Puppy video a fake?
posted at 12:39 pm on March 4, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Not the video, of course, but the puppy itself. Ace says yes; I say maybe. Compare and contrast the screencaps to Scotty, the magically realistic fake sleeping dog. Do we have our pup?
The one in the video seems not quite so … plush, but exposure to the elements in Iraq would do that to a toy, I guess. And the similarity of the markings is quite a coincidence.
Update: And maybe nothing more than a coincidence. Commenter “Limerick” says he has one of those fake dogs at home and the underside of it is completely flat. You can’t change its posture.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
I would rather wait for the investigation.. which I hope Allah puts on here. If it is Fake.. so be it. If it was alive.. so be it and I will eat crow!
But either way, that guy and the person holding the camera should possibly get their ranks pulled.
upinak on March 4, 2008 at 2:54 PM
blink, I can see you are in denial by the fact that you refuse to even call this behavior what it really is. You use the term, “playing with stuffed animals” because it sounds innocent. It sounds playful. It sounds nice. It sounds harmless. Unfortunately, if we are to be accurate what this is is mercilessly killing an innocent and defenseless young animal. I’m not spinning. That is simply what this appears to be. You, on the other hand, are spinning and purposely misrepresenting this behavior when you refer to it as “playing with stuffed animals.”
Its not that “A Marine shall not allow himself to be videoed playing with stuffed animals?”. It should actually be “a Marine shall never allow himself to be videoed needlessly and coldly killing a defenseless puppy.” See the difference? If not then there is no hope for you and I quit. Tickledragon is smart. She can explain it to you.
Zetterson on March 4, 2008 at 2:54 PM
Sigh, NO they do NOT represent us! Thats the whole stinkin problem here. The Idea that the worst of a group, represents the entire group buys into the Lib idea of identity politics! AND YOU ARE HELPING THEM BY ADMITING TO IT!
You will always be able to find a few bad apples in any group… you will always be people who don’t care too… so you are allowing others to hold the entire group accountable for an INDIVIDUALS action. YOU are saying they represent their service…
Find em… hold em accountable… but this is NOT some genocidal hate crime! ITS A DOG!
What if this were, oh… a SNAKE he was throwing over the cliff after catching it… or a big spider… or a lizard… or a big RAT he’d caught…
Would you still be this outraged? or is it because of Americas strange affinity for our pets… which MOST of the rest of the world does not share!
Yep, I’ve eaten dog, and cat, and monkey, and snake… and a whole lot of critters… guess what, thats what folks in foreign countires do…
thanks for the pschoanalysis… you’re wrong… but thanks…
What I am talking about is that you MUST judge people according to the condition they find themselves in. Holding soldiers in a War zone to the same standards as someone here in America is just plain stupid, and the lack of understanding about that is what leads to a LOT of what we call Post traumatic stress syndrome…
Romeo13 on March 4, 2008 at 2:59 PM
Guys, really, calm down. It’s gonna be taken care of.
funky chicken on March 4, 2008 at 3:00 PM
Griz, think about where you are right now. You are surrounded by people who love our soldiers. This site is an island of military love and respect surrounded by a sea of vicious and ungrateful Kos kids. Thats why we come here. Considering this video, and the soldiers in this video is angering people here, that should tell you all you need to know. People here are pissed because these few idiots just made the job of every good American soldier fighting over their more difficult. Thats all I can think of when I see this video. These idiots just did so much damage to our overall effort and a few hard headed/well intentioned commenters here cannot or will not attempt to understand that fact. In order to minimize the amount of damage something like this will do it is absolutely necessary to find these soldiers (if they are actually soldiers), and remove them from their duty. I don’t care if they are punished, just send them home so they don’t go ahead and do anything else this stupid again and as a result make life harder for the soldiers actually trying to do the right thing over there.
Zetterson on March 4, 2008 at 3:03 PM
Hey, I’ll make it easy for you…
ITS JUST A F”N DOG!!! Cruel? maybe. Stupid? Yep…
HATE CRIME or shows he’s going to be a Murdein Rapin Psycho Mutilating People Torturer? Uh… no…
Romeo13 on March 4, 2008 at 3:04 PM
Romeo I really don’t care if you think I am wrong or right. It isn’t my responsibility to take care of you! Nor is it my responsibility to take care of those soldiers who may have PTSD, nor do they want me to take care of them. But you know what…. NO ONE with any Common Sense would do that. Even those with PTSD have Common Sense!
Get over it… take care of your demons while this guy gets an investigation as to why he was being a jerk!
upinak on March 4, 2008 at 3:06 PM
Zetterson,
You need to reread my posts. Try to concentrate when you reread them.
I was clearly stating that these Marines have done nothing wrong IF the puppy is fake.
You, on the other hand, clearly condemned these Marines even if the puppy is fake.
If you don’t see the difference then there is no hope for you.
blink on March 4, 2008 at 3:09 PM
I think it’s been mentioned here befroe, but;
Marines in the field don’t wear rank insignia, nor do they wear unit patches or flags.
Some Marine units wear plain tan “flightsuits” rather than camoflage utilities.
Marines wear “coyote brown” Interceptor body armor, not any camo pattern.
That all said, everthing those guys are wearing is available online through mil-surplus/paintball/airsoft supply websites, including fake kevlar helmets and fake body armor.
Frozen Tex on March 4, 2008 at 3:13 PM
Ace was right the first time he weighed in. It’s a real dog. Dead? I still say no.
BTW, the fake dog doesn’t look much like the one in the video. Notice that it doesn’t have a big fluffy tail…?
John on March 4, 2008 at 3:18 PM
upinak,
Are you implying that the guy and the person holding the camera should get their “ranks pulled” even if the puppy is Fake??????
Please tell me which UCMJ article you would use to prosecute these guys if they refuse Non-Judicial Punishment?
blink on March 4, 2008 at 3:18 PM
Regardless of the dog being real or fake these Marines can be charged for videotaping themselves in uniform engaging in an act that misrepresents the Marine Corps. I personally don’t care if its a real dog or a fake – the video of them pretending is enough. Besides, when we pushed north there were plenty of dogs shot dead in the street and I didn’t hear anyone crying for PETA then. Let the Marine Corps handle the Marines, they’re better suited for it.
blankminde on March 4, 2008 at 3:20 PM
Most of the rest of the world doesn’t share our affinity for freedom, either. The only standard by which these people should be judged are American standards, not global averages.
Had it been a snake or a spider the guy killed, he would have felt no need to videotape the event or post it on YouTube. It is precisely because killing a puppy is shocking to Americans that he chose this subject. We don’t need even a single American soldier going out of his way to shock or otherwise outrage American taxpayers with videos glorifying his sick and dishonorable actions.
Blacklake on March 4, 2008 at 3:24 PM
blink et al, they don’t have to be charged with anything to let Gunny assign them a few extra duties of the unpleasant variety. There are latrines that need bailing out by hand, and patrol dog kennels that need cleaning, and big rocks that need to be turned into little rocks on many Camps.
There are grease traps in the DFC that need reaming out and cleaning and medical waste that needs hauling, and, gosh lots of other interesting and edifying tasks that this Lance Corporal will get to experience in the near future.
funky chicken on March 4, 2008 at 3:25 PM
Yes I do. Is that a problem for you? He was in it.
Let me look for that in the UCMJ.. as well as the Military law directives.
But next time put the WHOLE quite in there..
upinak on March 4, 2008 at 3:26 PM
When you grab an animal by the scruff of its neck it looks just like the puppy in the video. Can’t find a dog but here’s a cat with the same look.
It was alive.
John on March 4, 2008 at 3:27 PM
EWWW!!! KEWL….. I’s gots DEMONS!!!!
So, let me get this straight… because I’m not willing to condemn somthing that happened to a DOG, I’ve got Demons and NEED HELP!
I rest my case, overblown Outrage and Hyperbole.
Romeo13 on March 4, 2008 at 3:29 PM
I’m really surprised at this. Some of the commentary on this thread makes me wonder just how rare this type of event actually is. I’ve always written the ugly stuff off as a few bad apples whose misdeeds aren’t supported by their comrades. Think I’ll leave the thread and go stick my head back in the sand.
a capella on March 4, 2008 at 3:29 PM
That wiki cat? Fake.
Cuffy Meigs on March 4, 2008 at 3:30 PM
I, for one, certainly would advocate that (though I’ve no idea what the UCMJ actually allows).
At issue isn’t the puppy, but the creation of a videotape that portrays a service member in uniform engaged in a deliberate and dishonorable act. It’s the creation and distribution of the video, which will obviously be used by some to call into question the character of all US military personnel, that warrants harsh disciplinary action.
Blacklake on March 4, 2008 at 3:30 PM
Sigh… ever been in a War zone? Ever see guys do things that are funny at the time, but you look back on and groan?
Stress does really strange things to a sense of humor.
But don’t mind me… after all, Upinak says I Gots DEMONS!
Romeo13 on March 4, 2008 at 3:32 PM
No idea what their ranks are, but in the Marines a certain depth of understanding is required at a very early point in your career. Here’s a story that most Marines read as part of professional development that explains why these chaps should have had the sense to evaluate the potential consequences before acting. I hope this gets smothered by some other story though – the Marines have been getting enough bad press lately (justifiably bad, but still not something you want when you’re waging a PR campaign).
blankminde on March 4, 2008 at 3:33 PM
Have these guys been identified yet? I just turned on my radio and Dori Monson on 710 KIRO (Seattle) mentioned something about one of the guys being a Marine from this area, and mentioned a specific town (Monroe, WA?). Maybe I didn’t hear him correctly, but it sounded like they knew who the thrower was.
I want to emphasize that I turned it on in the middle of the segment, so I’m not sure about this – just asking if anyone else has heard this.
capitalist piglet on March 4, 2008 at 3:34 PM
a capella. I know quite a few guys on FOBs in Iraq and Afgahnistan. They have had to put down dogs and cats due to rabies. I did not ask how they put them done and they didn’t offer how. It isn’t like some people in here haven’t heard of it.
This is a different case and story, as you well know.
As for the “interesting” reactions. Well all I can say is that if I had to serve with these guys, I would ask to be moved. Military personnel know to act professional… this is lacking.
looking now… but anything I put down blink will just cut it down saying that this or that is not good enough. I am not the CO for this… so I am guesstimating. But we both at least agree.
upinak on March 4, 2008 at 3:35 PM
Oh, okay – he just said he had a caller who claims to be the Marine’s sister. They’re going to talk to her in a minute.
capitalist piglet on March 4, 2008 at 3:35 PM
Actually I’m pretty sure they can be charged with article 92 “violation of an order.” These clowns know the ramifications when they do something like this. We spend many, many, many hours training Marines in things like values, EOF, ROE, ect, ect. Regardless of if it’s a live puppy, dead puppy, or a stuffed animal, they violated the spirit of their patrol order which much be given before one steps outside of the wire; we all have to cover the same stuff regardless of the unit as it is directed by MNFW. There is no shortage of dead animals lying around Iraq, especially dogs, as most Iraqis view dogs as vile creatures anyways. If this were one of my Marines, he would be in an absolute world of sh** right now. Everyone needs to relax, I promise you the Marines will crush these guys to the full extent of the UCMJ.
gator70 on March 4, 2008 at 3:36 PM
You said it not I! And you are upset at me because you said it? Wow!
upinak on March 4, 2008 at 3:38 PM
I don’t have a problem with soldiers indulging in gallows humor (so long as it does not violate the UCMJ). I do have a problem with them videotaping that behavior and posting it on YouTube for the world to scrutinize. Can you see the difference?
Blacklake on March 4, 2008 at 3:38 PM
You might want to get a few Vets drunk, and see if you can get some of the war stories out of em then…
War is not pretty… it is not nice… Men have to do crappy things in War… its the nature of war.
It also tends to coursen the sense of humor… and what people think is funny. Its one way that stress is relieved.
Romeo13 on March 4, 2008 at 3:39 PM
You really have got to be kidding me. No really. Should I just refer to you as Michael Moore from now on? You see nothing wrong with creating and distributing a video that WILL hurt our troops and our country once released? You really see nothing wrong with that?
It is a fact that this video is being used as propaganda right now. This is propaganda gold, giftwrapped and packed especially for our jihadi enemies. How can you tell that this is propaganda? Hmmmm. Let me think about that one. Perhaps its because it makes our soldiers look brutal? Perhaps its because it makes them look like A-holes?
Now you and I know that the vast vast majority of our men and women fighting over there want to display the best possible image at all times. They want to win the hearts and minds of Iraqi and Afghan citizens.
Now you are saying, how can this video cause that kind of damage? Lets consider a hypothetical. Mr Muhammed Al Qaida just watched this video. Mr Muhammed Al Qaida knows a dozen families in Falluja. One of the families just found their little boy, dead in those same hills, beat up and bruised. Even though our soldiers had nothing to do with the boy’s death, Mr. Muhammed Al Qaida shows this video to the boys family. Now a half dozen of the little boys brothers are going to go out and kill somone wearing the same uniform as the soldiers in that video.
How would you consider our media here in the States, sympathetic to the overall war effort or hostile? Obviously, the MSM here is on the side of defeat/pull out at all cost/cut and run etc. Right now CNN just released a statement that if they get enough email traffic about this video they are going to show this video on TV tonight. Well, that’s not going to help John McCain in his presidential bid will it? He’s relying on a steading and increasing flow of good news coming out of Iraq. The last thing he needs is an already war weary citzenry to catch a glimps of a couple American soldiers brutalizing a cute little puppy. Nothing good can come from that.
And thats my point, nothing good comes from this video whether it is real or fake. It just doesn’t matter because the damage it is creating is already done. So yes, even if this is fake the soldiers did something very stupid. They helped our enemy and they hurt our good soldiers. That is a fact written in stone already and we don’t even know if its real or fake. I’m not concerned about that puppy. I’m concerned about the damage this stuff does to our soldiers and our country. That is why I don’t give a crap whether or not that dog was real or fake. The consequences are real regardless.
Zetterson on March 4, 2008 at 3:40 PM
Article 93 Cruelty and maltrealment.
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj2.htm#893.%20ART.%2093.%20CRUELTY%20AND%20MALTREATMENT893. ART. 93. CRUELTY AND MALTREATMENT
Any person subject to this chapter who is guilty of cruelty toward, or oppression or maltreatment of, any person subject to his orders shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.
upinak on March 4, 2008 at 3:42 PM
His family is getting death threats, according to the caller (his sister – and the caller DOES sound sincere) on KIRO.
capitalist piglet on March 4, 2008 at 3:43 PM
However, men do not have to videotape all the things they do in war and post them on YouTube. That goes a little above and beyond the call, as it were.
Blacklake on March 4, 2008 at 3:43 PM
Of course they can be charged. Anyone can always be charged for anything.
But I’d rather be defending that case than prosecuting it.
If it is fake, then they didn’t video themselves engaging in an act misrepresenting the Marine Corps. They videoed themselves playing with what was obviously a fake puppy.
If they had thrown a mannequin which happened to look like a person when a poor quality version of video was uploaded to you tube, then they weren’t misrepresenting the Marine Corps.
But then again, maybe I think too much like a typical JAG attorney.
blink on March 4, 2008 at 3:43 PM
Hmm…how about you don’t take a camera with you when you deploy? You’re not a tourist, you’re not a journalist, you’re not in the Public Affairs Office.
Full disclosure…I took one with me on both of my deployments, but then again, my self-edit feature isn’t missing or inop. I wouldn’t miss it too much if I had to go again without one.
James on March 4, 2008 at 3:43 PM
Marines have launched an investigation, according to Dori Monson, 710 KIRO.
capitalist piglet on March 4, 2008 at 3:44 PM
Agreed. What the hell is going on in that patrol that they’ve got cameras? Complacency, that’s what.
blankminde on March 4, 2008 at 3:44 PM
Welcome to the new world… the one where EVERYONE who does somthing stupid can have it on the net…
Are these guys idiots for publishing this? SURE…
Should they be held legaly liable? Whole other question.
And I might add, there are a LOT of folks calling for their heads on this thread, when we don’t even know where it happened, how it got out, or if its even real…. Judgement is being passed when we don’t even know what standard we need to hold the accountable too!
Which was my origional point… that apparently got sidetracked by my DEMONS!
(sorry, but thats just crackin me up…)
Romeo13 on March 4, 2008 at 3:45 PM
Wait, so the enemy uses this as propaganda and somehow puppy tossing trumps them cutting peoples heads off?…this is going to make people think bad of the entire US military because of this one incident?…I do not think it will make a difference…people who hate the military will continue to hate them and people who don’t will see it as only a couple of guys who do not represent the actions of the entire armed forces.
EnochCain on March 4, 2008 at 3:45 PM
Or This
899. ART. 99. MISBEHAVIOR BEFORE THE ENEMY
Any person subject to this chapter who before or in the presence of the enemy–
(1) runs away;
(2) shamefully abandons, surrenders, or delivers up any command, unit, place, or military property which it is his duty to defend;
(3) through disobedience, neglect, or intentional misconduct endangers the safety of any such command, unit, place, or military property;
(4) casts away his arms or ammunition;
(5) is guilty of cowardly conduct;
(6) quits his place of duty to plunder or pillage;
(7) causes false alarms in any command, unit, or place under control of the armed forces;
(8) willfully fails to do his utmost to encounter, engage, capture, or destroy any enemy troops, combatants, vessels, aircraft, or any other thing, which it is his duty so to encounter, engage, capture, or destroy; or
(9) does not afford all practicable relief and assistance to any troops, combatants, vessels, or aircraft of the armed forces belonging to the United States or their allies when engaged in battle;
shall be punished by death or such punishment as a court- martial may direct.
But Lawyers are interesting people. So we will see.
upinak on March 4, 2008 at 3:46 PM
I hear what you are saying, but that is a huge stretch, and could only be used if proven that the dog was alive, which would basically involve self incrimination. It would be far easier to get him on article 92, and the punishment would be the same. That’s how the UCMJ basically works, you charge with the most provable offense.
gator70 on March 4, 2008 at 3:47 PM
PERSON!
May be able to get em for conduct unbecoming, but I don’t know of any UCMJ article that says anything about animals…
Romeo13 on March 4, 2008 at 3:47 PM
It doesn’t matter if it is a stuffed animal. If they’d been taking shots or telling racist jokes and put it on YouTube and their chain of command got a hold of it they’re done. Its the uniform that does them in – amplified by their presence in a combat zone (presumably).
blankminde on March 4, 2008 at 3:48 PM
Thankyou Enoch, my Demons say they agree with you….
Romeo13 on March 4, 2008 at 3:48 PM
True… very true.
I do not wish death on these soldiers… just the punishment they deserve.
upinak on March 4, 2008 at 3:48 PM
I wonder how Iraqis feel about their over-population of wild dogs…?
CliffHanger on March 4, 2008 at 3:49 PM
They can charge them for multiple violations of the UCMJ I think – see what charges stick.
blankminde on March 4, 2008 at 3:51 PM
blink and gator….yeah, but why bother charging him with anything, unless he’s been a pain in the ass for a couple of years and this is the thing that will allow you to get him the hell out of the corps?
My husband’s an O-5, and he says there are quite a few incidents that they just let the NCOs handle and never, uh, hear anything about. Really, why not just let these fellows enjoy some special quality time with Gunny for a few weeks? Pushing for the Article 15 or 32 is more than this episode would seem to require, right?
funky chicken on March 4, 2008 at 3:52 PM
Does anybody remember that HamNation?…”Better Living Through Activism”. She tosses the cat out the window because the narrator said that it wasn’t very environmentally friendly to have domesticated animals.
malan89 on March 4, 2008 at 3:52 PM
I’ve spent my entire career in the animal health field, most of it in research, and as such have been responsible for the death of thousands of dogs. One dog’s death isn’t the issue, it is the casual support of intentional cruelty and rationalizing it as due to stress that bothers me. I keep remembering Scott Beauchamp’s fictional rationale for laughing at the disfigured women, defacing a child’s corpse, and running over dogs with a military vehicle as also a demonstration of stress. I don’t accept that as an excuse for all heinous behavior just because someone has served in a war zone. Sure, it can be responsible for some, but using it as a blanket excuse won’t fly.
a capella on March 4, 2008 at 3:52 PM
Except, as you can readily see from the reactions to the video, it wasn’t “obviously a fake puppy.” In the best possible case it is a fake or dead puppy that the viewer is supposed to believe is real and alive, but I’ve yet to see anything to suggest that the video does not in fact show precisely what it appears to show (beyond wishful thinking on the parts of those who apparently wish to minimize the incident). Whatever happened, it does indeed appear that the soldier throws a real, live puppy, and it is clearly the intent of the video that it appear precisely that way. That intention alone renders the generation of the video dishonorable.
Blacklake on March 4, 2008 at 3:53 PM
Do fake dogs lick their noses?
This guy is a disgrace.
Jim Treacher on March 4, 2008 at 3:53 PM
I used to listen to Dori a lot; cool guy.
Frozen Tex on March 4, 2008 at 3:53 PM
Fake or not, it’s bad PR. Shame on them for that.
Tzetzes on March 4, 2008 at 3:56 PM
And if she’d been enlisted and in uniform, she’d have been guilty of, if nothing else, engaging in political activism while in uniform. There’s a difference between what is acceptable behavior while in uniform and what’s acceptable behavior in civilian life. Soldiers are governed by the UCMJ for a reason.
Blacklake on March 4, 2008 at 3:57 PM
Well, reading some of the leftard blogs, they have actually tried to mobilize people in the Seattle area to wreck this mans father’s buisness, his mother’s business, the family home and to actually find this guy and kill him. Over a video that has not been proven to be real, over an animal that has not been proven to have even been hurt or killed.
And of course the always beautiful rantings of these anti-troop morons – “but wait until they come home and start killing humans and not puppies”. Brain.Cell.Is.Malfunctioning.Need.Shanti Baba.
Enlightened on March 4, 2008 at 3:57 PM
Well, there’s that bestiality one….
James on March 4, 2008 at 4:00 PM
Holy CRAP!
upinak on March 4, 2008 at 4:01 PM
And your sitting back in nice safe America, passing judgement when you have NO idea of what its like out there….
This kind of thing has been going on in the Military since time immemorial… you all back here just never saw it.
I’ll repeat. War is not nice. War is not good. People do things in war zones they would not fly back stateside. There is no such thing as a CLEAN war.
And YOUR attempt to judge these men by your civilian morals will be the Death of many a military man. When you can’t fire your weapon without worrying about the legal consequence… when EVERY American Casulty is now investigated by outside agencys (which it now is)… When what is a JOKE to them is held accountable by a bunch of Prima Donna’s back stateside???
Guys mistake was not throwing the dog, live or dead… it was letting people like you see it…
But thats just my DEMONS talking… or, is that my real life experience talking…
Anyway… not worth trying to convince you otherwise, you don’t have the cultural reference to understand.
Romeo13 on March 4, 2008 at 4:03 PM
And with the recent issues in Okinawa fresh in their CO’s mind I expect this foray into video publishing will be their last as Marines.
I think that the video is the problem though…call me heartless for not being overly concerned about the action itself.
blankminde on March 4, 2008 at 4:05 PM
I think what Romeo13 is trying to say is that war is hell, so it’s okay to throw puppies off cliffs.
Jim Treacher on March 4, 2008 at 4:06 PM
Enlightened, you think the moonbats over here are going to overreact, well, just imagine how the savages in the Middle East are already over reacting.
These soldiers are going to be dealing with this one incredibly stupid act for the rest of their lives. Its the stupidity of what they did that just irritates the hell out of me. I couldn’t care less about that puppy, the damage to our soldiers and their families caused by this needless stuff is just such a shame.
Zetterson on March 4, 2008 at 4:07 PM
Zetterson,
Get real. If your brakes failed next to a school I would see something wrong with the death of dozens of children, but I wouldn’t necessary hold you responsible.
If you’re a lawyer, then you should know better. If you’re not, then look up foreseeability. It matters. It should matter. It should matter for lawyers, and it should matter for leaders of Marines. You can’t punish juniors just because something bad happens.
What we should be arguing (if the puppy is fake) is foreseeability. What might seem like it should have been foreseeable on you tube with bad quality video MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN FORESEEABLE in person. I really can’t understand why this isn’t obvious to everyone. (Is this why people need to pay $600 per hour for lawyers for everything.)
This is all of course, under the premise that the puppy is fake. I don’t know if it is or isn’t.
blink on March 4, 2008 at 4:12 PM
I agree that the video is just plain hideous – joke or not. But to actually plan on inflicting damage to the apparently identified thrower, his family, their businesses etc is beyond belief.
These are the same idiots that say no death penalty, no war – but let’s hunt down and kill an alleged puppy killer. Bravo dumbshits. That oughta fix it. It’s actually quite scary that these people are already mobilizing without even knowing the whole story. I sincerely hope that noone, including the alleged puppy killer, are physically harmed because of this.
The three men in the video should be ashamed of themselves for creating a national disgrace.
.
Enlightened on March 4, 2008 at 4:14 PM
Liberalism certainly has come a long way. John Stuart Mill would be ashamed.
blankminde on March 4, 2008 at 4:19 PM
Um, you do know that Dogs are not Kosher to Islam? (pun intended). That an Islamic person would not see ANYTHING wrong with this? That their culture is much crueler than ours is?
Dogs throughout the middle east are not seen as pets, but as Pests… so… just how does this make our soldiers look bad to the people who are cutting off each others heads?
Romeo13 on March 4, 2008 at 4:20 PM
No Romeo, its not people like me the soldiers should be worried about. I see this video and all I do is worry about the backlash this is going to cause against our soldiers. I get stressed about the PR disaster that stuff like this causes. So no, the soldiers mistake was not letting me see it. It was letting other people see it who are actually surrounding his house right now with signs, marching up and down his street calling him a puppy killer. The mistake this soldier made was to allow the type of people to see this that wish to paint un already unpopular war as increasingly unpopular. This is simply a PR disaster.
Michelle, Bryan and Allah put a ton of effort into debunking the Beauchcamp story. Why? First in order to clear the soldier’s good names. Second, to avoid the PR disaster that would inevitably be tied to the military because of the story. This video will hurt our military and our country just like the beachcamp story would have had it been true. This is just a shame.
Zetterson on March 4, 2008 at 4:20 PM
They don’t need to love dogs in order to draw negative conclusions about our soldiers from that video. All that video shows is that our soldiers certainly don’t love dogs either. Therefore, all the propagandists need to do is convince people that the American soldiers did the same thing to their son as they did to that puppy. All they need to do is convince them that their children’s lives mean just as much to the American soldiers as that puppy’s life did.
Zetterson on March 4, 2008 at 4:24 PM
This is stupid.
Of course the video is damaging, but it’s certainly not damaging because of the reasons you’re stating.
blink on March 4, 2008 at 4:27 PM
Having seen the video over and over and also noticing the other videos on YouTube from a “petslover2008″, appears these few people have a habit of doing this….. a set up maybe?… this really does smell funny…. a few guys in such an open area…. any one note the line of bldgs in the background far away? When I was in Nam we never allowed ourselves to be that open, let alone be only two or three of us. I will also admit to doing less than humane things while I was in combat…. but this issue in this thread isn’t of the same relevance.
MNDavenotPC on March 4, 2008 at 4:27 PM
Lovely. I am a serious dog lover, but those people are out of their minds and frankly, scary.
capitalist piglet on March 4, 2008 at 4:29 PM
You do not need a crystal ball in order to foresee the PR damage this video would cause. Would you show a video of yourself apparently killing a puppy at a job interview? No. Of course you wouldn’t. Why? Because you can foresee a negative conclusion being drawn by your potential employer.
Zetterson on March 4, 2008 at 4:29 PM
Sorry, I’d love to believe that dog is fake, but it’s not.
It’s holding its body just like any puppy or any other nursing animal would when its mother–or anyone else–grabs it by the scruff of the neck.
I mean, I really, really want that video to be fake. But me wanting it doesn’t make it so or make that guy any less of a tool.
People do bad things. These guys did. Drum them out of the Corps.
Typhoon on March 4, 2008 at 4:31 PM
I’m hoping this is all a sham. Not only would that exonerate all of our military from being “savage puppy killers”, but it would shine light on the anti-military creeps. Unfortunately we’ve got some anti-military creeps running for president at the moment…
blankminde on March 4, 2008 at 4:33 PM
Exactly.
Zetterson on March 4, 2008 at 4:34 PM
They don’t get it. It is time to move on.
upinak on March 4, 2008 at 4:34 PM
Well, fortunately, the “crystal ball” test isn’t used by courts to determine reasonable forseeability.
You didn’t need a crystal ball in order to forsee your car killing dozens of children, either.
Your family might video you play wrestling with your kid. No harm – no foul right? Well, a poor quality version of that video on You Tube might look like you’re doing something else. You certainly didn’t need a crystal ball in order to forsee the PR damage done to yourself.
The only lessen your teaching is to AVOID BEING VIDEOED AT ALL TIME.
I would punt this case through the uprights if I was his JAG lawyer (if the puppy is fake).
blink on March 4, 2008 at 4:40 PM
Am I part of “they” upinak?
I read your Article 99 post. What is it that I don’t get?
That, even if the puppy if fake, these Marines could be charged for;
“”in the presence of the enemy–
(3) through disobedience, neglect, or intentional misconduct endangers the safety of any such command, unit, place, or military property”"
You’re right. I don’t get it. Neither would any prosecutor.
blink on March 4, 2008 at 4:49 PM
I have other things to do then dicker with you concerning what is right and wrong in the military as well as the eys of the world.
I see it wrong on all scales. PR, Dumb Kids, Stupid Idea, And a Dead Puppy.
You are just defending what a “bored” soldier is doing.
upinak on March 4, 2008 at 4:57 PM
Romeo, I think you misunderstood (or just refused to understand) what I was saying about these guys representing us. I meant they represent the US…not that they are indicative of the rest of the military. I meant that they should hold themselves to a higher standard because they wear the uniform of the US Military. While in that uniform, they are representatives of the USA.
I was not saying for a moment that these guys are a correct example of what our military guys are. I know as well as you do that there are bad apples in every bunch. But while they are wearing those uniforms, they represent the US military.
Just like if they were wearing NYFD uniforms or Police uniforms…they represent who they work for. Employers of all stripes look at their employees this way. WE are these guys’ employers, Sport, and they are representing us with behavior like this??
tickleddragon on March 4, 2008 at 5:17 PM
upinak,
Actually, I have nothing more important to do than to defend Marines and the Marine Corps on this website (if the puppy was fake).
Of course damage has been done. If it was a live puppy, then these guys and the Marine Corps will need to face the consequences for that damage. If the puppy is fake, then the damages were not forseeable by either the Marines or by the Marine Corps.
If the puppy was fake, then many people need to start worrying about more important issues.
You and Zetterson are the type of people that prosecutors love to have on a jury. The “someone must pay” mentality is definitely prevalent with both of you.
blink on March 4, 2008 at 5:21 PM
Wrong again blink. I distinctly said, all I want is the soldiers to be sent home. I did not say that they should be punished in any way. I want quiet action. I just don’t want any other soldiers attempting to do their duty to the best of their ability to have to pay because of the stupidity of these few. We need to get the bad apples away from there. Put them where they will not cause any further damage.
If it were up to me, this video would not be on youtube. If it were up to me the video would be in the hands of a high ranking military member. I would provide the video to that person with the instruction to put an end to this behavior. I would never want the video to see the light of day for fear of the PR damage it would cause our military.
Zetterson on March 4, 2008 at 5:35 PM
Gee.. and here I thought the Military was there to Project Power through controlled Violence to further the aims of the US Civilian Government… I sure didn’t see where in my Oath I was going to be an Ambassador…
I thought it was there to Protect and Defend the US… I thought it was the STATE Department that were ambassadors and represented the US…
You are buying into the meme that every action reflects on the whole US Military, which is an Impossible standard to maintain, and part of the LEFT’s politics of Group identity.
These guys are SOLDIERS. Thats their job. I quite understand the point you are trying to make… but reject it.
You are attempting to hold them to a Civilian moral code (not even legal code) and then make it like a HATE CRIME where they are going to be punished because they didn’t have the correct INTENT?
Guess what, these are young men, probably far from home, in stress the likes of which most can only imagine… and they made a lapse in Judgement for which YOU are now willing to destroy their carreers over…
Romeo13 on March 4, 2008 at 5:35 PM
How is drumming them out of the Corp not ruining their carreer?
Romeo13 on March 4, 2008 at 5:36 PM
If it’s a stuffed toy, no problem. If it’s a real dog, it’s “conduct unbecoming” perhaps worthy of some form of mild in-theatre punishment, but nothing more.
CliffHanger on March 4, 2008 at 5:43 PM
Behavior that damages the military must be deterred. There are two ways to deter it: 1). Work quietly within the military to put a stop to this behavior or 2). Expose this, boot these guys from the military, and make it clear to everybody in uniform that if you do something that makes the military look like a force for bad rather then a force for good then you will be gone.
I would prefer option 1 if the video had not been exposed to the world already. That leaves option 2. Unless of course you find nothing wrong with more and more events like this becoming daily news. Bottom line is this, do you want this sort of thing to become daily coverage on the news or do you want it to go away? If you want it to become a daily news event then defend this sort of action and brush it off as something that goes with the territory. If you think it would be better for everybody for this sort of story to dissapear from the computer screens and TV stations then I would refer you to re-read my option 2 above.
Zetterson on March 4, 2008 at 5:50 PM
Zetterson, um…actually, you “distinctly” stated;
To me, “some serious consequences” implies much more than getting their deployment cut short.
blink on March 4, 2008 at 5:54 PM
You are hysterical and you’re reading “into” me, rather than actually understanding me.
If it helps, I completely understand and agree with much of Col. Jessup’s speech in A FEW GOOD MEN, so you’re barking up the wrong tree (so to speak) accusing me of wanting to hold the military to civilian standards. But this was PUBLICALLY done – via video on youtube.
Frankly, I’d feel better NOT knowing what you guys DO. I understand that civilians shouldn’t be able to judge the things done to protect us in war, where we don’t have purview. But Hon, we have purview of this. These idiots taped themselves, and therefore hold themselves up for public scrutiny by their employers.
So, please chill on me…
tickleddragon on March 4, 2008 at 5:55 PM
This coversation still going on? It’s in the news, they think they know who this guy is. He’ll probably get non judicial punishment (a fine and restriction to barracks for a month or two) for bringing discredit upon the U.S. Armed Forces. At the very least a punitive remark in his Service Record Book which will slow down his next promotion.
I’m did a tour as a Drill Instructor, MCRD Parris Island. The military doesn’t teach those type of things. Sometimes 3 months of bootcamp doesn’t correct 18 years of piss poor parenting.
So if you want to blame someone, start with his parents and our “permissive you are special” society in general.
Because, unlike his parents, the U.S. Armed Forces will hold him accountable.
Hog Wild on March 4, 2008 at 6:02 PM
Agreed. Whole-heartedly.
tickleddragon on March 4, 2008 at 6:03 PM
You can say whatever you want about what the marines put up with. If one of them was cruel to an animal they should be stripped of rank and benefits and jailed. Period.
revolution on March 4, 2008 at 6:04 PM
That is the funniest thing I ever saw… Gallows humor is the best! Give me an F’n break… You really think that thing was alive? I doubt it… Looked dead to me… You really want to take a man out of the fight over a stupid video that no one can confirm is real? Even if it is real, who cares, its not your dog. Good thing there wasn’t a baby’s skull laying around…
m1a1usmc on March 4, 2008 at 6:05 PM
I’m up for gallow’s humor as much as the next guy – goth tendencies notwithstanding – but if you have this much disregard for life, I’m sure glad you’re not in mine.
To be dead, there certainly is no rigor mortis, as such. But as I said, alive or dead, this was abnormal behavior for anything but a retarded teenage boy.
tickleddragon on March 4, 2008 at 6:08 PM
My apologies to retarded teenage boys…
tickleddragon on March 4, 2008 at 6:09 PM
(There’s your gallows’ humor right there. Distasteful, innit?)
tickleddragon on March 4, 2008 at 6:09 PM
You are right. I did say that. After more thought I changed my mind. My opinion in regards to punishment has evolved into this that I wrote to Romeo13:
Zetterson on March 4, 2008 at 6:14 PM
Oh, and Zett, thanks for the shout out earlier…I don’t think I’ve had any more luck than you have on “schooling” the heartless.
tickleddragon on March 4, 2008 at 6:19 PM
This seems a bit at odds with other military folks here who claim this type of behavior, or worse, is commonplace in the military, and is excusable because of stress. So, is it a permissive society and poor parenting, or war time stress that causes these events?
a capella on March 4, 2008 at 6:20 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »