Four U.S. soldiers charged with rape OLONGAPO CITY, Philippines (Reuters) -- Philippine prosecutors charged four U.S. Marines on Tuesday with raping a 22-year-old Filipino woman in early November but cleared two other soldiers who had also been accused. Washington has not responded publicly to an earlier request by the Philippine foreign affairs department to transfer custody of the Marines to local authorities. A statement by the U.S. Embassy, which has been holding the soldiers, made no mention of custody but said the United States would continue to cooperate with the Philippines on the case under the two countries' Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA). "The U.S. remains committed to seeing that justice is served, and looks forward to a fair and impartial process that can provide for a just outcome," the statement said. Beyond small protests, the case has caused little public outcry or anti-American sentiment in the Philippines, the only former U.S. colony in Asia and a major security ally to Washington in the region. "We are happy the girl is going to get some kind of justice," said Katrina Legarda, a lawyer for the complainant. In affidavits, five of the Marines had disputed allegations that the woman was gang-raped in a van at a former U.S. Navy base at Subic Bay, suggesting there was consensual sex. The sixth soldier, who had also taken part in two-week military exercises with Philippine troops in October, did not submit an affidavit. The Filipino van driver, initially considered a witness, was charged as an accomplice, according to prosecution documents filed with a court in Olongapo City, northwest of Manila. "I was convinced there was a conspiracy among the accused," the city's chief prosecutor, Prudencio Jalandoni, told reporters. In the charge sheet, Jalandoni said evidence suggested the two cleared soldiers were not in the van at the time of the alleged rape. He said that once arrest warrants were issued, the four U.S. Marines and the Filipino driver would be placed in one detention facility, subject to the provisions of the VFA. One-year limit Recommending no bail be set for the accused, Jalandoni said he was "confident the case will be resolved before the end of the one-year period" stipulated in the VFA for the handling of criminal charges against U.S. soldiers. The court was expected to select a judge on January 3 to hear the case, but no trial date has been set. The woman who filed the complaint and the six soldiers -- all from the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit stationed in Okinawa, Japan -- did not attend three hearings held since late November. Relations between Manila and Washington deteriorated in the 1990s when Philippine senators ended a treaty allowing U.S. forces to keep naval and air bases that had been used as staging points during the Vietnam War and the first Gulf War. The bonds were repaired in 1999, when a more friendly Philippine Senate agreed to the VFA, which permits U.S. troops to join military exercises and train local units that are battling communist and Muslim insurgencies. Copyright 2005 Reuters. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Find this article at: http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/12/27/philippines.usa.reut/index.html if anyone is offended by the thread title, i will leave my sentiments at this: the logic i used in making that headline, is the same logic used by people in accusing muslims/islam.
That is sad, but how are they : A) Terrorists B) Christian They could be Muslim, Jewish, Budhist, we just don't know. And let's assume they are Christian...at least they are being punished for their crimes. Can you say the same thing for the Islamic Terrorists? Do their leaders punish them, or do they harbor them? DD
How so? They are not doing this in the name of Christianity. And there is a difference between a crime and a terrorist act. I don't think you really used logic at all!
I think that was his point. There's no logic used in some of the stupid threads here that blame Islam for random incidents. If they happen in Pakistan, it must be Islam's fault!
Acts done int he name of Islam, like terrorist acts, should be called Islamic terror. That's not blaming the religion, that's describing the terrorist and the act.
Except the blaming of Islam here goes well beyond that. See the "Honor Killings" thread for an example.
Sure, I agree. Just like when people say "religion has killed millions of people" I disagree when people blame the religion rather than the people who practice it.
They should be feeling lucky they did that in Philippine, which is expected to kowtow to US pressure in sentencing. Try it in Singapore.
then why don't you apply the same principle to the KKK? why not bring in religion when talking about priests who molest children? isn't that terrorism in a sense also? and why should religion be ignored in that sense if we make it a point to identify muslims?
These crimes you are talking about aren't done in the name of religion or for Jihad. The Islamic terrorists themselves say their religion calls for the violent acts they commit. No Catholic priest has said "Catholicism calls for molestation of children" like Islamic terrorists say "Islam calls for Jihad against the West." And terrorists want to broadcast their acts around their world to scare people and advance their cause. That is totally different from priests who molest children. They want to keep it secret.
kkk is done in the name of christianity. also islam doesnt call for those things, its a few loonies doing some crazy stuff, mostly due to emotional, political circumstances, just like the IRA or any other group. although you may feel it informationally correct to identify them with their religion, the harm of that (ie hate crimes against muslims, increased racism against muslims, etc etc etc) would say that we should rethink doing that. a priest may not molest kids in the NAME of christianity, however, when you see a trend of priests (ie people of a particular religion all in the same position of their church) all being accused of the same horrific crime, then why not identify them with their religion? that is what is done to muslims, eg the honor killings.
How much increased hate crime and racism is there really? Do we really want to hide the truth because we think some people might act racist? The priests are always identified as Catholic. So I'm not sure what the problem is there.
the truth is islam doesnt condone these acts. the truth is the ignorant public (like bigtexxx) do. the truth is crimes against muslims have increased, as has racism, abuse, etc etc etc. its easy to ask the question you ask when you havent personally or known people who have received death threats, had their mosques vandalized, gotten molotav cocktails thrown at a mosque five minutes from where you live, had your car keyed, your tires slashed, etc etc etc - all of which there is a documented increase in anytime something like the london bombings happen. the point about the priests is that religion is never tied into their actions, whereas with muslims it always is (in some cases justified, and in some cases not). im not saying to hide the truth, however, i am trying to get people to reflect on the consequences of some actions which they don't think hold much significance. anyway i think i have made my point(s) so this is the last i will post in this thread.
really? they are no different than the suicide bombers/terrorists on the other side of the coin...claiming to be sanctioned by their religion. Christians dont sanction their actions anymore than Islam practitioners sanction AQ you want to identify pedophile priests by their religion? fine, that is your perogative, but at least get the religion right. the priests that have been caught doing that were Catholic, which is a sect of Christianity. Hardly a indictment of the entire scope of Christian relgions.
Are personal insults also condoned under Islam? Wow. After a thread title like you posted (I realize that you're angry and frustrated), it's hard to take your insult seriously. I'll be the bigger man here and let it go.
Yes, go post things like Honor Killings and imply that its an Islam problem (artfully phrased as a question) and then claim you're the bigger man. Do you even realize how ignorant you come out sounding?
The Philipines aren't run by a regime like Marcos and there is much anti-American feeling among average Philipinos and in the government too. If they were kowtowing they would've just let the soldiers be tried by US military courts, like what used to happen under Marcos when situations like this occurred, instead of having them tried in Philipino courts.
