Skip to comments.Army General Charged with Forcible Sodomy During Tour in Afghanistan
Posted on 09/27/2012 11:22:30 AM PDT by STARWISE
An Army brigadier general has been charged with forcible sodomy, inappropriate relationships, and possessing alcohol and pornography while serving as a senior commander in Afghanistan earlier this year.
Brig. Gen. Jeffrey Sinclair, a deputy commanding general of the 82 nd Airborne Division, faces a possible court martial over the charges handed down Wednesday.
In May, Sinclair was sent home to the United States in the middle of his combat tour in Afghanistan, where he was serving in the southern Afghanistan province of Kandahar as the deputy commander of logistics and support for the 82nd Airborne.
A news release by the Fort Bragg Public Affairs Office listed the charges presented against Sinclair as including "forcible sodomy, wrongful sexual conduct, attempted violation of an order, violations of regulations by wrongfully engaging in inappropriate relationships and misusing a government travel charge card, violating general orders by possessing alcohol and pornography while deployed, maltreatment of subordinates, filing fraudulent claims, engaging in conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman and engaging in conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline, or of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces."
Few specifics about the allegations against Sinclair were released Wednesday, but a Defense Department official said "several women were the subject of Sinclair's alleged misconduct."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
The Thomas More Law Center announced today that it is representing U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonel Matthew Dooley, a 1994 Graduate of the U. S. Military Academy at West Point. In April 2012, LTC Dooley, a highly decorated combat veteran, was publicly condemned by General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and relieved of his teaching assignment because of the negative way Islam was portrayed in an elective course entitled, Perspectives on Islam and Islamic Radicalism.
.. it starts at the top.
Looks like he sodomized females, actually.
.. Pray for our brave troops, operating under abyssmal senior leadership. They’re out there suffering, 24/7, for us .. following the orders from their ‘leaders.’
Here we go again with another fun experiment to see who doesn’t actually bother to read the article, and/or doesn’t actually know what the definition of “sodomy” is.
Well that’s no way to move up in the ranks of Obama’s army!
That is one ugly guy...
Yours was the first inclination I had, but then I realized a queer would not be punished in Obama’s army.
If guilty of the other charges he should be keel-hauled. But I don't know how a Courts Martial can prove "attemped violation of an order", unless there are direct witnesses.
I'm okay with cleaning out the corrupt and perverse and broken upper echelon.
Is that the dude from “Lost”?
He looks like a resident of who-ville.
Isn’t failing your troops on the battlefield enough? Do you really have to F*** them too?
I bet General Casey would say ‘but I believe it would be an even greater tragedy if our diversity becomes a casualty here.’
A P.C. military kills the wrong folks.
I read the article and he is being charged for much more than sodomy. I know the definition of sodomy within the UCMJ. I always thought that article should have been re-written to mean "forced" sodomy. What a husband and wife due in their home (even on base) should be of NO interest to the military. Oral sex is included in the sodomy article, but is very normal for heterosexual couples. I was guilty of that article countless times during my 11 years Navy.
That said, I don't believe consenting males buggering each other is good for military morale and will eventually come to no good. Interesting that this General is going to be tried under that article and yet the military is conducting classes for homosexual tolerance/acceptance. Not saying the General engaged is such activity, just that it's hypocritical. If the other charges are true, get rid of that POS.
No doubt he acted wrongly and should be gone.
But, “forcible sodomy” could just mean that he got a bj from a female who felt ‘obligated’. Or, it could mean worse than we can imagine. They’re not saying.
I’ll go you one further: I don’t think the romantic element belongs on the combat team. How about no homosexuals period and no mixed sexed units below the division level or aboard combat vessels. Your a navy man, is there any reason a vessel could not have a female only crew?
I want to bring them all home.
Their mission is for naught now anyway.
Yes, because there are many ratings (specialties) that require upper body strength. Most women don't have it. It would require many manly dykes to deal with the simple maintenance of a Navy ship, not to mention other areas. Then, there is the problem with menstrual cycles of a woman only ship, not to mention even more pregnancies when in port. There are already too many of them occurring on mixed sex ships. Often times, their male counterparts have to pick up the slack. Think about it.
I assume they will toss him out of the military,unlikely to actually do any time since his rank warrants a slap on the wrist.I am surprised it is an officer and not a senior NCO.
If he was in Desert storm and he’d done 2 tours in Iraq and two tours in Afghanistan,he should have kind of known better.Otherwise seems like he just overused his privileges and his rank.
Unless he outright raped the females,which this article seems to be inferring,I’d say he was just unfit to be an officer or in the Army.
Who promoted Sinclair?
Hope the General Courts Martial gives him the sani-flush
I do not know about anyone else but I breathed a sigh of relief when they reported that the so-called sodomy was with females. “Forced” is not good but sodomy? Give me a break.
Back in the day this piece of shit would have been fragged..........
“definition of sodomy within the UCMJ.”
I agree with your assessment. In addition, I would bet that the writers of the UCMJ were in violation of it as they were writing it. Well, not at the same moment but at home with their mates.
Additionally, when women live in group settings, their menstrual cycles tend to synchronize. Some vessels would be unapproachable for a week or so (USS PMS).
How did that leftist pervert, rapist and obviously insane person become a brigadier general? That is nauseating.
What have the marxists done to our military, and exactly how bad is it?
So in other words, one of the ways to break the fallacy that women and men are equal would be to introduce a few crews with female only complements? Personally, I’d like to see the military revert/improve back to Reagan standards.
It’s an honest question. The gals are just as capable as the guys...right?
No, most "gals" are not as capable as "guys". I saw it personally in my later days in the Navy when women were assigned only to support ships. The women had problems with upper body strength (I saw it); their menstrual cycles put them in sick bay many times; and they would purposefully get pregnant to avoid a deployment. This is not to mention the many times they would cry "sexual harrassment" for any damn reason.
This was in the '80's - I've heard it's gotten worse no matter how much sensitivity training has tried to "correct" male thinking. And now the PC Pentagon wants to put women on submarines. Pfft.
Only on TV or movies where a 98 lb girl can crush 4 250lb no neck assassins single handed.
...you of course, understood, I was being sarcastic.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.