Bush and the Geneva Convention

[bradclark1]

Bush wants to change article 3 of the Geneva Convention. Bush says that it is too vague, in particular "(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;". To me it doesn't sound vague at all. Maybe he should look the words up in a dictionary. What he is doing is trying to tailor the Convention to suite the CIA's needs to extract information from terrorists. This is as wrong as wrong can be.
The GC has been around since 1929 without change and our soldiers don't need the risk of countries tailoring the convention to their specific needs. If so the convention might as well be thrown out as useless. Bush is trying to warp an international standard to fit his need for here and now after these secret prisons of his have been found out.
He is not thinking of our troops now or in future conflict's. This is another case of Bush trying to twist and corrupt for his use.
It's interesting that he stated that if this change doesn't pass, the program (I assume he mean's the secret prisons.) will be halted. Yes Mr President, if we don't play your game you'll take your ball and go home.
To me an obvious solution to his problem would be to circulate a letter of policy stating what the administration/goverment understanding of article three is and issue guidelines for interrogators to follow. That is of course unless you are ashamed of what those guidelines are and don't want them known by his fellow americans and the international community.

This is not intended to lead to a democrat vs. republican debate but a debate of right and wrong and the repurcussions facing our troops now and in the future.

Link for reading the Geneva Convention. (It's not long) http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/91.htm

[fredbass]

Bush wants to change article 3 of the Geneva Convention. Bush says that it is too vague, in particular "(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;". To me it doesn't sound vague at all.

Those words certainly can be interpretted and used in various ways, so in that sense they are vague. So even though I'm not that fond of President Bush, I can see why he would want it to be clarified a bit better. And there is nothing wrong or illegal about requesting something like that. Just because the rules haven't been changed in over 50 years doesn't necessarily mean that they should never be.

[The Avon Lady]

Bush wants to change article 3 of the Geneva Convention. Bush says that it is too vague, in particular "(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;". To me it doesn't sound vague at all. Maybe he should look the words up in a dictionary. What he is doing is trying to tailor the Convention to suite the CIA's needs to extract information from terrorists. This is as wrong as wrong can be.
Sound good to me! :rock:
The GC has been around since 1929 without change and our soldiers don't need the risk of countries tailoring the convention to their specific needs.
Wise up. Warfare has changed.
If so the convention might as well be thrown out as useless.
Much of it should indeed.
Bush is trying to warp an international standard to fit his need for here and now after these secret prisons of his have been found out.
And that's a good thing.
He is not thinking of our troops now or in future conflict's. This is another case of Bush trying to twist and corrupt for his use.
It will benefit all of humanity.
It's interesting that he stated that if this change doesn't pass, the program (I assume he mean's the secret prisons.) will be halted. Yes Mr President, if we don't play your game you'll take your ball and go home.
And we'll have shot ourselves in the foot, all during wartime.
To me an obvious solution to his problem would be to circulate a letter of policy stating what the administration/goverment understanding of article three is and issue guidelines for interrogators to follow. That is of course unless you are ashamed of what those guidelines are and don't want them known by his fellow americans and the international community.
Why should you reveal everything to the enemy?
This is not intended to lead to a democrat vs. republican debate but a debate of right and wrong and the repurcussions facing our troops now and in the future.
The enemy we face doesn't respect anything in the GC as it is.

[bradclark1]

What he can do instead of changing the convention is do what I said and publish a letter of policy. If we change the convention then everyone else can and would change it to suite their individual states needs. Where does the line get drawn?
Not to mention that the Geneva Convention is aimed at uniformed combatants. It's not supposed to be used for terrorist/insurgent protection.
That is also another reason for Bush just too come out with a policy and then he can submit it to Nato if he wants to come out with an international convention for treatment of terrorists/insurgents.

[The Avon Lady]

What he can do instead of changing the convention is do what I said and publish a letter of policy. If we change the convention then everyone else can and would change it to suite their individual states needs. Where does the line get drawn?

Not to mention that the Geneva Convention is aimed at uniformed combatants. It's not supposed to be used for terrorist/insurgent protection.
Wise up again. Terror nations are on the arise. They will have uniforms and regular armies but they won't give a damn about the GC.

Yes, there are lines to be drawn but they shouldn't be drawn at the "your pants are way down" line.
That is also another reason for Bush just too come out with a policy and then he can submit it to Nato if he wants to come out with an international convention for treatment of terrorists/insurgents.
Most other NATO members still having the luxury of not having to face a major massive war against such terror forces. They will not be a source of support for a while to come.

[fredbass]

What he can do instead of changing the convention is do what I said and publish a letter of policy. If we change the convention then everyone else can and would change it to suite their individual states needs. Where does the line get drawn?
Not to mention that the Geneva Convention is aimed at uniformed combatants. It's not supposed to be used for terrorist/insurgent protection.
That is also another reason for Bush just too come out with a policy and then he can submit it to Nato if he wants to come out with an international convention for treatment of terrorists/insurgents.

The U.S. continues to give its prisoners far better treatment than would they get from most other countries. They should consider themselves lucky and fortunate.
President Bush just wants some clarity. Nothing wrong with asking. Everyone has that right which you seem to overlook so easily. In that sense there is no line nor should there be.

[TteFAboB]

The Geneva Convention was designed, and can only be applied, with conventional armies in mind.

It does not cover terrorists and should not cover terrorists.

You want to earn the rights of the Geneva Convention? Then raise a standing army.

Have you read the Geneva Convention Brad? Why don't you count how may violations terrorists commit. I've stopped at 32 after it got too repetitive and boring: General Provisions lots of violations, General protection of POWs more violations, subsequent parts violated by default, Religious, intellectual and hpysical activities, discipline, etc. it's all violated. Everything from then onwards is violated. And a terrorist group is no legitimate "Party" because they do not recognize the right of the other side to exist.

The CIA can do as they please with terrorists. Had CIA agents been captured by Jihadists, they would not even think about applying the Geneva Convention to them, as they didn't with the hostages (violation) captures who were beheaved (violation), forced to convert to Islam(violation), deprived of physical, intellectual and religious activities (violation, violation, violation).

You want to know what's right and what's wrong? It's wrong to release a terrorist and all information about him if that's an advantage to terror cells. And it is right to lock him in a hole without sunbathing and use psychological torture on him if that serves to prevent another 3000 direct and how many more indirect victims of a terror attack plus their main goal of political victory.

The Hizbullah is sponsored by Iran...

[bradclark1]

Sound good to me! :rock:

Read what I wrote. The Convention is for the treatment of uniformed combatants!


Wise up. Warfare has changed.
See above


Much of it should indeed.
See above


And that's a good thing.
See above

It will benefit all of humanity.
See above


And we'll have shot ourselves in the foot, all during wartime.
[/quote
See above

[quote]Why should you reveal everything to the enemy?

Why should treatment of prisoners be secret?


The enemy we face doesn't respect anything in the GC as it is.
The Convention is for the treatment of uniformed combatants!

You are under the mistaken belief that terrorists/insurgents should be honored by the Geneva Convention and you would condone the corruption of that convention to suite the CIA's needs.
Terrorist's don't have any rights. It's legal to make them kneel and put a bullet in the back of their neck. Do not corrupt a convention that was made for uniformed combatants to warrant interrogation of terrorists.
I wonder if your line of thought would change if you were on the recieving end?

[The Avon Lady]

The Convention is for the treatment of uniformed combatants!

You are under the mistaken belief that terrorists/insurgents should be honored by the Geneva Convention and you would condone the corruption of that convention to suite the CIA's needs.
Terrorist's don't have any rights. It's legal to make them kneel and put a bullet in the back of their neck. Do not corrupt a convention that was made for uniformed combatants to warrant interrogation of terrorists.
Did you miss my 2nd post, where I already stated:

[i]"Wise up again. Terror nations are on the arise. They will have uniforms and regular armies[ but they won't give a damn about the GC."
I wonder if your line of thought would change if you were on the recieving end?
That goes for both of us. How many terrorist attacks have you been on the receiving end of?

[The Avon Lady]

Making my point:

Black Five Blog: Remind me why I liked Powell (http://www.blackfive.net/main/2006/09/friday_freefly__2.html). Highlighted quote:
He <Powell> continues to weasel his way left with one of the most profoundly stupid statements I can recall an educated person making.

“The world is beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism. To redefine Common Article 3 would add to those doubts. Furthermore, it would put our own troops at risk.”
The first sentence is simply incomprehensible as it is written. The moral basis for fighting terrorism is that killing innocents is evil, stopping those who kill innocents is good, period. Powell’s letter wasn’t so long that he couldn’t have taken the care to say what I assume he meant, The world is beginning to doubt the techniques we use in the fight against terrorism. The idea that our tactics in this war could ever undermine the moral basis for opposing terror is foolish and if somehow it happened it would simply be a reason to ignore the thoughts of those unable to sanction opposing evil.

His last sentence is at least a debatable point, although again incorrect in my mind. The idea that our actions in relation to the treatment of prisoners has any impact on our enemies treatment of our prisoners is an oft-repeated trope that has no basis in fact. Since the Geneva Conventions have been in effect we have fought a number of wars and in each one our enemies tortured and killed our POWs with very little regard for these rules.

[The Avon Lady]

heheh!

http://img158.imageshack.us/img158/9293/varv091806arp2.jpg

[tycho102]

The Geneva Convention was designed, and can only be applied, with conventional armies in mind.

It does not cover terrorists and should not cover terrorists.
A Winnar is you: http://www.mhaf.org/images/medal_gold_pipe.jpg

Recognizable uniform == Geneva Convention protections
No recognizable uniform == No Geneva Convention protections

What did the Russians do with German soldiers that were out of uniform, in Berlin? That's exactly right -- they machine-gunned them on the spot.

Now, for arab muslims, death is so common that they've become de-sensitized to it. Which brings me right back to Abu Ghairab. Sexual humiliation is something that the vast majority of jihadists absolutely cannot psychologically cope with. If there is any kind of deterance value to be gained by punishment, then sexual humiliation is the only thing that is going to work. To increase it's effectiveness, it would probably be best if it was a Jewish female laughing and pointing at their little peckers (no offense intended toward you, Avon -- I'm just being pragmatic).


So, I propose re-writing that article to read as follows:

Recognizable uniform == No sexually humiliating photos posted on the web and in newspapers/magazines.

Non-recognizable uniform == Sexually humiliating photos posted on the web and in newspapers/magazines.

[Immacolata]

You guys scare me.

He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.

The proper treatment of prisoners is one of those safeguards that prevents you from becoming the very monster you fight. Of course, if you honestly think that becoming a monster is what it takes, so be it.

There is no need to torture, or belittle them. Are they terrorists, have they caused grief and death, then execute them. No need to drag it out. I find more humanity in a swift sentence of justice than prolonged abuse.

[bradclark1]

Did you miss my 2nd post, where I already stated:

[i]"Wise up again. Terror nations are on the arise. They will have uniforms and regular armies[ but they won't give a damn about the GC."
We will deal with that if and when it arises. What about fighting a civilized nation?


Quote:
I wonder if your line of thought would change if you were on the recieving end?
That goes for both of us. How many terrorist attacks have you been on the receiving end of?
What don't you understand AL? The Geneva Convention does not cover terrorists. It is not meant to cover terrorists. The GC is for the treatment of uniformed combatants. What is so hard for you to understand about that? So, I am saying the GC cannot and should not be modified to cover tactics for extracting information from terrorist.
You want to shoot fingers and toes off? Fine. Want to beat them nearly to death? Fine. Want to put them on the rack? Fine. They don't have rights. I couldn't care less what is done to them. What I'm saying and saying is the GC is for uniformed combatants to be treated humanely. Don't try and lump terrorists treatment under a convention they are not meant to be under.
Do you understand now?
Terrorist under the GC = Bad
Terrorist not under GC = Good
I can't put it any simpler then that. I am not defending terrorist. Kill them all! I am defending a convention that was and is meant for uniformed combatants.

[The Avon Lady]

You guys scare me.

He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.

Response:
"Kol ham’racheim ‘al ha’achzarim sofo l’hisachzeir ‘al harachmanim" -- "one who is merciful to the cruel will ultimately be cruel to the merciful."

[The Avon Lady]

Did you miss my 2nd post, where I already stated:

"Wise up again. Terror nations are on the arise. They will have uniforms and regular armies[ but they won't give a damn about the GC."
We will deal with that if and when it arises. What about fighting a civilized nation?

To which I also stated in my 2nd post:

Yes, there are lines to be drawn but they shouldn't be drawn at the "your pants are way down" line.

Quote:
I wonder if your line of thought would change if you were on the recieving end?
That goes for both of us. How many terrorist attacks have you been on the receiving end of?
What don't you understand AL? The Geneva Convention does not cover terrorists. It is not meant to cover terrorists. The GC is for the treatment of uniformed combatants. What is so hard for you to understand about that?[/quote]
What is so hard for you to understand that terrorists can be uniformed?

What is so hard for you to understand that the world will laugh at you when the time comes and proclaim that "one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter"?

Just look at what the world had done to Israel any and every time it lifts a finger to defend itself. Why learn the hard way when someone else has already been through it.
So, I am saying the GC cannot and should not be modified to cover tactics for extracting information from terrorist.
And I'm saying that you should keep in mind that it's 2006 and the UN still has not defined what constitutes terrorism. Hint. Hint. Nudge. Nudge.
You want to shoot fingers and toes off? Fine. Want to beat them nearly to death? Fine. Want to put them on the rack? Fine. They don't have rights. I couldn't care less what is done to them. What I'm saying and saying is the GC is for uniformed combatants to be treated humanely. Don't try and lump terrorists treatment under a convention they are not meant to be under.
Do you understand now?
Terrorist under the GC = Bad
Terrorist not under GC = Good
I can't put it any simpler then that. I am not defending terrorist. Kill them all! I am defending a convention that was and is meant for uniformed combatants.
And all I'm saying is the GC as it stands, along with the world's anti-Americanism, along with today's terrorist conivences, along with much of the world's upsidedown moral logic today, will have US forces' hands tied behind their backs on day 1 of the next relevant conflict.

[Oberon]

Yes, I don't know what worries me more...the fact that these people from the dark ages are trying to kill us, or the fact that we're chasing them back into the dark ages....

[bradclark1]

Making my point:

Black Five Blog: Remind me why I liked Powell (http://www.blackfive.net/main/2006/09/friday_freefly__2.html). Highlighted quote:
He <Powell> continues to weasel his way left with one of the most profoundly stupid statements I can recall an educated person making.


“The world is beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism. To redefine Common Article 3 would add to those doubts. Furthermore, it would put our own troops at risk.”The first sentence is simply incomprehensible as it is written. The moral basis for fighting terrorism is that killing innocents is evil, stopping those who kill innocents is good, period. Powell’s letter wasn’t so long that he couldn’t have taken the care to say what I assume he meant, The world is beginning to doubt the techniques we use in the fight against terrorism. The idea that our tactics in this war could ever undermine the moral basis for opposing terror is foolish and if somehow it happened it would simply be a reason to ignore the thoughts of those unable to sanction opposing evil.

His last sentence is at least a debatable point, although again incorrect in my mind. The idea that our actions in relation to the treatment of prisoners has any impact on our enemies treatment of our prisoners is an oft-repeated trope that has no basis in fact. Since the Geneva Conventions have been in effect we have fought a number of wars and in each one our enemies tortured and killed our POWs with very little regard for these rules.
So let me get this right:
He's another that thinks terrorist should be covered under the GC.
His second paragraph thinks that we should totally ignore the convention because nations we have fought against before didn't go by it so screw the convention, we'll do whatever it takes to extract information because they are going to torture our troops anyway.
Those countries lost didn't they. Might be saying something there! Like we weren't like them. Lets not make ourselves like them shall we.

Abuse our troops and we will hunt you down and kill you no matter what it takes! Thats what we have going for us! The rage of the rightious.
Not; Well we torture their troops, so we can't say anything about their torture of ours.

Edit: Had to edit because my temper was getting to my post. :)
2nd Edit: BlackFive is a clown in my opinion after reading that article.

[Immacolata]

"Kol ham’racheim ‘al ha’achzarim sofo l’hisachzeir ‘al harachmanim" -- "one who is merciful to the cruel will ultimately be cruel to the merciful."

Aha! :P

The shaft of the arrow had been feathered with one of the eagle's own plumes. We often give our enemies the means of our own destruction.

this one is as well nice and ambigous.

As for the GC. It was crafted in response to the huge scale of modernized warfare. When millions of men were conscripted, low of morale from the beginning, and probably likely to surrender at the first given opportunity.

I agree with TAL that the convention does not cover the kind of terrorists we see today. But I still don't think that Guantanamo is solving anything, it just shows the predicament that the war on terror put the USA in. What to do with these terrorists? Well, for starters, if they are terrorists, why no judge them for their crimes? That they receive no trial is to me the biggest mystery of all in this. Trial them, kill them (which is judging them at least) or release them.

[Takeda Shingen]

You know, I haven't seen Friederich Nietsche, Aesop or Jewish Medrashic Quotation around here lately. I miss them. Jewish Medrashic Quotation and I used to play internet checkers when I first joined this board. He was actually the one who introduced by to Fried and Aesop. They called us the three amigos, mostly because the members just ignored me. I wish that old Jewy-Med, as I called him, would return to us.

By the way TteFaboB, congratulations on your award from the Kansas City St. Andrews Society. That's quite an honor.

[Skybird]

The GC in the main is one thing: the codification of a spirit, an attitude of mind, a moral demand, an approach to deal with the consequences of war.

I would like to see it being used on any opponent that uses it and respects it with regard to "us".

I do not understand why it should make us protect the interests and potentials of an attacker that does not see it valid for protecting us.

the tricky part is to prevent abusing it, or hollowing it out, and making reasonable judgements (not biased ones) when deciding for whom it should be used, and for whom not. as you see, I have slightly changed my opinion a bit during the last three years. But Bush wants card blanche. That is too much, even more so since he directs his creation, this illogical and hollow phrase "war on terror", to serve the interests of a certain political agenda (which does not mean that our very real Islamic enemy is less harmful to us).

As TteFAboB has it so wonderfully summed up in his sig: I will not allow others, in the name of their principles (or lack thereof), to deny me what I would never deny them in the name of mine.

Edit. I am contradicting myself. Here I say "GC yes", in other threads I argued in favour of "use moral to decide about peace or war, but once in war fight with all that you have, without moral." The problem for me seem to be that I differ again between "action of war" and combat, and treatment of prisoners. It seems to me I see the GC limited for the treatment of prisoners (that are at your mercy already), but not for the action of war, whereas the GC wants to have a say in both.

Edit 2: Further thinking about it, what is a prisoner that holds a potentially valuable information that would influence your capacity to fight - is he a prisoner, or does this passive potential turn him into a fighter again even when being imprisoned a slong as he withhold that information from you (becasue he an indirectly harm you by limiting your abilties to fight when hiding that information from you so that you cannot make use of it)?
Hm, I need to sit down and think this through. You know that first or second Dirty Harry movie? He has caught the bad guy who has kidnapped a girl that will die within a shgort period of time due to lack of oxygene, if she is not freed. Callaghan does not protect the right of the priosner to stay silent, he tortures him to force him to give away the life-saving info. He made a clear hierarchy: the interests of the innocent victim uncompromisingly go first, befor the interests of the criminal. But the constellation is clear: a bad guy and offender of moral rules, and his innocent victim. This constellation is less clearly to be defined in war. Think of German soldiers or British soldiers being caught in WWII. while participants of SS-slaiughterings can be argued to be criminals, the oprdinary wehrmacht grunt can be argued not to be that, maybe even to be a victim himself. Here, the principle of justice used by Callaghan could only be repalced by the rule of selfish interests of two war-waging sides. And would this be enough to skip legal protection for some prisoner that holds valuable information?

That Dirty Harry movie caused a moral uproar of the public in Germany when it was released, btw. Of course, against Callaghan's action. I was still at schooll, but found the trouble most irritating and unreasonable. The onyl defendig argument was: Callaghans's actions casued a precedent by which the gewneral protection and validity of the law could get hollowed out: ba defining more cases as "exceptions from the rules". which is, however, a valid argument.

[CCIP]

1. Torture is not acceptable as a principle, period. One might reasonably argue and excuse a specific case or series of cases where its application was neccesary, but codifying torture in international regulations is unacceptable.
I think one of the characteristics of 'terror nations' that we've seen so far has been the use of torture. What does that make our oh-so-civilized society if we stoop to that? I'm not keen on having another medieval feature here...

2. International conventions such as this should apply on a mutual basis, but they do stem and should stem from moral principles of our culture, not eye-for-eye. If an individual combatant violates conventions, he should be prosecuted for this duly, not denied rights and treated as his captors would prefer without proper investigation.
Idealistic, yes, very. But you can't run around saying conventions don't count. You get into a foggy territory where you can brand someone a terrorist without so much proof as catching him with a weapon, and treat him as you want.
I can safely say that this is precisely what Bush wants to do here - have the right to catch suspicious blokes in the bush, let his guys whatever he wants with them, and whether whatr they did was right or done for the right reason, proclaim that it's all legit and for great democracy. Because he can. Woot.
These new wars are all a grey area that certain people want to paint black and white. This is part of that effort.

3. It is completely unacceptable to have the denial of human rights codified in international regulation that specifically deals with them in the first place.
Think of the precedent this sets. We're better off not having a convention at all than having 'unpersons' codified into it and having 'legitimate' precedents of all this stuff...

None of this will make war crimes or torture go away. But at least let's not give up on modern post-Enlightenment moral principles just yet when it comes to international law...

[kiwi_2005]

Bush wants to change article 3 of the Geneva Convention. Bush says that it is too vague, in particular "(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;". To me it doesn't sound vague at all. Maybe he should look the words up in a dictionary. What he is doing is trying to tailor the Convention to suite the CIA's needs to extract information from terrorists. This is as wrong as wrong can be.


If its true that bush wants to make changes to suit the CIA (another form of Terroist?) then it will be the downfall of democracy and all those assicated with them. The old saying if ya can't beat em join em does not always work. America and the rest that follow are at the top because they dont act like savages. Do we really want to resort to these tactics?... Desperados?

[Skybird]

The background is that his attempt to allow a wider spectrum of "non-conventional" interrogation methods to be used in Guantanamo was brought to a stop even by his own Republican party that rejected him the needed support. He now tries it through the backdoor, somewhat distracting from or evading his defeat by that.

[The Noob]

BUSH YOU SILLY OLD...:x

Damnit, this sucks! The Genva Convention is a Good thing. Bush just wants to get rid of it so he can Torture and shoot everyone who he dislikes. THATS NAZILAND 2! This time it's no stupid bull****, this time it's serious!

The Problem is to define terrorism.

If this does not get clear, if you shout "America Sucks and all americans should die" (No offence against anyone, i am just making an excample) Bush can just say "He's a Terrorist, Torture him and Blow his Brain out".

Bush already did enought nazi-things, like saying "Torture is only Torture if it can kill you", and already did enough stupid and outright Facist things, like bringing people outta country to torture them. If they found out he wasn't anything bad, they thrown him in the woods of an unknown country! Secret Black CIA (Yes the are another form of Terrorists/Insurgents) Flights across Europe, Heard of it?

I know this sounds Stupid as hell, but this SERIOUSLY concerns me. The USA gets more Nazi alike every day. Lets make a Overview.

Nazi Germany

Discriminated
Jewish, Poles, Russians

Torturing Camps:
Concentration Camps

Army=Wehrmacht:
Does everything for thier Leader and Commits war Crimes

Gestapo:
Secret Police with Power over everything

Leader:
Uncle Adolf Heilstoned, der brave honest superman Fuehrer

Excuse to start war:
Attack of Poland on Germany (Germany only faked it in this case!)

Now Comes USA!

USA

Discriminated:
Islamists, Middle East People

Torturing Camps:
Secret Prisons, Abu Graib, Guantanamo

Army:
Does everything for thier Leader, and does war crimes too!

CIA, NSA, ect:
Secret Police with Power over everything

Leader:
Georgie Bush, the Clean Honest Democatic elected always says the thruth blah blah blah guy.

Excuse to start war:
Attack on the USA on 9/11. (True in this case)

Does anyone get the Pattern?

Anyway, the Point is, (Sorry but i can only express this in German, it's a...Redewedung here) "Der Zweck heiligt nicht die mittel!". It means you can't justify every action with that good what shall come out in the end. Because it is usually utter horsesh**.

You cannot justify the Torturing and Killing of People, even if they are Terrorists. You are going to thier level.

There is a great movie that shows what can come out of such stuff. It's called "The Siege" and it would not Suprise me if it is banned in America.

The Avon Lady, i would normally ask you "ARE YOU *MEEP*ING CRAZY?!" but i will not, since you can in my Opinion not judge this, since you are under terrorist Attacks for a Long time "down there" in Israel, and a certain hate has build up. It is right we need to Stop the terrorists. I hate Terrorism. It is GAY! The shall come out and FIGHT in a Open war, and not hide in thier holes like Bugs Bunny, but SUCH INHUMAN methods are just...wrong. We are Lowering to thier levels. We are going back in time...staight to Nazi Germany 1942.

Heil Bush! :nope:

(As usuall on my Political Comments if this gets to Offensive, remove it, no Problem. But i cannot hold myself on such terms like Removing GC.)

[Perilscope]

I do not agree on torturing people or changing the GC article three. However, as CCIP stated a few posts above:
...One might reasonably argue and excuse a specific case or series of cases where its application was neccesary,...
It all comes down that us Westerners, we do "try" to adhere to the Geneva Convention, them (terrorists), on the other hand they do not and will never follow it. So I will never feel ashamed or feel like a monster if we use an occasional slap to make one cough up some valuable information. ;)

However, if it's true that Bush asked for a change in article three, from this point on, if I hear one word from Bush saying something about China's way, I will laugh hard.

The GC is humane and straightforward, we must follow it as much as we can, point.

[The Avon Lady]

Bush wants to change article 3 of the Geneva Convention. Bush says that it is too vague, in particular "(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;". To me it doesn't sound vague at all. Maybe he should look the words up in a dictionary. What he is doing is trying to tailor the Convention to suite the CIA's needs to extract information from terrorists. This is as wrong as wrong can be.


If its true that bush wants to make changes to suit the CIA (another form of Terroist?) then it will be the downfall of democracy and all those assicated with them. The old saying if ya can't beat em join em does not always work. America and the rest that follow are at the top because they dont act like savages. Do we really want to resort to these tactics?... Desperados?
We have lost the moral high-ground (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=22618_CIA_Torture_Horror_Revealed)! :roll:

[Perilscope]

We have lost the moral high-ground (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=22618_CIA_Torture_Horror_Revealed)! :roll:
"assailed with loud Red Hot Chili Peppers music.":rotfl:

[Immacolata]

You know, I haven't seen Friederich Nietsche, Aesop or Jewish Medrashic Quotation around here lately. I miss them. Jewish Medrashic Quotation and I used to play internet checkers when I first joined this board. He was actually the one who introduced by to Fried and Aesop. They called us the three amigos, mostly because the members just ignored me. I wish that old Jewy-Med, as I called him, would return to us.

:rotfl:

Lest we forget, terrorism is not the invention of the palestinians or jihadists. It has been used widely across the world in modern times, by people of all faiths, but differing goals. The geneva convention is reserved for conventional warfare, not terrorism wars. A new set of doctrines must be formulated for how to respond to that type. What to do with capture terrorists etc.

[The Avon Lady]

You know, I haven't seen Friederich Nietsche, Aesop or Jewish Medrashic Quotation around here lately. I miss them. Jewish Medrashic Quotation and I used to play internet checkers when I first joined this board. He was actually the one who introduced by to Fried and Aesop. They called us the three amigos, mostly because the members just ignored me. I wish that old Jewy-Med, as I called him, would return to us.
To my surprise, Mr. Babylonian Talmud has dropped by to say hello at the American Spectator (http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10370). :D

[bradclark1]

Lest we forget, terrorism is not the invention of the palestinians or jihadists. It has been used widely across the world in modern times, by people of all faiths, but differing goals. The geneva convention is reserved for conventional warfare, not terrorism wars. A new set of doctrines must be formulated for how to respond to that type. What to do with capture terrorists etc.

Precisely.

[CCIP]

That's why I think the term 'War on Terror' is very misleading. It's not really a war, it's more of a special operation. War is far more straightforward than that.

I have no trouble with terrorists getting what they deserve. But I think we need to be very careful in the definition of a terrorist. A guy who blows up a building is most certainly a terrorist. A guy who paid money and/or gave weapons for another guy to blow up a building is a terrorist. A guy caught with explosives where he shouldn't be is probably a terrorist. A guy caught in the bush with a rifle could be a terrorist. A guy who likes to hate Americans and might throw a rock or two is probably not a terrorist, if even a potential terrorist someday. We all don't like any of the above, of course, but let's try to make sure the latter two categories don't have too straight a road to Guantanamo, at least...

[The Noob]

I have to add one thing: A guy who blows up a Building is maybe just insane. Could be.

[Oberon]

I have to add one thing: A guy who blows up a Building is maybe just insane. Could be.

Aaah, but in todays world it all depends what's in the building. 3000 civilians, he's insane. 3 civilians being held hostage by 4 terrorists, he's an agent of freedom. ;)

[Ishmael]

Having read this thread and many others here, I see no need to change the Geneva Convention to deal with Islamic terrorists. As stated above, The convention deals with uniformed troops of an opposing nation's army. Terrorists belong to no army and no nation. My solution is and has been for some time to try them under the law they chose to live under: Sharia.

Sharia is a much more draconian code than any other law currently extant. The punishments are far more severe than anything the West has to offer.

We are not attacking the Muslim faith as a whole, merely the extremists who attack us. Therefore, the defense of defending the faith does not apply.

I would actually try them under the Taliban interpretation of Islamic Law and punishment since they see that regime as the purest expression of their philosophy.

That said, I would try them in Islamic courts with our own hand-picked Islamic judges to ensure both a fair trial for the murders they have committed and the appropriate punishments under their law.

I would televise the trials on the Arab TV channels so the Muslims would see the fair application of those laws.

I would even offer, upon conviction, the families of the victims the opportunity to carry out sentence. This would also be televised to the Muslim world.

Let them see the West mete out Justice, Muslim style. Then they can decide for themselves if that is the road they wish to go down.

Also, having been convicted in an Islamic court, they become ineligible as martyrs, according to their own faith.

Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.

[Oberon]

IMHO, that's a good idea Ishmael....trouble would be finding the people who would attend that court and making sure they don't get gunned down/blown up/decapitated/kidnapped/disappear, or all of the aforementioned.

[Ishmael]

IMHO, that's a good idea Ishmael....trouble would be finding the people who would attend that court and making sure they don't get gunned down/blown up/decapitated/kidnapped/disappear, or all of the aforementioned.

Simple solution: Hold them in Guantanamo. They get a sunny vacation on the south coast of Cuba. There's lot's of great snorkeling and scuba diving off the coast there as long as you stay out of the minefields. I was there in the summer of 1978 and did a lot of both. It would be the new Club Fed.

Also, after the verdict is in, they could be taken into international waters. There their right hand would be removed in accordance with Sharia. Then they would be made to walk the plank in shark-infested waters. If they can get away from the sharks, then we have shown true Muslim "mercy".

[Immacolata]

No need for those measures. Try them under the law that governs the people they committed their crimes against. The Bush administration could easily let the prisoners of Guantanamo go before a judge. If they are guilty, they will be sentenced and punished.

[SubSerpent]

HAHAHAHAHA!!!:rotfl:

Desperate means from a desperate president!!!

This only further shows how badly Bush has lost and how hopeless he's become. HE must live by the saying, "If you can't beat them. Join them"...So when do we all start praying to Allah and speaking Arabic?!? :rotfl:

Bush can't find Bin Laden and he'll never be able to win this war on "terror", so all he can do is bang his own head against his wall thinking up evil ideas of his own of how to "protect the American people"...HAHAHA!!! :rotfl:What a bunch of bull!

Bin Laden has obviously defeated Bush by turning him into a monster as well!!!

First, Bush will start with the Geneva Convention and twist that all around so that he and America can torture anyone from a foriegn nation for anything at anytime.

Then Herr Bush and his wench will focus their attention on the schools that your childern go to by allowing principals or other staff members to execute and torture your child for any sort of intolerance or other misbehavior. It will be mandatory that your child grows up in a brainwashed Bush enviroment that makes him/her pledge allegiance to Bush's picture before each class.

Yes indeed, we've seen this before. I do recall his name being Adolf, but it appears he has returned and is now in full control of the United States.

[Sea Demon]

HAHAHAHAHA!!!:rotfl:

Desperate means from a desperate president!!!



LOL :lol: :rotfl:

George "The desperate president" Bush is surging in all polls.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-09-18-bush-poll_x.htm

President Bush is now at 44% approval heading into the elections, which is very high for a second term President historically. This beats out Clinton, and Reagan in their second terms. It even tops Bush Sr. in his midterm election numbers and of course the skunk Carter in his. No matter how many times you call this man Hitler or Idiot or Buffoon, he beats you every time. Gotta love it.

[SubSerpent]

HAHAHAHAHA!!!:rotfl:

Desperate means from a desperate president!!!



LOL :lol: :rotfl:

George "The desperate president" Bush is surging in all polls.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-09-18-bush-poll_x.htm

President Bush is now at 44% approval heading into the elections, which is very high for a second term President historically. This beats out Clinton, and Reagan in their second terms. It even tops Bush Sr. in his midterm election numbers and of course the skunk Carter in his. No matter how many times you call this man Hitler or Idiot or Buffoon, he beats you every time. Gotta love it.


Yeah, Sadaam also had a 100% rating in all his polls and he wasn't everyone's cup of tea it turns out! Gotta love that too! It's called forced publicity! :yep:

You don't think he and his right wing henchmen can pull something that big off? Just go back to the 2000 election that he and his henchmen stole from Gore!

Also note, that the 2000 election was the fourth time in United States history and in over 100 years to elect a canidate to the presidency while losing the nationwide popular vote. The other times before Bush were in 1824, 1876, and 1888. Obviously he wasn't very popular among MOST Americans that voted in the year 2000. That's why I believe, as do a lot of Americans, that he's as crooked as they come and this guy needs to be kicked out of office and placed behind bars.

[Sea Demon]

Yeah, Sadaam also had a 100% rating in all his polls and he wasn't everyone's cup of tea it turns out! Gotta love that too! It's called forced publicity! :yep:

You don't think he and his right wing henchmen can pull something that big off. Just go back to the 2000 election that he and his henchmen stole from Gore!

Also note, that the 2000 election was the fourth time in United States history and in over 100 years to elect a canidate to the presidency while losing the nationwide popular vote. The other times before Bush were in 1824, 1876, and 1888. Obviously he wasn't very popular among MOST Americans that voted in the year 2000. That's why I believe, as do a lot of Americans, that he's as crooked as they come and this guy needs to be kicked out of office and placed behind bars.

Yeah, yeah. Keep talking. I love that you foaming at the mouth Bush-haters are going......:damn: :damn: :damn: :damn:

Just keep repeating this stuff to yourself and maybe you'll feel better. :roll: :rotfl:

[The Avon Lady]

Yeah, Sadaam also had a 100% rating in all his polls and he wasn't everyone's cup of tea it turns out! Gotta love that too! It's called forced publicity! :yep:
Reality's a bummer for you, ain't it? Your comment could have come straight out of Pravda circa 1950.

[kiwi_2005]

Theres a pro american/Isreal image war going on in a kiwi forum some of them are pretty cool pics so i thought i did put em up here.
Aint it good to know we kiwis love ya ;):arrgh!:

This is a favourite.
http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c387/mischazion/Isreal/payback.jpg

and this one.
http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c387/mischazion/Isreal/crying_eagle.jpg

One for Avon ya reckon?
http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c387/mischazion/Isreal/thusandisrael.gif

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c387/mischazion/Isreal/friend_of_israel.jpg

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c387/mischazion/Isreal/LionofIsrael.gif

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c387/mischazion/Isreal/4f46fbe1.jpg

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c387/mischazion/Isreal/israel_palestine_cartoon.gif

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c387/mischazion/Isreal/Israel.jpg

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c387/mischazion/Isreal/bushhearyou.jpg

[Perilscope]

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c387/mischazion/Isreal/israel_palestine_cartoon.gif
I love this one... so based on facts :yep:

[The Noob]

European Soldier: Take Cover! *Hides under Bench*
American Soldier: Look, i'm at war on Terror! *Stands up and whinks his embedded Journalist Camera* *BOOM!* Dead...

Really Great Alternatives...:roll:

[The Avon Lady]

Kiwi, oldies but goodies.

Courtesy of The Mudville Gazette (http://www.mudvillegazette.com/milblogs/2006/09/19/#006533):

Somewhere out there the gods of law are laughing their heads off.

Soon, in a combat theater near you, the 82nd Airborne will be dropped into combat against terrorists. Additional aircraft will drop into combat the 666th Combat Defense Attorney Brigade (the legendary C-DABS). As each trooper in the 82nd lines up a shot at a terrorist aiming at him, one set of the 666th CDAB attorneys will file a motion with the Combat Field Judge asserting that the trooper is about to violate the rights of the jihadist at whom he is aiming. The trooper’s counsel will point out the imminent danger faced by his client and will assert “self defense” - meanwhile, the jihadist is blazing away at the trooper, ignoring the temporary injunction papers being waved at him by the Combat Marshal.

Other members of the terrorist group are gunning down members of the 666th Brigade as they try to present their business cards and establish an attorney-client relationship. Eventually the terrorists run out of ammunition only to discover that their AK-47s have not come close to being able to damage the American military as will the legal system about to invoked on their behalf by American law.

CDAB deaths will always be high, but given the ever-increasing number of American law schools cranking out an endless stream of unnecessary attorneys looking for work, the losses will be quickly replaced.
Take it from me, an Israeli mother, with friends whose husbands and children have been in combat duty in the IDF over the last 20 years, that the above scenario (barring the disposable lawyers) is not a joke. There have been numerous situations where IDF personnel have died or been injured because of fears of repercussions and confusion in abiding by the IDF's absurd code of ethics, compiled and frozen into law by local leftwing liberal professor Asaf Kasher, who I would like to have parachuted into Lebanon a month or 2 ago.

You've been warned. Learn from the experience of others. It's free!
European Soldier: Take Cover! *Hides under Bench*
Welcome to Fwance (http://www.nysun.com/article/39893)!

"It's deja vu all over again! - Yogi Berra

[Immacolata]

Take it from me, an Israeli mother, with friends whose husbands and children have been in combat duty in the IDF over the last 20 years, that the above scenario (barring the disposable lawyers) is not a joke. There have been numerous situations where IDF personnel have died or been injured because of fears of repercussions and confusion in abiding by the IDF's absurd code of ethics, compiled and frozen into law by local leftwing liberal professor Asaf Kasher, who I would like to have parachuted into Lebanon a month or 2 ago.

You've been warned. Learn from the experience of others. It's free!


And it looks as if it is getting more dangerous (http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34501), too.

[The Avon Lady]

And it looks as if it is getting more dangerous (http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34501), too.
I read that elsewhere yesterday but that has nothing to do with this thread's subject. There is no lack of discussion locally on Israel's fiascos in this past summer's war. Some were so blatant that anyone on the street could have easily pointed them out. :down:

[Immacolata]

Ah, sorry for the threadjacking. I for one was upset that the offensive didn't go too well. No one can live with Hisbollah as a "neighbour". But they are still there, alas. And I do believe they are not entitled to protection under the geneva convention due to the way they fight (trying to get back on track).

[STEED]

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c387/mischazion/Isreal/israel_palestine_cartoon.gif
I love this one... so based on facts :yep:

That is so spot on.

[The Avon Lady]

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c387/mischazion/Isreal/israel_palestine_cartoon.gif
I love this one... so based on facts :yep:
http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/9639/marguliesaugust22006kh1.gif

More cartoons at MidEast Truth (http://www.mideasttruth.com/cartoons.html).

[Oberon]

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Spot on!

I like this one:

http://www.mideasttruth.com/mtcartoons/Ariail/arialAugust172006.gif

[The Avon Lady]

I like this one:

http://www.mideasttruth.com/mtcartoons/Ariail/arialAugust172006.gif
Get serious (http://www.islamonline.net/fatwa/english/FatwaDisplay.asp?hFatwaID=65310). :shifty:

[The Avon Lady]

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c387/mischazion/Isreal/israel_palestine_cartoon.gif
I love this one... so based on facts :yep:

That is so spot on.
Today, in the news..... (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=112402)

Don't miss the video link toward the article's end. Simply disgusting.

[bradclark1]

Today, in the news..... (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=112402)
So much for fighting for their people!!!

[SUBMAN1]

The Geneva Convention was designed, and can only be applied, with conventional armies in mind.

It does not cover terrorists and should not cover terrorists.

You want to earn the rights of the Geneva Convention? Then raise a standing army.

Have you read the Geneva Convention Brad? Why don't you count how may violations terrorists commit. I've stopped at 32 after it got too repetitive and boring: General Provisions lots of violations, General protection of POWs more violations, subsequent parts violated by default, Religious, intellectual and hpysical activities, discipline, etc. it's all violated. Everything from then onwards is violated. And a terrorist group is no legitimate "Party" because they do not recognize the right of the other side to exist.

The CIA can do as they please with terrorists. Had CIA agents been captured by Jihadists, they would not even think about applying the Geneva Convention to them, as they didn't with the hostages (violation) captures who were beheaved (violation), forced to convert to Islam(violation), deprived of physical, intellectual and religious activities (violation, violation, violation).

You want to know what's right and what's wrong? It's wrong to release a terrorist and all information about him if that's an advantage to terror cells. And it is right to lock him in a hole without sunbathing and use psychological torture on him if that serves to prevent another 3000 direct and how many more indirect victims of a terror attack plus their main goal of political victory.

The Hizbullah is sponsored by Iran...

One tiny bit of legality better be thrown in here. The fact that Bush declared war on them means he should probably abide by the GC. This gave Bush special powers by declaring war since if he did not, then the 9/11 happanings would be a police matter only. So there is a fine a line to be walked.

-S

[SkvyWvr]

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c387/mischazion/Isreal/israel_palestine_cartoon.gif
I love this one... so based on facts :yep:

That is so spot on.
Today, in the news..... (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=112402)

Don't miss the video link toward the article's end. Simply disgusting.

Disgusting isn't enough. Such brave soliders of Islam.:nope:

[Fish]

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c387/mischazion/Isreal/israel_palestine_cartoon.gif
I love this one... so based on facts :yep:

That is so spot on.
Today, in the news..... (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=112402)

Don't miss the video link toward the article's end. Simply disgusting.

Disgusting isn't enough. Such brave soliders of Islam.:nope:

Perhaps I am the only one here, but seems to me the guy is just bringing the boy to a save spot.

[bradclark1]

[
One tiny bit of legality better be thrown in here. The fact that Bush declared war on them means he should probably abide by the GC. This gave Bush special powers by declaring war since if he did not, then the 9/11 happanings would be a police matter only. So there is a fine a line to be walked.

-S

Actual real war was not declared.

[Perilscope]

Actual real war was not declared.
The terrorists did thought! ;)

[The Avon Lady]

Perhaps I am the only one here, but seems to me the guy is just bringing the boy to a safe spot.
You know something?

I agree with you. I'm going to post an comment on the article.

[The Avon Lady]

I knew that (http://hotair.com/archives/2006/09/20/bombshell-abc-independently-confirms-success-of-cia-torture-tactics/)! :roll:

Follow the links, too. :yep:

[Immacolata]

I wonder how the anti-torture crow is going to explain their way out of that one.

[The Avon Lady]

I wonder how the anti-torture crow
You meant "crowd" but "crow" fits in nicely. :lol:

[Fish]

I knew that (http://hotair.com/archives/2006/09/20/bombshell-abc-independently-confirms-success-of-cia-torture-tactics/)! :roll:

Follow the links, too. :yep:

O'Reilly he? :hmm:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200609160003


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfSRwUxjmM4

[Skybird]

Also something that has to do with the GC:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5368360.stm

If I remember correctly, I have hinted at this since over a year - and defenders of the war always were only laughing and wondering if I am serious, and saying that it cannot be true. "Worse than under Saddam? Can't be true, cause what have we fought for so far, then?"

Well, good question, guys.

[tycho102]

Also something that has to do with the GC:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5368360.stm

If I remember correctly, I have hinted at this since over a year - and defenders of the war always were only laughing and wondering if I am serious, and saying that it cannot be true. "Worse than under Saddam? Can't be true, cause what have we fought for so far, then?"

Well, good question, guys.
Well, seeing how CNN never reported on Saddam's jails because they'd get kicked out of the country (or just outright shot), and seeing how the International Red Cross never grew the balls necessary to actually "inspect" his prisons and mass graves....I'd say the Shi'a are looking to wipe out the Sunni. And I'd also say that Iran is doing it's part to further just that. I'd also say that Saudi Arabia will be feeling the Shi'a pressure when Iraq and Iran team up against it. Kuwait will also be sucking.

To answer your question, we got the Kurds some autonomy, and they are a pain in the ass for Iran, Turkey, the Shi'a, and the Sunni. If the Shi'a manage to wipe out the Sunni, they're still going to have to deal with the Wahabbi and ethnic Kurds.


And it's entirely possible some good could come out of that very position.

[Skybird]

To answer your question, we got the Kurds some autonomy, and they are a pain in the ass for Iran, Turkey, the Shi'a, and the Sunni. If the Shi'a manage to wipe out the Sunni, they're still going to have to deal with the Wahabbi and ethnic Kurds.

My question...?

And it's entirely possible some good could come out of that very position.

And it is also entirely possible that tomorrow I win the jackpot in Lotto, and on X-mas get abducted by an UFO and get genetically mutated into the master of all universe.

[Sea Demon]

;)
And it is also entirely possible that tomorrow I win the jackpot in Lotto, and on X-mas get abducted by an UFO and get genetically mutated into the master of all universe.

:hmm: I guess you didn't listen to the Iraqi President yesterday thanking the USA for liberating Iraq, and looking forward to taking more control of it. He seemed rather upbeat about it. Fact is, right now, there is less death going on. Things are looking up, but like my friend over there right now said, don't listen to the media. He's said before that there are many challenges, violent spots of terrorist resistance left, and we know that terrorists are terrorizing the local population. What's new???But we're trying everything in our power to stabilize the situation. And my friend Chris volunteered happily to go back, and knows more than you about the situation Skybird. You read the internet, he's actually there.

Maybe someday you'll realize that the USA is actually your friend. ;)

[Skybird]

Yaddayaddayadda. In five years, at the latest, no one will talk like that anymore. Promised.

Concerning the Iraqi president - anyone out there taking that jester serious...? He does a politican's typical job: glossing things over.

Soldiers tend to stubbornly believe exclusively what motivates them for their mission. Cause if they start to question the mission, the morale goes down. I have sympathy for that. Who wants to realize that he is being send into war for lies, and on a lost mission? Realising that really can ruin your day - and the days you still have to spend there. so keep up the sweet dream, as long as possible. Maybe you can win some more minutes before the rough awakening.

And what has all that to do with the detoriating situation concerning torture over there, practiced from all sides? It has been reported soince over a year, by many different medias, correspondents, organisations over the last year - not only by the UN now.

[Skybird]

Maybe someday you'll realize that the USA is actually your friend. ;)
Judging by it's unrealistic policies, a very debile friend, and not less retarded than it's European "partner". Two idiots walking together - do their IQs add up for a better score...?

[SUBMAN1]

Yaddayaddayadda. In five years, at the latest, no one will talk like that anymore. Promised.

Concerning the Iraqi president - anyone out there taking that jester serious...? He does a politican's typical job: glossing things over.

Soldiers tend to stubbornly believe exclusively what motivates them for their mission. Cause if they start to question the mission, the morale goes down. I have sympathy for that. Who wants to realize that he is being send into war for lies, and on a lost mission? Realising that really can ruin your day - and the days you still have to spend there. so keep up the sweet dream, as long as possible. Maybe you can win some more minutes before the rough awakening.

And what has all that to do with the detoriating situation concerning torture over there, practiced from all sides? It has been reported soince over a year, by many different medias, correspondents, organisations over the last year - not only by the UN now.

I guess if you knew that you were doing a mission for a bunch of lies, it might affect your moral. Good thing that what they are fighting for is the right thing!!! Most of those soldiers have a "Brain" Skybird and can figure out that they are doing the world a favor! Maybe one day you will figure it out too! :p

-S

[Skybird]

Stars shining bright above you,
night breezes seem to whipser I love you,
birds singing in a sycamore tree
dream a little dream of me.

Sweet dreams till sunbeams find you -
Sweet dreams that leave all worries behind you.
But in your dreams, whatever they be,
Dream a little dream of me.

[bradclark1]

ttp://p8.news.re2.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060921/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_casey_interview_2;_ylt=AjE7fLB_p5NCIpHdSQbFwI ZX6GMA;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,11069-2368770,00.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/19/AR2006091901341.html

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0921/dailyUpdate.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/20/AR2006092001716.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5052138.stm

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/09/16/iraq.main/index.html

Just an interesting piece:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-letter20sep20,1,226790.story?coll=la-headlines-world&ctrack=1&cset=true

[Tchocky]

The "terrorists don't respect GC" argument is wearing thin..

1) This isnt really about whoever you're fighting against, it's about your country's respect and self-image. I've used the slippery-slope argument so often in the last few years I'm not bothered anymore.

1a) How the hell can you fight "terror"? It's a bleedin' tactic, not a country.

2) Is this really about "clarifying" the GC? There would not be this kind of fuss if this was over a legal term-switching. W wants to be able to do things he cant legally do/has just been found out doing.

[The Noob]

You right Wing Republicans...are...arrrrg! :nope:
A unfriendly bunch of war-for-profit people who think Europeans are Stupid fools. I know a Friend from America, he's now here in Austria. And Hell, he finally did Realise how much USA *Add Insult Here*.

Maybe you all should come over here and try it out!

Time for a Song Parody.

This is the USA, Mister Jones
No free health insurance or prepaid telephones
You had your Money in wallet before
But you won't have it there any more (Credit Cards)

This is the USA, Mister Green
We like the Guns nice and clean
You had a Policman to kill your Criminals before
But he won't help you out any more

Do what the Employer command
They're in the Republican Party and not in a band

This is the USA, Mister Brown
You and your Gun went to town
The Mugger had you worried about this Street
And he won't worry you anymore *Gunshot Sound*

[August]

Haha you people are going to be so mad when you see who we elect as our next president.

[Ishmael]

How do you know there will be an election after this one? Bush thinks he's called by God to lead this country until the job is done. How do you know he will leave office?

[The Noob]

Haha you people are going to be so mad when you see who we elect as our next president.
Maybe. If you AGAIN "Elect" (If you can call it that) a Republican Cowboy like Bush for President, there will be a Very angry Post here. And after this President (Wich will be Controlled by the Bush's, thier Money and Companys), there will be again: Right, a Bush! :nope:

Nostradamus was right.

http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/9287/nostradamusso4.jpg
http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/6149/bushidioteb5.jpg

Bush thinks he's called by God to lead this country until the job is done.
Like the Pope. Pope Bush. :roll:

But in the end it's all a Conspirancy by the three stooges.

http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/5894/threestoogesfq6.jpg

[August]

How do you know there will be an election after this one? Bush thinks he's called by God to lead this country until the job is done. How do you know he will leave office?

Well, i'd be willing to bet you anything that he will, seeing as how there's this llittle thing called the 22nd Amendment to the US Consitution.

"No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term."

[August]

the usual idiotic blather

So says the guy whose country started the 1st world war and gave the world Hitler. BTW your comical propaganda photoshops are a bit dated. Colin Powell hasn't been Sec of State for almost 2 years now.

[The Noob]

the usual pro America cilce Blather
I AM NO NAZI GODDAMNIT!!! :stare:

Not all Austrians are Nazis. Many are, but not me. I'm the only one Left. Left.

[Immacolata]

the usual idiotic blather

So says the guy whose country started the 1st world war and gave the world Hitler. BTW your comical propaganda photoshops are a bit dated. Colin Powell hasn't been Sec of State for almost 2 years now.

So says the guy whose country gave us Bush, secret CIA prisons and an Iraq invasion that none of us have figured out why exactly was necessary in the first place.

[Ishmael]

How do you know there will be an election after this one? Bush thinks he's called by God to lead this country until the job is done. How do you know he will leave office?

Well, i'd be willing to bet you anything that he will, seeing as how there's this llittle thing called the 22nd Amendment to the US Consitution.

"No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term."


So what? That's just a part of the Constitution. The thing that Bush referred to as"just a piece of paper."

In wartime, his idea of the unitary executive gives him the power to suspend the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Why do you think Kellogg, Brown & Root are building concentration camps in this country for Homeland Security? He can declare anyone a terrorist anytime for any reason at all with no legal recourse to the victim. So when they round all of us evil, traitorous, liberal democrats will you come visit us in the camps? I'm sure I'll be there. Just ask for Ivan Denisovitch.

[scandium]

the usual idiotic blather
So says the guy whose country started the 1st world war and gave the world Hitler. BTW your comical propaganda photoshops are a bit dated. Colin Powell hasn't been Sec of State for almost 2 years now.
So says the guy whose country gave us Bush, secret CIA prisons and an Iraq invasion that none of us have figured out why exactly was necessary in the first place.

You left out Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, the wiretapping at the UN, the withdrawl and undermining of every International Treaty from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to the Geneva Conventions to Kyoto, and $75/barrel oil prices that we all have to pay now (which was $25/barrel in 2000)... and we're still not even scratching the damage done to the world by this halfwitted jackass of a "President" (the complete refusal to even acknowledge, let alone address, Climate Change could ultimately be the most disasterous for us all, since the US contribution to this problem is 25% of all fossil fuel emissions even though the US has less than 3% of the world's population... which about sums up the arrogance and malignant indifference of the Bush regime).

[The Noob]

You all can Conter Anti-Bush way better than me. :huh:

I have to get a patch for my Brain.

[Immacolata]

Erm, whoa. I just wanted to make sure that everybody knows, that when you point your finger at someone else, three are pointing straight back at you. Wasn't about to launch into a complete red faced, mouth foaming anti-bush tirade...

[scandium]

*shrug* he's hovered near Nixonian approval levels at home since his "re-election" for good reason... Hitler probably had higher approval levels even while Berlin was being bombed ;)

[TteFAboB]

I love Bush. Bush rocks. I want to vote for Bush again. Let's elect Bush our King. Bush for Pope. Bush is my idol. Long live Bush.

[fredbass]

You left out Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, the wiretapping at the UN.

My My, such nonsense. :down: The prisons we have are vacations away from home compared to the treatment they would have got if the U.S. had not been in charge. And those who will be in prisons as the U.S. hands over control to the Iraqis will be praying for our return or a quick death. :know: The wiretapping was a good idea by the way. :up:

[The Noob]

I love Bush. Bush rocks. I want to vote for Bush again. Let's elect Bush our King. Bush for Pope. Bush is my idol. Long live Bush.
This somehow sounds not serious. This is a Parody, right?!

:rotfl::rotfl:

The prisons we have are vacations away from home compared to the treatment they would have got if the U.S. had not been in charge.

Iraqi=Shoots Prisonier
USA=Tortures and shoots Prisonier

[fredbass]

Iraqi=Shoots Prisonier
USA=Tortures and shoots Prisonier

The correct way to show this is:

Iraqi=tortures, cuts off ears, fingers, toes and then shoots prisoners
USA=interrogate, intimidate, degrade, and humiliate but rarely hurt or shoot anybody

[SkvyWvr]

Iraqi=Shoots Prisonier
USA=Tortures and shoots Prisonier

Proof please.

[The Noob]

Iraqi=Shoots Prisonier
USA=Tortures and shoots Prisonier
The correct way to show this is:

Iraqi=tortures, cuts off ears, fingers, toes and then shoots prisoners
USA=interrogate, intimidate, degrade, and humiliate but rarely hurt or shoot anybody

I have to add something.

USA=interrogate, intimidate, degrade, and humiliate but rarely hurt or shoot anybody except in thier secret prisons where they throw in everyone who strongly dislikes america and accuses them Terrorists

[August]

the usual idiotic blather
So says the guy whose country started the 1st world war and gave the world Hitler. BTW your comical propaganda photoshops are a bit dated. Colin Powell hasn't been Sec of State for almost 2 years now.
So says the guy whose country gave us Bush, secret CIA prisons and an Iraq invasion that none of us have figured out why exactly was necessary in the first place.

I feel comfortable with the comparison.

[August]

So what? That's just a part of the Constitution. The thing that Bush referred to as"just a piece of paper."

Link please...

[fredbass]

I have to add something.

USA=interrogate, intimidate, degrade, and humiliate but rarely hurt or shoot anybody except in thier secret prisons where they throw in everyone who strongly dislikes america and accuses them Terrorists

Your opinion sounds quite rediculous, but if the so called secret prison helps Americas fight against terrorism then you won't find me complaining about it.

[The Noob]

Your opinion sounds quite rediculous, but if the so called secret prison helps Americas fight against terrorism then you won't find me complaining about it.

Yeah, very "Americanny" to justify everything with the Fight on Terrorism. :lol:

But sure, "Ahh amerca has to fight terrorism tho help the world and save my Behind blah blah blah". LOL'd about such stuff. The only thing you did was Imprisonating Harmless Commies and USA Haters. Let such People free and Concentrate on Hunting down Osama.

[SkvyWvr]

Your opinion sounds quite rediculous, but if the so called secret prison helps Americas fight against terrorism then you won't find me complaining about it.

Yeah, very "Americanny" to justify everything with the Fight on Terrorism. :lol:

But sure, "Ahh amerca has to fight terrorism tho help the world and save my Behind blah blah blah". LOL'd about such stuff. The only thing you did was Imprisonating Harmless Commies and USA Haters. Let such People free and Concentrate on Hunting down Osama.

:o :o :o Does anyone have any Idea what he is ranting about???

[fredbass]

:o :o :o Does anyone have any Idea what he is ranting about???

Not really.:roll:

[Perilscope]

:o :o :o Does anyone have any Idea what he is ranting about???Never did, never will :D

[tycho102]

Your opinion sounds quite rediculous, but if the so called secret prison helps Americas fight against terrorism then you won't find me complaining about it.
Yeah, very "Americanny" to justify everything with the Fight on Terrorism.

We also use the "War on Drugs", the "War on Communism", and "The War on Middle-America" to justify things. Our Bible-Belt has a "War on Sexuality" and "War on Naked Chicks", but it's really just social engineering.

[The Noob]

:o :o :o Does anyone have any Idea what he is ranting about???Never did, never will :D

That i dislike america and how it behaves.

[August]

:o :o :o Does anyone have any Idea what he is ranting about???Never did, never will :D
That i dislike america and how it behaves.

Yeah we got that... :roll:

[Onkel Neal]

:o :o :o Does anyone have any Idea what he is ranting about???Never did, never will :D

That i dislike america and how it behaves.

You dislike America? :cry:

What, are you Darth Vader?

[The Noob]

You dislike America? :cry:

Don't cry Neal, we can still be Friends...:lol:


What, are you Darth Vader?

No. I'm someone else. :D
http://www.startreklives.de/crew/images/chekov.gif
Chekov: Captain, i tell you, Communism works!
Kirk: Shout up Pavel! Keep your eyes on the Screen!
Chekov: Yes Sir!

:rotfl:

[Onkel Neal]

Ha! Don't accuse me of crying, I'll give you the Mother of all Nurse avatars :ping:

[The Noob]

Ha! Don't accuse me of crying, I'll give you the Mother of all Nurse avatars :ping:

Holy C***!

*Hides in Turbolift*

[Skybird]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5371394.stm

I wonder if not stabilizing the situation after one has waged war, not taking enough care of security, and protecting the public, while one is operating with numerically too inferior forces, also should not be covered by the GC. Torture to death is common practice now in Iraq, and 6600 murders in the running two months is a terrible high number.


Torture is indeed at appalling levels in Iraq. Everyone, it seems, from the Iraqi forces to the militias to the anti-US insurgents, now routinely use torture on the people they kill. (...) The number of violent deaths for July and August reached a total of 6,600 - 13% higher than the figure for the previous two-month figure. They come at a time when 147,000 American soldiers are deployed in Iraq, the majority of them in the area around Baghdad. In recent months, reinforcements have been brought in to try to curb the violence. (...) Some 147,000 soldiers may seem a large number, and it is more than the US Department of Defense had been hoping to deploy in Iraq by now. But the overwhelming majority of them are not out on the streets, stopping the bombings and kidnappings and murders. The total number of fighting soldiers in the American force is probably about 18,000 - quite a small number, given the area they have to cover and the size of the problem. (...) The Americans have never put enough foot patrols in the streets, and they long ago lost control of many towns and cities as a result. (...) The US Department of Defense has now provided another measure of the problem it faces. Its latest opinion poll carried out in Iraq indicates that, among the five million Sunni Muslims there, about 75% now support the armed insurgency against the coalition. This compares with 14% in the first opinion poll the Defense Department carried out back in 2003. It is a catastrophic loss of support, and there is no sign whatever that it can be effectively reversed. (...) The rise in hostility to the US forces is clearly linked to the onslaught against the town of Falluja in 2004. This, we are told, was ordered directly by the White House and the Department of Defense after the bodies of four American defence contractors were hung from a bridge in April 2004. The ferocity of the attack by the US marines persuaded large numbers of Iraqi Sunnis that the Americans were their enemies. (...) But the latest crop of figures indicate that complete victory for the US, whatever that might mean, is now out of the question.

For God's sake and reason, get thiose troops out of there. So that after their invasion and actions have triggered this violence, they must not load even more moral responsebility on their shoulders for not carrying out sufficient action, but still participating in the overall situation - by simply being there, for nothing. It is pure cynism to say one cares for one's troops and supports them - but leave them in a hopeless mess like this if there is nothing anymore that they can acchieve or do. Or does anyone beloieves a future president will send in another 150 thousand troops as reinforcements?

[The Noob]

Holy Muck, i wasn't aware it was that bad down there!

[The Avon Lady]

What, are you Darth Vader?
No. I'm someone else. :D
http://www.startreklives.de/crew/images/chekov.gif
Chekov: Captain, i tell you, Communism works!
Kirk: Shout up Pavel! Keep your eyes on the Screen!
Chekov: Yes Sir!

Will you be the tattered shoe or the ripped boot (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfIpnd7wN8o)?

[SubSerpent]

@SkyBird


Great last post Mate! :up:


I've been telling everyone that this was going to be a pointless war with no winners. Obviously Iraq is now a much worse place to be than it was prior to the war. But, that's good ole America for you though. Always poking its nose into other countries foreign affairs and starting more trouble there than what was there previously. :nope:

[Happy Times]

Im also starting to think that pulling out of Iraq and Afganistan would be wise right away. Instead of waiting year or two for the inevitable. Then start training for the next battles, with using lessons learned from these two places, and coming up with a plan how these battles would be decisive victories. Any ideas? Strictly minimazing casualties (for both sides), the least costly method could be to nuke capitals of Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Iran for a start. PS. Unconditional surrender, non negotiable.

[Skybird]

Im also starting to think that pulling out of Iraq and Afganistan would be wise right away. Is it really you speaking...? :-j

[The Noob]

What, are you Darth Vader? No. I'm someone else. :D
http://www.startreklives.de/crew/images/chekov.gif
Chekov: Captain, i tell you, Communism works!
Kirk: Shout up Pavel! Keep your eyes on the Screen!
Chekov: Yes Sir!
Will you be the tattered shoe or the ripped boot (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfIpnd7wN8o)?

Ripped boot. :lol:

[Happy Times]

Im also starting to think that pulling out of Iraq and Afganistan would be wise right away. Is it really you speaking...? :-j Lost my faith, anyone isnt comitted to anything meaningful yet, like taking care of Pakistanis and Saudis. Chasing insurgents in Iraq and UBL in Afganistan/Pakistan doesnt really do nothing, but play to the hands of the enemy. Its also wrong towards the military to demand results, without giving them the tools to do it with. Our societes are so weak these days.. Too many are too cowardly, too lazy and too stupid to be interested in the common good of their community, country or culture. Its going to get worse before it gets better. By the end of it all, i doubt anyone will remember the Geneva convention. :rotfl:

[Fish]

Im also starting to think that pulling out of Iraq and Afganistan would be wise right away. Instead of waiting year or two for the inevitable. Then start training for the next battles, with using lessons learned from these two places, and coming up with a plan how these battles would be decisive victories. Any ideas? .

Ask Rumsfeld. :up:

[Oberon]

Im also starting to think that pulling out of Iraq and Afganistan would be wise right away. Instead of waiting year or two for the inevitable. Then start training for the next battles, with using lessons learned from these two places, and coming up with a plan how these battles would be decisive victories. Any ideas? .

Ask Rumsfeld. :up:

There are known knowns. These are things that we know we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.

:rock: :rock: :rock: :rock: :rock:

[SkvyWvr]

the usual idiotic blather
So says the guy whose country started the 1st world war and gave the world Hitler. BTW your comical propaganda photoshops are a bit dated. Colin Powell hasn't been Sec of State for almost 2 years now.
So says the guy whose country gave us Bush, secret CIA prisons and an Iraq invasion that none of us have figured out why exactly was necessary in the first place.

You left out Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, the wiretapping at the UN, the withdrawl and undermining of every International Treaty from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to the Geneva Conventions to Kyoto, and $75/barrel oil prices that we all have to pay now (which was $25/barrel in 2000)... and we're still not even scratching the damage done to the world by this halfwitted jackass of a "President" (the complete refusal to even acknowledge, let alone address, Climate Change could ultimately be the most disasterous for us all, since the US contribution to this problem is 25% of all fossil fuel emissions even though the US has less than 3% of the world's population... which about sums up the arrogance and malignant indifference of the Bush regime).

I love reading your rantings. It's like the sunday comics. You have managed to blame almost 100 years of fossil fuel emissions, the fact that Americans love their big cars, the price of oil, the red spot on Jupiter and countless other ridiculous things on the Bush administration. Now as far as I know, Bush hasn't been in office a full 2 terms, yet he has single handedly managed to destroy the planet. Why are you not mentioning the dramatic drop in gas prices in the last few weeks. I know, it's Clinton's administration that should recieve the praise for that, right.

[Perilscope]

Why are you not mentioning the dramatic drop in gas prices in the last few weeks. I know, it's Clinton's administration that should recieve the praise for that, right.
huh! for that its neither Bush or Clinton, but in part because this year hurricanes have been quite quiet down south. :yep:

[August]

Why are you not mentioning the dramatic drop in gas prices in the last few weeks. I know, it's Clinton's administration that should recieve the praise for that, right. huh! for that its neither Bush or Clinton, but in part because this year hurricanes have been quite quiet down south. :yep:

Yeah, but for the past 6 years the Democrats have been saying Bush is responsible for high gas prices. It stands to reason that if he's responsible then he's responsible for them lowering as well, no?

[Perilscope]

Yeah, but for the past 6 years the Democrats have been saying Bush is responsible for high gas prices. It stands to reason that if he's responsible then he's responsible for them lowering as well, no?Don't forget what I wrote, I said "in part". Doesn't mean it's all because this year hurricanes have been quiet, but "in part". In addition, the OECD and OPEC did is part too, which the USA isn't member of the latter, thus no power on the price they export to us, sadly.

Another "in part", the fact that the Iranian nuclear crisis as calmed down, them(Iran) they are part of the OPEC, in other words, Iran holds heavy cards when it comes to the worlds oil price, believe it or not, or like it or not.:D

Therefore, many "in parts" make up for the oil prices you see lately, even here in Canada the price as dropped. My point is, it's not only a single leader who will decide on the oil price. Sure, Bush can help is country by doing this and that, but not by much, it is only another "in part" that helps. :D

[August]

Yeah, but for the past 6 years the Democrats have been saying Bush is responsible for high gas prices. It stands to reason that if he's responsible then he's responsible for them lowering as well, no?Don't forget what I wrote, I said "in part". Doesn't mean it's all because this year hurricanes have been quiet, but "in part". In addition, the OECD and OPEC did is part too, which the USA isn't member of the latter, thus no power on the price they export to us, sadly.

Another "in part", the fact that the Iranian nuclear crisis as calmed down, them(Iran) they are part of the OPEC, in other words, Iran holds heavy cards when it comes to the worlds oil price, believe it or not, or like it or not.:D

Therefore, many "in parts" make up for the oil prices you see lately, even here in Canada the price as dropped. My point is, it's not only a single leader who will decide on the oil price. Sure, Bush can help is country by doing this and that, but not by much, it is only another "in part" that helps. :D

I understand all that. My post was a tounge in cheek reference to the blame Bush for everything crowd.

[SkvyWvr]

Why are you not mentioning the dramatic drop in gas prices in the last few weeks. I know, it's Clinton's administration that should recieve the praise for that, right.
huh! for that its neither Bush or Clinton, but in part because this year hurricanes have been quite quiet down south. :yep:

Exactly, but if the season had been bad, and the prices continued climbing, Bush would have been blamed.

[SkvyWvr]

Yeah, but for the past 6 years the Democrats have been saying Bush is responsible for high gas prices. It stands to reason that if he's responsible then he's responsible for them lowering as well, no?Don't forget what I wrote, I said "in part". Doesn't mean it's all because this year hurricanes have been quiet, but "in part". In addition, the OECD and OPEC did is part too, which the USA isn't member of the latter, thus no power on the price they export to us, sadly.

Another "in part", the fact that the Iranian nuclear crisis as calmed down, them(Iran) they are part of the OPEC, in other words, Iran holds heavy cards when it comes to the worlds oil price, believe it or not, or like it or not.:D

Therefore, many "in parts" make up for the oil prices you see lately, even here in Canada the price as dropped. My point is, it's not only a single leader who will decide on the oil price. Sure, Bush can help is country by doing this and that, but not by much, it is only another "in part" that helps. :D

That is also my point but others, whom I responded to, seem to think differently

[SkvyWvr]

I understand all that. My post was a tounge in cheek reference to the blame Bush for everything crowd.

Oh. I forgot to mention Plutos expulsion from the solar system. That had to be because of Bush.:roll:

[Perilscope]

I understand all that. My post was a tounge in cheek reference to the blame Bush for everything crowd.
I hate Bush myself, but I understand too much how government works to blame only him, or not to blame at all if not necessary. The whole cabinet takes decisions, not only him. Bush isn't that clever, but he isn't that stupid, or else he would have failed school altogether and never would have had the chance for presidency.

Many people in this forum, and elsewhere, blame everything on Bush and "blindly". Some hate America, thus blame Bush, some hate is face, so Bush is to blame, and some others simply doesn't understand nothing at all, thus blame Bush.

In all history all presidents and in any country have taken sh*t from left and right, even the dam Iranian president is hated by his own people to a certain point. Nobody will ever escape that.

There are times to rightfully blame, and there are times to rightfully acclaim. The problem is that the good deeds one makes are never remembered and the bad ones remembered. Shame on humans. :D

[scandium]

I understand all that. My post was a tounge in cheek reference to the blame Bush for everything crowd.
Oh. I forgot to mention Plutos expulsion from the solar system. That had to be because of Bush.:roll:

Was it Harry S. Truman who was famous for having a sign on his desk reading "The buck stops here."?

When has GWB ever taken responsibility for any of the catastrophes that have occured on his watch? On 9/11 he sat in a classroom reading My Pet Goat while the country was under attack yet came out of it as a hero with US support at an all time high across the world, a unified house and senate, and a 90% approval rating; 6 years later his approval rating has been stuck in the toilet, partisanship, bickering, nationalism, and hatred toward the US are at levels never known before - and yet you don't think he has anything to do with that?

Whose decision was it to, solely, as Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces, to invade Iraq even though there was only a slim majority of support for it at home (and only after a 6 months systematicly and continually linking Iraq to 9/11, which we know is false, and claiming Iraq was an "eminent threat" to the US which we know is false, and that the US would be greeted as liberators, which we know is false) and overwhelming opposition to it abroad.

Then there's Katrina and "you're doing a heckuva job Brownie"; Brownie being the former Horse Commissioner that Bush put in charge of FEMA and who was obviously in way over his head when called on to perform the job Bush had appointed him to do.

That's just two classic examples of collosal screwups that Bush's fingerprints are all over - one would usually be enough for a person with any sense of decency and integrity to admit to himself that he is in over his head, and resign and let someone competent take over. But Bush doesn't even admit mistakes, he just ignores them or passes the buck.

[Onkel Neal]

....That's just two classic examples of collosal screwups that Bush's fingerprints are all over - one would usually be enough for a person with any sense of decency and integrity to admit to himself that he is in over his head, and resign and let someone competent take over. ...

Hi there! Satan here, just wanted to say keep up the good work.

[August]

I understand all that. My post was a tounge in cheek reference to the blame Bush for everything crowd. I hate Bush myself, but I understand too much how government works to blame only him, or not to blame at all if not necessary. The whole cabinet takes decisions, not only him. Bush isn't that clever, but he isn't that stupid, or else he would have failed school altogether and never would have had the chance for presidency.

Many people in this forum, and elsewhere, blame everything on Bush and "blindly". Some hate America, thus blame Bush, some hate is face, so Bush is to blame, and some others simply doesn't understand nothing at all, thus blame Bush.

In all history all presidents and in any country have taken sh*t from left and right, even the dam Iranian president is hated by his own people to a certain point. Nobody will ever escape that.

There are times to rightfully blame, and there are times to rightfully acclaim. The problem is that the good deeds one makes are never remembered and the bad ones remembered. Shame on humans. :D
I agree. Some people, either through ignorance, simple mindedness or ulterior motive will attempt to pin their hatred upon the shoulders of one single man. "The Buck Stops Here"... yeah right, at the desk of the ultimate scapegoat.

What they fail to realize (or refuse to) is that in any organization the size of the US Federal government, anything the President does, or doesn't do, is the product of the input and guidance, and all too often down right sabotage of hundreds if not thousands of people both in and out of immediately recognizable positions of governmental power.

Now a peculiarity of the US Presidency is the constitutionalized two 4 year term limitiation in office. I think it's hard for people from parlimentary nations to understand the full ramifications of this. Practically from the moment a US President wins re-election his power begins to wane. A countdown begins to the day when he no longer will have the power to sign or veto bills, appoint or fire officals ect and when he no longer stands on "the Bully Pulpit" as one of my favorite presidents once termed it. Because of this during his second term he finds it increasingly difficult to persuade anyone to further his agenda and also increasingly finds them more and more often willing to "toss him under the bus" if it suits their own political futures.

As this process plays out with ever increasing effect his thoughts and efforts turn to his legacy. Not the legacy of tomorrow but the one of years, decades and centuries in the future. You have to remember that after leaving office a Presidents career, especially his policial career, is for all intents and purposes over. He goes into the unescapable retirement of "elder statesmanhood". Overqualified to do anything beyond speaking tours and writing books. His legacy is all he really has.

I disagree with you however about good deeds not being recognized. They eventually do but only when enough time has passed so that future generations have the ability to see their true long term effect.

[scandium]

....That's just two classic examples of collosal screwups that Bush's fingerprints are all over - one would usually be enough for a person with any sense of decency and integrity to admit to himself that he is in over his head, and resign and let someone competent take over. ...
Hi there! Satan here, just wanted to say keep up the good work.
Well maybe not quite, but consider this:

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/15035936/site/newsweek/

Selective Intelligence

Sept. 27, 2006 - The White House’s release of a dire National Intelligence Estimate on global terrorism has illustrated once again how easy it is to publicly misrepresent intelligence-community findings—especially when almost all of the key documents remained shrouded in secrecy.

Only two days ago, while attempting to knock down stories by The New York Times and other publications about the NIE, White House Press Secretary Tony Snow insisted to reporters that the document’s conclusions were entirely consistent with the public statements of the president and other Bush administration officials.

..

But the actual wording of the NIE contains sobering conclusions that, in tone and substance, are very different from what Bush and other administration officials have recently been saying about the government’s progress in the war on terror. Even more potentially problematic for the White House, intelligence-community officials say, there are at least two more secret studies underway that are likely to undercut the administration’s public positions on sensitive national-security issues.

The NIE, which is supposed to reflect the consensus judgment of the U.S. intelligence community, states that the global jihadist movement “is spreading and adapting to counter-terrorism efforts”; that the number of jihadists are “increasing in both number and geographic dispersion,” and that the war in Iraq had become “the cause celebre” for jihadis around the world, “breeding a deep resentment of U.S involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement.”
The first two paragraphs are just another example of an ongoing pattern of deception, intelligence manipulation, secrecy, and distortion by the current U.S. gov't to fix the facts around their agenda. The last paragraph, however, is especially damning because it illustrates in black and white that yet again the experts are right, have been right all along, and that the Bush admin efforts to win the "war on terror" are not only completely ineffective, they are actually fueling resentment toward the US and creating ever ripening conditions for terrorism to flourish and spread.

And that has consequences for all of us, not just the U.S., since the U.S. is not the only country to have to deal with the consequences. Which is why I'm so vocally critical of Bush and the sycophantic idiots he surrounds himself with - if U.S. policies only affected the U.S. then while I might be sympathetic, I probably wouldn't really care... however in a globalized world like this one where the U.S. dollar is the standard currency of the world and where the U.S. military has a presence in every corner and policies for every hemisphere, then your actions have profound effects for all of us, not just Americans.

*shrug* however little your vote is worth in this day and age of Diebold paperless electronic voting, the rest of us can only criticize... and wait for 2008 and hope that sanity in foreign policy returns.:-?

[The Avon Lady]

....That's just two classic examples of collosal screwups that Bush's fingerprints are all over - one would usually be enough for a person with any sense of decency and integrity to admit to himself that he is in over his head, and resign and let someone competent take over. ...
Hi there! Satan here, just wanted to say keep up the good work.
Well maybe not quite, but consider this:

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/15035936/site/newsweek/

Selective Intelligence
Selective Intelligence - how ironic a title.

Level headed people out there, consider this instead:

Yes, Our Iraq Policy Has Helped al Qaeda Recruit..........Especially when it was Clinton’s Iraq policy. (http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZDFhOGRlYjQxYjc1ZGZiOGU5MTgyODBiY2NiN2JhYWI)

Most important snippet:
If we’re to be honest, however, it would be preposterous to claim that anything President Clinton did — in Iraq or anyplace else — “caused” jihadist terrorism. Just as it is inane to argue now that our current Iraq policy is the “cause.”

Whether we wish to acknowledge it or not, jihadism is attractive to tens of millions of people in what is called the Muslim world. Out of a total population of about 1.3 billion, that may not be a very high percentage (although I daresay it is higher than we like to think). But it is the ideology that attracts recruits. Grievances are just rhetoric. If the bin Ladens did not have Iraq, or the Palestinians, or Lebanon, or Pope Benedict, or cartoons, or flushed Korans, or Dutch movies, or the Crusades, they’d figure out something else to beat the drums over. Or they’d make something up — there being lots of license to improvise when one purports to be executing Allah’s will.

It is bad enough when the Muslim charlatans opportunistically use American policies they don’t like for militant propaganda purposes. It is reprehensible when American politicians do it.
But, please, read it all. Some common sense, sorely lacking worldwide in this day and age.

[ReallyDedPoet]

You can tell the November US elections are drawing close. The Republicans trying to blame Clinton is a joke, just a distraction and political ploy leading to November.

If Clinton was such a concern regarding IRAQ, why are we only hearing about it now. Again the November elections.

[bradclark1]

Yes, Our Iraq Policy Has Helped al Qaeda Recruit …
Especially when it was Clinton’s Iraq policy.


Oh please!!! When was al Qaeda in Iraq before we invaded?

As far as the rest. What are we prepared to pay? We will be there a hundred years from now still fighting the terrorists. What have we accomplished in five years?
Just to hold we need to start executing suspected terrorists. The problem with that is that the "civilized" world doesn't have the stomach for it. Thats what the other arab states do because it's the only thing that works for the present goverments to stay in power. Kill those against you or be killed themselves. It's the law of the land.

[The Avon Lady]

Yes, Our Iraq Policy Has Helped al Qaeda Recruit …
Especially when it was Clinton’s Iraq policy.

Oh please!!! When was al Qaeda in Iraq before we invaded?
Sometimes, policies spill over borders and presidential terms. But you would have understood what the title meant had you simply read the article before commenting.

[tycho102]

Yes, Our Iraq Policy Has Helped al Qaeda Recruit …
Especially when it was Clinton’s Iraq policy.

Oh please!!! When was al Qaeda in Iraq before we invaded?

Not just al Qaeda.

Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Abu Nidal Organization, Hezbollah, Al-Gamaat Al-Islamiyya, HAMAS, Lashkar-e-Tayyiba, Abu Sayyaf (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Sayyaf), Hizbul Mujahideen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hizbul_Mujahideen), Muslim Brotherhood (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Brotherhood), CAIR, and another thousand or two that I don't have the time to find or list.

They are all supported by islamic tithes. Some (20% is what I figure) of it goes to build madarassas and mosques and clerical luxuries, and the rest (80%) goes to fund jihad. And it all went through Iraq, just the same as it goes through Egypt, Morocco, Algeria, Libya, Pakistan, Iran, Syria, Lebanon.

Jihad is jihad. It takes all sorts of people and skills. Some are better liars than others, and some are better marksmen than others.

[ASWnut101]

...quite quiet down south. :yep:



heh, try saying that five times very fast:cool:

[bradclark1]

Sometimes, policies spill over borders and presidential terms. But you would have understood what the title meant had you simply read the article before commenting.

What that opinion says is we didn't invade Iraq in 98 so we showed al Qaeda we were weak?
I would say there was no particular 'reason' for bin Laden to commit terrorism. You can't say Clinton didn't try to get him. What reason was there for Spain or the spoiled plots in France.
The reason is he's on a self imposed jihad and thats the only reason he needs.

[bradclark1]

They are all supported by islamic tithes. Some (20% is what I figure) of it goes to build madarassas and mosques and clerical luxuries, and the rest (80%) goes to fund jihad. And it all went through Iraq, just the same as it goes through Egypt, Morocco, Algeria, Libya, Pakistan, Iran, Syria, Lebanon.

Jihad is jihad. It takes all sorts of people and skills. Some are better liars than others, and some are better marksmen than others.

You forgot to mention the USA, UK, Canada, France, Spain, Italy. So should we invade ourselves. The USA was/is a big contributor for the IRA. Should the U.K. invade the USA. Should we invade France?

[ASWnut101]

BUSH YOU SILLY OLD...:x

Damnit, this sucks! The Genva Convention is a Good thing. Bush just wants to get rid of it so he can Torture and shoot everyone who he dislikes. THATS NAZILAND 2! This time it's no stupid bull****, this time it's serious!

The Problem is to define terrorism.

If this does not get clear, if you shout "America Sucks and all americans should die" (No offence against anyone, i am just making an excample) Bush can just say "He's a Terrorist, Torture him and Blow his Brain out".

Bush already did enought nazi-things, like saying "Torture is only Torture if it can kill you", and already did enough stupid and outright Facist things, like bringing people outta country to torture them. If they found out he wasn't anything bad, they thrown him in the woods of an unknown country! Secret Black CIA (Yes the are another form of Terrorists/Insurgents) Flights across Europe, Heard of it?

I know this sounds Stupid as hell, but this SERIOUSLY concerns me. The USA gets more Nazi alike every day. Lets make a Overview.

Nazi Germany

Discriminated
Jewish, Poles, Russians

Torturing Camps:
Concentration Camps

Army=Wehrmacht:
Does everything for thier Leader and Commits war Crimes

Gestapo:
Secret Police with Power over everything

Leader:
Uncle Adolf Heilstoned, der brave honest superman Fuehrer

Excuse to start war:
Attack of Poland on Germany (Germany only faked it in this case!)

Now Comes USA!

USA

Discriminated:
Islamists, Middle East People

Torturing Camps:
Secret Prisons, Abu Graib, Guantanamo

Army:
Does everything for thier Leader, and does war crimes too!

CIA, NSA, ect:
Secret Police with Power over everything

Leader:
Georgie Bush, the Clean Honest Democatic elected always says the thruth blah blah blah guy.

Excuse to start war:
Attack on the USA on 9/11. (True in this case)

Does anyone get the Pattern?

Anyway, the Point is, (Sorry but i can only express this in German, it's a...Redewedung here) "Der Zweck heiligt nicht die mittel!". It means you can't justify every action with that good what shall come out in the end. Because it is usually utter horsesh**.

You cannot justify the Torturing and Killing of People, even if they are Terrorists. You are going to thier level.

There is a great movie that shows what can come out of such stuff. It's called "The Siege" and it would not Suprise me if it is banned in America.

The Avon Lady, i would normally ask you "ARE YOU *MEEP*ING CRAZY?!" but i will not, since you can in my Opinion not judge this, since you are under terrorist Attacks for a Long time "down there" in Israel, and a certain hate has build up. It is right we need to Stop the terrorists. I hate Terrorism. It is GAY! The shall come out and FIGHT in a Open war, and not hide in thier holes like Bugs Bunny, but SUCH INHUMAN methods are just...wrong. We are Lowering to thier levels. We are going back in time...staight to Nazi Germany 1942.

Heil Bush! :nope:








Forgetting Someone, like Al-Quida (i really dont give a **** how its spelled)

Discriminated:
Christains, Jews, USA, Israel, anyone who dosent follow islam

Torturing Camps:
Basements of apartments in which beheadings, torture, dismemberment, ect. occur

Army:
Fanatical psycos who blow-up themselves, blow-up civilians, assasinate political leaders, slaughter Christains, Rape women, slaughter childeren, vow to "wipe Israel off the face of the Earth." should I keep going?


Seceret Police types:
Fanatics with money with power over everything

Leader:
Osama Bin Laden, Iranian "president," wealthy pakastani mountain dwellers

Excuse to start holy war:
Christains/Jews are the devils. Want to spread Islam all over the world.

Makes me (and how many other people) wonder just whoose side you're on.:nope: :stare:

[Happy Times]

BUSH YOU SILLY OLD...:x

Damnit, this sucks! The Genva Convention is a Good thing. Bush just wants to get rid of it so he can Torture and shoot everyone who he dislikes. THATS NAZILAND 2! This time it's no stupid bull****, this time it's serious!

The Problem is to define terrorism.

If this does not get clear, if you shout "America Sucks and all americans should die" (No offence against anyone, i am just making an excample) Bush can just say "He's a Terrorist, Torture him and Blow his Brain out".

Bush already did enought nazi-things, like saying "Torture is only Torture if it can kill you", and already did enough stupid and outright Facist things, like bringing people outta country to torture them. If they found out he wasn't anything bad, they thrown him in the woods of an unknown country! Secret Black CIA (Yes the are another form of Terrorists/Insurgents) Flights across Europe, Heard of it?

I know this sounds Stupid as hell, but this SERIOUSLY concerns me. The USA gets more Nazi alike every day. Lets make a Overview.

Nazi Germany

Discriminated
Jewish, Poles, Russians

Torturing Camps:
Concentration Camps

Army=Wehrmacht:
Does everything for thier Leader and Commits war Crimes

Gestapo:
Secret Police with Power over everything

Leader:
Uncle Adolf Heilstoned, der brave honest superman Fuehrer

Excuse to start war:
Attack of Poland on Germany (Germany only faked it in this case!)

Now Comes USA!

USA

Discriminated:
Islamists, Middle East People

Torturing Camps:
Secret Prisons, Abu Graib, Guantanamo

Army:
Does everything for thier Leader, and does war crimes too!

CIA, NSA, ect:
Secret Police with Power over everything

Leader:
Georgie Bush, the Clean Honest Democatic elected always says the thruth blah blah blah guy.

Excuse to start war:
Attack on the USA on 9/11. (True in this case)

Does anyone get the Pattern?

Anyway, the Point is, (Sorry but i can only express this in German, it's a...Redewedung here) "Der Zweck heiligt nicht die mittel!". It means you can't justify every action with that good what shall come out in the end. Because it is usually utter horsesh**.

You cannot justify the Torturing and Killing of People, even if they are Terrorists. You are going to thier level.

There is a great movie that shows what can come out of such stuff. It's called "The Siege" and it would not Suprise me if it is banned in America.

The Avon Lady, i would normally ask you "ARE YOU *MEEP*ING CRAZY?!" but i will not, since you can in my Opinion not judge this, since you are under terrorist Attacks for a Long time "down there" in Israel, and a certain hate has build up. It is right we need to Stop the terrorists. I hate Terrorism. It is GAY! The shall come out and FIGHT in a Open war, and not hide in thier holes like Bugs Bunny, but SUCH INHUMAN methods are just...wrong. We are Lowering to thier levels. We are going back in time...staight to Nazi Germany 1942.

Heil Bush! :nope:







Forgetting Someone, like Al-Quida (i really dont give a **** how its spelled)

Discriminated:
Christains, Jews, USA, Israel, anyone who dosent follow islam

Torturing Camps:
Basements of apartments in which beheadings, torture, dismemberment, ect. occur

Army:
Fanatical psycos who blow-up themselves, blow-up civilians, assasinate political leaders, slaughter Christains, Rape women, slaughter childeren, vow to "wipe Israel off the face of the Earth." should I keep going?


Seceret Police types:
Fanatics with money with power over everything

Leader:
Osama Bin Laden, Iranian "president," wealthy pakastani mountain dwellers

Excuse to start holy war:
Christains/Jews are the devils. Want to spread Islam all over the world.

Makes me (and how many other people) wonder just whoose side you're on.:nope: :stare: Funny :rotfl:But that about sums it up, sometimes its better to simplify things. "Peace or war, as you choose." , that was the only message the Roman diplomat had, at the start of the second Punic War in 218 BC, to the Carthaginians that had broken a treaty by invading a citystate allied to Rome. The Carhaginians tried to negotiate a new treaty, knowing that Rome was weak financially and militarily stretched out. But Romans realised that it was a decision that would decide their future. So their reply was the same, "Peace or war, as you choose."

[The Noob]

[...]

Makes me (and how many other people) wonder just whoose side you're on.:nope: :stare:

I'm on the side of Sweden circa 1978, thats my side.

Now you want to accuse me to collerborate with Radical Islamists...:nope:

I'm on the side of blowing away all radicals. But not all islamists are radical crazy ones, like some of your politicans want to make it look like.

My side is Left Wing. Your side is, i guess, Conservative right wing, like most US Citizens. Perfect setup for a flame war of ideoligys. :shifty:

(Warning: The last sentence was with sarcasm.)

[SkvyWvr]

I understand all that. My post was a tounge in cheek reference to the blame Bush for everything crowd.
Oh. I forgot to mention Plutos expulsion from the solar system. That had to be because of Bush.:roll:

Was it Harry S. Truman who was famous for having a sign on his desk reading "The buck stops here."?

When has GWB ever taken responsibility for any of the catastrophes that have occured on his watch? On 9/11 he sat in a classroom reading My Pet Goat while the country was under attack yet came out of it as a hero with US support at an all time high across the world, a unified house and senate, and a 90% approval rating; 6 years later his approval rating has been stuck in the toilet, partisanship, bickering, nationalism, and hatred toward the US are at levels never known before - and yet you don't think he has anything to do with that?

Whose decision was it to, solely, as Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces, to invade Iraq even though there was only a slim majority of support for it at home (and only after a 6 months systematicly and continually linking Iraq to 9/11, which we know is false, and claiming Iraq was an "eminent threat" to the US which we know is false, and that the US would be greeted as liberators, which we know is false) and overwhelming opposition to it abroad.

Then there's Katrina and "you're doing a heckuva job Brownie"; Brownie being the former Horse Commissioner that Bush put in charge of FEMA and who was obviously in way over his head when called on to perform the job Bush had appointed him to do.

That's just two classic examples of collosal screwups that Bush's fingerprints are all over - one would usually be enough for a person with any sense of decency and integrity to admit to himself that he is in over his head, and resign and let someone competent take over. But Bush doesn't even admit mistakes, he just ignores them or passes the buck.

Please show me some kind of proof that Bush has passed the buck.

[ASWnut101]

The last paragraph, however, is especially damning because it illustrates in black and white that yet again the experts are right, have been right all along, and that the Bush admin efforts to win the "war on terror" are not only completely ineffective, they are actually fueling resentment toward the US and creating ever ripening conditions for terrorism to flourish and spread.

Please scandium, tell me where the "war on terror" has been completely ineffective...

[Skybird]

The last paragraph, however, is especially damning because it illustrates in black and white that yet again the experts are right, have been right all along, and that the Bush admin efforts to win the &quot;war on terror&quot; are not only completely ineffective, they are actually fueling resentment toward the US and creating ever ripening conditions for terrorism to flourish and spread.

Please scandium, tell me where the &quot;war on terror&quot; has been completely ineffective...
Hm... Taleban back in Afghanistan, stronger than ever before in the last five years... The country constantly detoriating due to too many broken promises for support, aide and money transfer... more terror globally... more terrorists globally, and in Iraq... Al Quaeda succesfully transformed from an organization to a thinking pattern and motivation that now is carried by every wannabee-martyrer who never had any link to the original organisation... Iraq dismantled of any structures that could have prevented it from falling like a ripe apple to the Shia Iranian mullahs... economical costs in the many thousands of billions if one thinks beyond the immediate military costs... - I think you have asked the wrong question. the right question is: where has the WOT been effective...? We have multiplied our worries, not reduced them. So far exactly the opposite has been acchieved of what was wanted to be acchieved. The world is not safer, but more violant now. but the most important thing is: jihad has been massively accelerated, fueled, additonally motivated, assisted. We have lost time. Islam should payt us to serve it's public relation interests. The last three years we have proven that we are specialists in winning them additonal support and leading new jihad recruits to them. Incompetence, irgnorrance, arrogance, extremely bad planning and worse preparation in advance - stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid. WOT is a stupid phrase and thus an adequate description for the symptoms of this giant folly. And it has been waged in a stupid way from the beginning. Terror is just a weapon, we need to strike the ideology and thinking that makes use of it. additonally, military war is an all-or-nothing-at-all thing for me. You only should wage it if you are determined to completely wipe out your enemy and all and everything that supports him and keeps his strength intact - AT ALL COSTS, no matter hoe cruel they are. The Israelis don't understand that anymore. The Americans don't understand that anymore. And the other European nations also do not understand it anymore. We are too soft. we are not grim enough for war, and we are too noble for fighting a war like it needs to be fought. we make to many compromsies - in the name of humanitarianism and love. We love life, Islam loves death. Christian martyrers suffer defensively and passively, Islamic martyrers actively and aggressively kill enemies. We hold our other cheek to the enemy - they cut not the cheek, but the whole head. Christian armies, although superior in weaponry and armour, throughout the centuries had been outclassed in motivation and combat spirit by their Muslims attackers. Our noble attitude - is no match for Islam's lack of scruples. That's why we are loosing. we must stop wanting to change Islam, to make it weaker, it will not work. We must change ourselves, must become stronger, and giving up some of our "civilised" reason and scruples.

[ASWnut101]

And from what source did you see these from?

p.s. but I do agree with you about how the world is getting "soft."

The terrorist fly airplane into buildings, kill 3,000+
We drop bomb on Taliban safehouse, kill 20 civilians. America is now seen as barbarians to the outside world. half the world is now screaming "death to America"

plus many of you are missing a critical factor:
you blame our President,(dictator to The Noob), on everything that the US has done. In REALITY, he is not our ultimite decision maker, like in other countries. EVERYTHING related to this matter is actually passed through the SENATE, which is elected by the PEOPLE. President has little power compared to Senate and Congress. HE (Bush) IS NOT THE US's ULTAMITE DECISION MAKER. ITS THE SENATE, WHO ARE BEURACRATS ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE!

Many of you who live outside the US obviously have no clue about how our country runs. You just follow what your government says, and you accept that as reality. You belive what your government is telling you, while here in the USA, we belive what we feel is right. That is what makes us one of the most powerful in the world. FREEDOM OF SPEECH and the FREEDOM OF PRESS is something some of you apparently don't have in your States, Countries, and Colonies. You are beliveing in lies, whatever you are told to (even if inderectly). STOP BLAMING BUSH AS THE "MASTERMIND" BEHIND ALL OF THIS PRO-USA "TERROR."

-ASWnut

[August]

In REALITY, he is not our ultimite decision maker, like in other countries. EVERYTHING related to this matter is actually passed through the SENATE, which is elected by the PEOPLE. President has little power compared to Senate and Congress.


This has been pointed out to them more than once ASWnut.

[Skybird]

And from what source did you see these from?

p.s. but I do agree with you about how the world is getting "soft."

The terrorist fly airplane into buildings, kill 3,000+
We drop bomb on Taliban safehouse, kill 20 civilians. America is now seen as barbarians to the outside world. half the world is now screaming "death to America"

No one seriously complained when you sturkc Afghnaistan. when people complained abiut Iraq - then maybe this is because there were no terrorists there, and Saddam had nothing to do with 9-11, or Al Quaeda. you should been stayed focussed on Afghanistan, and leave Iraq alone - it was no more a dnager to anyone, Saddam'S teeth had been drawn - he could balk but not bite, plus he had the lack of sacrupels to crack down the religious extremists. But Afghnaistan now is close to falling back into the abyss you have promised them to lift out of. Half of the finacial oney being promised - never arrived. Support went down and down. Stupoid economical mistakes had been made, that forced many farmers to plant poppy again, if they wanted to survive. The military presence was so low that the Taleban were allowed to regroup, and come back - in force. And one of their major supporters, Pakistan, is presented to the public as an "ally".

With all that criticism Amnerica has earned for it's folly in Iraq - it just got what it deserved. when you make stuoid ideas, don'T expect other nations to join you althought hey warned you and told you that it would turn into exactly what you see now. It's your own responsebility. when my friend jumps out of the window, I do not jump behind him in misunderstood solidarity. Instead I try to talk it out of his head in advance and warn him that it is the fifth floor. If he still jumps, and survives, I afterwards tell him that he has behaved like an idiot.

[Happy Times]

Terror is just a weapon, we need to strike the ideology and thinking that makes use of it. additonally, military war is an all-or-nothing-at-all thing for me. You only should wage it if you are determined to completely wipe out your enemy and all and everything that supports him and keeps his strength intact - AT ALL COSTS, no matter hoe cruel they are. The Israelis don't understand that anymore. The Americans don't understand that anymore. And the other European nations also do not understand it anymore. We are too soft. we are not grim enough for war, and we are too noble for fighting a war like it needs to be fought. we make to many compromsies - in the name of humanitarianism and love. We love life, Islam loves death. Christian martyrers suffer defensively and passively, Islamic martyrers actively and aggressively kill enemies. We hold our other cheek to the enemy - they cut not the cheek, but the whole head. Christian armies, although superior in weaponry and armour, throughout the centuries had been outclassed in motivation and combat spirit by their Muslims attackers. Our noble attitude - is no match for Islam's lack of scruples. That's why we are loosing. we must stop wanting to change Islam, to make it weaker, it will not work. We must change ourselves, must become stronger, and giving up some of our "civilised" reason and scruples. Il simplify if someone didnt get Skybirds post. We have to start killing them in large numbers untill they surrender and do what we demand. And to anyone wondering , the answer is yes, i am ready to personally fight in this war. Are you?:p

[August]

With all that criticism Amnerica has earned for it's folly in Iraq - it just got what it deserved. when you make stuoid ideas, don'T expect other nations to join you althought hey warned you and told you that it would turn into exactly what you see now. It's your own responsebility. when my friend jumps out of the window, I do not jump behind him in misunderstood solidarity. Instead I try to talk it out of his head in advance and warn him that it is the fifth floor. If he still jumps, and survives, I afterwards tell him that he has behaved like an idiot.

"Far better is it to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure... than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much, because they live in a gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat." -- Teddy Roosevelt.

[scandium]

With all that criticism Amnerica has earned for it's folly in Iraq - it just got what it deserved. when you make stuoid ideas, don'T expect other nations to join you althought hey warned you and told you that it would turn into exactly what you see now. It's your own responsebility. when my friend jumps out of the window, I do not jump behind him in misunderstood solidarity. Instead I try to talk it out of his head in advance and warn him that it is the fifth floor. If he still jumps, and survives, I afterwards tell him that he has behaved like an idiot.
"Far better is it to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure... than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much, because they live in a gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat." -- Teddy Roosevelt.
That's a joke right? Afghan was done on the cheap using the Northern Alliance as a proxy on the ground, assisted by a few thousand Spec Forces troops, and NATO Air Power for support; and post-invasion we've maintained a rotating international force of a few thousand troops who've accomplished little more than fight a rear-gaurd action to try and hang onto (barely) our "victory".

And you definitely can't be talking about Iraq, for there is nothing mighty or glorious about a country of 300 million with the world's largest, most technologically advanced, and one of the best trained defeating an already defeated 3rd rate army that has no Air Force, no heavy armour, has less than 1/10th your population which has been reduced, after 2 wars and a decade of sanctions, to nearly 3rd world status and half of whose population was composed of children under the age of 16.

Nothing daring, mighty, or glorious about either of those half-assed easy victories that have since, through sheer incompetence and a complete and total denial of the post-invasion hurdles, have not only gone sour but worsened the very thing that these two campaigns are supposed to be part of a war on.

[ASWnut101]

With all that criticism Amnerica has earned for it's folly in Iraq - it just got what it deserved. when you make stuoid ideas, don'T expect other nations to join you althought hey warned you and told you that it would turn into exactly what you see now. It's your own responsebility. when my friend jumps out of the window, I do not jump behind him in misunderstood solidarity. Instead I try to talk it out of his head in advance and warn him that it is the fifth floor. If he still jumps, and survives, I afterwards tell him that he has behaved like an idiot.
"Far better is it to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure... than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much, because they live in a gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat." -- Teddy Roosevelt......defeated 3rd rate army that has no Air Force, no heavy armour......


Yes this may be true AFER Operation I.F., but I'm pretty sure that before Operation I.F., They had the Largest Army in the world, They HAD an Air Force, and they had plenty of tanks....just count the ones blown up in the desert.:) In fact, I think we never had more than 300,000 troops in country (Iraq) at one time.

[Narcosis]

People who react so angrily to Sending troops in to Iraq or when Israel defended her self, are like crabs you find on humans and are located in one area, where the sun don't shine.

You never hear or find these people, when 100,000s are being slaughtered in the Sudan under the gun of Muslim militias, or in Rwanda where a million were butchered by machetes a few years back.

Is this what you call "pacifists selective protesting"?

[bradclark1]

I think it's accepted that africans will always butcher each other to the end of time.
As an american, we have our fingers in enough pies so essentially I don't care about Sudan or Rwanda.
We are in Iraq and Israel is tied tight to us so those are the ones I care about.

[Iceman]

http://cyberallies.com/miscpics/time.jpg

[Fish]

Christian extremists! :nope: :nope: :nope:

[SkvyWvr]

How do you know there will be an election after this one? Bush thinks he's called by God to lead this country until the job is done. How do you know he will leave office?
You can't really believe this. It's nonsense and you know it.

[Immacolata]

Yeah that is quite far fetched. I do not believe you can put Bush in the same boats as third world dictators like Chavez or Bhumibol. He will of course honour the laws and hold an election by late 2008.

Besides the man is very outspoken on his mandate from the people, not Gawd.

[SubSerpent]

He will probably come up with some BS law to try to keep himself in power somehow and state that it's for the "good" of the American people! He'll think any other canidate for the job isn't going to "protect" America from terrorism.

BTW, I will laugh my a-- off when it doesn't happen and a Democrat takes the Whitehouse again and brings home the troops! I will think it's funny because it would be a HUGE slap in Bush's face to see someone else coming in a ruining his BIG plans for world domination and takeover. What will Bush do after that I wonder? Probably go hide under his bed in his jammies at his mommy and daddy's ranch in Texas thinking some terrorist is going to come after him! LOL!!! WHAT A PANSY!!!!:lol:

[ASWnut101]

the usual idiotic blather

So says the guy whose country started the 1st world war and gave the world Hitler. BTW your comical propaganda photoshops are a bit dated. Colin Powell hasn't been Sec of State for almost 2 years now.

So says the guy whose country gave us Bush, secret CIA prisons and an Iraq invasion that none of us have figured out why exactly was necessary in the first place.


What is with you non-Americans and "Secret CIA Prisons/Torture camps"
PROVE that they exist, and are not just some thing you heard off of Dale Gribble from King of the Hill.

[SubSerpent]

Abu Grav was one for instance... It was a torture camp! US Officials have covered that one up pretty good and put the blame on a few enlisted soldiers who were just following orders. Obviously an a high ranking officer would have and did know what was going on there. Orders from the president perhaps?

Just because it surfaced the way it did the US government was quick to "clean its hands" so to speak of any wrong doing. Of course we don't torture and humiliate the enemy, we are the US after all!

I smell BS and the odor seems to intensify the closer I get to Wash D.C.

[ASWnut101]

He will probably come up with some BS law to try to keep himself in power somehow and state that it's for the "good" of the American people! He'll think any other canidate for the job isn't going to "protect" America from terrorism.

BTW, I will laugh my a-- off when it doesn't happen and a Democrat takes the Whitehouse again and brings home the troops! I will think it's funny because it would be a HUGE slap in Bush's face to see someone else coming in a ruining his BIG plans for world domination and takeover. What will Bush do after that I wonder? Probably go hide under his bed in his jammies at his mommy and daddy's ranch in Texas thinking some terrorist is going to come after him! LOL!!! WHAT A PANSY!!!!:lol:


Yep, Will just see what happens when Hillary "whore" Clinton takes office. We will just see how good a Lib. runs the office. happend before: Lindon B. Johnson "lost" (if you could even call it that) vietnam, John F. Kennady: Did no better, Bill Clinton: Serbia (theres still fighting over there) His "great" effort to kill the worlds most wanted man (OBL). Lets see how well his wife does.

[SkvyWvr]

He will probably come up with some BS law to try to keep himself in power somehow and state that it's for the "good" of the American people! He'll think any other canidate for the job isn't going to "protect" America from terrorism.

BTW, I will laugh my a-- off when it doesn't happen and a Democrat takes the Whitehouse again and brings home the troops! I will think it's funny because it would be a HUGE slap in Bush's face to see someone else coming in a ruining his BIG plans for world domination and takeover. What will Bush do after that I wonder? Probably go hide under his bed in his jammies at his mommy and daddy's ranch in Texas thinking some terrorist is going to come after him! LOL!!! WHAT A PANSY!!!!:lol:

Ok. You win. I have now read the most childish thing ever. And just when I thought I'd see it all.:roll:

[SubSerpent]

I'd rather see Hillary in the Whitehouse than a repeat G.W. Bush.

BTW, there is no proof Hillary is a whore! She showed true composer and forgiveness to her husband who did something wrong. She is strong for this! Most women would have gone "all-out-ape-****" for the same thing!

This shows she has true character and she's not quick to rush to unneccesary war and violence unlike Bush who is a war fanatic.

[SkvyWvr]

I'd rather see Hillary in the Whitehouse than a repeat G.W. Bush.

BTW, there is no proof Hillary is a whore! She showed true composer and forgiveness to her husband who did something wrong. She is strong for this! Most women would have gone "all-out-ape-****" for the same thing!

This shows she has true character and she's not quick to rush to unneccesary war and violence unlike Bush who is a war fanatic.

She did that for political gain, son in effect she is a whore.

[SubSerpent]

He will probably come up with some BS law to try to keep himself in power somehow and state that it's for the "good" of the American people! He'll think any other canidate for the job isn't going to "protect" America from terrorism.

BTW, I will laugh my a-- off when it doesn't happen and a Democrat takes the Whitehouse again and brings home the troops! I will think it's funny because it would be a HUGE slap in Bush's face to see someone else coming in a ruining his BIG plans for world domination and takeover. What will Bush do after that I wonder? Probably go hide under his bed in his jammies at his mommy and daddy's ranch in Texas thinking some terrorist is going to come after him! LOL!!! WHAT A PANSY!!!!:lol:

Ok. You win. I have now read the most childish thing ever. And just when I thought I'd see it all.:roll:

Well the most childish thing I've SEEN is currently residing at the end of 1600 Pennsylvania ave.:yep:

[SubSerpent]

I'd rather see Hillary in the Whitehouse than a repeat G.W. Bush.

BTW, there is no proof Hillary is a whore! She showed true composer and forgiveness to her husband who did something wrong. She is strong for this! Most women would have gone "all-out-ape-****" for the same thing!

This shows she has true character and she's not quick to rush to unneccesary war and violence unlike Bush who is a war fanatic.

She did that for political gain, son in effect she is a whore.


Why do you think she did it for political gain? Her husband is no longer the president and she is still faithful to him.

Just because Bill was a man whore doesn't make her a whore!

[SkvyWvr]

I'd rather see Hillary in the Whitehouse than a repeat G.W. Bush.

BTW, there is no proof Hillary is a whore! She showed true composer and forgiveness to her husband who did something wrong. She is strong for this! Most women would have gone "all-out-ape-****" for the same thing!

This shows she has true character and she's not quick to rush to unneccesary war and violence unlike Bush who is a war fanatic.

She did that for political gain, son in effect she is a whore.


Why do you think she did it for political gain? Her husband is no longer the president and she is still faithful to him.

Just because Bill was a man whore doesn't make her a whore!

Come on, she wanted to give the impression of strength you have apparently bought into.

[SubSerpent]

Frankly I don't care if Hillary or Joe Blow wins the upcoming election as long as the first thing they do in office is to bring home the troops and leave Iraq and the middle east alone. The second thing they should do is have Bush deported to Iraq - after all, he made it - he should live there! :yep:

[ASWnut101]

You say Abu Grav, yes?
it wasn't very secret you know, but maby just to your government it was

And you say that they were following orders?
Do you forget the fact that more than 20 (twenty) beheadings and mutilations had occured on US troops? a little bit of revenge, maby. I'm sure if you were a troop that you would be pissed if your friend was beheaded "in the name of 'peaceful' islam"

And I didn't know that taking pictures of a naked person was torture to them, did you?

[SubSerpent]

I'd rather see Hillary in the Whitehouse than a repeat G.W. Bush.

BTW, there is no proof Hillary is a whore! She showed true composer and forgiveness to her husband who did something wrong. She is strong for this! Most women would have gone "all-out-ape-****" for the same thing!

This shows she has true character and she's not quick to rush to unneccesary war and violence unlike Bush who is a war fanatic.

She did that for political gain, son in effect she is a whore.


Why do you think she did it for political gain? Her husband is no longer the president and she is still faithful to him.

Just because Bill was a man whore doesn't make her a whore!

Come on, she wanted to give the impression of strength you have apparently bought into.

I haven't bought into anything. Fact is, people don't stay with people they hate or feel betrayed by. She still sleeps in bed with Bill each night and still hugs and kisses him just like she did prior to the scandal that the Rebpublicans created. I'm not doubting that Clinton got his jolly's sucked off by a whore secretary who is now a millionaire BTW. Clinton wasn't the first president or the last president to have this though. There are reports that go all the way back to George-freakin-Washington's time as the president that claim some presidents from him on may have had homosexual encounters and some might have even raped a few women (black and white).

[SkvyWvr]

Frankly I don't care if Hillary or Joe Blow wins the upcoming election as long as the first thing they do in office is to bring home the troops and leave Iraq and the middle east alone. The second thing they should do is have Bush deported to Iraq - after all, he made it - he should live there! :yep:

It's funny how you can mention the US withdrawl from Nam as a bad idea but insist that cutting and runing now is a good idea.:roll:

[SubSerpent]

You say Abu Grav, yes?
it wasn't very secret you know, but maby just to your government it was

And you say that they were following orders?
Do you forget the fact that more than 20 (twenty) beheadings and mutilations had occured on US troops? a little bit of revenge, maby. I'm sure if you were a troop that you would be pissed if your friend was beheaded "in the name of 'peaceful' islam"

And I didn't know that taking pictures of a naked person was torture to them, did you?


No, I don't think a US troop should become "vengeful" towards a people based on what a few crazy Islamic people did to a few US personnel. This just makes the problem worse on both sides. Yes, I was a troop (sailor) and I lost a good friend of mine on the USS Cole. Did I go on a rampage and shoot every muslim extremist I came across. Of course not! That would make me as bad as them!

Yes, taking naked pictures of the enemy and embarrassing them is one of the worst forms of torture to their culture! It would be like them cutting off your nuts and sending them to your mom via mail!

[SkvyWvr]

I haven't bought into anything. Fact is, people don't stay with people they hate or feel betrayed by. She still sleeps in bed with Bill each night and still hugs and kisses him just like she did prior to the scandal that the Rebpublicans created.

First of all they have seperate places and second of all how can you suggest the Republicans created the scandal. None of them pulled Bill's pecker out of his pants for him and none of them lied to the grand jury.

[SubSerpent]

Only republicans care what one man does with his penis! Another form of modern communism on the republican side. Shame really! :nope:

Law number 1238284889032902909024720-P introduced by the republicans.

Titled: Penis control!

Really, there should be a new organization formed in the government. Call it the PIA or something (Penis Intelligence Agency). They should go around and make sure US presidents and other top officials keep it in their pants.

[SubSerpent]

And don't tell me that if you were in Bill's shoes that you wouldn't have stuck yours in her mouth either if she came crawling to you on her hands and knees! That's BS on your part to state otherwise! You were a sailor after all!

[Perilscope]

^^^ Maybe it's not my affairs SubSerpent, but you are "Approaching Critical Depth" for real, your trash talk and dirty mouth will sink you soon!
Can't you just talk normally instead of using these words on a forum where kids might read your junk? :x

[August]

Why do you think she did it for political gain? Her husband is no longer the president and she is still faithful to him.

How many divorced people have become president? And you're right, she isn't a whore. Whores earn their money. She's a dirty thieving lawyer who bilked people out of money in shady real estate deals.

Google The Whitewater scandal and especially Vince Foster.

[SubSerpent]

^^^ Maybe it's not my affairs SubSerpent, but you are "Approaching Critical Depth" for real, your trash talk and dirty mouth will sink you soon!
Can't you just talk normally instead of using these words on a forum where kids might read your junk? :x

Actually I thought what I stated was fairly clean and accurate. How else would you like me to describe sex to you? Do you perfer the birds and the bees? Grow up!

[ASWnut101]

[quote=SubSerpent] And you're right, she isn't a whore. Whores earn their money. She's a dirty thieving lawyer who bilked people out of money in shady real estate deals.

hehe, isnt that just a thieving whore?:arrgh!: :know:

[SubSerpent]

Why do you think she did it for political gain? Her husband is no longer the president and she is still faithful to him.

How many divorced people have become president? And you're right, she isn't a whore. Whores earn their money. She's a dirty thieving lawyer who bilked people out of money in shady real estate deals.

Google The Whitewater scandal and especially Vince Foster.

Like I stated to Avon recently, opinions are like a-holes, everyone's got one!

You have no proof of this claim and any rubbish the republicans try to come up with shows no credible evidence that she is either A) A money hungry lawyer B) a whore

[Sea Demon]

He will probably come up with some BS law to try to keep himself in power somehow and state that it's for the "good" of the American people! He'll think any other canidate for the job isn't going to "protect" America from terrorism.

BTW, I will laugh my a-- off when it doesn't happen and a Democrat takes the Whitehouse again and brings home the troops! I will think it's funny because it would be a HUGE slap in Bush's face to see someone else coming in a ruining his BIG plans for world domination and takeover. What will Bush do after that I wonder? Probably go hide under his bed in his jammies at his mommy and daddy's ranch in Texas thinking some terrorist is going to come after him! LOL!!! WHAT A PANSY!!!!:lol:
Ok. You win. I have now read the most childish thing ever. And just when I thought I'd see it all.:roll:

And this is why the Democrats are screwed. Because even their leaders seem to think this crap. Maybe not as ridiculous as what is demonstrated here, but it's close. The American people by and large do not trust the Democrats with national security and this shows why.

[SubSerpent]

He will probably come up with some BS law to try to keep himself in power somehow and state that it's for the "good" of the American people! He'll think any other canidate for the job isn't going to "protect" America from terrorism.

BTW, I will laugh my a-- off when it doesn't happen and a Democrat takes the Whitehouse again and brings home the troops! I will think it's funny because it would be a HUGE slap in Bush's face to see someone else coming in a ruining his BIG plans for world domination and takeover. What will Bush do after that I wonder? Probably go hide under his bed in his jammies at his mommy and daddy's ranch in Texas thinking some terrorist is going to come after him! LOL!!! WHAT A PANSY!!!!:lol:
Ok. You win. I have now read the most childish thing ever. And just when I thought I'd see it all.:roll:

And this is why the Democrats are screwed. Because even their leaders seem to think this crap. Maybe not as ridiculous as what is demonstrated here, but it's close. The American people by and large do not trust the Democrats with national security and this shows why.

Don't be upset when the Dems take the Whitehouse back in '08. Sorry, but your Bush has had too much time in the Office and screwed up enough for the Dems to have to put back together again.

[bradclark1]

Google The Whitewater scandal and especially Vince Foster.

Found innocent! How much tax dollars did that take? Hundred million or some outrageous amount. The only good that came out of that was it blew Ken Star out.
Another sorry attempt by republicans that couldn't beat them politicaly so went after them personally and it didn't pan out.

[SubSerpent]

Google The Whitewater scandal and especially Vince Foster.

Found innocent! How much tax dollars did that take? Hundred million or some outrageous amount. The only good that came out of that was it blew Ken Star out.
Another sorry attempt by republicans that couldn't beat them politicaly so went after them personally and it didn't pan out.

Agreed.

[plastik]

I agree with bradclark1 completely except where he mentions that this can damage US troops in future conflicts. While this is true, the world is not just US troops, there are lots of troops from other countries which are just as respectable!! So it is not only a question of US troops as if they were the center of the universe, other soldiers have TODAY those rights which bradclark1 is demanding for US soldiers tomorrow.

But that is a minor point. I agree with everything else. My pov is that bush is basically trying to legalize torture, as simple as that.

To the Avon lady: nobody is asking for prisoners to be treated with luxury as your cartoon says. Human right are not luxury, they are a right. What many are asking is simply that torture and state terrorism are not allowed.

Cheers!

[ASWnut101]

well, then once they stop torturing and killing our captured troops, we will stop taking pics of them naked. maby.

[SubSerpent]

well, then once they stop torturing and killing our captured troops, we will stop taking pics of them naked. maby.

That's just sick! :nope:

[ASWnut101]

they deserve it.......kill us, dont expect to get a good reaction.

[SubSerpent]

they deserve it.......kill us, dont expect to get a good reaction.


That makes your mentality no better than their's aparrently! There is obviously no hope for the foreseeable future I'm afriad for peace! :nope:

[Ishmael]

You guys should really read this bill. It repeals habeas corpus, suspends constitutional guarantees to US citizens for so-called aiding and abetting terrorism. The definition of the latter is overly broad and can mean not agreeing with the President's policies.

http://www.informationliberation.com/index.php?id=16337 (http://www.informationliberation.com/index.php?id=16337)

Torture Bill States Non-Allegiance To Bush Is Terrorism

Legislation tolls the bell for the day America died, birth of the dictatorship
By Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones

Buried amongst the untold affronts to the Bill of Rights, the Constitution and the very spirit of America, the torture bill contains a definition of "wrongfully aiding the enemy" which labels all American citizens who breach their "allegiance" to President Bush and the actions of his government as terrorists subject to possible arrest, torture and conviction in front of a military tribunal.

7:25PM CST UPDATE

After five hours of searching through the 80-plus page bill, Alex Jones, who won the 2004 Project Censored award for his analysis of Patriot Act 2, uncovered numerous other provisions and definitions that make the bill appear as almost a mirror image of Hitler's 1933 Enabling Act.

So, I put this question to my Republican friends. Are we becoming a fascist state or not?
Combine the above with the Internment camps that Halliburton subsidiary KBR are feverishly constructing across the nation and I come up with a pretty chilling portrait of our near future. Is this Germany in 1932?

[Sea Demon]

You guys should really read this bill. It repeals habeas corpus, suspends constitutional guarantees to US citizens for so-called aiding and abetting terrorism. The definition of the latter is overly broad and can mean not agreeing with the President's policies.


Oh come on Ishmael. Stop reading the opinions of bush-haters and start thinking for yourself. Have you read the bill? Have you interpreted it for yourself? Or have you only read this article and treat it as though it's gospel because you so wish to compare Bush to Hitler? I've taken the time to read alot of it, and I'm not seeing the hysteria you describe.:shifty:

[SubSerpent]

You guys should really read this bill. It repeals habeas corpus, suspends constitutional guarantees to US citizens for so-called aiding and abetting terrorism. The definition of the latter is overly broad and can mean not agreeing with the President's policies.

http://www.informationliberation.com/index.php?id=16337 (http://www.informationliberation.com/index.php?id=16337)

Torture Bill States Non-Allegiance To Bush Is Terrorism

Legislation tolls the bell for the day America died, birth of the dictatorship
By Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones

Buried amongst the untold affronts to the Bill of Rights, the Constitution and the very spirit of America, the torture bill contains a definition of "wrongfully aiding the enemy" which labels all American citizens who breach their "allegiance" to President Bush and the actions of his government as terrorists subject to possible arrest, torture and conviction in front of a military tribunal.

7:25PM CST UPDATE

After five hours of searching through the 80-plus page bill, Alex Jones, who won the 2004 Project Censored award for his analysis of Patriot Act 2, uncovered numerous other provisions and definitions that make the bill appear as almost a mirror image of Hitler's 1933 Enabling Act.

So, I put this question to my Republican friends. Are we becoming a fascist state or not?
Combine the above with the Internment camps that Halliburton subsidiary KBR are feverishly constructing across the nation and I come up with a pretty chilling portrait of our near future. Is this Germany in 1932?


I call it crazy! I've been telling these republican sheepeople that Bush was leading them right into his crazy plans! Of course this bill probably means that no one else can run for president either because to do so would be considered to be a terrorist act and going against Herr Bush and his Nazi war party.

[Sea Demon]

I call it crazy! I've been telling these republican sheepeople that Bush was leading them right into his crazy plans! Of course this bill probably means that no one else can run for president either because to do so would be considered to be a terrorist act and going against Herr Bush and his Nazi war party.

Oh, my God!!!:huh: Next thing you know, Bush is going to be compared to Mao. He's going to force his version of the American "Cultural Revolution" on us. WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE!!!!! AHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!:huh: :doh: :doh: :doh:

Dude, you are seriously going to drive yourself insane. Look up the word neurosis and get a cup of coffee. :up:

[ASWnut101]

I call it crazy! I've been telling these republican sheepeople that Bush was leading them right into his crazy plans! Of course this bill probably means that no one else can run for president either because to do so would be considered to be a terrorist act and going against Herr Bush and his Nazi war party.


thats pretty crazy talk to me......
take Sea Demon's advice. chill.

[SubSerpent]

Did either one of you read that bill? The craziest thing you can do is support a president that is trying hard to give himself Hitler like powers over US citizens as well as what Bush deems to be a "terrorist" or "terrorist sympothizer". The bill allows him to claim anyone a terrorist and allows him and his regime to torture and execute anyone that Bush deems deserving to be.That is crazy!! I guess the agents will be coming for me soon since I have dissed Herr Bush so many times?

[ASWnut101]

starting to sound like a nazi yourself.......whats with "herr bush"

[Sea Demon]

Did either one of you read that bill? The craziest thing you can do is support a president that is trying hard to give himself Hitler like powers over US citizens as well as what Bush deems to be a "terrorist" or "terrorist sympothizer". The bill allows him to claim anyone a terrorist and allows him and his regime to torture and execute anyone that Bush deems deserving to be.That is crazy!! I guess the agents will be coming for me soon since I have dissed Herr Bush so many times?

I haven't finished it yet, but I don't yet see the hysteria and delusions you read into it. You might want to try reading it yourself. And putting it into it's proper context. ;)

[SubSerpent]

Did either one of you read that bill? The craziest thing you can do is support a president that is trying hard to give himself Hitler like powers over US citizens as well as what Bush deems to be a "terrorist" or "terrorist sympothizer". The bill allows him to claim anyone a terrorist and allows him and his regime to torture and execute anyone that Bush deems deserving to be.That is crazy!! I guess the agents will be coming for me soon since I have dissed Herr Bush so many times?

I haven't finished it yet, but I don't yet see the hysteria and delusions you read into it. You might want to try reading it yourself. And putting it into it's proper context. ;)

It was people like you in germany that just let the problems get worse as Hitler took over. Then it was too late to do anything and those Germans regretted it BIG time. Some of them couldn't wait for the US to come and take Nazi Germany down. Everything was Hitler this Hitler that there. Nobody was aloud to talk or say one negative thing about him without being thrown into the gas showers right along with the Jews!

Now everything is Bush this and Bush that! Obviously this bill is exactly like Hitlers and people like you are just willing to let it be! I hope you can live with yourself!

[ASWnut101]

Yes, time will tell when people get proved wrong.

I can't belive that you belive that bush is going to take over the world....hes only got two years left in office! then lets see how hilary is "so much" better.

[Sea Demon]

Now everything is Bush this and Bush that! Obviously this bill is exactly like Hitlers and people like you are just willing to let it be! I hope you can live with yourself!

You're the one who can't shut up about Bush. :lol: :rotfl: :rotfl:

[ASWnut101]

:rotfl:

[SubSerpent]

Now everything is Bush this and Bush that! Obviously this bill is exactly like Hitlers and people like you are just willing to let it be! I hope you can live with yourself!

You're the one who can't shut up about Bush. :lol: :rotfl: :rotfl:


You obviously half read the post and missed the meaning! :doh:

That's ok though...You have Bush's mindset and he too laughs at jokes that aren't funny (or weren't jokes to begin with) and tells jokes (or at least what he thinks is a joke).

[SubSerpent]

:rotfl:


You are such a follower it's disgusting! You need the support of all these Bush supporters to feel important. I pitty you thread stalker!

[Sea Demon]

Now everything is Bush this and Bush that! Obviously this bill is exactly like Hitlers and people like you are just willing to let it be! I hope you can live with yourself!

You're the one who can't shut up about Bush. :lol: :rotfl: :rotfl:


You obviously half read the post and missed the meaning! :doh:

That's ok though...You have Bush's mindset and he too laughs at jokes that aren't funny (or weren't jokes to begin with) and tells jokes (or at least what he thinks is a joke).

Nope. I caught the post. And got what you were saying. ;) I just don't think you understand how fantatical you are in your hatred.

[SubSerpent]

Now everything is Bush this and Bush that! Obviously this bill is exactly like Hitlers and people like you are just willing to let it be! I hope you can live with yourself!

You're the one who can't shut up about Bush. :lol: :rotfl: :rotfl:


You obviously half read the post and missed the meaning! :doh:

That's ok though...You have Bush's mindset and he too laughs at jokes that aren't funny (or weren't jokes to begin with) and tells jokes (or at least what he thinks is a joke).

Nope. I caught the post. And got what you were saying. ;) I just don't think you understand how fantatical you are in your hatred.


I don't think you understand how fanatical Herr Bush is or the war in Iraq considering it's all about oil and world control.

[ASWnut101]

man, and you said you didn't insault people......

[SubSerpent]

man, and you said you didn't insault people......


:doh: :huh: Say what?

[Sea Demon]

I don't think you understand how fanatical Herr Bush is or the war in Iraq considering it's all about oil and world control.

Dude, you are so lost, I fear there's no recourse for you. What are you going to do with yourself if the Republicans win electorally in November? Move out of the country? :lol: I love reading your crazy posts. You are one seriously cracked up funny guy.

[ASWnut101]

man, and you said you didn't insault people......


:doh: :huh: Say what?


copy this into browser, then go all the way down to your last post for that page.:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=98777&page=6

thats what Im talking about.

[SubSerpent]

man, and you said you didn't insault people......


:doh: :huh: Say what?


copy this into browser, then go all the way down to your last post for that page.:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=98777&page=6

thats what Im talking about.

That I stated that I don't hate anyone on here? WTF? I don't hate anyone on here. You are really reaching here buddy considering I have been a member a lot longer than you and have done more for the community than you have. All you want to do is come on here a look for friends to support your naive thoughts. Of course you are going to find some like Iceman, Sea Demon, Westgate, etc that are all hardcore right (wrong) wing supporters, but you will also see that I too have friends on here and people who support my ideas and views. So why do you just come after me I wonder? Is it because you are jealous of me or is it that you are just causing trouble? I'm thinking the latter of the two considering there is nothing about me to be jealous about.

[ASWnut101]

because of your views and statements of YOUR OWN COUNTRY!

I sometimes think that if you hate it soooo bad, why wont you leave to go to a better one.....

besides, your comments to other people on this board weren't very likable....

[Sea Demon]

That I stated that I don't hate anyone on here? WTF? I don't hate anyone on here. You are really reaching here buddy considering I have been a member a lot longer than you and have done more for the community than you have. All you want to do is come on here a look for friends to support your naive thoughts. Of course you are going to find some like Iceman, Sea Demon, Westgate, etc that are all hardcore right (wrong) wing supporters, but you will also see that I too have friends on here and people who support my ideas and views.

You radiate hatred. And you are passionate about it. And not only that, your passions are derived from conspiracy theories and kookie left-wing internet blogs. The people you list as "hardcore right (wrong) wing supporters" just counter the fanatical BS you espouse. Rational people with families to support just don't want your crazy type of people running the country. Too bad if you can't take it. :p

[August]

That I stated that I don't hate anyone on here? WTF? I don't hate anyone on here. You are really reaching here buddy considering I have been a member a lot longer than you and have done more for the community than you have. All you want to do is come on here a look for friends to support your naive thoughts. Of course you are going to find some like Iceman, Sea Demon, Westgate, etc that are all hardcore right (wrong) wing supporters, but you will also see that I too have friends on here and people who support my ideas and views.
You radiate hatred. And you are passionate about it. And not only that, your passions are derived from conspiracy theories and kookie left-wing internet blogs. The people you list as "hardcore right (wrong) wing supporters" just counter the fanatical BS you espouse. Rational people with families to support just don't want your crazy type of people running the country. Too bad if you can't take it. :p

Watch it SD. He'll pull that "I've been a member longer than you" shtick on.... oh wait.... :D

[Sea Demon]

Watch it SD. He'll pull that "I've been a member longer than you" shtick on.... oh wait.... :D

Right, and seeing how I was an enlisted guy in college and then served as an officer in the USAF after graduation, I'm willing to bet I've got more years of service to boot. :p

Such is life.........;)

[SubSerpent]

because of your views and statements of YOUR OWN COUNTRY!

I sometimes think that if you hate it soooo bad, why wont you leave to go to a better one.....

besides, your comments to other people on this board weren't very likable....

So I am suppose to lie down and take it like some beaten man? That BS. I don't hate the US, I love my country and everything it stood for prior to going to war against the Iraqi people! I had no problem with going to war against the terrorist group Al Qadea and Osama bin Laden. War on Iraq was nothing more than a "perk" to Bush and if you don't see that by now you never will. You are lopsided on your views just as much as you see me to be lopsided on mine!

I refuse to go to another country because I feel that I have, my father has, his father has, and his father before him, etc... all the way back to the early 1700s have done more than enough to earn me and my future decendants a right to be here.

I'm sorry if you only view MY comments as unlikeable to others. That is a biased viewpoint from your perspective and that's you choosing the side that you are most comfortable with. Of course you are going to bash on me and my viewpoints on every single detail so like I mentioned earlier why bother? I'm just going to debate right back against you then as well. Do yourself a HUGE favor and quit thread stalking me on every single thing!

[ASWnut101]

well, you are the only democrat posting right now...

The Noob isnt online right now.....

[SubSerpent]

well, you are the only democrat posting right now...

The Noob isnt online right now.....

I'm not a democrat btw.. I'm a registered Independant. Sorry to break the news to you! I had mentioned it somewhere before though to Sea Demon!

[ASWnut101]

well, good luck with the '08 elections......

[Sea Demon]

well, good luck with the '08 elections......

:rotfl: Now that's comedy...!!!:lol:

[ASWnut101]

well, its off to the racks for me.......

Cya

[SubSerpent]

well, good luck with the '08 elections......

We never win anyways, but at least I can voice my opinion about both parties flaws. Shame independants never win, considering we take the best out of both sides.

Lately I have been geared more towards the Democrat side - well ever since Bush declared war on the Iraqi people for his own greedy desires!

[Sea Demon]

Lately I have been geared more towards the Democrat side - well ever since Bush declared war on the Iraqi people for his own greedy desires!

How pathetic. :roll:

[SubSerpent]

Lately I have been geared more towards the Democrat side - well ever since Bush declared war on the Iraqi people for his own greedy desires!

How pathetic. :roll:

Why is it pathetic? If you are going to make a claim about someone or their beliefs, make sure you state the reason for it. Otherwise it just looks like a personal attack to that person!

[Sea Demon]

We never win anyways, but at least I can voice my opinion about both parties flaws.

wasn't it you who once posted this...



democrats = :up: :up: :up: :up: :up:
republican = :down: :down: :down: :down: :down:



I'll look for the thread if you don't remember.

Independent, my foot. ;) That's one of the reasons I say pathetic. You figure out the rest. I think it's clear as day.

[SubSerpent]

We never win anyways, but at least I can voice my opinion about both parties flaws.

wasn't it you who once posted this...



democrats = :up: :up: :up: :up: :up:
republican = :down: :down: :down: :down: :down:



I'll look for the thread if you don't remember.

Independent, my foot. ;)

Independants can go either way Sea Demon. That is the point of being an Independant and that post you refered to btw was written WAY after Bush decided to invade Iraq. As I have clearly stated I chose to go more Democrat on views as of lately since Bush invaded Iraq.

[Sea Demon]

We never win anyways, but at least I can voice my opinion about both parties flaws.

wasn't it you who once posted this...



democrats = :up: :up: :up: :up: :up:
republican = :down: :down: :down: :down: :down:



I'll look for the thread if you don't remember.

Independent, my foot. ;)

Independants can go either way Sea Demon. That is the point of being an Independant and that post you refered to btw was written WAY after Bush decided to invade Iraq. As I have clearly stated I chose to go more Democrat on views as of lately since Bush invaded Iraq.

I've never seen you critisize anything on the Democrat side. Dude, you ain't foolin' anyone. :lol:

[SkvyWvr]

And don't tell me that if you were in Bill's shoes that you wouldn't have stuck yours in her mouth either if she came crawling to you on her hands and knees! That's BS on your part to state otherwise! You were a sailor after all!

No, I won't tell you that but I will tell you I would not have lied about it. Don't you see that he opened himself up to bribery and all kinds of other problems?

[SkvyWvr]

I call it crazy! I've been telling these republican sheepeople that Bush was leading them right into his crazy plans! Of course this bill probably means that no one else can run for president either because to do so would be considered to be a terrorist act and going against Herr Bush and his Nazi war party.

Ok, I was wrong. This is the most ignorant thing I've read.

[SkvyWvr]

Oh, my God!!!:huh: Next thing you know, Bush is going to be compared to Mao. He's going to force his version of the American "Cultural Revolution" on us. WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE!!!!! AHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!:huh: :doh: :doh: :doh:

Dude, you are seriously going to drive yourself insane. Look up the word neurosis and get a cup of coffee. :up:

I think it needs to be stronger than coffee.:yep:

[SkvyWvr]

It was people like you in germany that just let the problems get worse as Hitler took over. Then it was too late to do anything and those Germans regretted it BIG time. Some of them couldn't wait for the US to come and take Nazi Germany down. Everything was Hitler this Hitler that there. Nobody was aloud to talk or say one negative thing about him without being thrown into the gas showers right along with the Jews!

Now everything is Bush this and Bush that! Obviously this bill is exactly like Hitlers and people like you are just willing to let it be! I hope you can live with yourself!

I'll start worrying about it when the Republicans start physically beating the Dems on Capital Hill and smashing liberal shops.:roll: