Graner gets 10 years...
Now Playing: Tsumani Aid: A Concert of Hope - Pink Floyd's "Wish You Were Here"
Topic: people who need help
Plenty of fingers have been pointed over the whole Abu Ghraib prison scandal, and finally after many months someone has been held accountable. 10 years in prison was granted to Army Spc. Charles Graner.

**********************************************

Graner Gets 10 Years in Iraq Prison Abuse

2 hours, 24 minutes ago

By T.A. BADGER, Associated Press Writer

FORT HOOD, Texas - Army Spc. Charles Graner Jr., who grinned in photos of Iraqi prisoners being sexually humiliated but told jurors, "I didn't enjoy what I did there," was sentenced Saturday to 10 years behind bars in the first court-martial stemming from the Abu Ghraib prison scandal.

Graner, labeled the leader of a band of rogue guards at the Baghdad prison in late 2003, could have received 15 years.

Asked if he felt remorse after the sentence was handed down, Graner said, "There's a war on. Bad things happen."

Graner will be dishonorably discharged when his sentence is completed. He also was demoted to private and ordered to forfeit all pay and benefits.

A day after convicting him, the jury of four Army officers and six senior enlisted men deliberated about two hours to determine Graner's sentence. He could have received 15 years.

Graner, who had been free prior to trial, was taken into custody after the sentence was read. He gave his mother, Irma, a big hug and his father, Charles Sr., a firm handshake before the jury foreman read the sentence.

"He's scared to death," Irma Graner said later.

Graner was accused of stacking naked prisoners in a human pyramid and later ordering them to masturbate while other soldiers took photographs. He also allegedly punched one man in the head hard enough to knock him out, and struck an injured prisoner with a collapsible metal stick.

Defense lawyer Guy Womack said his client and the six other Abu Ghraib guards charged with abuses were being scapegoated, but added that he thought the jury did its job well.

"I firmly believe there should have been reasonable doubt, but we respect their decision," he said outside the courthouse. He added that he had feared Graner could have received a harsher sentence than the 10-year term.

Prosecutors Maj. Michael Holley and Capt. Chris Graveline would not speak to reporters, but they said in a joint statement, "We think it is important that the world was able to observe this court-martial."

Under military court rules, Graner's case will be automatically appealed to the Army Court of Criminal Appeals. He also could request clemency from his commanding general.

Graner did not testify during his trial, but during the sentencing phase Saturday he took the witness stand to repeat the defense claim that the jury clearly rejected: that he had been ordered by intelligence agents at Abu Ghraib to abuse the prisoners to make them easier to interrogate.

Womack asked him why he was smiling in the infamous photos, some of which were shown while Graner spoke.

"I'm smiling now, and that's a nervous smile," Graner said.

Graner described himself as a by-the-book prison guard corrupted by superiors who ordered him to physically mistreat and sexually humiliate detainees.

He said he initially resisted pressure to mistreat prisoners, but his Army superiors made it clear to him that he was expected to obey the commands of the military and civilian intelligence agents who ran his part of Abu Ghraib.

Graner said a lieutenant in his unit told him: "If (military intelligence) asks you to do this, it needs to be done. They're in charge, follow their orders."

He said he now knows that those orders were unlawful, but "at the time my understanding is that they were (lawful), or I wouldn't have done them," he said.

Graner, a 36-year-old reservist from Uniontown, Pa., spoke for nearly three hours as an "unsworn statement," meaning he was not subject to cross-examination by prosecutors. He did not testify during his trial.

He concluded by saying: "I didn't enjoy what I did there. ... A lot of it was wrong, a lot of it was criminal."

Holley, the co-prosecutor, said in his final statement that Graner was a disgrace to the military and urged the 10 jurors to send him to prison for the maximum sentence.

"The time for Specialist Graner to be responsible for his actions is finally here," Holley said.

Graner faced 10 counts under five separate charges: Assault, conspiracy, maltreatment of detainees, committing indecent acts and dereliction of duty. He was found guilty on all counts, except that one assault count was downgraded to battery.

Four soldiers have pleaded guilty in the case. Two other guards from the 372nd Military Police Company, a reserve unit from Cresaptown, Md., are awaiting trial, along with Pfc. Lynndie England, a clerk at Abu Ghraib who last fall gave birth to a baby believed to be fathered by Graner.

Throughout Graner's 4 1/2-day trial, prosecutors depicted him as a sadist who took great pleasure in seeing detainees suffer.

"It was for sport, for laughs," prosecutor Graveline told jurors in his closing argument Friday. "What we have here is plain abuse. There is no justification."

Iraqi detainee Hussein Mutar, in videotaped testimony shown as the sentencing phase began Friday evening, said he had supported the U.S.-led invasion to oust Saddam Hussein until he was abused.

"The Americans came to free the Iraqi people from Saddam," Mutar said. "I didn't expect this to happen. This instance changed the entire picture of the American people (for me)."

Irma Graner, testifying in the sentencing phase, described her son as a kind and gentle man who faithfully served his country.

"He is not the monster he's made out to be," she said quietly. "In my eyes he'll always be a hero."

The shocking photos of reservists abusing and sexually humiliating prisoners were first broadcast on CBS's "60 Minutes II" in April.

A month later, President Bush urged Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to make sure that any guilty U.S. soldiers be punished for "shameful and appalling acts."

Speaker suggests "stripping" as good job opp for 8th graders
Mood:  down
Topic: people who need help
Speaker Touts Stripping to 8th Graders

Jan 14, 4:33 PM (ET)

By BILEN MESFIN

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - The principal of a Palo Alto middle school may not invite a popular speaker back to an annual career day after he told girls they could earn a good living as strippers.

Management consultant William Fried told eighth-graders at Jane Lathrop Stanford Middle School on Tuesday that stripping and exotic dancing can pay $250,000 or more per year, depending on their bust size.

"It's sick, but it's true," Fried said in an interview later. "The truth of the matter is you can earn a tremendous amount of money as an exotic dancer, if that's your desire."

Fried has given a popular 55-minute presentation, "The Secret of a Happy Life," at the school's career day the past three years. He counsels students to experiment with a variety of interests until they discover something they love and excel in.


But school principal Joseph Di Salvo said Fried may not be back next year.

The principal said Fried's comments to the class came after some of them asked him to expand on why he included "exotic dancing" on his list of 140 potential careers.

Fried spent about a minute answering questions, defining strippers and exotic dancers synonymously. According to Jason Garcia, 14, he told students: "For every 2 inches up there, you should get another $50,000 on your salary."

"A couple of students egged him and he took it hook, line and sinker," said Di Salvo, who also said the students took advantage of a substitute teacher overseeing the session.

"It's totally inappropriate," Di Salvo said. "It's not OK by me. I would want my presenters to kind of understand that they are coming into a career day for eighth-graders."

That stripping advice wasn't the only thing that riled parents. Di Salvo said one mother said she was outraged when her son announced that he was forgoing college for a field he loves: fishing.

"He really focused on finding what you really love to do," said Mariah Cannon, 13.

Fried, 64, said he does not think he offended any of the students: "Eighth-grade kids are not dumb," he said. "They are pretty worldly."

Tsunami disaster...
Mood:  sad
Topic: pictures
Satellite images of the Tsunami disaster

Before/After pic

More tsunami pics

Ok I think that's about enough for now...those are three good resources there. Besides, it doesn't take long to search for these online. And there is no telling how long these websites will remain as they are, where they are online.

Responsibility...
Mood:  a-ok
Topic: quotes
"There is nothing quite like reality to test one's responsibility."

I came up with that quote as I was driving home from work. What it means, basically, is that you cannot really tell how responsible someone is until they are tested in the real world. Anyone can say "I would do this" or "I wouldn't do this"...but what happens when push comes to shove?

The best example would be pregnancy. Guys can talk all they want about how they would stick around if their girlfriend got pregnant, but when push comes to shove and their gf becomes pregnant, how many actually stick around?

I was thinking about that as I was driving home...and no I wasn't thinking about my gf lol. I was thinking about 4 other girls I know who are unwed and recently pregnant. It's a sad and scary world out there sometimes...

Qwest DSL, part 2...
Mood:  irritated
Topic: ramblings
Ok so I get off of work at 5pm last night and bust ass to get home ASAP in case "Rob from Qwest" is there waiting for me. He's not, so I sneak in the apt and start cleaning whatever I can to make the place look decent (yes...I do have a problem lol).

Anyway, Rob comes by at about 5:15pm. I open the door and jokingly forewarn him about not having the cleanest apartment. He doesn't say a thing, just walks in, puts his equipment down on my futon and turns to look at the television. I just so happened to have "Fear Factor" on tv and he paused for 4 or 5 seconds to watch it. I know it's not a big deal, it's just strange that this man enters my apt, doesn't say a damn thing, and gets mentally sucked into a tv show. Don't worry, the strangeness continues...

He asks me "is anything else plugged in?" I assumed he was referring to electrical stuff because he had to do something that either involved pulling some plugs or potentially blowing a fuse or something. I start to mention the surge protector that the computer is plugged into and then turn to the tv to mention all the electrical stuff plugged in there...

"No, I mean like a telephone..."

"Oh," I said, "yeah I have a telephone right over here." I then pointed over at my telephone.

He then asked if my phone line was connected directly from the wall to the computer, and I informed him that my phone line actually was rewired through my surge protector (that way, if an electrical surge hits, it doesn't blow the DSL box that I don't own). He informs me that he has "never seen a DSL connection work after being filtered through a surge protector." Well, mine worked just fine for over 3 months, and I told him that. Doesn't sound like he believed me. So he unplugged it from the surge protector and started testing the phone line.

Long story short, we checked the wiring to see if it was bad, then we checked the wall connection to see if it was bad. The original wall phone outlet I had used successfully for 3 months aparently was not getting a dial tone anymore (maybe once or twice did I have a slight connection problem to the internet...99.9% of the time tho it worked fine). He then tested the outlet that my phone has also been working just fine for 3+ months...you could hear (through his equipment/instruments) a dial tone that had hissing/interference on the line. So, apparently I've gotten DSL from an outlet that doesn't have a dial tone, and have been using my home phone on a line with a bunch of static. Yet, before Rob showed up (and two days before that) I never had any trouble with DSL or my phone. At this point I asked "well maybe we should try connecting my DSL box to the line with static that my phone used to be plugged into. "No that wouldn't work," he said confidently. "You're lucky you can even make a phone call with that line."

He mentioned to me a couple of times how he would "have to get back there and look at it." "Back there" meaning getting to the phone outlet that is kinda hiding behind an end table, lamp and whatnot. So I offered to move the table if he needed to "get back there" as he claimed.

"Well, I'll have to charge you," he said. After a few questions such as "why would you guys charge me just so I can get DSL connection back?" he mentions that the charge would be $100! $100 just so I can continue to spend nearly $70/month for my phone and DSL?! That's ridiculous!

I told Rob what I thought of this and he kept claiming Qwest would go out of business if they gave away stuff like that for free. He claimed that their computers show that the DSL is "working fine" up until it reaches the box outside, and that it is something inside the apt that is causing the static/bad line.

I figured that Qwest must have the following philosophy:

If something causes a main phone line to go out (affecting multiple customers) Qwest will fix it for free (or sneak it into the phone bill as hidden fees perhaps?). This way, they don't lose a chunk of business.

If, however, it only affects one customer (such as my case, where only my apt appears to have been affected) they will make the resident pay for it. If the resident doesn't pay for it, they will only lose that one customer instead of a chunk.

It's too bad that the execs at Qwest don't know simple business concepts: let's assume it takes Rob an entire hour to fix the problem (I doubt it would even take that long) and he's paid $20/hr (I would hope they don't even pay him that much). Qwest would then be out $20 for labor. Hell, we'll even through in another $20 for the very slight depreciation of his equipment and perhaps new wiring for the apt. So, Qwest is out $40 now. What do they get in return? Well they get to keep me as a customer for one. My happiness wouldn't be measurable monetarily, but my business would be. Every month they would get $60 - $70 from me that they otherwise would lose. In ONE month they would have made back what Rob fixed. Even if it truly costs them $100 (assuming they only charge me exactly what it costs them) then by month TWO I would have paid them back. Each additional month is now profit for them.

Instead, I told Rob if it was going to cost money I'd check with the landlord. If they wouldn't be willing to help, then I would just go with cable internet (it's only a little more $ than DSL, and I wouldn't have to pay $100 to fix anything). I know it wasn't Rob's job to try to keep me as a customer of Qwest or "sell me" on anything (and I can definitely testify that that's TRUE with Rob) but he just shrugged and said "ok." So I helped him out the door.

Out of curiosity I went back to my DSL box and hooked it up to the old phone line (with the static issues). The modem did it's checks and whatnot and within a few minutes: BOOM, the INTERNET LIGHT WAS BACK ON!!! I clicked on the internet explorer button and sure enough I was online.

So much for paying $100 huh? Ridiculous...

Now I have to check my phone bill to make sure the SOBs don't charge me for Rob's visit. If anything, I should be charging them for wasting my time...

Good ol' Qwest DSL...
Mood:  a-ok
Topic: ramblings
So I go home for lunch yesterday and the internet is still down in my apartment. I've had issues with it for over two days. I called Qwest on Tuesday night to see if they were having issues: the woman on the other end (from a call center in North Dakota I found out) says that everything is ok on their end. She tried to contact someone in their technical support department (or something like that) and everyone was gone for the day. So she offered to have someone contact me the next day (which was yesterday).

So I am at home during lunch and I started making some food when the home phone rang. I figured it was either a telemarketer or my gf. (I thought maybe she would call to talk since I couldn't get online). I answer the phone and I hear someone mumble something followed by "Qwest." I said "excuse me?" so he would repeat it. "This is Rob from Qwest" is all he said. I waited for him to say more...a few seconds went by and nothing. "Ok..." I said, "what can I do for you?" He then mumbled something about my DSL box (which I obviously knew was having issues, I was just waiting for the person who called to explain why he was calling lol). I mentioned to him that my DSL connection was down and which lights were/were not on or blinking on the box. He then said, "Ok I can be over at 1:30." I explained to him that I had to go back to work and would be home after 5pm and asked if he could come then. He put up a little fight but eventually said he thought he could come around then.

He then asked for another # to reach me at, so I gave him my cell phone. He said he would try some configurations internally to see if he could get my box to work and then call me later. Isn't it a little scary that Qwest can configure things on my DSL box from another location? Wonder if they are able to tap into anything else through my phone line that way lol

Anyway, I told him to leave me a msg on my phone since I wouldn't be able to answer it. Sure enough, around 2pm he leaves me two messages. The first message is just background noise/blank (which makes me think this guy is in his 50s like my dad lol) and the second message is "this is Rob from Qewst. I did some configuring on my end and as far as I can tell the DSL box is running fine. If you have any questions, call me at..." and then he finished it with "I will see you around 5."

So he says it's fixed yet he still needs to come by my apt? I mean I want my DSL connection back...but couldn't they have given me more of a forewarning so I could have either cleaned up a little more or shoved more in the closet? lol

Crazy huh?

Anyone else agree...?
Mood:  happy
Topic: ramblings
If only it were socially acceptable...I could spend 24/7 on the computer. Sure I'd have to get up every once and a while for regular bodily functions and to eat and whatnot (not to mention, give my ass a chance to breathe lol) but other than that I could EASILY spend whole days at a time on the computer downloading stuff, surfing the web, working on my websites, etc...

On second thought...screw whether it is socially acceptable or not...

Enough is enough...
Mood:  irritated
Topic: ramblings
You know what irritates me? People who are using the recent tsunami in SE Asia as a means to vent their frustrations about the war in Iraq. They say things like, "It is very sad that mother nature has unleashed something that has taken so many innocent lives. What is even worse is President Bush sending troops to Iraq for his own selfish reasons so him and his cronies can get richer while more and more American soldiers die. Now more than ever we need to tell Bush we're tired of it and we want..." yada yada yada

Certainly my heart goes out to all of those who have been affected by this tsunami. There are literally millions of people who will never be the same now because of that one fateful day in December. What irritates me to the bone, though, is people comparing "mother nature" to the "mother !#(*&" (as they would call the man in the White House). I understand that many, if not all, of these people who are so against the war are just clouded with their deep seeded hatred for Bush, republicans and general, and anything involving conflict. But to try to compare a natural disaster to a decision to the removal of a brutal dictator just irks me.

Even the loss of life inflicted by the tsunami is comparable to Saddam's executions. One article in particular lists Saddam's death toll at 61,000 (found by polling Iraq's population) but they said that when Saddam was removed from power, upwards of 300,000 were found in mass graves, whereas human rights officials estimate that the total could be upwards of 500,000 to 1 million. If that is the case, then Saddam would be "worse" than the tsunami when it comes to loss of life(considering it would be hard to find anyone who agrees that this many people "should" have died from either horror).

So did Saddam kill this many people or not? Did he order the execution of even 30,000 people? If he did, would it not make sense that his removal would be a good thing? Perhaps "democracy in the middle east" is a far fetched hope, but shouldn't we at least give the Iraqi people a chance to decide for themselves whether they want a dictator or a free country? Soldiers returning from Iraq will tell you that the people of Iraq are happy...there are some terrorists and insurgents who are not happy (and never will be unless the US withers and dies) but those who were under Saddam's reign are no longer...

So, please, if you disagree with the war in Iraq, fine, just say it. If you don't like the fact that he is replubican or Christian or rich or white or whatever, fine. You can disagree with his economic policies or his public speaking abilities, but please don't go so far as to say what Bush has done is worse than the tsunami (or worse than Saddam, as some claim). There is just no basis of truth behind that.

Post Office joke
Mood:  lazy
Topic: funny stuff
There was this fellow who worked for the Post Office whose job it was to process all the mail that had illegible addresses. One day a letter came to his desk, addressed in a shaky handwriting to God. He thought, "Oh boy, better open this one and see what it's all about."

So he opened it and read: "Dear God, I am an 83 year old widow living on a very small pension. Yesterday someone stole my purse. It had $100.00 in it, which was all the money I had until my next pension check.
Next Sunday is Christmas, and I had invited two of my friends over for dinner. Without that money, I have nothing to buy food with. I have no family to turn to, and you are my only hope. Can you please help me?"
The postal worker was touched, and went around showing the letter to all the others. Each of them dug into his wallet and came up with a few dollars. By the time he made the rounds, he had collected $96.00, which they put into an envelope and sent over to her. The rest of the day, all the workers felt the warm glow of the kind thing they had done.
Christmas came and went.

A few days later another letter came from the old lady to God. All the workers gathered around while the letter was opened. It read, "Dear God, How can I ever thank you enough for what you did for me? Because of your gift of love I was able to fix a glorious dinner for my friends. We had a very nice day and I told my friends of your wonderful gift. By the way, there was $4 missing. I think it must have been those thieving bastards at the Post Office."

Steve Young is in the NFL Hall of Fame!
Mood:  party time!
Well...it was announced today...

Marino, Young Among 15 Finalists for the Hall of Fame

January 11, 2005

CANTON, Ohio (AP) -- Dan Marino and Steve Young set dozens of NFL passing records in the 1980s and '90s, some of which Peyton Manning is erasing now. Marino and Young soon might have something else in common: membership in the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

The two retired quarterbacks are among 15 finalists for the hall announced Tuesday. The class of 2005, which will have from three to six members, will be announced Feb. 5, the day before the Super Bowl in Jacksonville, Fla.

``It's an honor to get to this stage of the selection process and to be considered along with 14 other deserving candidates,'' Marino said in a statement released by CBS, where he is a commentator on its NFL pregame show.

``I've always said that election to the Pro Football Hall of Fame was the greatest individual achievement in the game and it would be one of the highlights of my career to join the sport's greatest players in Canton.''

Marino, who holds many of the NFL's career passing records, and Young, who led San Francisco to the 1995 Super Bowl title, are among four finalists who made the list in their first year of eligibility.

The others are Michael Irvin, a member of the Dallas teams that won three Super Bowls between 1992 and 1995, and the late Derrick Thomas, the Kansas City linebacker who died in 2000 after a car accident.

Marino completed 4,967 of 8,358 passes for 61,343 yards and 420 touchdowns from 1983-99 with the Miami Dolphins. He passed for 3,000 yards 13 times in a season, including six seasons in which he reached 4,000. The native of Pittsburgh, who played for the University of Pittsburgh, passed for 300 yards in a game 63 times and 400 yards 13 times.

He held the record of 48 touchdown passes in a season until Manning threw 49 this season for the Indianapolis Colts.

Young, one of the top-rated passers in NFL history, was the 1995 Super Bowl MVP after throwing six touchdown passes in the 49ers' 49-26 win over San Diego.

``It's a huge honor to be considered with the names on this list, some of the all-time greats,'' Young said in a statement issued through ESPN, where he is an NFL analyst. ``I have always had enormous respect for the Hall of Fame and all it represents, and should this come to pass it would be the capstone to my athletic career.''

The left-handed Young threw for at least 3,000 yards in a season six times and had 20 or more touchdown passes in a season five times. Adept at avoiding onrushing defenders and scrambling for yardage, he rushed for 4,239 yards and 43 touchdowns.

His league record for passer rating in a season -- 112.8 in 1994 -- was also shattered this season by Manning, who finished at 121.1.

Two of the finalists had already been determined: senior nominees Fritz Pollard and Benny Friedman.

Pollard, who played in the 1920s, was the first black coach of an NFL team. Friedman played for several teams from 1927-34.

The other nominees are linebacker Harry Carson, who played for the New York Giants in the 1970s and 1980s and was a member of the 1987 Super Bowl champions; defensive end Richard Dent, MVP for the Chicago Bears in the 1986 Super Bowl; defensive end L.C. Greenwood, a member of Pittsburgh's ``Steel Curtain'' teams of the 1970s; guard Russ Grimm, a member of Washington's famed ``Hogs''; defensive end Claude Humphrey, who played for Atlanta and Philadelphia between 1968-81; guard Bob Kuechenberg, who played on Miami's 1972 undefeated Super Bowl champions; wide receiver Art Monk, a member of three Super Bowl winners with Washington; Roger Wehrli, a cornerback for the St. Louis Cardinals from 1969-82; and the late George Young, who built two Super Bowl winners as general manager of the Giants.