US Forces Rape and Murder 14-year-old Iraqi Girl

  On 10/12/2009 at 7:03 PM, vasio said:

I was going to put Red Army in red but I must have edited out the color code. But yes we have progressed from past wars, you can't be naive and ignore that, war has changed, the internet played a big part since war journalists can update their blogs in realtime, it's also much harder to get away with war crimes as proven with Abu Ghraib and also with this story.

Nam was just as bad as the great patriotic war i'd say, so wars have only "improved" since then

so did some iraqis die?

  On 10/12/2009 at 4:43 PM, Iain C said:

  Piers Morgan said:

does it actually even matter wether the photos are real or not? the story is.

 

Since we're talking about gang rape:

Just another day at KBR in Iraq, and the politicians who believe so fervently in womens' rights.

  On 10/12/2009 at 4:30 PM, messiaen said:

  On 10/12/2009 at 3:19 PM, The Overlook said:

A whole lotta WATMM membership cards and posting privileges oughtta be confiscated and/or revoked after this thread.

 

That being said, it's been a hilariously illuminating social experiment. All the feminists who decry porno as the fulfillment of rape fantasies could use this for ammunition. "Why, yes, Jeeves, when a woman is raped by three grown men, it's typically a quite arousing game of hide the sausage in the orifice and the only part of the woman that appears to protest the violation is the semi-formed frown on her face!"

 

I'm not sure which is more amusing though, the fact that there's at least a dozen obvious indications that the photos are fake OR the fact that anti-American idiocy led a lot of people posting in this thread to ignore those indications.

 

does it actually even matter wether the photos are real or not? the story is.

well yes it does because if you're going to come in a public message baord and try to spread news of a controversial (and hard to believe for a lot of americans) story that is factual but including a fake picture of a porno movie as the featured picture for the article, you're going to kind of run into a world of shit. and by world of shit i mean loss of credibility, and a total lack of seriousness surrounding the issue.

theyre from a 2004 porno guys, i can't believe no one knew that.

  On 10/12/2009 at 8:42 PM, Awepittance said:

  On 10/12/2009 at 4:30 PM, messiaen said:

  On 10/12/2009 at 3:19 PM, The Overlook said:

A whole lotta WATMM membership cards and posting privileges oughtta be confiscated and/or revoked after this thread.

 

That being said, it's been a hilariously illuminating social experiment. All the feminists who decry porno as the fulfillment of rape fantasies could use this for ammunition. "Why, yes, Jeeves, when a woman is raped by three grown men, it's typically a quite arousing game of hide the sausage in the orifice and the only part of the woman that appears to protest the violation is the semi-formed frown on her face!"

 

I'm not sure which is more amusing though, the fact that there's at least a dozen obvious indications that the photos are fake OR the fact that anti-American idiocy led a lot of people posting in this thread to ignore those indications.

 

does it actually even matter wether the photos are real or not? the story is.

 

well yes it does because if you're going to come in a public message baord and try to spread news of a controversial (and hard to believe for a lot of americans) story that is factual but including a fake picture of a porno movie as the featured picture for the article, you're going to kind of run into a world of shit. and by world of shit i mean loss of credibility, and a total lack of seriousness surrounding the issue.

I thought you of all people would have been totally fine with fakes/hoaxes.

that image is shitty because it distracts from the horror of the act. it serves as a distraction from the topic. it's pretty stupid getting het up about a fake image, though, when a 14 year old girl has been raped and killed by an army that was suppose to 'liberate'. what the fuck is more important?

here's a better link: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/5293821/Former-US-soldier-guilty-of-rape-and-murder-of-Iraqi-girl.html

=/

  On 10/12/2009 at 9:41 PM, inteeliguntdesign said:

that image is shitty because it distracts from the horror of the act.

this

  On 10/12/2009 at 9:18 PM, chenGOD said:

  On 10/12/2009 at 8:42 PM, Awepittance said:

  On 10/12/2009 at 4:30 PM, messiaen said:

  On 10/12/2009 at 3:19 PM, The Overlook said:

A whole lotta WATMM membership cards and posting privileges oughtta be confiscated and/or revoked after this thread.

 

That being said, it's been a hilariously illuminating social experiment. All the feminists who decry porno as the fulfillment of rape fantasies could use this for ammunition. "Why, yes, Jeeves, when a woman is raped by three grown men, it's typically a quite arousing game of hide the sausage in the orifice and the only part of the woman that appears to protest the violation is the semi-formed frown on her face!"

 

I'm not sure which is more amusing though, the fact that there's at least a dozen obvious indications that the photos are fake OR the fact that anti-American idiocy led a lot of people posting in this thread to ignore those indications.

 

does it actually even matter wether the photos are real or not? the story is.

 

well yes it does because if you're going to come in a public message baord and try to spread news of a controversial (and hard to believe for a lot of americans) story that is factual but including a fake picture of a porno movie as the featured picture for the article, you're going to kind of run into a world of shit. and by world of shit i mean loss of credibility, and a total lack of seriousness surrounding the issue.

 

I thought you of all people would have been totally fine with fakes/hoaxes.

i am fine with the concept or technique of hoaxing. in fact i encourage it. but i just im disbelief that someone could fall for this particular very old hoax, that is all.

robbie: old hoax to new eyes still shocking. From the circumstances, it's completely believable, and after all, how many people really know what a rape is like? Maybe she thought that if she co-operated they would spare her family? Sure the onus is on the audience to do some research, but the visceral nature of the act combined with the photos leads to some pretty immediate reactions.

is this real yet?

shit just got real

  On 10/12/2009 at 7:03 PM, vasio said:

I was going to put Red Army in red but I must have edited out the color code. But yes we have progressed from past wars, you can't be naive and ignore that, war has changed, the internet played a big part since war journalists can update their blogs in realtime, it's also much harder to get away with war crimes as proven with Abu Ghraib and also with this story.

War is and always will be hell, but yeah, the images and horror of it are more accessible to any person thanks to the internet, yet the media has made it more detached from the public consciousness. It's like all the controversy about the picture of a dying US soldier in Afghanistan. It's terrible, but seriously, why is that so shocking? Troops don't die, they get shot, hit by sharpnel, burn to death in vehicles, and more end up becoming amputees and parapalegics than killed.

As for the rape, it's old news, the pics are clearly fake. Slightly less bothered after reading that long sentences were awarded (hadn't read about it in awhile.)

My uncle is a doctor in the army (did a tour there in Iraq) and my dad is retired USAF. It's like they've said, most in the service are generally ok if not good people, but there will always be a minority of fucking morons signing up to play war and kill. Sadly they often the less desirable of society who haven't manage to land in jail by 17 and somehow got in the service. I'd like to think such atrocities by US/UK forces are less common than what happend with huge conscript armies in WWII and Nam, but at the same time we're a generation raised on first person shooters and apathy toward violence. This nasty shit like rape and civillian massacres will happen again and again...how can it not be expected in an enviroment where you kill or be killed, and you're trained to destroy at command?

  On 10/13/2009 at 5:15 AM, joshuatxuk said:

  On 10/12/2009 at 7:03 PM, vasio said:

I was going to put Red Army in red but I must have edited out the color code. But yes we have progressed from past wars, you can't be naive and ignore that, war has changed, the internet played a big part since war journalists can update their blogs in realtime, it's also much harder to get away with war crimes as proven with Abu Ghraib and also with this story.

 

War is and always will be hell, but yeah, the images and horror of it are more accessible to any person thanks to the internet, yet the media has made it more detached from the public consciousness. It's like all the controversy about the picture of a dying US soldier in Afghanistan. It's terrible, but seriously, why is that so shocking? Troops don't die, they get shot, hit by sharpnel, burn to death in vehicles, and more end up becoming amputees and parapalegics than killed.

 

As for the rape, it's old news, the pics are clearly fake. Slightly less bothered after reading that long sentences were awarded (hadn't read about it in awhile.)

 

My uncle is a doctor in the army (did a tour there in Iraq) and my dad is retired USAF. It's like they've said, most in the service are generally ok if not good people, but there will always be a minority of fucking morons signing up to play war and kill. Sadly they often the less desirable of society who haven't manage to land in jail by 17 and somehow got in the service. I'd like to think such atrocities by US/UK forces are less common than what happend with huge conscript armies in WWII and Nam, but at the same time we're a generation raised on first person shooters and apathy toward violence. This nasty shit like rape and civillian massacres will happen again and again...how can it not be expected in an enviroment where you kill or be killed, and you're trained to destroy at command?

im sure theres a valid point in there but all i see is a tubby cat sliding on the floor in a yogurt box.

over.

and over.

well it's official, i'm no longer using that signature.