posted on May 5, 2004 05:46:16 AM new linda says, "How appallingly pathetic YOU are. You've been calling for the US to admit defeat since the war began. You continue to support our enemy. You are a disgrace to your country."
Right, koto.
Linda is pathetically desperate and slips in here at night while the east coast is sleeping to make her nasty accusations. She maligns Kerry's stellar military record while conveniently forgetting the miserable one held by Bush.
For weeks, she has been obsessed over the nature of Kerry's purple hearts while not mentioning the bronze or silver star awarded to him.
Now, they would like to put the horrible abuse of prisoners on the back burner along with the embarrassment of the president of the United States apologizing on Al jazeera. I don't think they will successfully hide that horrific episode with an attack on Kerry or the disastrous, strategic catastrophe that Iraq has become since it was illegally and immorally invaded by the Bush administration.
Of course I don't support the enemy. When did the good people of Iraq become the enemy? Or, more importantly WHY did the good people of Iraq become the ememy?
No, linda. I am not a disgrace to my country. My feelings now represent over half of all Americans. We are fed up with George Bush and his imperialistic foreign policy which denigrates and abuses all the values that as true Americans we hold dear.
posted on May 5, 2004 07:06:38 AM new
Scott McClellan says that Bush became aware of the torture sometime after the Pentagon started looking into it and that Bush didn't know about the classified Pentagon report until some of the news organizations reported its existence.
So does this mean that the President is near the bottom of the ladder when it comes to information within his own government?
posted on May 5, 2004 07:14:51 AM new
Bremmer knew about it. After resigning in protest, Abdul Basit Turki, Iraq's first minister of Human Rights, said that Bremmer took no action when he was presented with evidence of the torture of the POW's.
' In November I talked to Mr Bremer about human rights violations in general and in jails in particular. He listened but there was no answer. At the first meeting, I asked to be allowed to visit the security prisoners, but I failed," he said. "I told him the news. He didn't take care about the information I gave him." '
Abdul Basit Turki
CNN just announced that Bush has excluded Aljazeera as a channel to deliver his apology. Maybe he will deliver his apology on the gardening channel.
ubb.ed.
[ edited by Helenjw on May 5, 2004 07:18 AM ]
posted on May 5, 2004 07:22:59 AM newSo does this mean that the President is near the bottom of the ladder when it comes to information within his own government?
It's extremely likely. He admitted in an interview that he rarely reads newspapers and instead prefers to be briefed by White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice. “The best way to get the news,” he explained, “is from objective sources. And the most objective sources I have are people on my staff who tell me what’s happening in the world.”
And that's probably how he also gets info about what going on in Iraq--he gets it after it has passed through aides & is pre-chewed and digested for him.
____________________
We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. -- John F. Kennedy
posted on May 5, 2004 09:02:31 AM new
Maybe you should inform fenix and myself what times are approved by you for us to post.
that Iraq has become since it was illegally and immorally invaded by the Bush administration.
A war that was voted on 296-133 in the House and 77-23 in the Senate.....and by Senator kerry....who's not stating we should pull out as you would like him to do.
Just pointing out it was NOT illegal.
Maybe you'd like to point out just which of those who voted for going to war with Iraq are now claiming we should withdraw. I doubt you will.....as it would make a point that your wanting us to admit defeat and pull out is rarely stated by those who saw a reason to go in, in the first place.
posted on May 5, 2004 09:32:35 AM new
Linda....I get so tired of straightening out your butchered "version" of what I said.
I said that in Iraq "we should admit defeat and leave as soon as possible --not in an irresponsible manner". You take words out of context and write your edited version...just as you bold phrases in articles that sound like what you want to hear.
It seems that several people here are having problems similar to mine. Maybe you should rethink your technique. Derisive laughter didn't work...old regurgitated c&p articles are not read and you will be corrected on your tendency to attribute thoughts to others that they have never stated or even inferred.
Looks like it's time to go back to the drawing board and come out playing fair.
posted on May 5, 2004 10:11:14 AM new
Here, linda k are few of the many times that I have had to correct your interpretation of what I said on this topic...all different threads believe it or not.
http://www.vendio.com/mesg/read.html?num=28&thread=193122&id=193360
My suggestion was to admit defeat and leave as soon as possible and by as soon as possible, I pointed out that I did not mean to leave immediately in an irresponsible manner. That's what I really said, lindak....
http://www.vendio.com/mesg/read.html?num=28&thread=204693&id=204771
My suggestion was to admit defeat and leave as soon as possible and by as soon as possible, I pointed out that I did not mean to leave immediately in an irresponsible manner. That's what I really said, lindak....
posted on May 5, 2004 12:05:39 PM new
No apology from Bush.
_ President Bush said in Arab television interviews that the treatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison was "abhorrent" and does not represent "the America that I know." In two interviews, he stopped short of apologizing. Bush said he retained confidence in Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.
posted on May 5, 2004 12:18:09 PM new Donald H. Rumsfeld: "I think that -- I'm not a lawyer. My impression is that what has been charged thus far is abuse, which I believe technically is different from torture. I don't know if it is correct to say what you just said, that torture has taken place, or that there's been a conviction for torture. And therefore I'm not going to address the torture word."
Taguba Report: "Breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoric liquid on detainees; pouring cold water on naked detainees; beating detainees with a broom handle and a chair; threatening male detainees with rape; allowing a military police guard to stitch the wound of a detainee who was injured after being slammed against the wall in his cell; sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick, and using military working dogs to frighten and intimidate detainees with threats of attack, and in one instance actually biting a detainee."
posted on May 5, 2004 02:12:39 PM new
Donald H. Rumsfeld: "I think that -- I'm not a lawyer
Either he is or is not a lawer. Does he know what he is? This guy is on the cabinet.....
"Breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoric liquid on detainees; pouring cold water on naked detainees; beating detainees with a broom handle and a chair; threatening male detainees with rape; allowing a military police guard to stitch the wound of a detainee who was injured after being slammed against the wall in his cell; sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick, and using military working dogs to frighten and intimidate detainees with threats of attack, and in one instance actually biting a detainee."
Perhaps Rumsfeld should have this done to him to see if it is really abuse or torture.
If they are torturing the Iraqi prisoners, god only knows what they are doing to Sadam
Re-defeat Bush
[ edited by logansdad on May 6, 2004 01:59 PM ]
This was classic George W Bush. In interviews with Arab TV channels about the abuse of Iraqis at the hands of American soldiers, he did exactly what he does when he faces troubles domestically.
Mr Bush used his credibility and his plain-speaking to communicate a clear, simple message.
President Bush made his points and did not stumble
He denounced the abuse of Iraqi prisoners as "abhorrent" and said the soldiers responsible do not represent America.
Unlike Saddam Hussein's regime, President Bush said the US would investigate the allegations and bring to justice those responsible.
He tried to put out a really simple, clear message.
But the interview left many questions unanswered, and it is unclear whether his speaking style, so effective with his supporters at home, will play well abroad.
Unanswered questions
He made some interesting concessions over the course of the two interviews.
In the al-Arabiya interview, he said the US had to find out whether this is a systemic problem.
It was a concession that it might not have been just a few bad eggs and might be a much broader problem.
In a democracy, everything is not perfect - mistakes are made, but those mistakes are investigated...
President Bush
He did give his confidence to Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld and commanders in the region, but he also said that people would be brought to book.
But he left unanswered a whole file of questions.
How widespread is the abuse?
That is the key issue and the one that could come back and bite them several times. By all accounts, there are more allegations out there.
The interviews also left unanswered questions about how the US government and military dealt with the reports of abuse.
How come there was a report in January by Major General Antonio Taguba listing almost all of the abuses and the top general in America, Richard Myers, had not read it as of an interview last Sunday?
When did President Bush know about this? When did it filter up the chain of command?
That is a question that is going to keep coming around, which they are dodging so far.
What happened after the Taguba report in January? Were these desperately damaging allegations simply left at the lower levels of command?
And there will be questions about the disciplinary actions.
Part of the trouble will be the military language.
Some of the soldiers have been reprimanded, but to people outside of the military that sounds like a slap on the wrist.
And what will happen to the private contractors named in General Taguba's report?
It is not clear that they have any way of bringing them to book whatsoever. American officials haven't, according to the contractors, even talked to them about this yet.
Damage control
And while Mr Bush is very good at speaking to an American audience, he is not so good speaking to a foreign one.
His plain speaking style is seen as simplistic and unintelligent by Europeans.
The big question is how Mr Bush's style will play in the Arab world
These interviews will show how well his style and message plays in the Arab world.
Mr Bush made the points he wanted to make and didn't stumble over any questions.
He didn't apologise, which might annoy the Arab world.
Mr Bush, and more broadly the United States, has a difficult job to win over public opinion in the Middle East, and clearly two interviews aren't going to do the trick.
The coming days will show whether this scandal continues to expand, as there is a great danger of it doing.
If additional allegations come to light in the coming days and failings at higher levels in the US government or military are revealed, that could easily wipe out any good these interviews might have done.
____________________
We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. -- John F. Kennedy
posted on May 5, 2004 06:18:19 PM new I wonder how many NEOCONS will support the Rush Limbaugh position on the Iraqi prison torture.
From Rush Limbaugh's own transcript of a conversation about the Iraqi prison torture: (emphasis added)
CALLER: Rush if you were in the military and you were ordered to interrogate someone even though it was an in-depth interrogation, you would do your job in a business-like manner. And I think most people would, do a difficult job that they didn't want to do in a business-like manner. These people had a job to do, but they were taking pleasure in it. There's something psychologically wrong with that. It's not the act so much. It was like a college fraternity prank that stack up naked men --
RUSH: Exactly. Exactly my point! This is no different than what happens at the skull and bones initiation and we're going to ruin people's lives over it and we're going to hamper our military effort, and then we are going to really hammer them because they had a good time. You know, these people are being fired at every day. I'm talking about people having a good time, these people, you ever heard of emotional release? You of heard of need to blow some steam off? These people are the enemy. Our people are being fired at, shot at, these are young people that have volunteered to go over there and they're having bullets fired in their way, bombs and mortar fire aimed at 'em by the people that they are guarding and charged to get information from.
posted on May 5, 2004 06:35:30 PM new
helen - Your words were "admit defeat"....doesn't really matter how quickly or slowly we withdraw under YOUR stated terms. But I understand....I'd be embarassed to admit I'd said anything like that too and then professed to support my country.
---------------------
There's been mention in the news of the UK questioning some of the internet pics of their soldiers with the POWs. They have claimed the uniforms, guns, hats....aren't what their soldiers in that area wore. Time will tell but it looks like some are asking for an investigation of just where those photos came from.
posted on May 6, 2004 07:20:05 AM new Linda says..."There's been mention in the news of the UK questioning some of the internet pics of their soldiers with the POWs. They have claimed the uniforms, guns, hats....aren't what their soldiers in that area wore. Time will tell but it looks like some are asking for an investigation of just where those photos came from."
How ludicrous to suggest that the photos which have been inspected and accepted by the Bush administration, who have subsequently trotted out their damage control including the President of the United States, would be fake based only on reports from rival newspapers.
BTW...What is your opinion of the Rush quote that I posted above?
posted on May 6, 2004 07:32:00 AM new
If for nothing else, Rumsfeld should be removed for making this statement.
" When asked by a reporter whether torture has taken place in Iraq, Rumsfeld said, "My impression is that what has been charged thus far is abuse, which I believe technically is different from torture." He added that he did not know "that torture took place. ""
Chants from the Iraqi people....
"democracy doesn't mean killing innocent people."
"America and Israel are the enemies of God."
And from a banner..."Free women or we will launch jihad"
Wewould rather have Saddam's hell than Bush's paradise."
posted on May 6, 2004 10:29:15 AM new
Helen - I think you misunderstood one thing in Lindas quote. It is not the pictures of the americans that are being called into question... The pics in question are similar pics involving British soldiers which showed up right after the American pics.
OH and I'll comment on Rush - hiss comment does not shock me in the least, he;s just reiterating what a sick twisted bast*rd he really is.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on May 6, 2004 04:09:49 PM new
koto1
posted on May 5, 2004 03:46:43 AM
Linda wrote -
"How appallingly pathetic YOU are. You've been calling for the US to admit defeat since the war began. You continue to support our enemy. You are a disgrace to your country."
Pretty strong words Linda. Do you realize how appallingly desperate that sounds?
Did they sound that way to you when helen said them about this administration and Condi Rice's statement in particular?
I do find helen's desire, from the beginning of the war, to 'admit defeat' at the first sign of trouble when this war in Iraq began....an appallingly desperate idea though.
posted on May 6, 2004 04:33:02 PM new
That sounds so ignorant,linda. You and twelvepole and bear are beginning to resemble each other so that there is no distinction from one of you to another.
It seems that every single post that you write lately is an insult just like bear and just like twelvepole.
If that's all you have to say, I feel sorry for you.
posted on May 6, 2004 05:08:24 PM new
what did you expect helen from these armchair warmongers, who would be very happy to see your children murdered for corporate profits in the name of freedom....
ever notice all the warmongers have no family fighting.....cowards....this is not a war for honor or to defend freedom, it is about money for a select few....the warmongers have now become Saddams....
Bush has created a global network of extra-legal and secret US prisons with thousands of inmates
Sidney Blumenthal
Thursday May 6, 2004
The Guardian
EXERPT
The Bush administration was well aware of the Taguba report, but more concerned about its exposure than its contents. General Richard Myers, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, was dispatched on a mission to CBS news to tell it to suppress its story and the horrifying pictures. For two weeks, CBS's 60 Minutes II show complied, until it became known that the New Yorker magazine would publish excerpts of the report. Myers was then sent on to the Sunday morning news programmes to explain, but under questioning acknowledged that he had still not read the report he had tried to censor from the public for weeks.
President Bush, Condoleezza Rice and other officials, unable to contain the controversy any longer, engaged in profuse apologies and scheduled appearances on Arab television. There were still no firings. One of their chief talking points was that the "abuse" was an aberration. But Abu Ghraib was a predictable consequence of the Bush administration imperatives and policies.
Bush has created what is in effect a gulag. It stretches from prisons in Afghanistan to Iraq, from Guantánamo to secret CIA prisons around the world. There are perhaps 10,000 people being held in Iraq, 1,000 in Afghanistan and almost 700 in Guantánamo, but no one knows the exact numbers. The law as it applies to them is whatever the executive deems necessary. There has been nothing like this system since the fall of the Soviet Union. The US military embraced the Geneva conventions after the second world war, because applying them to prisoners of war protects American soldiers. But the Bush administration, in an internal fight, trumped its argument by designating those at Guantánamo "enemy combatants". Rumsfeld extended this system - "a legal black hole", according to Human Rights Watch - to Afghanistan and then Iraq, openly rejecting the conventions.
posted on May 6, 2004 06:44:22 PM new
Maybe you'd like to enlighten us as to where you think those Iraqi criminals and those Iraqi's that were firing on our solders *should* be placed helen.
In those prison's that weren't built because of those who opposed alocating the funding to do just that? Or should we just shoot them rather than put them in jail or a holding facility. Or maybe should we just allow them to continue on with their crimes and attempts to kill our soldiers.
