The moral relativist are up in arms over the actions of a naive/immoral young man and woman. With the example set by our leading Politicians why should we be surprised? People in the armed forces are no different from football players, State Politicians of all persuasions or our current Federal Government. Are our pollies really disgusted or do they just have to act as if they are? If they were so disgusted why do they sniff chairs, fornicate and tell lies? These cadets are just a reflection of immoral society brought about by the philosophies of those who are now shouting the loudest.

People in the armed forces are no different from football players, State Politicians of all persuasions or our current Federal Government.
runner,
you have just identified the core of the problem. Let's hope others can see that too.

runner,

No doubt you are frustrated that humans behave...well, like humans. Sorry to inform you, but it seems people have always fornicated and told lies (even in the best circles of morality).

When I was looking up some Kirk records of one of my ancestors back in the early eighteen hundreds in Scotland, I was fascinated to see the workings of this tight-knit "moral" society. They Kirk had a lot of muscle back then in influencing how society operated - and guess what?....those records were full of people telling lies and fornicating.

Unfortunately, the upshot of our being such a clever species is that we have a talent to mislead - it sets us apart intelligence-wise from the other mammals.

Or do you think all this "behaviour" is a recent development?

" If they were so disgusted why do they sniff chairs, fornicate and tell lies?"

I put it down to allowing women to be elected to parliament and to serve in the armed forces. Without them, Liberals wouldn't sniff chairs, soldiers and politicians wouldn't fornicate and nobody would tell lies.

Poirot asks

'Or do you think all this "behaviour" is a recent development?'

Read what took place in Sodom and Gommorah and you will see it certainly is not new. Man is corrupt to the core. The displays of horrors from our politicians however is total hypocritical if you were to examine their lives. Why should people be so surprised at the actions of the cadets or football players when our elected leaders are no better?

runner,

I believe if you examined each and every epoch of history, you would find the same conduct.

People are hypocritical, whether they are elected or inherit their exalted positions.

But there is goodness and altruism also....why do you always concentrate on the negatives?

As in every facet of life, there are consistently two sides in evidence.

morganzola

you are obviously blinded by your bias if you think abhorent behaviour is limited to the Liberals. Space or censorship would not permit publication of the Federal Labour party front benchers antics alone. You obviously know nothing also about State politics. Have you heard of NSW?

Poirot,
yeah, we're rather like a battery aren't we ? + & - but why are so many of them flat ?

runner,

I'm not a great Labor fan either, but I've never heard of one of their leaders sniffing chairs after women have sat on them.

runner,
Young people have always engaged in sex, so that is not the scandal.

The scandal is that the bloke filmed and braodcast the activity, with no thought for the girl. What a low life! It was a set up simply to provide a few laughs for him and his sick mates.

If the story in the Aus is correct, we need better selection of cadets for officer material. See link.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/failed-by-the-system-the-cadets-true-story/story-fn59niix-1226036287047

If I was the Commandant, I would drum the bloke out in front of the whole college, right to the front gate and turf him out barefoot and in his undies, then kick his mates out as well.

Hopefully he will face criminal charges.

morganzola,
have you checked how much sniffing's going on on the Labor side after blokes sat in the chairs ?

@ individual:

No, have you?

morgonzola,
nope, I'm a conservative !

Dear runner,

Apparently this recent incident is only the tip of the iceberg (no pun intended). It seems that there have been many incidents involving females being taken advantage of in the Defence Forces with no criminal charges ever being laid. As Peter Reith said in a recent interview - it's time that those in charge admitted that a serious problem does exist and that a full investigation took place and criminal charges if found guilty - were laid. Many have gotten away with inappropirate and bullying behaviour for far too long.

Morganzola, perhaps you've forgotten that 2 ex leaders of Labor in Qld, one leader & one deputy leader were locked up for pedophilia. That comes a bit above sniffing I think.

Yes Lexi, you are right, we have far too many lady officers, & not enough lady men [other ranks] in our defence forces. That is one of the reasons that we do not have enough engineer ratings to crew more than half our navy ships. Men won't serve under them.

The men have always had to take young male junior officers in hand, & supply the training that the college did not. Most young officers don't know which way is up, when they come out of college. This does not work as it did, now they are flooded with girl junior officers. Many of the old hands who supplied this unofficial training would rather get out than bother.

When a leading hand stoker, [engineer] was recently asked why there was a plastic vase, with paper flowers zip tied to the bulkhead oh his engine room on one navy ship he answered that like a good boy scout he was prepared.

Prepared for what he was asked. Well you see he said, we've had a girl junior engineering officer on board for a while now. She has yet to venture into an engine room, but I'm prepared just in case she ever does.

Many of these girls are a bad joke, as far as defence goes. It is OK to have a bleeding heart in a library, but they are no use in a boarding party. These girls will have to toughen up, or try a different line of work.

It is about time that Defence got their act together. Not only in terms of the culture but better management of resources - they are a shocker.

But while senior officers and public servants continue to promulgate the 'over reaction' line not much will change.

To fix a problem one first has to admit there is a problem.

Further to *Lexi's* comments I would suggest that we need to be ever cognizant of the fact that this society, amongst others, delights in duplicity. That is to say, that what is said for public purposes does not always accord with private practice and opinion.

You see, whilst I admit that I am not aware of the current circumstances, I can testify that both the australian and north american militaries have for a long time docked in those ports of the world that are little more than glorified whore houses on the beach, such as Pattaya, Thailand, and in that regard I may share some of *Runner's* in principal concerns.

To me, and admittedly I hold a minority view on count in many areas, once you start taking advantage of women from impoverished backgrounds merely because you can for a small financial cost, with the reward being more than just sexual gratification, then in some cases it is clear that a regard and respect for women as a whole is eroded, thus the cureent scandal comes as no surprise to me.

..

The Navy in W.A. for a long time had the "Ol Blue Eyes Initiation" for officers, where an elderly Original Australian woman north of Perth was involved.

..

This is regrettabley another one of those phoney debates where the manner of the "Feeding of the Chooks" determines that which is aired in the public media.

The politicians know this .. clearly .. but simply do not care sufficiently to do anything about it, and thus legitimise the practice by attending multi-national conferences in these dens of iniquity.

It re-inforces an us and them mentality i.m.o. and I find that an ongoing practice with many disturbing features.

The problem with the military, and para-military organizations (police and such), is that they are a power unto their own. They shouldn't be run by civilians who have no idea but they need independent services keeping them in check, such as criminal investigators, shrinks, medical services, and such. They are TOO independent when really there's no real logical reason for them to be that way. Those days are gone where the military had to run that way 'on the run' cause of distance from their society.

Dear Hasbeen,

Peter Reith in his TV interview indicated that there was a serious problem in the Defence Force going back for quite a few years that needs to be brought out into the open. Many people have complained but the cases have never been thoroughly investigated. What Reith was saying - it's time they were. They do have to admit that a problem exists. Brushing things aside isn't doing anyone much good. And it's too convenient to simply blame it on female officers - many of whom would probably question not only the calibre of their male supervisors - but of the way they behave and what they think they're entitled to from females. If you think that the females should "toughten up." Perhaps they wouldn't have to, if the males could treat them with the respect that they're entitled to as fellow officers.

Hasbeen,
I have had discussions with police officers who also talk of the incompedence of female officers, but this debate is not about that.

This is about the trustworthyness and lack of integrity of a future officer of our ADF, who betrayed a female, and co-cadet's, trust by broadcasting a sexual encounter. A low act in any society.

This illustrates that he would sell out his mates for personal advantage and thus is unworthy to be a leader of others. Would you serve under such an officer?

The other dissappointing thing is that the female cadet was advised the blokes would only get a slap on the wrist. Then after the issue became public, the commandant suggested she apologise for the public attention. Some of the cadets shouting abuse at her so obviously they expected her to just accept her treatment and the public perception of the college was more important than the wefare of its students.

This was not some little practical joke, like short sheeting a bed, this womans moral reputation was on the line and she had every right to be angry. The college and the cadet's support should be for her

Dear Banjo,

Thank You for clarifying the facts for us. I wasn't aware of all the details - only that Peter Reith felt so strongly that the matter should not be swept under the rug. That things had gone too far this time.
Again - Thanks!

I don't think the ladies morality is in question. I think everyone knows what her morals are. I think that is the problem here, having her morals exposed for what they are.

Yes Lexi there is a problem in the defence force, it is this equal opportunity BS.

It is all well & good for the girls club to want another career path for ladies, in the defence force. It would have been fine for many years, when our defence forces did little that was dangerous. Now we use the force for some very dangerous stuff, & the girls don't hack it.

For centuries, in every army on earth, hazing has gone on. One thing that happened to every bloke who went to Duntroon was he had his balls boot polished. This was done very publicly, often in mass. No one ever got out of it. It even happened at school cadet camps.

I am not in favour of this type of hazing, but authority has never been able to stop it.

When I was doing my flying training near Wagga, all new trainees would have their gear removed from the shower block, & dumped in the trainee pilots club, 150 metres away. A quite cold initiation in mid winter.

I don't know what happens now, with the girls, with boot polish, or their gear, they probably demand on suites, but without initiation, they can't be part of the whole.

The defence force has to be tough. If you aren't, don't go there. It not a debating society. Their debating will happen with guns. It's a place for tough people, not sir Galahads, although I wonder how well he actually treated the ladies.

Hasbeen
That is such a sexist comment. What about the morals of the man involved? Why do you give him a free pass? He not only slept around (that is not illegal) he filmed the event and distributed it without the consent of the woman.

Sheesh..not a gentlemen among you is there!

Banjo
I have also spoken to police officers about female officers, most of them have difficulty in accepting a woman as a supervisor regardless of her competency. Do you blokes really think men are all competent in whatever profession they hold?

There is still a lot of spite in relation to women in traditional male roles.

Bad behaviour within defence should be a matter of concern to all. Ex officers and cadets have come out speaking of similar incidents and other ritualistic perversions and most of those now going public about this are men.

Appropriate name that, Hasbeen. In the future women wear pants and run companies too!.

Her morals? Like, having sex? Oh yeah, I forgot, in the 1800's sex was naughty...

pelican,
The incompedence of female police I refered to was mainly in relation to their lack of physical size and the feeling the male officers had that they had to do more to 'look after' their partner in bad situations. I suspect male instinct, but as i said this debate is not about female suitability for front line operations. Oh, and I did not say I agreed with the male police officers.

Lexi,
I did not know Reith made any comment. My info just comes from press stories and i refer you to the link in my first post. This morning their also was an item saying the college Commandant may have to resign. Guess the buck does stop somewhere.

Hasbeen,
I went through initiation rites and maybe the females have their own rites, i don't know, but this is not about that either.

Women have sexual urges as well as males and because she had sex with this bloke does not make her immoral. It is not reasonable that other cadets refer to her as a slut. I would really be angry if my daughter was treated this way by her classmates. If the bloke were my son, I would flog him for being so stupid and wasting my money in raising him.

There is no excuse for anyone, male or female, to film and broadcast a sexual encounter simply to embarrass and/or ridicule either of the couple. Sexual encounters must remain private. This bloke is no officer and gentleman. Standards have to be set.

Dear Banjo,

Well said. Standards do have to be set for the protection of all. And, in this case - someone must be held accountable. The fact that "we've always done it this way," is simply an excuse for bad behaviour - and should not be tolerated.

Dear Hasbeen,

I don't mean to be contentious in this matter. However the mere fact that the behaviour that you describe as typical of the Defence Forces doesn't excuse it, nor should it mean that it should continue. Things change with time - and by the evidence it seems that changes are long overdue here.

The nub of the problem is that there are women in the services.
When they had seperate women's services things went fairly well.

However that is not the bone of contention, any 'man' (and the inverted commas are there for a purpose) who would make love to a girl and then broadcast the act to others is not a man.
Such a person should never be entrusted with life or death decisions involving personell under him.
He simply could not be trusted not to look out for himself first.

This is the type of Officer who is sometimes 'lost in action' and no one ever wants to say where the bullet came from.

I remember an incident at the Battle School at Haramura in Japan back in the 1950s when a Sergeant (in a British unit) who was a particularly nasty bully was shot in the leg during an exercise where troops went in under covering rifle fire from their mates. The shooter was never identified (one of about fifty) but rumour had it that the one that drew the short straw was not a good shot.

@ StG:

You have to bear in mind that Hasbeen was training to fly a Sopwith Camel. Things were different then.

I would equate putting this immoral act on skype the same as taking photos of young teen girls and displaying them in the name of art. They are both abhorent.

A first cousin of mine (female in the Army)for 30 years Hasbeen found the Army 'easy' in comparison to her childhood on a farm.

A school girlfriend of mine now in her forties closer to the Admiral level in the Navy; intelligence plus! Could have chosen to be an Engineer, yet her skills and talents more suited, according to the Navy, in the Strategy area.

There are many females who could become Engineers in the Navy Hasbeen, however the Navy was rife, up until this Century, with a well hidden air/energy of chauvanism/gender favouritism. That was the era as we all know, however Australia has a way to go in stamping out archaic thought processes, the 'facade and egos' starting at the 'top'!

Interesting point that last term. 'The top'. Senior defence force staff, Senior Navy personnel (although the Navy has been through some of this crap a few years back and taken the steps/measures addressing negative behaviour)and related agencies have not been forced to address these issues for the good part of Australian defence history.

A strict 'zero tolerance' policy and implemented, after regular talks/meetings from Senior Training officials within Defence should have been sufficient discouragement to Cadets training at ADFA, never to have engaged in such disrespectful and disgraceful behaviour regardless of alcohol or any excuse.

Shame on any Defence Personnel thinking more of their careers and egos than the Victim.

Shame on the parents also for raising teenagers who could think to engage or participate in the filthy,degrading,despicable, sly and unlawful act.

No respect for themselves or their future cadets, in all probability saving their lives in the future, particularly during their first mission to Afghanistan.

Q: How the hell are Defence going to entrust these types of dispositions to saving and lawfully caring for female victims in other countries or our country in the future?

These types of conversations should be raised by ADFA Training Personnel at the 'commencement' of their Training, discussing consequences and loyalty to one's own trainees and future units/battalions preparing them for the real world 12 months away.

Banjo
Apologies I should not have made that assumption.

Clearly there should be standards. My understanding is that nowadays there are no physical restrictions in recruiting other than a fitness requirement. Having been involved with one of my children's martial arts classes there are some small sized black belters (adults and children) who could give a big person a run for their money.

I think the funniest thing is this is seen as a defence culture problem when the cadets had only been there 3 months. I wonder if scandals in the defence forces also stretch to people who have filled out the paperwork but have not yet joined.

It's a very powerful institution that can corrupt young men away from the morals their parents gave them in 3 months.

pelican,

'Bad behaviour within defence should be a matter of concern to all. Ex officers and cadets have come out speaking of similar incidents and other ritualistic perversions and most of those now going public about this are men.'

I don't think it is of concern. When all is said and done, a certain amount of bastardisation is required. This is an occupation where people will have to survive great adversity, and kill and unquestionable follow orders that put them in grave danger of being shot.

No matter how you paint this 'bullying' or 'ritualistic perversions', it is at the core of building a culture, a necessary culture where the chain of command is sacrosanct, and the team is more important than the individual. There is no place for 'special' people. Those that cant hack it need to be sifted out. Bastardisation is the best tool. Soldiers need to know the guy next to them has been degraded and humiliated and has been able to take it on the chin and still thrive and earn respect.

Now I'm sure you'll enthral me with new age respectful and cuddly team building over a coffee and a sharing caring non-hierarchical culture the defence forces need to embrace, but I'll bet you'll change your mind when they actually have to defend you.

I want the brutal sadists defending me.

I'll just add, that I would never join the defence forces as I wouldn't accept someone shouting and spraying saliva in my face. I'm with pelican, they should do a health and safety audit on that one.

I am somewhat of an individual, and not a team player at all, so I am not suited to the defence forces. I have a problem with authority figures.

DO you really want an army full of people like me? That's where we're headed.

See, degradation and humiliation aren't my thing, so I don't join organisations that are into that and expect them to change for me. I accept that personnel must be emotionally toughened and tested as well as physically toughened and tested. I'd rather not be tested.

If most of those expressing so much sympathy were asked to crew a RIB, [inflatable boat] to go apprehend an illegal 60ft fishing boat, that the illegals were defending with 15ft sharpened bamboo poles, they would probably foul their pants. Most of our defence force have no trouble with this.

We do this rubbish, with our men's lives because bleeding hearts have made it politically more attractive to endanger them, than endanger the illegals by putting a round through their bow. God help us if ever we have to fight for our survival.

However when a junior lady officer, who is more worried about hurting the illegals than the safety of our men, is given command of that RIB, some sailors do come close to such fouling.

Due to this cr4p there have been instances where our navy ran away from such fishing boats, defended with sticks.

Reading many of the above posts makes it obvious why we can't attract recruits.

Having spent one year in the CMF then six years Regular Army (plus 1 year on Active Service including being shot at by bad shots) and a further five years in the CMF I never saw any bastardization, nor did an NCO or an Officer ever shout in my face. Spraying a soldier with one's saliva is and was, assault.

I well remember an incident at a National Service Training Battalion where the Duty Officer tried to take the rifle off of a lad who was on Guard. The Officer got a butt stroke and a broken jaw. the lad got a "Well done" off the Commanding Officer. He that got butted had been in the habit of asking young inexperienced boys to give him their rifle while on guard, when they did he would put them on a charge for giving him their rifle. The one that 'butted' him had had a brother in the same company in the previous intake. Forewarned etc.

I saw another incident in which an Officer called to a soldier with the salutation "Hey, You" which the soldier ignored. Finally the Officer after a couple more 'Hey You's , sprinted in front of him and demanded to know why he hadn't stopped.
"Were you addressing me, Sir?"
Getting an affirmative, he then told the Officer that as he was a trained soldier he could be addressed by his rank of 'Private' or 'Soldier'.
End of confrontation, the Officer swallowed his pride and addressed him as 'Soldier'
Perhaps more fitting would have been 'Old Soldier'. :)

I served in an army of individuals who worked together as a team.

That's a wonderfully rose-coloured glasses view of military life Captain Darling (IsMise). But, as everybody knows, spittle is de rigueur in the armed forces.

Haven't you seen that movie A Few Good Men? There are countless other movies featuring close-talkers shouting into a soldier's face while spittle flies EVERYWHERE!

I'm afraid I don't believe your unsupported and un-provable assertions.

I repeat, I want the brutal sadists defending me. Not some PC talking-stick mob.

'He that got butted had been in the habit of asking young inexperienced boys to give him their rifle while on guard, when they did he would put them on a charge for giving him their rifle. '

A mild form of bastardisation I would say. Bullying hierarchical culture with humiliation based initiation rights-of-passage. I support it wholeheartedly.

" I'm with pelican, they should do a health and safety audit on that one."

You are? Can't remember mentioning spittle.

The bastardisation rituals are archaic. These sorts of rituals are not positive nor do they instil trust or feelings of security about the men fighting along side you in war.

I would rather have a soldier next to me who had defended me against a group of sadistic neanderthals than took advantage of a vulnerability ie. new cadet.

It is not necessary to be a sadist to be a good soldier nor to have courage. Often it is those who are speaking out about these behaviours that show courage. Not the namby pambys who hide behind the screen of 'manhood' afraid to do the right thing

Right on, Pelican.
Others who have seen spittle flying have been watching to many American movies.
It might be a theory about America's Armed forces that they break men down to build them up the way that they want them. I've never seen it, the Marines that I knew were as individualistic as any men that I met in our army. I had very little to do with the US Army.
I met a few Australian Officers who were rotten to the core and they didn't last long, but I also knew Officers who were indeed 'Officers and Gentlemen'.
One product of Duntroon, (the son of an Australian General), won the hearts and minds of his first platoon on their very first parade.
When all were seated in an old and rusty WW II Nissen hut he addressed them thus "My name is Blank. I am a First Lieutenant and I am your Platoon Commander (suppressed groans from the mob; what the bloody hell have we got here?).
"This is Sgt. Sssss and Corporals Cccc and Bcccc. They have just returned from Korea and are here to teach us (us?)
I will be admistrative head of the platoon but they will be in charge of our (our?) training. My professional interest is Armour and, as yet, I know very little about the Infantry. Carry on Sergeant.".
Then he sat down in the first row of diggers, and so it went, but there was never any familiarity, he was always 'Mister' to his men, never once did he step down from being an Officer but there was great mutual respect.

He went on to do very well.

Did being the General's son help? Probably not much, I was standing beside him on a roadside in Korea when Dad arrived (he hadn't seen his father for two years) as the General walked by he saluted his father who touched the brim of his cap in return, said "G'day, son" and continued on his way. They got together a few days later.

"I'm afraid I don't believe your unsupported and un-provable assertions.".

But then one wouldn't expect you to, you've never been there an' done that.
I could, of course, mention names, places and dates but these blokes are possibly still alive and rather old if they are, and one would not like to cause any embarassment, however mild.

Dear Is Mise,

Thanks for sharing your accounts. I enjoyed reading them. It just goes to show that we can't lump everyone together - there's always differences even in the Defence Forces.

A couple of thoughts on the "moral relativism" aspect that was part of the opening post.

Just where in the bible does it forbid the use of a webcam and Skype to broadcast a sexual encounter to friends? If it's not there there then we are all in the same boat relatively speaking.

For the rest is what the cadet's are alleged to have done so fundamentally different to other breaches of sexual privacy which seem to be widely accepted. People sharing details of sexual encounters with friends. Kiss and tell book's. Snoop photo's making the front page of magazines and morning TV.

There is a massive breach of trust involved in the incident if the description of it is true but I do wonder about the level of outrage expressed when so many other actions which can bring a lot of embarasment to the subject are mainstream.

R0bert

"'He that got butted had been in the habit of asking young inexperienced boys to give him their rifle while on guard, when they did he would put them on a charge for giving him their rifle. '

A mild form of bastardisation I would say. Bullying hierarchical culture with humiliation based initiation rights-of-passage. I support it wholeheartedly.Posted by Houellebecq, Monday, 11 April 2011 5:39:20 PM".

Not mild at all as the young soldier could expect at least 5 days confined to barracks, if not 14 days.

'Confined to Barracks' meant getting up an hour before everyone else and reporting to the Duty Sergeant, who if he was a good bloke, would give the lad a few light jobs for half an hour. Then he would be free for the normal days work.
At the end of the work day he would report to the DS and do half an hours extra drill, or he might be told to report back in 'Full Field Dress' i.e. both packs, water bottle, one blanket, rifle and bayonet. Packs correctly filled with spare clothes, boots etc.
If the DS was a bastard he might then order the lad to come back in Leave Parade Dress. This would be rubbing it in as all of his leave was cancelled until the end of punishment.
Dismissed for Dinner.
After dinner report again and usually sent to work cleaning pots and pans or whatever in one of the Messes until 9:00 PM.

He still has to get his kit ready for tomorrow, clean his rifle etc., and this goes on every day till the sentence is complete.

Mild barstardisation? Hardly.

Got anymore insights into your lack of knowledge to share with us?

IsMise,

It's all in the same category as left handed screwdrivers and striped paint and chicken lips. Initiation rituals to humiliate the new boys and keep them in their place, and test out whether they can be a 'good sport'.

It's exactly the kind of thing pelican's admonishing, just a different degree.

pelican,

'The bastardisation rituals are archaic.'

So is marriage.

'These sorts of rituals are not positive nor do they instil trust or feelings of security about the men fighting along side you in war.'

Yeah they are. They are a positive for all the people who are part of the joke and who set up the ritual; the team, and they exclude the different, non-team players. Obedience is needed. Lack of subservience must be punished.

'I would rather have a soldier next to me who had defended me against a group of sadistic neanderthals than took advantage of a vulnerability ie. new cadet.'

It's best to eradicate vulnerabilities before you get to the battlefield. Who wants someone beside you who cried because you asked them to buy chicken lips and they don't exist. It's a cunning selection process. They don't need passengers.

Remember pelican, it takes a sadistic Neanderthal to fight a sadistic Neanderthal. How are you going to win against another army where anything goes for them. Like fighting with one arm tied behind your back that is.

'Often it is those who are speaking out about these behaviours that show courage.'

NO! They're the 'I'm special' me me me lot. They need to be dragged down a peg and fit in with the team culture. Trouble makers need to be eradicated before you're in a trench and one of the 'soldiers' is refusing to fight because he wasn't asked nicely enough.

'Not the namby pambys who hide behind the screen of 'manhood' afraid to do the right thing'

What's manhood got to do with it? Ah, so your objections are really just bigoted sexism by proxy. The right thing is to prepare the team for sadistic battle. The team is paramount, not the me me me individual.

Tell me pelican, do you want these bleeding heart types to be bleeding hearts with the enemy too? I bet you were upset at the racist remarks from a soldier towards the Afghans too. When you get your way, the soldiers wont be able to come at killing the enemy, because that wont be the right thing to do.

I cant wait to see one of your soldiers turn on the rest of the Aussies and shoot them all from behind for political reasons after one too many Pilger books.

Houlley
I can't tell if you're joking.

The scenario does not have to be so black and white. Neither bleeding heart nor sadistic neanderthal. Even a bleeding heart is going to defend themselve in the face of an attack if it means life and death. They are not going to say "don't shoot me you poor delusional thing, let's be brothers".

The culture within Defence is well known but still nobody does a thing. Vulnerability of a new cadet is real, he/she can be trained to be a good soldier and that does not mean following orders to belittle someone - how is that character building. It is lemming building that is about all - and there is a difference between lemmings and those who follow orders in war. The sorts of bastardisation rituals that go on are dehumanising. It will be interesting to see what details are in the Rufus Black Report once details are revealed (if they are to be revealed).

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2011/s3188513.htm

Houlley I doubt a follower of John Pilger would be in the army in the first place, they would most probably be more of the type we need. That is, those who respect human rights even in war. You can be a good soldier and still act with dignity.

I'm looking forward to the day when the world is largely a place of independent democratic nations where war will no longer be such a common occurrence. It has to happen eventually and the one positive thing about globalisation is the flow of information will assist to that end.

Posted by *Houellebecq* Monday, 11 April 2011 11:11:19 AM

" ... It's a very powerful institution that can corrupt young men away from the morals their parents gave them in 3 months. ... "

*DreamOn* (quote from the song lyrics)

" ... One night in Bangkok makes a hard man humble
Not much between despair and ecstasy
One night in Bangkok and the tough guys tumble
Can't be too careful with your company
I can feel the *Devil* walking next to me ... "

We would do do well to remember that relatively few Australian laws have extra-territorial effect. Exceptions include - pedophilia, treason, a few others ..

Same thing with "LawLess Zones" during the times of the wholesale massacres of *Original Australians* in Australia.

Posted by *Runner* Sunday, 10 April 2011 7:15:46 PM

" ... I would equate putting this immoral act on skype the same as taking photos of young teen girls and displaying them in the name of art. They are both abhorent. ... "

Of course, in practical terms, I think that many would succumb in less than 3 hrs, let alone 3 months *Houelly* As for age, well, by age matters are reckoned not in some jurisdictions outside of Australia, but rather by the timing of the young lady's 1st period, consistent with 1 crude adage that I was made aware of as a lad growing up in Perth, Western Australia.

" ... Old enough to Bleed, Old enough to Butcher! ... "

Rituals of the ADF in places like *Pattaya* include, but are not limited to, "Top & Tail Buddying and Bonding" with 2 members of the ADF and 1 Likely Young Lady, where kudos is awarded for the quantity and quality of the wenches bedded per unit of time etc.

I suspect that the young lady at the centre of the ADF Skype live broadcast scandal did not realise that she was destined for the "Trophy Cabinet."