbed him with a knife, and took the picture with the dying suspect.

{...
Brian O’Rourke, Navy Region Southwest spokesman for Commander Rear Adm. Bette Bolivar, told the Navy Times that the Navy “will not be dropping premeditated murder charges against Chief Petty Officer Gallagher, despite Petty Officer [Corey] Scott’s testimony. The credibility of a witness is for the jury to decide.”

Scott on Thursday revealed under oath – and under the protection of immunity that was granted by the government – that he, Gallagher and others had treated the ISIS fighter when he was brought in to Seal Team 7 for about 20 minutes. The detainee appeared to be stabilized but then Gallagher stabbed the ISIS fighter below his collarbone, Scott had testified.

Then, Scott, a SEAL medic, went over and made the decision to cover the ISIS fighter’s breathing tube so he would die by asphyxiation, or suffocation, which he did.

“I knew he was going to die anyway, and I wanted to save him from waking up to whatever would happen to him,” Scott said during his testimony, the Navy Times reported.
...}
SEAL Gallagher still facing murder charges even after another SEAL confesses to the murder

And you know nothing of Islam.
Islam is a reformed version of Judaism, with the exact same Old Testament.

I hope he killed more than one

Have you sawed off anyone's head today scumbag


You are referring to ISIS decapitations with a knife, which is against Islam.
ISIS has not a single cleric backing them.
They are totally unIslamic.
They are secular Sunni created and likely supported by the US.
No Moslem would ever saw at anyone's throat.
 
Look simpleton the California state sales tax is 7.5 percent, groceries are exempt, Thus if an illegal made 30,000 dollars and spent it all on taxable items which can not happen they would pay 2250 per year in taxes. However much of the money goes for food UNTAXED, more goes for rent paid in cash because they are illegal to a slumlord UNTAXED, then there is the money they send home UNTAXED. All in all an illegal might if they were prosperous pay 500 dolllars a year in taxes, I pay almost twice that every pay before I even pay sales taxes. So how does 500 dollars a year in taxes paid equal free medical when 500 dollars divided by 12 equals exactly 41.66 per month in possible money spent on a health insurance premium?

The same argument could be made for most poor people. Your argument is that they didn't pay anything into the system. Clearly they do. The value of their labor exceeds the costs of the services provided.

Yo moron, if you used a fake SS number you would be arrested

We can't arrest the real criminals, much less people who commit petty violations.

Okay, Sweetie... if you are such a fucking loser that you are competing with someone with no money, no connections and a limited grasp on English, that's on you.
Illegals have no right to be here simpleton, and those poor Americans you reference are made poorer because they are guaranteed minimum wage in jobs they do not get because illegals are working those jobs and being paid less than minimum which benefits the slave driving employer and hurts the now unemployed and as you say POOR AMERICAN.

This is why Martin Luther Kings family voted for Trump

Enjoy Trump till 2024, then another Trump takes over

Wrong.
Who we call "illegal" are actually natives, and they were here before us.
We illegally either killed the natives or chased them out to Mexico or Canada.
And the 8 states that used to be part of Mexico that we bought, was with treaties saying we could not make them leave or stop them their travel back and forth from these states at least.

It is those of European descent who actually have no legal right to be here.
This is strange. It's like you don't know that Aztecs aren't Navajo at all.

The Aztecs and Navajo are related.
And both were here before us.
 
If that is true why did the navy not convict him

Technicalities.
The one documented incident, the corpsman said that when Gallighar slit his throat, he missed the arteries, so it was not fatal.
He said he euthanized the suspect himself.
The rest were not documented enough for a conviction.
But the image is a war crime against mutilation of bodies, humiliation, abuse of the dead, etc.

{...
Geneva Convention IV
Article 16, second paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides: “As far as military considerations allow, each Party to the conflict shall facilitate the steps taken … to protect [the killed] against … ill-treatment.”
fnIcon.gif

Additional Protocol I
Article 34(1) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides: “The remains of persons who have died for reasons related to occupation or in detention resulting from occupation or hostilities … shall be respected”.
fnIcon.gif

Additional Protocol II
Article 4 of the 1977 Additional Protocol II provides:
1. All persons who do not take a direct part or who have ceased to take part in hostilities, whether or not their liberty has been restricted, are entitled to respect for their person [and] honour …
2. Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, the following acts against the persons referred to in paragraph I are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever:

(e) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment …
fnIcon.gif

ICC Statute
Pursuant to Article 8(2)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii) of the 1998 ICC Statute, “[c]ommitting outrages upon personal dignity” constitutes a war crime in both international and non-international armed conflicts.
fnIcon.gif

II. Other Instruments
Oxford Manual
Article 19 of the 1880 Oxford Manual provides: “It is forbidden to … mutilate the dead lying on the field of battle.”
fnIcon.gif

Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam
Article 3(a) of the 1990 Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam provides: “In the event of the use of force and in case of armed conflict … it is prohibited to mutilate dead bodies.”
fnIcon.gif

Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and IHL in the Philippines
Article 3(4) of Part IV of the 1998 Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and IHL in the Philippines provides that “desecration of the remains of those who have died in the course of the armed conflict or while under detention” shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to persons hors de combat. Article 4(9) provides: “Every possible measure shall be taken, without delay, … [to prevent] mutilation [the dead].”
fnIcon.gif

ICC Elements of Crimes
With reference to the war crime of outrages upon personal dignity, the 2000 ICC Elements of Crimes specifies that Article 8(2)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii) of the 1998 ICC Statute also applies to dead persons.
fnIcon.gif

UNTAET Regulation No. 2000/15
The UNTAET Regulation No. 2000/15 establishes panels with exclusive jurisdiction over serious criminal offences, including war crimes. According to Section 6(1)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii), “[c]ommitting outrages upon personal dignity” constitutes a war crime in both international and non-international armed conflicts.
fnIcon.gif

...}
Customary IHL - Practice Relating to Rule 113. Treatment of the Dead

This is well known and no sane soldier would do what Gallaghar did.
The US prosecuted many cases of this in the past.
The fact we no longer do, condemns our whole military system.
Dude a local admitted to splitting the shits throat to save him from being tortured by the local military

Fuck off and die you Islamic shit

Make sure you cut off all the little girls vaginas first

Wrong.
It was not a local who killed the suspect, but the corpsman.
And he did not slit the suspects throat, it was Gallaghar who did that.
He just blocked the airway.
But clearly it was Gallaghar who tried to murder the suspect, stabbed him with a knife, and took the picture with the dying suspect.

{...
Brian O’Rourke, Navy Region Southwest spokesman for Commander Rear Adm. Bette Bolivar, told the Navy Times that the Navy “will not be dropping premeditated murder charges against Chief Petty Officer Gallagher, despite Petty Officer [Corey] Scott’s testimony. The credibility of a witness is for the jury to decide.”

Scott on Thursday revealed under oath – and under the protection of immunity that was granted by the government – that he, Gallagher and others had treated the ISIS fighter when he was brought in to Seal Team 7 for about 20 minutes. The detainee appeared to be stabilized but then Gallagher stabbed the ISIS fighter below his collarbone, Scott had testified.

Then, Scott, a SEAL medic, went over and made the decision to cover the ISIS fighter’s breathing tube so he would die by asphyxiation, or suffocation, which he did.

“I knew he was going to die anyway, and I wanted to save him from waking up to whatever would happen to him,” Scott said during his testimony, the Navy Times reported.
...}
SEAL Gallagher still facing murder charges even after another SEAL confesses to the murder

And you know nothing of Islam.
Islam is a reformed version of Judaism, with the exact same Old Testament.

I hope he killed more than one

Have you sawed off anyone's head today scumbag


You are referring to ISIS decapitations with a knife, which is against Islam.
ISIS has not a single cleric backing them.
They are totally unIslamic.
They are secular Sunni created and likely supported by the US.
No Moslem would ever saw at anyone's throat.
No scumbag I am referring to heads being cut off with dull saws. Fuck you Arab scum
 
Look simpleton the California state sales tax is 7.5 percent, groceries are exempt, Thus if an illegal made 30,000 dollars and spent it all on taxable items which can not happen they would pay 2250 per year in taxes. However much of the money goes for food UNTAXED, more goes for rent paid in cash because they are illegal to a slumlord UNTAXED, then there is the money they send home UNTAXED. All in all an illegal might if they were prosperous pay 500 dolllars a year in taxes, I pay almost twice that every pay before I even pay sales taxes. So how does 500 dollars a year in taxes paid equal free medical when 500 dollars divided by 12 equals exactly 41.66 per month in possible money spent on a health insurance premium?

The same argument could be made for most poor people. Your argument is that they didn't pay anything into the system. Clearly they do. The value of their labor exceeds the costs of the services provided.

Yo moron, if you used a fake SS number you would be arrested

We can't arrest the real criminals, much less people who commit petty violations.

Okay, Sweetie... if you are such a fucking loser that you are competing with someone with no money, no connections and a limited grasp on English, that's on you.
Illegals have no right to be here simpleton, and those poor Americans you reference are made poorer because they are guaranteed minimum wage in jobs they do not get because illegals are working those jobs and being paid less than minimum which benefits the slave driving employer and hurts the now unemployed and as you say POOR AMERICAN.

This is why Martin Luther Kings family voted for Trump

Enjoy Trump till 2024, then another Trump takes over

Wrong.
Who we call "illegal" are actually natives, and they were here before us.
We illegally either killed the natives or chased them out to Mexico or Canada.
And the 8 states that used to be part of Mexico that we bought, was with treaties saying we could not make them leave or stop them their travel back and forth from these states at least.

It is those of European descent who actually have no legal right to be here.
This is strange. It's like you don't know that Aztecs aren't Navajo at all.

The Aztecs and Navajo are related.
And both were here before us.
Who gives a shit
 
QUOTE="Frannie, post: 23543885, member: 71891"]Navy Secretary threatened to resign, but not the Top SEAL officer: officials

I'll pose next to any dead ISIS member, twice if I slit their throat. The democrats are actually crazy at this point as they are clearly wanting Trump to win in 2020.....[/QUOTE]

Hey shit for brains, Gallagher doesn't work by himself.

He is part of a team. A team that testified against him.

A team that doesn't want him back on it.

How do you think that's going to work out?
 
QUOTE="Frannie, post: 23543885, member: 71891"]Navy Secretary threatened to resign, but not the Top SEAL officer: officials

I'll pose next to any dead ISIS member, twice if I slit their throat. The democrats are actually crazy at this point as they are clearly wanting Trump to win in 2020.....

Hey shit for brains, Gallagher doesn't work by himself.

He is part of a team. A team that testified against him.

A team that doesn't want him back on it.

How do you think that's going to work out?[/QUOTE]
With the navy secretary getting fired


Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

At some point Trump is gonna get tired of winning

PS if you defend isis I will do the same to you as you are the traitor
 
Technicalities.
The one documented incident, the corpsman said that when Gallighar slit his throat, he missed the arteries, so it was not fatal.
He said he euthanized the suspect himself.
The rest were not documented enough for a conviction.
But the image is a war crime against mutilation of bodies, humiliation, abuse of the dead, etc.

{...
Geneva Convention IV
Article 16, second paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides: “As far as military considerations allow, each Party to the conflict shall facilitate the steps taken … to protect [the killed] against … ill-treatment.”
fnIcon.gif

Additional Protocol I
Article 34(1) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides: “The remains of persons who have died for reasons related to occupation or in detention resulting from occupation or hostilities … shall be respected”.
fnIcon.gif

Additional Protocol II
Article 4 of the 1977 Additional Protocol II provides:
1. All persons who do not take a direct part or who have ceased to take part in hostilities, whether or not their liberty has been restricted, are entitled to respect for their person [and] honour …
2. Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, the following acts against the persons referred to in paragraph I are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever:

(e) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment …
fnIcon.gif

ICC Statute
Pursuant to Article 8(2)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii) of the 1998 ICC Statute, “[c]ommitting outrages upon personal dignity” constitutes a war crime in both international and non-international armed conflicts.
fnIcon.gif

II. Other Instruments
Oxford Manual
Article 19 of the 1880 Oxford Manual provides: “It is forbidden to … mutilate the dead lying on the field of battle.”
fnIcon.gif

Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam
Article 3(a) of the 1990 Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam provides: “In the event of the use of force and in case of armed conflict … it is prohibited to mutilate dead bodies.”
fnIcon.gif

Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and IHL in the Philippines
Article 3(4) of Part IV of the 1998 Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and IHL in the Philippines provides that “desecration of the remains of those who have died in the course of the armed conflict or while under detention” shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to persons hors de combat. Article 4(9) provides: “Every possible measure shall be taken, without delay, … [to prevent] mutilation [the dead].”
fnIcon.gif

ICC Elements of Crimes
With reference to the war crime of outrages upon personal dignity, the 2000 ICC Elements of Crimes specifies that Article 8(2)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii) of the 1998 ICC Statute also applies to dead persons.
fnIcon.gif

UNTAET Regulation No. 2000/15
The UNTAET Regulation No. 2000/15 establishes panels with exclusive jurisdiction over serious criminal offences, including war crimes. According to Section 6(1)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii), “[c]ommitting outrages upon personal dignity” constitutes a war crime in both international and non-international armed conflicts.
fnIcon.gif

...}
Customary IHL - Practice Relating to Rule 113. Treatment of the Dead

This is well known and no sane soldier would do what Gallaghar did.
The US prosecuted many cases of this in the past.
The fact we no longer do, condemns our whole military system.
Dude a local admitted to splitting the shits throat to save him from being tortured by the local military

Fuck off and die you Islamic shit

Make sure you cut off all the little girls vaginas first

Wrong.
It was not a local who killed the suspect, but the corpsman.
And he did not slit the suspects throat, it was Gallaghar who did that.
He just blocked the airway.
But clearly it was Gallaghar who tried to murder the suspect, stabbed him with a knife, and took the picture with the dying suspect.

{...
Brian O’Rourke, Navy Region Southwest spokesman for Commander Rear Adm. Bette Bolivar, told the Navy Times that the Navy “will not be dropping premeditated murder charges against Chief Petty Officer Gallagher, despite Petty Officer [Corey] Scott’s testimony. The credibility of a witness is for the jury to decide.”

Scott on Thursday revealed under oath – and under the protection of immunity that was granted by the government – that he, Gallagher and others had treated the ISIS fighter when he was brought in to Seal Team 7 for about 20 minutes. The detainee appeared to be stabilized but then Gallagher stabbed the ISIS fighter below his collarbone, Scott had testified.

Then, Scott, a SEAL medic, went over and made the decision to cover the ISIS fighter’s breathing tube so he would die by asphyxiation, or suffocation, which he did.

“I knew he was going to die anyway, and I wanted to save him from waking up to whatever would happen to him,” Scott said during his testimony, the Navy Times reported.
...}
SEAL Gallagher still facing murder charges even after another SEAL confesses to the murder

And you know nothing of Islam.
Islam is a reformed version of Judaism, with the exact same Old Testament.

I hope he killed more than one

Have you sawed off anyone's head today scumbag


You are referring to ISIS decapitations with a knife, which is against Islam.
ISIS has not a single cleric backing them.
They are totally unIslamic.
They are secular Sunni created and likely supported by the US.
No Moslem would ever saw at anyone's throat.
No scumbag I am referring to heads being cut off with dull saws. Fuck you Arab scum

Which is neither allowed by Islam or anything approaching an Arab tradition.
So is a fake action someone who is not Arab or Moslem is promoting.
 

Forum List

Back
Top