Obama's military contempt: The outrageous treatment of Clint Lorance

[Londoner]

Another hit job from the Republican Propaganda Machine

Lorance’s site contends that intelligence reports he had reviewed suggested that every man on a motorcycle in that vicinity was presumed to be a member of the Taliban because the insurgent group was in control of the area. The order to fire the two long-range shots was rightful, his account says, “eliminating the threat.”

Prosecutors say Lorance knew that to be false — and they elicited testimony from service members that bolstered their case. U.S. troops in Afghanistan may open fire only if they detect hostile intent or actions in the battlefield.


The OP doesn't tell the full story. There was testimony from his platoon that Lorance knew the approaching people were not a military threat but chose to slaughter them regardless.

Then Lorence attempted to obstruct a lawful investigation:

After the shooting, Lorance tried to hide evidence that the two dead Afghans were carrying proper identity, something the Taliban rarely do. "He told his soldiers to forget they saw the IDs. That was wrong," said Womack.

Why would Lorence ask his soldiers to lie?


None of the rightwing propaganda tells the whole story.

Lorence might be innocent or he might be guilty, but the Right doesn't care about this. They are using this man's life as an instrument to attack Obama.

Why did the OP hide crucial facts?

 

[Jarlaxle]

You blame President Obama for a general court martial verdict?

You'd think former Rep. West, who served in the military would know how the court martial process works.

Are you ACTUALLY stupid enough to think that Obama couldn't have broomed this in a second?!

Seriously? You WANT the President of the United States to put the cabash on a duly convened military court?

When it's this goddamn stupid? HELL FUCKING YES!

 

[Londoner]

I remember when the Bush chain of command lied about Pat Tillman's death - and falsified witness statements. Thank god the rightwing propaganda machine got caught on this one. The family was angered that they turned his death into war propaganda.

Again: why did Lorence ask his troops to lie?

Again: why are rightwing news sources not telling the whole story and presenting all the evidence?

Again: why does this shit keep happening? Lorence might very well be innocent (I don't think he should be convicted of murder), but why are there attempts on the right to cover up some key facts of this case? Why does the Right always lie about this stuff

The reason that soldiers have to determine if there is a threat prior to shooting is so that they don't start shooting each other because of things like political views. Pat Tillman was not well liked. He was very opinionated about the war. Evidence revealed that he was shot at suspiciously close range.

Here is my question.

Why did the Bush command structure lie about Pat Tillman's death?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUZCP1QUOS8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPLxjc-WxTk[/ame]

 

[JakeStarkey]

"When it's this goddamn stupid? HELL FUCKING YES!"

#21 above

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So Obama isn't CiC?

He most certainly is. But, if you'd served, you'd know that the CinC does not preside at courts martial.

He does, however, sign off on the RoE, which is what was used as the basis of this court martial. By restricting the ability of troops in a combat zone to react to danger he is making it harder for them to get home alive. Since that was your overriding concern when Bush was president, one would think you would treat Obama the same way.

 

[lakeview]

There's definitely more to this story than the OP put out there:

Army Lt. Clint Lorance faces life after being convicted of murder - UPI.com

A U.S. Army officer was convicted of murder Thursday for ordering soldiers under his command in Afghanistan to shoot all Afghans they saw on motorcycles.

Lorance was deployed to Afghanistan after previously serving as a military police officer in Iraq. Witnesses called by prosecutors testified he was often aggressive toward Afghans.

First Lt. Katrina Lucas, who testified for the defense, said members of the Taliban often used red motorcycles while they were on expeditions to plant bombs. But she acknowledged Afghans with no terrorist ties or intentions also rode them.

The man's own chain of command did this to him, not President Obama, and it looks like they were justified.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You blame President Obama for a general court martial verdict?

You'd think former Rep. West, who served in the military would know how the court martial process works.

It would seem that you would attempt to understand the issues before commenting.Then again, you haven't let that stop you before.

It would seem that you still do not know how courts martial are convened and who runs them.

It would seem, once again, that you have no idea what you are talking about. I never said that Obama personally oversaw the court martial, neither did West. I believe that his objection is the same as mine, that the man was convicted for making the right decision simply because it didn't fit into the political expediency of pretending we are fighting people that aren't trying to kill us.

The way it used to work was that the guy on the ground got the benefit of the doubt unless their was clear evidence that he was wrong. Now, even with clear evidence he was right, he got tossed under the bus. That makes it a lot more dangerous to be a soldier, and makes it a lot easier for the other guy to kill them.

That, like it or not, is Obama's fault, and has nothing to do with how the court martial was convened, or who ran the fucking farce.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Another hit job from the Republican Propaganda Machine

Lorance’s site contends that intelligence reports he had reviewed suggested that every man on a motorcycle in that vicinity was presumed to be a member of the Taliban because the insurgent group was in control of the area. The order to fire the two long-range shots was rightful, his account says, “eliminating the threat.”

Prosecutors say Lorance knew that to be false — and they elicited testimony from service members that bolstered their case. U.S. troops in Afghanistan may open fire only if they detect hostile intent or actions in the battlefield.


The OP doesn't tell the full story. There was testimony from his platoon that Lorance knew the approaching people were not a military threat but chose to slaughter them regardless.

Then Lorence attempted to obstruct a lawful investigation:

After the shooting, Lorance tried to hide evidence that the two dead Afghans were carrying proper identity, something the Taliban rarely do. "He told his soldiers to forget they saw the IDs. That was wrong," said Womack.

Why would Lorence ask his soldiers to lie?


None of the rightwing propaganda tells the whole story.

Lorence might be innocent or he might be guilty, but the Right doesn't care about this. They are using this man's life as an instrument to attack Obama.

Why did the OP hide crucial facts?

Why would you make a post without any links? Is it because you are actually lying yourself, and that no one found any ID on the bodies?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I remember when the Bush chain of command lied about Pat Tillman's death - and falsified witness statements. Thank god the rightwing propaganda machine got caught on this one. The family was angered that they turned his death into war propaganda.

Again: why did Lorence ask his troops to lie?

Again: why are rightwing news sources not telling the whole story and presenting all the evidence?

Again: why does this shit keep happening? Lorence might very well be innocent (I don't think he should be convicted of murder), but why are there attempts on the right to cover up some key facts of this case? Why does the Right always lie about this stuff

The reason that soldiers have to determine if there is a threat prior to shooting is so that they don't start shooting each other because of things like political views. Pat Tillman was not well liked. He was very opinionated about the war. Evidence revealed that he was shot at suspiciously close range.

Here is my question.

Why did the Bush command structure lie about Pat Tillman's death?

The Truth Behind the Pat Tillman Story

He wasn't charged with, and the prosecution never alleged, that he asked anybody to lie.

 

[bodecea]

Everything that happens in the military is now Obama's fault.

ZZZZZZZ

If it happens, it's BECAUSE OBAMA!

You heard it here first. He is responsible for all things bad, and no things good. Pay attention.

He's the President. The buck stops on his desk.

Or it's supposed to. His bootlickers and sycophants make sure the buck doesn't get anywhere near his desk.

^ Has not a clue about our military justice system.

 

[bodecea]

Funny how Bush was personally responsible for Abu Ghraib, but Obama has nothing to do with the rules of engagement in the Afghan Theater.

But Abu Ghraib wasn't torture, remember? So...what's the issue you have with it?

Just pointing out the left's hypocrisy here.

And by "the left", I means you.

Oh...well, since you are pointing a finger specifically at me....pull out the posts of mine where I ever said President Bush was personally responsible for Abu Ghraib.

 

[bodecea]

Are you ACTUALLY stupid enough to think that Obama couldn't have broomed this in a second?!

Seriously? You WANT the President of the United States to put the cabash on a duly convened military court?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...ucer-serving-55-years-on-pot-gun-charges.html

If I look in this thread, will I find similar shock and dismay from you?

Smart money says "no".

"Asked" is nowhere near the same as what YOU want...a President to INTERFERE with a duly convened courts martial.

But hey....it's ok to not follow the proper LEGAL procedures if it's something YOU want, right?

 

[bodecea]

Another hit job from the Republican Propaganda Machine

Lorance’s site contends that intelligence reports he had reviewed suggested that every man on a motorcycle in that vicinity was presumed to be a member of the Taliban because the insurgent group was in control of the area. The order to fire the two long-range shots was rightful, his account says, “eliminating the threat.”

Prosecutors say Lorance knew that to be false — and they elicited testimony from service members that bolstered their case. U.S. troops in Afghanistan may open fire only if they detect hostile intent or actions in the battlefield.


The OP doesn't tell the full story. There was testimony from his platoon that Lorance knew the approaching people were not a military threat but chose to slaughter them regardless.

Then Lorence attempted to obstruct a lawful investigation:

After the shooting, Lorance tried to hide evidence that the two dead Afghans were carrying proper identity, something the Taliban rarely do. "He told his soldiers to forget they saw the IDs. That was wrong," said Womack.

Why would Lorence ask his soldiers to lie?


None of the rightwing propaganda tells the whole story.

Lorence might be innocent or he might be guilty, but the Right doesn't care about this. They are using this man's life as an instrument to attack Obama.

Why did the OP hide crucial facts?

Sounds like this guy's a perfect hero for Davey.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Seriously? You WANT the President of the United States to put the cabash on a duly convened military court?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...ucer-serving-55-years-on-pot-gun-charges.html

If I look in this thread, will I find similar shock and dismay from you?

Smart money says "no".

"Asked" is nowhere near the same as what YOU want...a President to INTERFERE with a duly convened courts martial.

But hey....it's ok to not follow the proper LEGAL procedures if it's something YOU want, right?

He could, entirely legally, pardon Lorence.

 

[daveman]

If it happens, it's BECAUSE OBAMA!

You heard it here first. He is responsible for all things bad, and no things good. Pay attention.

He's the President. The buck stops on his desk.

Or it's supposed to. His bootlickers and sycophants make sure the buck doesn't get anywhere near his desk.

^ Has not a clue about our military justice system.

Yes, we know. Obama is NEVER responsible for anything.

Are you going to try to blame this on Bush? You know you want to.

 

[daveman]

But Abu Ghraib wasn't torture, remember? So...what's the issue you have with it?

Just pointing out the left's hypocrisy here.

And by "the left", I means you.

Oh...well, since you are pointing a finger specifically at me....pull out the posts of mine where I ever said President Bush was personally responsible for Abu Ghraib.

Not gonna bother. You have a habit of running away when you're proven wrong.

But I can guarantee you you never criticized those who held Bush responsible for it.

...unless you'd like to find a post of yours doing just that.

 

[daveman]

Seriously? You WANT the President of the United States to put the cabash on a duly convened military court?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...ucer-serving-55-years-on-pot-gun-charges.html

If I look in this thread, will I find similar shock and dismay from you?

Smart money says "no".

"Asked" is nowhere near the same as what YOU want...a President to INTERFERE with a duly convened courts martial.

But hey....it's ok to not follow the proper LEGAL procedures if it's something YOU want, right?

So, in summary...you're not criticizing those who asked Obama to interfere in a duly convened criminal prosecution. You're too busy criticizing those who ask Obama to interfere in a duly convened courts martial.

That about cover it?

 

[daveman]

Another hit job from the Republican Propaganda Machine

Lorance’s site contends that intelligence reports he had reviewed suggested that every man on a motorcycle in that vicinity was presumed to be a member of the Taliban because the insurgent group was in control of the area. The order to fire the two long-range shots was rightful, his account says, “eliminating the threat.”

Prosecutors say Lorance knew that to be false — and they elicited testimony from service members that bolstered their case. U.S. troops in Afghanistan may open fire only if they detect hostile intent or actions in the battlefield.


The OP doesn't tell the full story. There was testimony from his platoon that Lorance knew the approaching people were not a military threat but chose to slaughter them regardless.

Then Lorence attempted to obstruct a lawful investigation:

After the shooting, Lorance tried to hide evidence that the two dead Afghans were carrying proper identity, something the Taliban rarely do. "He told his soldiers to forget they saw the IDs. That was wrong," said Womack.

Why would Lorence ask his soldiers to lie?


None of the rightwing propaganda tells the whole story.

Lorence might be innocent or he might be guilty, but the Right doesn't care about this. They are using this man's life as an instrument to attack Obama.

Why did the OP hide crucial facts?

Sounds like this guy's a perfect hero for Davey.

How, exactly? I was never a combat troop. Never claimed to be. Never claimed to want to be anything what I was -- a support troop doing vital work.

But your mindless lashing out is understandable. Someone criticized Obama.

 

[JoeB131]

Everything that happens in the military is now Obama's fault.

ZZZZZZZ

If it happens, it's BECAUSE OBAMA!

You heard it here first. He is responsible for all things bad, and no things good. Pay attention.

He's the President. The buck stops on his desk.

Or it's supposed to. His bootlickers and sycophants make sure the buck doesn't get anywhere near his desk.

I am sure that the LT's actions could be appealled.

I just don't see why anyone would take it seriously. He ordered his men to shoot at unarmed people.

 

[JoeB131]

Another hit job from the Republican Propaganda Machine

Lorance’s site contends that intelligence reports he had reviewed suggested that every man on a motorcycle in that vicinity was presumed to be a member of the Taliban because the insurgent group was in control of the area. The order to fire the two long-range shots was rightful, his account says, “eliminating the threat.”

Prosecutors say Lorance knew that to be false — and they elicited testimony from service members that bolstered their case. U.S. troops in Afghanistan may open fire only if they detect hostile intent or actions in the battlefield.


The OP doesn't tell the full story. There was testimony from his platoon that Lorance knew the approaching people were not a military threat but chose to slaughter them regardless.

Then Lorence attempted to obstruct a lawful investigation:

After the shooting, Lorance tried to hide evidence that the two dead Afghans were carrying proper identity, something the Taliban rarely do. "He told his soldiers to forget they saw the IDs. That was wrong," said Womack.

Why would Lorence ask his soldiers to lie?


None of the rightwing propaganda tells the whole story.

Lorence might be innocent or he might be guilty, but the Right doesn't care about this. They are using this man's life as an instrument to attack Obama.

Why did the OP hide crucial facts?

Why would you make a post without any links? Is it because you are actually lying yourself, and that no one found any ID on the bodies?

Here's a link...

U.S. soldier convicted of murdering two Afghans is scapegoat - lawyer