It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pregnant Mom Of 4 Sentenced To Prison For Refusing To Serve In Iraq

page: 14
41
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 12 2013 @ 11:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by milkyway12
reply to post by gosseyn
 


What this woman did was abandon her oath and the other mothers and fathers serving their country. Last I checked, you voluntarily sign your life over to Uncle Sam.

The sentence was justified.

What she should have done is to turn her self pity into pride. That she is protecting millions upon millions of baby girls. No, she abandoned her oath to protect the 310 million souls to the best of her ability.

I guess the children of this country didn't matter much, the ones she is protecting or rather was until just abandoned them.
edit on 11-5-2013 by milkyway12 because: (no reason given)





Justified my A## ! Ive seen soldiers refuse to deploy and were only given a dishonorable discharge & no jail time. This has more to do with her speaking out against the war machine and the politics of it then her insubordination obviously. No good deed goes unpunished apparently.


Oh yes defending me from that huge Iraqi Navy from invading our shores, and forcing me to convert to Islam , axis of evil ect


And using the bankrupt nation's children to further your propaganda, shame on you! It's the children of this country that will be paying the tab for a worthless war that started before they were even born. Deprived of college grants, denied health care in exchange for financial ruin. A debt that can never be paid off in their lifetime. so Halliburton and fat friends drunk with power could reap the blood money.

Sorry but the troops, these soldiers are not protecting my freedoms or my life for that matter. They are used as cannon fodder bottom line. The whole war itself was and is based on a series of lies, lies upon lies. In fact I cant think of a war that was about protecting our sovereignty besides a certain German horde under the control of a lunatic "he was a problem" and some Red coats from Britain being fought by farmers many moons ago. They "the troops" are only protecting special interests of Big Oil , and field of poppy plants in Afghanistan ... wouldn't want the CIA to lose it's funding out of number one import coc aine or anything. Because that would make you a traitor. As long as they don't come and take a dump on my lawn I could care less what the people of Iraq do or say about me and this country.

So being young naive like most soldiers with a high school mentality still mind you... she enlisted after being spoon fed lies and propaganda under the illusion of patriotism , its us vs them it is do or die! GET r DUN MERCUH! What a crock of B.S! I think it is safe to say it certainly is grounds for defaulting on that bogus contract with Uncle Sam. Same could be said in selling your soul to the devil himself. In fact it's the same thing. False promises, they dont want to give soldiers that college money now, heck they don't take care of our troops any more anyway. They wont even generate housing for homeless veterans. But the dude must abide, irony is they sure do have a lot of stockades for anyone that refuses to do thy bidding don't they?
same people that own for profit prisons.




So much for moral integrity and doing the right thing


Bigger Oil Fields

Bigger Profits

Uncle Sam !


edit on 13-5-2013 by DarthFazer because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 12 2013 @ 11:49 PM
link   
_________________

Iraq had absolutely no m.d weapons .,
the invasion was an international war crime.
Those that perpetrated the lie need to be in jail !
NOT this young mother !!

What's has become of ats ?
. . . more as shills R us, rather than ats anymore. *sigh*
Have we succumb to the ptb ?
__________________



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 12:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by ChuckNasty
reply to post by sean
 


She'll get all of the above.

She will also be an example to those who violate the UCMJ. No broken process here.... Hopefully the other gals will use the system to protect them instead of the internet.

The military justice system is night and day different than any civilian one.

But we all understand your feelings. Does seem like a waste of money.
Edit: It really is a waste of money. But discipline is the UCMJ ultimate goal.

edit on 12-5-2013 by ChuckNasty because: as above


What service is a pregnant woman going to do in the military, other than secretary duties??



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 12:25 AM
link   
reply to post by milkyway12
 




She's not protecting anyone fightin in that war. You seriously think warring in the mideast is for our protection?



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 12:27 AM
link   
reply to post by DarthFazer
 



Justified my A## ! Ive seen soldiers refuse to deploy and were only given a dishonorable discharge & no jail time.
Were these douche bags you speak of notified in Canada?? That's where this deserter was.





This has more to do with her speaking out against the war machine and the politics of it then her insubordination obviously.
If you bothered to read the thread you'd know that her defense is a fabrication of her attorney. She never spoke out. This BS is just a way to get off the hook...but it didn't work too well.


As I stated earlier, if it was up to me she'd have her citizenship revoked after her 10 months is up and I'd ship her back to Canada.
edit on 13-5-2013 by seabag because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 12:33 AM
link   
reply to post by sean
 



What service is a pregnant woman going to do in the military, other than secretary duties??


Well, how about the service she signed up to do??

It's almost like you're making the case why women shouldn't serve in the military. After all, what good are they if they just run off and make babies?? That's what I gathered from your dismissive post.



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 12:34 AM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


Yeah I did read, but that's just my opinion when it comes to the mind set of this unthinking machine called discipline. Well isn't that what lawyers do best .. bs the courts and make bargains ?
edit on 13-5-2013 by DarthFazer because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 12:49 AM
link   
reply to post by DarthFazer
 



Yeah I did read, but that's just my opinion when it comes to the mind set of this unthinking machine called discipline.

Opinion? You proclaimed "this has more to do with her speaking out against the war machine and the politics of it then her insubordination" which is so far from the truth it's laughable. It has nothing to do with speaking out because she didn't speak out! It also has everything to do with her insubordination because she was not only AWOL she fled the country!!


You can't make claims that outrageous and completely off the mark then say "Oh, that's just my opinion" and expect to be taken seriously.



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 01:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by sean
 



What service is a pregnant woman going to do in the military, other than secretary duties??


Well, how about the service she signed up to do??

It's almost like you're making the case why women shouldn't serve in the military. After all, what good are they if they just run off and make babies?? That's what I gathered from your dismissive post.


Well a pregnant woman is a pregnant woman. Yes they can still serve, but most likely are doing light duty jobs. The thing I was trying to imply or convey was that maybe she wasn't offered something of lighter duty and figured F'it and just went AWOL. There is probably more to this story. You can't hate a person for changing their beliefs or wanting to clear their conscience and simply want out. That is a form of PTSD and she speaks of how stressful it was to witness what she has.

You have recruiters sitting out like vultures in front of high schools talking about how wonderful it is to join the military, but they never ever tell you truth about the horrors and the fact you may not make back alive from your tour of duty. Some of that doesn't really set in till your shot at, get your legs blown off, or take someones life. Every person is different. PTSD is the bane of the military and they don't like people knowing that they have a good sum of people who have it. At peak times it could be as high as 30 out of every 100 will have PTSD. I would be lying if I said I support the war, I support the troops to come back alive. We have gone to war of the most idiotic of things and a great deal of people on both sides have died over it. Mainly Over oil when we have technology far more efficient than fossil fuel sitting hidden behind closed doors at the patent office. Just goes to show you just how corrupt the government you serve or have served is. They play us like pawns. The lies and deception runs deep.
edit on 13-5-2013 by sean because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 01:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by sean
Well a pregnant woman is a pregnant woman. Yes they can still serve, but most likely are doing light duty jobs. The thing I was trying to imply or convey was that maybe she wasn't offered something of lighter duty and figured F'it and just went AWOL.

She wasn't pregnant when she deserted. She is pregnant now, in 2013, when the story was written. She was not pregnant in 2007, when she took off for Canada.

Nor did she go AWOL. She deserted. She admitted it in court. "I intended to quit my job permanently." That's not AWOL, that's desertion.



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 01:45 AM
link   
She admitted to herself that she was wrong and made a mistake signing up. Good for her.



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 01:48 AM
link   
reply to post by sean
 


would you care to point out where it said she was pregnant at the time of her desertion and running away to Canada? i have seen NOTHING that states she was pregnant at THAT TIME in 2007. what i have seen is she became pregnant NOW in 2012-2013 sometime. at a time she should have KNOWN the was a strong possibility of spending time in a military prison. so unless we can find something that said she was pregnant at the time of her desertion, can we please STICK TO THE FACTS AS THEY ARE KNOWN, and not drag in a pity point that had nothing to do with her desertion.

heck at that time she only had TWO kids and not four with one on the way, from what i have seen. it kinda looks like the whole purpose of TWO of her kids was as an attempt to be allowed to stay in Canada since those children could claim Canadian citizenship. :shk:



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 02:02 AM
link   
reply to post by milkyway12
 

You take an oath to protect the Constitution, not serve in a military which is under the command of civilian politicians who are beholden to money interests.

According to the Laws of Land Warfare, its not only her right to disobey illegal, immoral orders, but its her duty.

Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Pakistan have nothing to do with protecting her little girl or yours or mine (if I had any children), its about money, power and control in the form of mineral wealth, natural resources and strategically important geography.

In the case of Libya, it was even more devious than that. Khadaffi was promoting the practice of demanding gold for oil. In addition, he had a publicly owned, debt free central bank. Crimes, which according to the Western Crime Syndicate, are punishable by death.

Kimberly Rivera is a true American hero. If more people in the military were as brave and morally strong, we could put an end to the US overseas empire.


edit on 13-5-2013 by gladtobehere because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 02:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by sean

Originally posted by ChuckNasty
reply to post by sean
 


She'll get all of the above.

She will also be an example to those who violate the UCMJ. No broken process here.... Hopefully the other gals will use the system to protect them instead of the internet.

The military justice system is night and day different than any civilian one.

But we all understand your feelings. Does seem like a waste of money.
Edit: It really is a waste of money. But discipline is the UCMJ ultimate goal.

edit on 12-5-2013 by ChuckNasty because: as above


What service is a pregnant woman going to do in the military, other than secretary duties??


Yes, she'll be limited to admin duties at a certain trimester. Until then, she would be cleared on tasks that her doctor allows. She can even PCS or go TDY until the doc states otherwise...

News nugget: A female can get convo leave (free time off) every month due to their cycle.

Still think the lady in question should've gotten legal advice before fleeing.



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 02:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by FurvusRexCaeli

Originally posted by sean
Well a pregnant woman is a pregnant woman. Yes they can still serve, but most likely are doing light duty jobs. The thing I was trying to imply or convey was that maybe she wasn't offered something of lighter duty and figured F'it and just went AWOL.

She wasn't pregnant when she deserted. She is pregnant now, in 2013, when the story was written. She was not pregnant in 2007, when she took off for Canada.

Nor did she go AWOL. She deserted. She admitted it in court. "I intended to quit my job permanently." That's not AWOL, that's desertion.


Desertion is another level of AWOL. You get tagged AWOL before you are deemed a deserter.



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 02:24 AM
link   
First of all, my bias. I was an armor officer, but it was towards the tail end of Viet Nam, and never saw combat. Thinking about it, perhaps one time out of a thousand, I wish I had gone over, but as we all know, war and death is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest. I was a very tiny part in a team that had dedicated itself to the country, the Constitution, and to providing the elected authorities with a reliable instrument to use in the situations they believed demanded it.

I can not tell you, nor would it help, to try to explain my feelings about these men. I hope that those who are posting here can understand my profound respect in some small way.

The arguments here have been ably expressed, but may I return to the question of the Chaplain and Conscientious Objectors in general? There is some interesting information in AR 600-43, available to anyone. From the manual:

a. Military personnel who seek either discharge or assignment to noncombatant duties because of conscientious objection will submit an application on DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action) to their immediate commanding officer. Personnel will indicate whether they are seeking discharge or assignment to noncombatant duties.
That's her first step and sets all the wheels turning. I would not be surprised if the Chaplain said "See your CO for the form." What is the Chaplain's role in all this?

a. The interviewing chaplain may be from any component of the Armed Forces but not assigned to an Active or Inactive Control Group.
(1) Before interviewing applicants, the chaplain will advise them that any communication between the applicant and the chaplain will not be privileged since a detailed report of the interview will become a part of the application for consideration in the adjudication process.
Guides for the investigation?

During the conduct of the entire investigation, the investigating officer should remember that—
a. A conscientious objector under this regulation is a person who is sincerely opposed, because of religious or deeply held moral or ethical (not political, philosophical, or sociological) beliefs, to participating in war in any form

While feelings may change, it appears that she didn't feel that way when she signed up.
And what does the military think Conscientous Objection is?

Conscientious objection
A firm, fixed and sincere objection to participation in war in any form or the bearing of arms, because of religious training and belief. Unless otherwise specified, the term “conscientious objector” includes both 1–0 and 1–A–0 conscientious objectors.
b. Class 1–0 conscientious objector. A member who, by reason of conscientious objection, sincerely objects to participation of any kind in war in any form.
In these extracts, I have deleted provisions relating to those who are willing to serve, but only in a non-combat position.

I have to admit that I don't see the military's error in the handling of this.

edit on 13-5-2013 by charles1952 because: Spacing



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 03:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by milkyway12
reply to post by gosseyn
 


What this woman did was abandon her oath and the other mothers and fathers serving their country. Last I checked, you voluntarily sign your life over to Uncle Sam.

The sentence was justified.

What she should have done is to turn her self pity into pride. That she is protecting millions upon millions of baby girls. No, she abandoned her oath to protect the 310 million souls to the best of her ability.

I guess the children of this country didn't matter much, the ones she is protecting or rather was until just abandoned them.
edit on 11-5-2013 by milkyway12 because: (no reason given)


Sadly, this is true. I served in Iraq and personally know a few single mothers that served along with me. She signed a contract giving her life to Uncle Sam and lifted her right hand and swore allegiance to the United States of America. She does not get special treatment.

The sentence is justified...



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 03:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by FurvusRexCaeli

Originally posted by sean
Well a pregnant woman is a pregnant woman. Yes they can still serve, but most likely are doing light duty jobs. The thing I was trying to imply or convey was that maybe she wasn't offered something of lighter duty and figured F'it and just went AWOL.

She wasn't pregnant when she deserted. She is pregnant now, in 2013, when the story was written. She was not pregnant in 2007, when she took off for Canada.

Nor did she go AWOL. She deserted. She admitted it in court. "I intended to quit my job permanently." That's not AWOL, that's desertion.


Ok lets forget about pregnancy and lets forget about AWOL and talk about desertion. And why is she a deserter??



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 03:55 AM
link   
reply to post by gosseyn
 


I find the article that is the feature of this thread to be one of a growing daily example of society. I am not surprised but I am saddened. The woman at the heart of this issue is a heroine.

What I do not understand is, if she has the support of the Canadian politicians and Archbishop Desmond Tutu as a Nobel Peace Prize recipient - why don't they have any power to defend her situation???

She was given legal representation and from what I have read the legal practitioner presented her case properly. This is another example of 'the law' being inadequate and far far far from balanced.

Imagine this - if every soldier who had committed suicide had acted as this heroine did - would they have been better off - sitting in jail or completely removed from the misery of their existence???? Hard to tell right now!

Imagine this - when every objector, for whatever reason, whether already enlisted or still a civilian - stood their ground and stated, as this brave lady has - "I cannot shoot at Children or be a risk to my fellow soldiers, so I am objecting..." - can you see the chaos that would be caused????

Imagine no one wanting to enlist because they did not want to shoot at Children let alone innocent civilians living in their own land just trying to go about their lives. What would the government do - put everyone in jail????

This lady is a heroine for being honest and true to her soul. I keep recalling the words of, who was it, George Orwell - People who speak the truth will be seen as traitors ot the state - or similar. More power to this lady and all others like her.

Much Peace...to the people killed in senseless wars...



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 04:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by iwilliam
From the article linked in OP:



This so-called Christian chaplain could have advised her that there was a regulation, AR 600-43, that gave her the right to petition to be classified a conscientious objector. He chose not to do the Christian thing.

Since she was never advised of her rights as a conscientious objector, she believed that she had no options but to return to Iraq or to emigrate to Canada. Rivera and her husband and two children fled to Canada in February, 2007, settling in Toronto.




This chaplain should be stripped of his collar, if not his job. From the way this sounds, he was either being ignorant and negligent regarding his job, or otherwise he was knowingly trying to serve the military above serving god or his fellow man-- and for that reason IMO should be stripped of his religious position.

Ummm, excuse me? You get that option during enlistment, during medical screening, during SRP. Yeah, she was asked that. You want proof that she was asked that? Ask any soldier. Did she know what it meant? Probably not. But to say the chaplain did'nt advise her of this is total BS.
Its up to the soldier to understand ARs(Army Regulations) and FMs(Field Manuals). Any soldier who advances in the rank would know this.
Having a family is no excuse either to study, I for one have been hitting the books as I have a promotion board coming up, an with a newborn an wife who has'nt slept, its tough, but not impossible.
I'm sorry, but did the article say this would have been her second deployment? Well she already been down there once already!
Again, its up to her to know this, she may have had terrible squad/team leaders who prolly did'nt see the signs.
Going AWOL is a big No no, shame on her, she should have bit her tongue an stayed, plus deployments pay big, her children could have benefitted from the financial gain. Simply stupid thats all.



new topics

top topics



 
41
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join