Graner's going down!

Published on January 14, 2005 By dharmagrl In Current Events

Charles Graner, one of the soldiers at the center of the Abu Ghraib abuse scandal has been found guilty of all charges bought against him.

The Jury took less than 5 hours to return it's verdict.

Graner faces up to 17 years in jail for his crimes....and I hope he gets the max. He's a jackass of the highest order, he bought shame upon the good names of many US servicemembers.

You're going down, Graner. I, and a good many of the American public, am rejoicing.

P.S. You might wanna think about keeping your ass to the wall in your new 'home'.....

Comments (Page 2)

dabe

on Jan 15, 2005

I do believe Graner was following orders. That's not to say that what he did was excusable. It was hideous. I do agree that he must shoulder some responsibility for his actions. He really did seem to enjoy it alot, also. But, I have to agree with a previous poster here that it's a cryin' shame that the higher ups who gave him the orders, right up to Ashcroft and Gonzales, and Bush, should be held accountable. They are the ones, after all, who set the stage for this crap to take place. Graner is just a fall guy here. He got ten years for his actions. He's gonna come out of jail a very bitter man, and hopefully he'll have the presence of mind to direct his anger at the leadership that put him there. He got royally screwed.

dharmagrl

on Jan 15, 2005

I do believe Graner was following orders.

Each and every servicemember is trained in LOAC (Law Of Armed Conflict). LOAC specifically states that if a person is given an order they believe to be unlawful they MUST disobey it. To obey leaves them just as culpable as the person issuing the unlawful order. Graner knew the LOAC stipulations, and it's not a one-time training, it's an annual requirement...so for him to say he didn't know...well, that's bullshit, to be blunt.

I absolutely agree that those further up the chain of command should be held responsible IF they issued unlawful orders. They're not stupid, though. They issued orders to 'soften' prisoners, but they left the methods and manners of accomplishing such 'softenings' in the hands of the guards. They covered their asses, in other words.

He won't do the full ten....if he behaves himself he'll end up doing 5 or 6.

dabe

on Jan 16, 2005

dharmagrl, I am aware of the LOAC stipulations. That's why I feel that he has to be held responsible. He's obviously a real shithead. He obviously really enjoyed his work. That's what makes him so dispiccable, and why he got the 10 year sentence. But, he was given orders. Gonzales, Ashcroft and Bush redefined "torture" to enable this crap. And, now they are shifting the blame to the small potatos. They are the most dispicable in this whole miserable fiasco. They should ultimately be held accountable. Sounds like you and I are on the same page here. It really is a no-brainer.

dharmagrl

on Jan 16, 2005

dharmagrl, I am aware of the LOAC stipulations

I'm very impressed with that...

Gonzales, Ashcroft and Bush redefined "torture" to enable this crap

Yeah, whenever the shit hits the fan, the semantics start. Not the first government to do that, and certainly not the last. It's despicable, really...that people can use different words and twist meanings in order to get away with stuff.

Sounds like you and I are on the same page here.

Yep, it does.....at last!!!

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!