The obligatory “puppy-tossing Marine expelled from Corps” post; Update: Administrative discharge?
posted at 1:51 pm on June 12, 2008 by Allahpundit
I guess the puppy was real after all.
The Marine Corps on Wednesday said it was expelling one Marine and disciplining another for their roles in a video showing a Marine throwing a puppy off a cliff while on patrol in Iraq…
Lance Cpl. David Motari, assigned to the 1st Battalion, 3rd Marine Regiment at Kaneohe Bay, is “being processed for separation” from the Marine Corps, the Marine Corps said in a news release. He also received unspecified “non-judicial punishment.”…
“The actions seen in the Internet video are contrary to the high standards we expect of every Marine and will not be tolerated,” Marine Corps Base Hawaii said in a news release. “The vast majority of Marines conduct their duties with honor and compassion that makes American people proud.”
Here’s the official release noting that the specifics of his NJP can’t be divulged. Question for Marines, Marine spouses, and anyone else capable of answering: On what grounds, precisely, was Motari “expelled”? Article 15 of the UCMJ doesn’t list expulsion or discharge as one of the available punishments for enlisted men. The worst sentence you can get, it appears, is “correctional custody” for 30 days. Did they just lean on him to quit (note that the official release says nothing about expulsion just that he’s being “processed for separation”) or is there something I’m missing? Furthermore, what’s the offense here? “Being a douchebag”? I’m guessing it falls under Article 134, but you tell me.
Update: A reader in the know e-mails:
I’m a former Marine Company Commander and have done many of these.
By the news stories, everything regarding the NJP seems correct. A Marine can be processed for administrative discharge for a variety of reasons (misconduct, pattern of misconduct, fraudulent enlistment, “good of the service”, humanitarian, etc). Marines discharged administratively are eligible for Honorable or General Discharges. General Discharges are characterized as either “General, Under Honorable Conditions” or “General, under Other than Honorable Conditions”. Each are determined by the totality of his service and the type of admin discharge received. A “Hums Sep” would most likely be an “Honorable” discharge. A “Misconduct” or “Pattern of Misconduct” would most likely receive an “OTH”.
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 4 Next »
He’s not going on them now, so that point doesn’t necessarily stand.
That was hyperbole. It’s not quite as cool as satire, but the two of them are good buddies.
And yes, the presumption should be given on the side of the evidence we have.
1. We know he voluntarily enlisted.
2. We know he thought throwing a puppy off of a cliff was funny not just for himself but for other people to see.
The second doesn’t necessarily outweigh the first, but it certainly takes the shine off of his knight’s armor.
So now you’re changing the bar. If that’s what you believe, then why’d you even ask me if I had ever served?
Bottom line, the Marine’s have their expectations, and this man doesn’t meet them.
Esthier on June 12, 2008 at 5:01 PM
sure it will be black blood with new times toman blood.
At least it is answering you. I can’t even get it to answer my question.
upinak on June 12, 2008 at 5:02 PM
No one here justified cruelty to humans. (Well, that isn’t true.) You are the one that jumped from a guy who killed a dog to guys who harmed humans. I’m not going to allow you to make that comparison without challenge.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 5:02 PM
Agreed. And happy to hear the sons are doing well.
Zetterson on June 12, 2008 at 5:03 PM
That was almost funny.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 5:03 PM
A HA! Cad!
Your ruse has been exposed.
‘Tis but a scratch!
Et tu Brute on June 12, 2008 at 5:05 PM
I would’ve punched it up a bit, but I couldn’t find a puppy in time.
Jim Treacher on June 12, 2008 at 5:05 PM
T
I’ve said soi from the beginning.
Did I change the bar? When? My point about speaking to what we would do is always reserved for those who have actually been there.
Had this not been public, he would still be in the Corps. The Marines standards concerning dog killing isn’t what you think it is. This guy put them in a bad light and they had no choice but to do what they did. Shame on him for allowing the video to get out. We lost an otherwise heroic Marine.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 5:09 PM
Try harder next time. We need some levity on this thread.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 5:09 PM
Thank you.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 5:10 PM
The only people’s opinions that really mattered in that time and place were his brothers-in-arms. Did he do a stand up job on patrol? Could they count on him in a pinch? Did he relieve the watch on time? Until proven otherwise I’m guessing he did those things. I’ll say this, I’d rather have him by my side than some of you moral equivocating fools.
Thanks to modern media, he got made an example of. Oh well.
dingbat on June 12, 2008 at 5:10 PM
TheUnrepentantGeek on June 12, 2008 at 3:19 PM
Killing puppies for no reason is a sign of cruelty. csdeven claims the reason is that we equate humans to animals. That’s factually false. I don’t think snake is in any way close to a human. I frankly wouldn’t personally care if all of them disappear. But if you took an alive snake and started slicing it up, I would know that YOU are a pig. If you pee on a painting, YOU are a pig. If you like the sound of little mice squeaking under your foot, YOU are a pig. I watch YOU do things to even an inanimate object and I am within my rights to draw moral conclusions about you. The object isn’t the issue.
freevillage on June 12, 2008 at 5:11 PM
Don’t worry, you’re doing fine.
Jim Treacher on June 12, 2008 at 5:12 PM
Well, as an NCO I’ll technically never be “in command” of soldiers, I lead them.
I’m a detailed recruiter right now (with a report of 10 Sep back to Bragg).
Your arguement is a straw man. It’s not about the dog. Its not about his throwing a dog off a cliff. It’s about doing the wrong thing. This Marine did a bad thing. It’s not about the species of animal he threw off a cliff it’s that he did it and laughed about it. As though it were a joke.
And even if it were about a dog I’m reminded of St Francis of Assisi’s quote:
JasonG on June 12, 2008 at 5:14 PM
This is me saying…
Told you so.
John on June 12, 2008 at 5:20 PM
I would like to clarify something a few of you have said…
such as “a man who’s job it is to kill humans”
a Marine’s job is not to kill humans, it’s to defend humans and liberty… sometimes that requires killing humans.
I for one believe that our soldiers save far more lives than they take.
Kaptain Amerika on June 12, 2008 at 5:21 PM
Much better, monkey boy.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 5:21 PM
You need to read the relevant posts again. You asked if he was a failure when he signed up, and I said no one here knew. I used the Iraqi girl atrocity as an example of guys who signed up who also may have been a bit off track. I was responding to your presumption that all sign ups are not failures when they enter. I made no comment about a dog. You’re challenging something which doesn’t exist.
a capella on June 12, 2008 at 5:22 PM
but then sc will say that the Marine was a hero that signed up.
Endless loop.
upinak on June 12, 2008 at 5:23 PM
So what now? Now it’s OK to throw monkeys off cliffs, huh?
Sheez…
Et tu Brute on June 12, 2008 at 5:23 PM
My argument is that the Marine is not a disposable human over the life of an animal. Would you drum your soldier out of the military over this if it were kept in house?
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 5:24 PM
With apologies to the monkey! ;)
Jim Treacher on June 12, 2008 at 5:26 PM
NEVER! What a waste! We need them for experimental cosmetic testing.
Jeeze. What’s wrong with you?
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 5:26 PM
But it wasn’t. He filmed it and put it on the Internet. You might as well ask if he’d be drummed out if he hadn’t thrown the puppy.
Jim Treacher on June 12, 2008 at 5:27 PM
WHY Don’t you answer my question csdevon… since this will be the last time.
IF you were working with someone you know abused something… would YOU work with that person?
If you can’t answer the question because I would assume you would say no… which would then you just screwed up your whole arguement.
Your Son’s, while in the military, I hope would never do this to a animal, much less a person. It is called common sense and empathy. And for someone to throw anything off a cliff that Humans deem as a companian, then it makes your arguement irrelevant.
upinak on June 12, 2008 at 5:28 PM
Filming something should not be the final arbitrator to the act. They should only look at the act itself. If the act itself is not worthy of removal, then why would it become one when filmed?
It is just PC crap, much like “hate” crimes.
Tim Burton on June 12, 2008 at 5:31 PM
No, I wouldn’t work with someone who “abused” animals, but this Marine didn’t abuse that animal. He killed it.
Tim Burton on June 12, 2008 at 5:32 PM
You’re making a point and I see a motivation behind the point.
There is a big step between killing a dog and raping a human being. I don’t accept a comparison of the two as a legitimate point. To answer your questions takes the next step which eventually leads us right back where we are now. The question is does the Marine deserve the punishment he got for killing a dog when he undoubtedly has done, could have done, and probably will do more for society than that dog ever would have. Considering it was sick and would have died within hours, I don’t give the dog much of a chance.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 5:33 PM
Exactly. And for anyone, I don’t care if you are a animal lover or hater, you wouldn’t want to work with that individual because you wouldn’t know if they would turn around and hurt you.
upinak on June 12, 2008 at 5:34 PM
They did look at it. Because he filmed it and put it on the Internet.
Assuming you’re correct and the act itself wouldn’t be worthy of removal, you don’t think publicizing the act is itself an act?
Jim Treacher on June 12, 2008 at 5:35 PM
Was there a point to that?
O rly?
Sounds an awful lot like a blanket statement about his character to me.
So?
Well I’d hope not, but I don’t know you. I don’t know your character. Having never met you, never taken the time to evaluate you on a meaningful level, I can’t know what you’d do in a given situation. That’s not a call I’d be willing to make even if I HAD seen your worst moment on film because I don’t have that information.
So the value of a life is based on the service it provides to humans? Which humans then? If a dog provides a service to an evil man, is the dog somehow responsible the same way a knowing human would be? Or is the dog innocent because it does not know better?
Dogs, like all animals, are utterly amoral. A dog cannot knowingly do moral good because a dog doesn’t understand what that is (howevermuch Disney would like you to think otherwise). Lest you forget, Dogs bite people too (and even kill people – as many as 32 last year if you Google it), but we don’t count that against them. Why would we, they’re just animals?
I have been before, and I likely will be again. They’re great pets. But they’re not people.
TheUnrepentantGeek on June 12, 2008 at 5:35 PM
LOL. I suppose one could also say that about Michael Vick.
a capella on June 12, 2008 at 5:36 PM
JasonG on June 12, 2008 at 5:14 PM
So it was wrong to kill the animal? Man, I can’t tell you how many soldiers I’ve been out that shot jackrabbits, birds and such.
Was it piss poor judgment to film it? Yes. Was it wrong to kill the dog? No, absolutely not. Wrong to throw him off the cliff? I’d say no. After all, dead is dead.
Piss poor judgment to film it, but definitely not worthy of dismissal. After all, I know WWII vets who admit to doing worse to humans in the Pacific and no one would doubt their hero status.
Tim Burton on June 12, 2008 at 5:37 PM
Years ago the Stars and Stripes printed a story where a sailor threw a babecue party at his home in Italy. He invited all his friends. A stray kitten walked into his yard. He snatched the kitten off the grass and jammed it into his barbecue to watch it burn. He and all his friends laughed as the kitten tried to escape the flames. Finally, the sailor’s wife rushed outside and rescued the scorched kitten. Her husband went to prison.
I’m ashamed to admit there are some sick people in the military. While we are mostly honorable, it’s still a cross-section of America. Thugs, punks, and losers are mixed in with the patriotic heroes.
Black Adam on June 12, 2008 at 5:38 PM
My point is that the “standards” many are asserting the Marine Corps have, are not in fact the standards they have. They would never have taken this action had it never been seen. So the problem is not the killing of the dog. It is the fact that the public got wind of it. And that dumbass Marine has himself to blame for it. Even at that, I refuse to vilify him. He most likely is a decent person and simply made a stupid mistake that he will probably not repeat. And I’d allow that it would have taken a talk from his Sergeant to do the trick.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 5:39 PM
Oh, so they’re keeping him around?
Jim Treacher on June 12, 2008 at 5:41 PM
Ya know, I think you explained the mentality I’m seeing from some on this topic. I have been exposed to Vets my entire life and I know they are not saints. I know they are presented as saints in the movies etc, but once you talk to the real deal, you learn to be especially appreciative of the horrors they were exposed to and that they came back to function in society.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 5:42 PM
They didn’t keep him around. He has been discharged. In the instance I used, they would have kept him on.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 5:44 PM
Tim, that’s just a bankrupt train of thought.
It is about the dog, and about the wrong thing, and about his joking around about being cruel to animals, while actually being cruel to an animal. It’s just monstrous to toss a puppy off a cliff for fun with that sneering, mocking joke voice…mocking the natural inclination of normal people, as if they were the depraved ones. loook here is something cute. HAH I squashed it. Look at me squash the cute puppy. That’s not just douchebaggery, there’s something wrong with that freak. If you have to kill a dog, well, kill it. Don’t make a mockery out of kindness.
He’s ruined because his actions met the light of day. Maybe that was his doing, he certainly knew he was being taped. He can blame himself if he’s ruined. The fuck.
SarahW on June 12, 2008 at 5:45 PM
No kidding. Even though he really does meet their standards, honest he does. Weird, huh? I’m going to go out on a limb here and blame the liberals.
Jim Treacher on June 12, 2008 at 5:46 PM
Is it allowable to you that this could be an isolated incident in this Marines life? A mistake of youth? Or is anyone who makes a dumb mistake a thug, punk, or loser?
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 5:46 PM
They aren’t saints and war isn’t righteousness. Especially to the Christians who are outraged about the killing, I remind them that David was killing people (including what seemed like civilians) left and right and yet God called him a righteous.
Tim Burton on June 12, 2008 at 5:47 PM
You can blame us all. Especially anyone who thinks this is an unforgivable act and revel in his demise.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 5:48 PM
I find it ironic and telling about the morality of outrage that the people here are having when there is virtually silence on this thread:
Mugabe militias burn women and children alive
Tim Burton on June 12, 2008 at 5:49 PM
Exactly my point. I haven’t been there and likely never will, but those who have already decided that this man shouldn’t be a Marine.
Yes, but then you decided that those who have been there can only speak for themselves, which makes the whole thing rather meaningless.
You really have no proof of that any more than I have proof that the man was a wannabe serial killer.
If you believe that Marine=heroic, then you’re just being redundant.
We lost a Marine, one other Marines decided shouldn’t be one.
Esthier on June 12, 2008 at 5:50 PM
…in an abusive manner, while laughing sadistically into a camera.
Esthier on June 12, 2008 at 5:50 PM
Nah, it’s the liberals.
Jim Treacher on June 12, 2008 at 5:52 PM
So, does God think carpet bombing civilians is O.K.? Sounds like you’ve got a biblical reference to reinforce it.
a capella on June 12, 2008 at 5:53 PM
What are we supposed to say about it? No one is arguing that burning women and children alive is OK or that Mugabe militias are still honorable despite this one “moment of weakness.”
Esthier on June 12, 2008 at 5:54 PM
Yeah, but you just made the point that David killed civilians left and right and it was O.K. with God. Why is it different if Mugabe does it?
a capella on June 12, 2008 at 5:57 PM
Right. And lets not forget what God commanded Saul to do to the Amalekites.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 6:00 PM
I agree that killing puppies in a cavalier fashion is a sign of cruelty, but taken without the context provided by in-depth evaluation we can’t be sure that the man is habitually cruel, sadistic or evil. One cruel, sadistic, or evil act does not necessarily define the entirety of someone’s character.
But really, my main point is that vitriol directed at this guy over a single animal is 1) way out of proportion with what was done and 2) violent enough to be incredibly hypocritical and self defeating. Protesting cruelty by posting cruel things on the Internet and making judgments you don’t have adequate information to make seems counterintuitive.
I believe that my claim that this IS about the fact that a dog (rather than a chicken, snake, rat etc.) is related to both my points. Because we anthropomorphize our pets.
I condemn that act in the strongest terms (if he admits it was real and alive, that’s a very disturbing act) and I would hope someone qualified to assess sociopathic tendencies would have a long talk with him.
But the outcry has been insane (and I don’t mean just the comments here, though some have been over the top) – threats of violence to him and his family? Clearly over the line.
TheUnrepentantGeek on June 12, 2008 at 6:04 PM
Well, actually in my Biblical Theology class this debate came up. I argued that there are individual punishment and communal punishment for sins. Obviously war is communal.
Carpet bombing cities was not about killing civilians, even Dresden and Tokyo wasn’t about killing civilians. It was about destroying the national will to fight.
Ultimately, the faster you kill the enemy using all methods the faster the killing can stop and therefore the more lives you can ultimately save.
Using two nuclear weapons on Japan saved on conservative estimates a million lives on the US side at the cost of less than 50K lives. This included my grandfather who after seeing fighting in the South Pacific was sure he wasn’t going to survive that last landing.
Tim Burton on June 12, 2008 at 6:04 PM
Of course.
Esthier on June 12, 2008 at 6:06 PM
You get to make a judgment on the Marine, but you cannot speak with authority as to how you personally would act in war when you have never been there. It isn’t a criticism of you. Just a refining of the points we are touching on.
Signing up in time of war, IS heroic. He gets that presumption over the opposite.
They don’t make that same decision when the incident is not public. Can you understand the reason why?
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 6:07 PM
Killing of civilians at times is acceptable. I understand that few people in Western Civ has ever taken a logic course, but there is a part in the equation that most people are missing when making logical conclusions.
A != Non-A (r.t)
Look at the Respect (r) and realize there is a huge difference.
Just as people think that “Thou Shall Not Kill” is in the 10 Commandments, it is not. It actually says, “Thou Shall Not Murder”. There is a huge difference in respect to killing as in war and killing as in murder.
Tim Burton on June 12, 2008 at 6:09 PM
You liberal hating monkey you! You need to use King Kong’s image from now on.
Oh the apemanity!
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 6:10 PM
Well, why would the Marines do this to an American hero, unless they’ve been infiltrated by liberals?
Jim Treacher on June 12, 2008 at 6:11 PM
I never did.
Though how I would act is completely irrelevant. I don’t know how I would act, that’s true, but even if I did the exact same thing, I’d still be punished as is fitting.
That’s your connotation and as such makes you redundant.
Where’s your proof of that?
Esthier on June 12, 2008 at 6:13 PM
No, the question was whether joining the military and wearing the uniform automatically eliminates losers from participating. It has nothing to do with the relative value of dog vs human, or how much good the guy would have accomplished. As regards your diagnosis and prognosis for the pups health, we have only the word of the culprit on that, so I’ll give it a pretty low believability rating.
a capella on June 12, 2008 at 6:13 PM
csdeven – Motari was pulled out of regular school to go to special “screw-up” school, then went straight into the military.
I predict he’s a bad and stupid apple, but if he wants to expend the effort to stop being a jerk and grown up and do right, I guess that’s up to him.
Because this is going to follow him. Maybe there are folks who don’t care about his past. (More fool them) Motari will find his level.
SarahW on June 12, 2008 at 6:19 PM
Too late, they have been infiltrated.
Watch Marcus Luttrel discuss PC crap from the military when he was on ops.
That isn’t to mention the BS with women in combat.
Tim Burton on June 12, 2008 at 6:23 PM
Ah, csdeven, now we have a third act to judge the man by. It’s not looking so good…
Esthier on June 12, 2008 at 6:25 PM
If it has nothing to do with the value of a dog vs. a human (because you are as outraged as if it was a human (maybe more, since Marines tend to kill humans more), then why are you up in arms over this act? After all, it is this act that you are saying DQs him. Therefore, it has everything to do with the value of a dog and if we should be pushing him out as if he did it to a human.
Tim Burton on June 12, 2008 at 6:26 PM
SEE!!!
Jim Treacher on June 12, 2008 at 6:27 PM
Excuse me?
I don’t give a rats tail who is male, female, other sex in the Military.
Do you have problem with women in the military?
upinak on June 12, 2008 at 6:27 PM
It’s called PC KK.
If the Marines had a real standard concerning the killing of puppies, we would have many more of these than this one. Twas public attention killed this Marines career.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 6:29 PM
If you have to ask that, you need to talk to people who have witnessed the brutality over there and how it is routinely swept under the rug.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 6:31 PM
That’s good to know. What if Mugabe is at war with his opponents? Or, we decided to bomb a country leader’s tent in Libya when we weren’t at war with them, and killed his daughter? Is God O.K. with that? How about assassinating someone like Chavez?
a capella on June 12, 2008 at 6:33 PM
Pathetic Communists Killing Kareers?
Public attention that was brought on him through no fault of his own.
Jim Treacher on June 12, 2008 at 6:34 PM
That’s pretty funny coming from you.
You judged my comdemnation of the Marine’s cruelty towards the dog with a broad brush by saying ….
Sounds like it? Your opinion? Judging are we? I thought you didn’t know anything about me? Yet you’re presumptious enough to conclude I meant one thing, when I meant something altogether different.
I stated earlier on this thread my hostile comment was directed towards the single hideous act of the Marine, and it was not a judgement of his entire tour of duty. I had no knowledge of his accomplishments or assignments on the field of battle, therefore I couldn’t make a judgement.
Before you judge others from your high and mighty throne. maybe you should take a good hard look at yourself.
fogw on June 12, 2008 at 6:34 PM
I was talking to you. For someone who has asked more than once for others to bring proof, surely this isn’t a controversial question.
Esthier on June 12, 2008 at 6:37 PM
Leave a link for your facts. I read accounts that are entirely different.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 6:37 PM
WoW! Your ability for basic rational thought is seriously lacking. That is like saying a gang declares war on everyone means that their killing is moral. Or saying I declare was on you so I would be moral to show up and shoot you. That is irrational.
Tim Burton on June 12, 2008 at 6:39 PM
Do you REALLY need me to give you links to video’s of dogs being tormented in Iraq? Try Google.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 6:39 PM
Certainly. And his real sin in the eyes of the USMC.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 6:40 PM
He didn’t film it and put it on the Internet. I’m pretty sure that happened by magic.
Jim Treacher on June 12, 2008 at 6:41 PM
is this thread split or something? Can anyone see my posts?
upinak on June 12, 2008 at 6:41 PM
Can’t you google?
I can see that one.
Esthier on June 12, 2008 at 6:42 PM
Still waiting for a link to her claim that I have tried to Google and cannot find.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 6:46 PM
No, as has been pointed out many, many times, he knew he was being filmed and did it anyway. Dumbass.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 6:47 PM
as I don’t share cs’s isues that every military person is “perfect” (I was in a while ago and can tell you stories on those rejects) I can say cs’ isn’t lying about the dogs. Torturing them… I doubt it, and they usually get caught due to people with tender hearts for animals.
My ex bf and I tried to do the LTR when he went to Afghanistan this last time… he told me that they were killing the dogs and cats. I, being a animals lover only asked if they were being humane… one shot to the head. He said yes. But I have heard from other friends how some rejects tortured kittens, and got kick out. Good on the Army for doing that… rejects like that don’t need to be near weapons if they are going to do that.
As I stated in this thread earlier. Anyone who abuses an animal need not be in the military. period.
upinak on June 12, 2008 at 6:48 PM
I found some articles on a different website talking about this, and they also attack Hot Air, and Michelle Malkin:
Here is article one:
Malkin’s Conspiracy Theories Proven Wrong
Lee Rogers
Rogue Government
June 12, 2008
The terror war is a complete fraud and we are not over in Iraq fighting for freedom. It is time for propagandists like Malkin to face the facts. Ask yourself how much credibility Malkin and her followers have when they resort to baseless conspiracy theories with no factual evidence to spin the truth of what was an obviously authentic video of a U.S. Marine engaging in some incredibly disgusting behavior.
The conspiracy theorists over at Michelle Malkin’s web site Hot Air, have now been forced to admit that the conspiracy theories they endorsed surrounding the infamous puppy toss video were completely false. Several months ago, Hot Air went into damage control mode when a video showing a U.S. Marine tossing an innocent and defenseless puppy over a cliff while on patrol in Iraq surfaced on the Internet. Malkin and others immediately claimed that the video was a fake. With no conclusive evidence, they endorsed theories including ones that claimed the puppy was actually a stuffed toy and that the audio in the video was edited to recreate the puppy’s cries for help as it was tossed over the cliff. Lance Cpl. David Motari who was identified as the Marine tossing the puppy over the cliff has now been kicked out of the Marines. The puppy toss video was cited as the reason for his separation. The bottom line is that Malkin and all of her brainwashed followers will simply do anything to defend what the U.S. military does even if it flies in the face of factual information and common sense. Simply put, the U.S. military is not fighting for freedom over in Iraq when George W. Bush and the criminals in Washington DC are implementing a police state in the U.S. and shredding the Constitution. Since this is the case, there should be no reason for Malkin and others to run cover for military personnel based upon the premise that they are fighting for freedom. There is very little freedom left in this country, so its time to ask what the U.S. military is really doing in Iraq and in over 100 countries around the world.
From the AP:
The Marine Corps on Wednesday said it was expelling one Marine and disciplining another for their roles in a video showing a Marine throwing a puppy off a cliff while on patrol in Iraq.
The 17-second video posted on YouTube drew sharp condemnation from animal rights groups when it came to light in March.
The clip shows two Marines joking before one hurls the puppy into a rocky gully. A yelping sound is heard as it flips through the air.
“That’s mean. That’s mean, Motari,” an off-camera Marine is heard telling the Marine who tossed the black and white dog. The off-camera Marine snickered slightly afterward.
Lance Cpl. David Motari, assigned to the 1st Battalion, 3rd Marine Regiment at Kaneohe Bay, is “being processed for separation” from the Marine Corps, the Marine Corps said in a news release. He also received unspecified “non-judicial punishment.”
The Marine Corps didn’t say what role Motari played in the clip.
The video was viewed tens of thousands of times before YouTube took it down due to a violation of the site’s terms of use.
“The actions seen in the Internet video are contrary to the high standards we expect of every Marine and will not be tolerated,” Marine Corps Base Hawaii said in a news release. “The vast majority of Marines conduct their duties with honor and compassion that makes American people proud.”
The second Marine, Sgt. Crismarvin Banez Encarnacion also received unspecified “non-judicial” punishment.
Kurt Nimmo writing for InfoWars has called on Michelle Malkin to apologize for using ridiculous conspiracy theories to defend this incredibly cruel act. Kurt sums up the absurdity of the situation below.
Michelle Malkin, the neocon going by the handle Allahpundit, and all the other neocon camp followers, will support the troops no matter what they do, no matter how many dogs, farm animals, children, mothers and fathers, grandmothers and toddlers they torture, kill, and dismember. After all, most neocons hate all things Muslim, they viscerally loathe all “pinkos” and people who exercise the First Amendment.
The terror war is a complete fraud and we are not over in Iraq fighting for freedom. It is time for propagandists like Malkin to face the facts. Ask yourself how much credibility Malkin and her followers have when they resort to baseless conspiracy theories with no factual evidence to spin the truth of what was an obviously authentic video of a U.S. Marine engaging in some incredibly disgusting behavior. This puppy toss video is just the tip of the iceberg. Look at the torture, the killing of innocent civilians, the depleted uranium scandal, countless cases of corruption and waste. With all of this in mind, it becomes impossible to justify the continued occupation of Iraq regardless of how Malkin and others try to spin it.
RMC1618 on June 12, 2008 at 6:49 PM
I never make that mistake. I know better.
Entelechy on June 12, 2008 at 6:50 PM
Here is article two:
RMC1618 on June 12, 2008 at 6:51 PM
But it isn’t his fault because he’s a hero because he joined the Marines.
Jim Treacher on June 12, 2008 at 6:51 PM
I’m not outraged and I didn’t say it DQs him. His command did. The issue was whether simply joining the military insures that all enlistees are immunized against doing bad things that are against military codes. In other words, the bell shaped curve of human behavior still exists in the military. That was the crux of my argument. Wouldn’t matter if it is animal cruelty, theft, rape, murder, or smuggling dope. I like to think there is less of that in the military than in the civilian population. Makes me feel better. But, using the act of enlistment as a purification rite goes a bit too far.
a capella on June 12, 2008 at 6:51 PM
And that makes sense.
Killing them is one thing. Even animal shelters do that. Throwing them off of a cliff while laughing sadistically is another thing.
Having it taped and shown on the Internet goes completely over the line.
And yet how many on their side apologized after the truth came out about Scott Beachamp?
Esthier on June 12, 2008 at 6:54 PM
Oh I smell conspiracy. When MM is on Fox.. how is it that Allah aka MM is posting blogs at the same time?
upinak on June 12, 2008 at 6:54 PM
As you and I agree… cs’s went off a deep end.
upinak on June 12, 2008 at 6:56 PM
Who?
RMC1618 on June 12, 2008 at 6:57 PM
I’m sure I misspelled his name. The guy who wrote the false articles with the wife who works at TNR.
Esthier on June 12, 2008 at 6:59 PM
Esth is saying how many on the left came out and apologized after Scott wrote those stories which were not true.
upinak on June 12, 2008 at 7:01 PM
Do they still call it a Big Chicken Dinner? I hope it tastes terrible.
Blacklake on June 12, 2008 at 7:03 PM
Another party I’m late to.
Ah well, shouldn’t have been throwing puppies off a cliff and videotaping it, should you dumbass?
A stupid, cruel thing to do, but hopefully he’ll realize it. And hopefully if won’t destroy the rest of his life.
By the way, good to see you back csdeven. Seems like the old crowd is coming back.
SouthernDem on June 12, 2008 at 7:04 PM
Just trying to cover all the bases. It isn’t every day we have someone like you here who can help us out with the hard parts. So, was it O.K. to bomb Gadhafi’s daughter? Murder or something less harsh? What about Chavez? I suppose if civilian deaths are acceptable in war, the jihadis would have some justification for suicide vests, right? I’ve always struggled with some of these issues and it’s a comfort to have someone with expertise willing to share.
a capella on June 12, 2008 at 7:06 PM
He is a dumbassed hero.
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 7:06 PM
Either he is or isn’t.. don’t sit on the damn fence!
upinak on June 12, 2008 at 7:08 PM
i have a feeling this story will have the same fate as the Scott Beachamp, it will fade into obscurity
RMC1618 on June 12, 2008 at 7:08 PM
It’s nice to be back playing devils advocate. :-)
I’m back because the McShamnesty shills were right. In the end, I’ll hold my nose and vote for him.
How are things with you?
csdeven on June 12, 2008 at 7:09 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »