Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 12/4/2001 9:09:30 PM EDT
The first American woman to fly in combat, Lt Col. Martha McSally filed a lawsuit against the DoD in Washington DC on Monday over military regulations, practiced only Saudi Arabia, requiring women to wear birquas when off base, have a male escort, and not drive or even sit in the front of a car, when they leave Prince Sultan Air Base. The Saudi Government only requires female tourists to wear clothes that are "conservative" and cover the arms and legs. In the lawsuit McSally said the Pentagon regulations, which are imposed only in Saudi Arabia, violate her First Amendment constitutional right to practice her Christian faith freely and to not have a religion imposed on her. For more info: [url]http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20011204/ts/attack_lawsuit_dc_1.html[/url] Well what do you think is gonna happen? Did she just flush her career down the toilet like that US Army Captain in Bosnia who refused to wear the UN insignia? Or did she do it right this time by compling first and THEN filing a lawsuit afterward?
Link Posted: 12/4/2001 9:17:56 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 6:25:53 AM EDT
Well what do you think is gonna happen? Did she just flush her career down the toilet like that US Army Captain in Bosnia who refused to wear the UN insignia? Or did she do it right this time by compling first and THEN filing a lawsuit afterward?
View Quote
She'll have too many supporters in Congress to suffer much career damage over this. But she's still a nincompoop for filing the lawsuit.
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 6:29:58 AM EDT
No, her career is over. There's nothing Congress can do about that. She should be more concerned with her service, and her mission.
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 6:37:47 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/5/2001 6:31:29 AM EDT by thebeekeeper1]
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 6:45:12 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Major-Murphy: No, her career is over. There's nothing Congress can do about that. She should be more concerned with her service, and her mission.
View Quote
I agree and I believe it is rightfully so. We don't need a bunch of complaining girls in the military who are mad because they can't wear the clothes they want to, or guys doing the same thing for that matter. She'll probably just retire and become a newscaster or get a talk show....... Michael
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 6:47:00 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Renamed: She'll have too many supporters in Congress to suffer much career damage over this. But she's still a nincompoop for filing the lawsuit.
View Quote
Unlikely...too many with long memories in the Chain of Command. She will get what may appear to most as decent evaluations but when compared to everyone else up for promotion they won't be good enough. Some just don't know when to leave it alone.
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 6:47:09 AM EDT
Not to get too into it, but.... New isn't a Patriot. He's just another self-absorbed servicemember, who didn't want to follow orders, that he took an oath to obey. His distraction took away from the readiness of his unit, by wasting valuable training time on indulging a confused young man.
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 6:52:51 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 6:57:37 AM EDT
She may be an aspiring screen writer who thinks this will make a good episode on JAG. Not likely.
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 6:58:49 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Grin_N_Barrett:
Originally Posted By Renamed: She'll have too many supporters in Congress to suffer much career damage over this. But she's still a nincompoop for filing the lawsuit.
View Quote
Unlikely...too many with long memories in the Chain of Command. She will get what may appear to most as decent evaluations but when compared to everyone else up for promotion they won't be good enough. Some just don't know when to leave it alone.
View Quote
You may be right, but I have to think that there are a lot of people who want to make sure that the "first American woman to fly in combat" winds up with stars on her shoulders. Major-Murphy's junior senator is probably planning to hold hearings on this. [;)]
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 6:59:07 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/5/2001 7:13:44 AM EDT by Major-Murphy]
Whenever you really dig into the character of those servicemembers who do things like: Won't adhere to a Command directed dress-code. Refuse vaccinations DNA samples UN patches etc. You will, more often than not, find an individual you would not want in your fighting hole, if ever the SHTF. Just an observation, because those I ran into, who were like that, were shit-bags.
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 7:03:49 AM EDT
Beekeeper, If I believe your arguement about New (I don't, we both know that but anyway), how can you then turn around and so quickly discount McSally's claim?? McSally is saying that she is being Un-Constitutionally forced to follow the customs of another religon by the United States Air Force. As to New the Constitution say the President is the Commander in Chief. If POTUS says you do x,y,and z, you do it. There is no section of the Constition that says soldiers have the option of disregarding the POTUS. In McSally's case, the military has always allowed freedom of religon, and set up policies respective of the views of religons, Consientious Objecter status for Quakers for instance. But they FORCE McSally to abide by the religious customs of a foriegn government......... And you support New's protest of the UN, But discount McSally's claim, which is based on Constitutional principles, and supports the agreement that allowed Saudi Arabians to dictate behavioral standards to US service persons???
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 7:04:01 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 7:04:12 AM EDT
I am with Beekeeper here. It was a while ago so I don't remember the facts all that clearly. I can tell you that I would not wear a UN uniform under any circumstances. The only one I would ever wear is a US uniform. If the US gov. wanted to drum me out of the service it would be them wasting the training on me, and probably violating the constitution.
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 7:16:51 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 7:28:06 AM EDT
Yes Your response makes sense. But it is your glorification of NEW and immediate castigating of McSally that makes me think that you are being inconsistent. Both are arguing over a PRINCIPLE. McSally is saying her 1st Amendment Rights are being infringed upon. The Air Force is making her wear certain items, the problem is they are making here wear those items to satisfy religous rules of the government of Saudi Arabia. I would say that wearing an "islamic" clothing item is in effect the USAF violating the seperation of Church and State. Also you could argue that our Soveriegnty is being violated by the agreement. You seemed to immediately discount that line of reasoning. New says he doesn't like to wear light blue hats. You believe that New refusing oders to wear certain items of clothing for identification, or uniformity purposes is some type of "higher purpose". I think you reasoning is inconsitent.
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 7:28:10 AM EDT
Often times, in war and training, the United States is allied with different nations, organizations and/or "coalitions". For the sake of organization, command and control and safety, during these times, it is the practice of the US armed services to mark vehicles and uniforms, as a means to identify friend and foe. Doing this, IN NO WAY, infringes on the sovereignty of the US. It is not the same as "putting on a UN uniform".
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 7:35:39 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 7:38:43 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 7:41:01 AM EDT
You're not doing it right![:)] You're supposed to argue on and on about the UN for 9 pages.[:D]
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 7:47:16 AM EDT
I'm not saying she is right, but she does have the Right to have her greivance settled in neutral forum. As far as New I also don't think he went about protesting the order properly. I think McSally has (as far as I can tell with the limited info) gone about protesting the orders in a proper manner. I think that in the future troops posted there may be ASKED if they will agree to abide by the dress code, if they say yes the will be posted there, if they say no they will be assigned elsewhere. I wonder tho' if this is a situation that would be better avoided by not having troops there in the first place.
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 7:49:26 AM EDT
You all seem to be missing the point... What McSally is suing about is the same BS that makes our Chaplans have to hide their insignias and call themselves "councilers". Remember WE are supposed to be there to help THEM. To protect Saudi Arabia from Iran and Iraq. Our people fight for them and they treat us like SHIT And unlike the idiot Army officer in Kosovo McSally isnt REFUSING to do anything, in fact if you read the story she is in Saudi Arabia right at the moment, performing her mission as normal, in spite of the insults heaped on her and all other US servicewomen by the people she is there to protect, and which her own government is for its own convinence aiding and abetting.
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 7:57:32 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/5/2001 7:50:30 AM EDT by Major-Murphy]
"Remember WE are supposed to be there to help THEM. To protect Saudi Arabia from Iran and Iraq. Our people fight for them and they treat us like SHIT" We're there for our own reasons. We're not in Saudi Arabia out of the goodness of our hearts. The mission there has nothing to do with her comfort or convenience, either. If, for diplomatic reasons, the military adheres to certain local practices, that's that. She needs to suck it up and realize she's there as a soldier, not a tourist.
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 8:18:24 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Major-Murphy: She needs to suck it up and realize she's there as a soldier, not a tourist.
View Quote
That explains my (non-military) view of the whole situation perfectly.
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 8:51:44 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/5/2001 8:44:58 AM EDT by ckapsl]
I think that McSally should follow the local rules. But I also think that you guys are a bit too harsh on her. She is not refusing to do her duty. She is complaining about having to be dressed and treated like a leper because of Saudi Arabia's religious rules. There is an American heart beating in there. She has my sympathy, if not my complete approval. [Edited to add: No offense meant to any lepers]
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 9:14:17 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/5/2001 9:10:18 AM EDT by timh70]
Originally Posted By Major-Murphy: Won't adhere to a Command directed dress-code. Refuse vaccinations DNA samples UN patches etc. Just an observation, because those I ran into, who were like that, were shit-bags.
View Quote
Ok Maj, I'm just a Sergeant In the Corps, but I must take some issues with what you have said. First the vaccinations for anthrax: There have been more that 1 or 2 cases where people have gotten sick from the innoculations. And the company that manufactures the vaccine has YET to get FDA approval. So I too would deny the vaccine. look at Gulf War Syndrome. I is highly possible that it is connected to the anthrix pills that were forced on the services by the government. Second the DNA samples: If they would destroy the DNA samples after you get out, there is no problem. But to keep the samples after your service is over makes no sense. Why does the military need to keep your DNA on file? They don't. Third the UN patch crap: When I was out in the Med in '95 and '98, we were tasked to support the NATO action is Bosnia. No one wore patches, because NATO in and of it's self, has no military jurdistiction. It is a PACT. Tha's all. The same with the U.N. Screw what the U.N. says. The ideas of the U.N. flies in the face of freedom. They have NO military jurdistiction over ANYONE. The ONLY time that yo uare REQUIRED to wear the insignia of a foregin service is if you are in an EXCHANGE OF SERVICE MEMBER ROLE. For example, the British and Spanish Harrier pilots that are in USMC squadrons are required to wear the appropriate squadron patches. But they are not required to wear an American flag patch. When in formation, they wear the equivalant uniform from their service, along with their own headgear, not a USMC cover. American service members do NOT belong to any foregin service, and should not be made to wear their a friggin blue beret. Our oath is "to support and defend the Constitution of The United States against all enemies, FOREGIN AND DOMESTIC". Not "support and defend the U.N." And finally, the dress code. Did you know that Islamic service members are now allowed to wear the Islamic head gear while in uniform in America? They didn't follow the uniform regulations, and they got the rules changed (which is B.S. IMHO). In the USMC, appropriate civilian attire is: trousers or slacks, a collard shirt, shoes, socks and a belt. Back in CONUS, I usually wear tee shirts, and jeans, as do most junior enlisted. So I'm a shitbag for not following clothing regs? Whatever. Yes' I've been in trouble. I've been to NJP (article 15) twice, and been reduced both times, and STILL have the trust of the pilots, due to my experience and knowledge. Am I a shit bag? Maybe, but I think that my qualifications in my job say differently. I was low power qualified, CDQAR (certify Safe for flight on maintenance), shift supervisor. Pilots would take my word and fly if I told them a jet was safe for flight. So just because you buck the system doesn't make you a "shitbag" [smoke] _______________________________________________ "You are not a REAL Marine until you've been to NJP" -Chesty Puller
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 9:27:44 AM EDT
This is just one more reason they never should have allowed girls to fly fighters. Thank God I got out before this happened and never had to fly with one. 99% of them are not able to do the job effectively and most are just there to prove a point. This is one of those cases. Our country is at war and this C*** is more worried about what she has to wear off base than killing the enemy.
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 9:31:01 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/5/2001 9:24:35 AM EDT by garandman]
Women don't belong in the military. Period. Does it really matter if this hump drivin' planes, or ridin' a desk. Not to me it don't. Further, men that ACT like petty women should be culled out ASAP. And YES, I do mean homos. In addition to heterosexual sissies. the military is about KILLING. it ain't no palce for the petty or the squeamish. I was born in the wrong century. I'm gonna file a complaint. [BD]
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 9:31:17 AM EDT
Refuse orders and you are a shit-bag. That's the way it goes. You didn't refuse the vaccine, though. How about the experimental vaccine that they give to prevent Jap-Encephalitis... Did you refuse that, too? Maybe you guys in the Wing are just a little loose, that's all. [;)] Now, for the dress code, that's situational. We all know that jeans and tee is OK. In Hawaii it's OK to wear flip-flops, not so in DC. You wear an earing, though, even off base...shit-bag. The dress code for officers, and for those deployed to other nations, is a more serious thing, though. If you were in my Bn, and refused a direct order to wear a little UN patch, take your vaccine... ...You'd getting more than office hours.
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 9:42:16 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Major-Murphy: We're there for our own reasons. We're not in Saudi Arabia out of the goodness of our hearts.
View Quote
While we need their oil, they also need us to protect them. While they are the single biggest cash purchaser of military equipment and hardware from the US, they don't have the people necessary to man it. We keep Saudi from becoming West Iraq because it benefits us, and they let us because it benefits them. The bullshit they hoist upon the servicemen over there is ridiculous.
The mission there has nothing to do with her comfort or convenience, either. If, for diplomatic reasons, the military adheres to certain local practices, that's that. She needs to suck it up and realize she's there as a soldier, not a tourist.
View Quote
If they wanted to adhere to local practice [b]she wouldn't be over there in the first place.[/b] They don't hold women in high regard, so why station her there? By stationing her there it creates tension regardless. A solider stationed over there isn't even allowed to have a Bible, Torah or any religious insignias or jewelry on them even while on base. They are forbidden from practicing any faith other than Islam. A good friend of mine spent several years over there in both Kuwait and Saudi in the Air Force, and he was not pleased with all the things they had to abide by. He kept his bible with him anyway. God Bless Texas
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 9:46:28 AM EDT
All your points are true. They are part of what makes serving a challenge. Some are cut out for it, and some are not. There's no draft, but there IS Levenworth, for those who decide to refuse a lawful order.
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 9:48:18 AM EDT
She is not refusing to do her duty. She is complaining about having to be dressed and treated like a leper because of Saudi Arabia's religious rules.
View Quote
Complaining is normal; in fact, if the troops aren't complaining then something's wrong. [;)] But filing a LAWSUIT is just ridiculous. How well do you think the military would function if service members were to go running to their lawyer every time they didn't like a regulation? You might as well let the Teamsters organize the ranks so they could handle grievances through a union steward. [rolleyes] And let's suppose McSally [i]does[/i] win her lawsuit. Does she really think that the Saudis are going to turn a blind eye when she goes cruising around Riyadh in a tube top? Good luck to her if she thinks she's going to win any lawsuits in a Saudi court.
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 9:59:40 AM EDT
If I understand this correctly, she doesn't have to follow "their" dress code if she doesn't leave the base. So how can she say they are forcing her to do anything. It's simple if she doesn't want to be told what to wear just stay on base.
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 10:07:21 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Major-Murphy: Not to get too into it, but.... New isn't a Patriot. He's just another self-absorbed servicemember, who didn't want to follow orders, that he took an oath to obey. His distraction took away from the readiness of his unit, by wasting valuable training time on indulging a confused young man.
View Quote
Have to disagree with you. Mr. New did the right thing by refusing to wear a foreign insingina / headgear on his US uniform. He was not "confused" and I think his "distraction" actually woke quite a few people up. Why are American troops being commanded by foreign generals and being shipped off to fight other country's battles for them? All service men and women have a duty to disobey illegal orders, as I'm sure you are aware. He perceived this order to be in violation of his oath of enlistment as well as against Army regulations. I don't see him as self-absorbed at all, I see him as a patriot.
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 10:10:22 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/5/2001 10:02:56 AM EDT by LWilde]
Waaaaaa!!! Listen to her! Geez, you'd think that a military officer with half a brain would understand and respect the situation that she is in...(This AIN'T New York, Sweet Knees and Miss Hillary AIN'T around to quack for your RIGHTS as a military woman and you are not protected by the Constitution while out of the jurisdiction and physical protection of the United States Armed Forces camp/ship/base. Got it?) In fact, just about the only place where you are perfectly safe is Haze Grey and Underway. Hell, she's lucky she wasn't forced to wear a burqa. If that's what the locals want...then that's what they get. I was always taught that the code while deployed was always simple: When in Rome... I remember going to school years ago to learn all about Arabic and Saudi customs and culture. I thought some of it was really weird but realized that it was not my place to critize them. We made sure that we didn't do something really stupid...no matter how bizarre we thought their behavior might have been. Then there's this: How about not being the Ugly American and insulting the locals' sensibilities? What may be unfair, restrictive, or just disgusting to your ax-grinding-liberal-liberated-female-get-out-of-my-way-I am WOMAN ego, may just be everyday normal operating culture to the host country's citizens. Don't piss in their soup while you're in country. Bad for our relations with them...and it gets you a quick ticket home. Damn, if this is indicative of the priorties and mindset of our female military...then it WAS a huge mistake to let them into anything but clerical jobs. (Shit...that'll draw fire!) Good thing is...her career is toast. Sue the DoD? Right...that'll work! I don't care how many congresswomen she has on her team and how many TV expose shows she gets on or books she writes...she is done as an officer in our military. Good. [;)]
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 10:10:56 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Renamed: Complaining is normal; in fact, if the troops aren't complaining then something's wrong. [;)] But filing a LAWSUIT is just ridiculous. How well do you think the military would function if service members were to go running to their lawyer every time they didn't like a regulation?
View Quote
From the news article: [i]The Texas native has opposed the policy of the 363rd Air Expeditionary Wing since it was adopted in 1995, but has failed to convince Defense Department or Air Force officials to drop it.[/i] It sounds like she has been trying to change the rule within the system for some time. Moreover, service members don't give up all their rights just because they wear the uniform. In fact, Congress has allowed service members to sue the military and has explicitly designated one of United States Circuit Courts as a path of appeal for uniformed service members, who can also appeal all the way to the US Supreme Court in certain cases. If I were in her place, I would swallow my pride and faith and all this foolish talk of rights and such, and meekly obey the rule. I don't think that McSally should pursue this. But some things, including religious faith, are important to some people. She deserves a little better than the characterizations of [b]hump[/b], [b]shit-bag[/b] and [b]C***[/b] that some people are giving her.
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 10:14:58 AM EDT
the woman in question was wrong. she swore to obey "orders given .." etc.. and as far as you folks thinking that her constitutional rights were violated, remember that our (if you are a military member) rights are defined by the UCMJ. folks in the military arent there to exercise their rights! THEY ARE THERE TO DEFEND IT !
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 10:18:26 AM EDT
WAIT A MINUTE!!! Am I missing something here? Will somebody PLEASE tell me how is Hell she made O-5? If she has been a pain in the ass for six years...what gives? No wait...it couldn't be a simple case of PC promotions could it? Naaaaa...that would never happen. I seem to remember a block on my FITREP called "judgement". Sort of important trait as I remember. Used to be if you got anything but an A in that...well you might as well kiss your military career adios! [pissed]
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 10:18:32 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/5/2001 10:18:00 AM EDT by Major-Murphy]
Originally Posted By zombee: Why are American troops being commanded by foreign generals and being shipped off to fight other country's battles for them?
View Quote
They're not. This is misinformation.
All service men and women have a duty to disobey illegal orders, as I'm sure you are aware. He perceived this order to be in violation of his oath of enlistment as well as against Army regulations.
View Quote
He perceived this, yes. He was ill-informed and wrong. This is not my opinion, it is a legal fact. He was not placed under the command of a foreign General OR organization. He was told to wear something, he refused that order because he didn't like what that thing symbolized. Too bad.
I don't see him as self-absorbed at all, I see him as a patriot.
View Quote
You have very little understanding of the meaning of "legal order" or the "oath". When in the service, you cannot participate in certain behaviors, activities and organizations. That's the way it goes. In the military, if you give speeches bad mouthing the president, it's a crime. They make you get a funny haircut, too.
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 10:43:53 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 11:25:14 AM EDT
To follow up on Major Murpheys Post, US troops have been commanded by forgein generals,example Montgomery commanded some American units on the northern side of the German advance during the Battle of the Bulge.
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 11:27:49 AM EDT
Horrors!
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 11:34:43 AM EDT
Originally Posted By JIMBEAM: To follow up on Major Murpheys Post, US troops have been commanded by forgein generals,example Montgomery commanded some American units on the northern side of the German advance during the Battle of the Bulge.
View Quote
And they regarded Monty as a cowardly, backward fool. For the record.... [}:D]
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 11:36:21 AM EDT
Did Monty make them wear one of his sissy berets?
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 11:37:51 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Major-Murphy: Did Monty make them wear one of his sissy berets?
View Quote
I think it was more Monty's ascot that cheesed them off. [:D]
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 11:38:13 AM EDT
If McSally's religious faith is at the heart of the issue, then she should explain how wearing a robe or riding in the back of a vehicle is a violation of her Christian beliefs.
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 11:39:24 AM EDT
Major- I know for a fact that, in some circumstances, American soldiers take orders from foreign commanders. I was one of them and my whole unit thought it was total BS. (This is not "misinformation" as you put it). Don't you find it even slightly questionable that our soldiers are slowly being blended in with a global military force? As for legal orders, I am well aware of them as I am aware of the oath I took. I have also refused to follow a few illegal orders with no reprocussions. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for taking and giving orders, but if you are told to do something that violates regulations, you have a duty to refuse. You know this. Please show me the Army regulation that covers the wear and appearance of foreign headgear on a US uniform or that one that tells you its okay to take off your unit patch and replace it with one from the UN. This would have been a disgrace in the units I was with, might as well spit on your insignia while you are at it. Foreign badges / awards are one thing, but this is entirely different. As for the haircut, I didn't find it "funny" at all. It was hysterical considering I was a long-haired punk fresh out of high school. The girls loved the high-and-tight, though, and I saved a bundle on shampoo. [;D]
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 12:27:57 PM EDT
Originally Posted By zombee: Major- Don't you find it even slightly questionable that our soldiers are slowly being blended in with a global military force?
View Quote
Really now.... Look, I was temporarily attached to a foreign unit. I followed orders, but it was a courtesy. Show me a modern instance where an American military unit falls/fell under the command of a foreign military command.
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 12:49:12 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Renamed: If McSally's religious faith is at the heart of the issue, then she should explain how wearing a robe or riding in the back of a vehicle is a violation of her Christian beliefs.
View Quote
I would imagine that her court will ask her to do so. Any complainant has to demonstrate that he/she is actually harmed, not just theoretically.
Link Posted: 12/5/2001 12:53:52 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/5/2001 12:45:56 PM EDT by Major-Murphy]
Here's a little story about Mike New, patriot. [b][size=4]Phony Prescription Scam[/size=4] While awaiting the outcome of his case, Mike New was on involuntary leave. The 26-year-old medical specialist had been working for a Texas manufacturing firm and studying computer science at a local college. He was arrested in July of 1998 on drug charges for allegedly phoning in a phony prescription to a pharmacy for a drug commonly prescribed for people suffering anxiety. If convicted on that charge, he could be sentenced to as much as 10 years in prison. He was convicted in January 1998 of forging prescriptions and was fined $500 and sentenced to seven years’ probation.[/b] Wow. What a patriotic hero. What was that I was saying about shit-bags.....
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top