0
   

THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ VI

 
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 May, 2004 07:52 am
As I predicted, the prisoner abuse situation is being handled by banning cameras. (at least for future transgressions)



Rumsfeld bans camera phones
From correspondents in London
May 23, 2004
MOBILE phones fitted with digital cameras have been banned in US army installations in Iraq on orders from Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, The Business newspaper reported today.

Quoting a Pentagon source, the paper said the US Defence Department believes that some of the damning photos of US soldiers abusing Iraqis at Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad were taken with camera phones.

"Digital cameras, camcorders and cellphones with cameras have been prohibited in military compounds in Iraq," it said, adding that a "total ban throughout the US military" is in the works.

Disturbing new photos of Iraqi prisoner abuse, which the US government had reportedly tried to keep hidden, were published on Friday in the Washington Post newspaper.

The photos emerged along with details of testimony from inmates at Abu Ghraib who said they were sexually molested by female soldiers, beaten, sodomised and forced to eat food from toilets.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,9643950%5E1702,00.html
0 Replies
 
Joe Nation
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 May, 2004 08:19 am
Luckily for Richard Perle, he has his novelist career to fall back on, now that his candidate for Iraqi President has been revealed as a two-timing, back stabbing, con-man. The Jordanians would love to have a visit from Chalabi, but I think he will be headed for Iran soon, probably to check on the sources for the bogus intel he fed Perle and Cheney and Bush for months.

Thanks Dick!

Joe
0 Replies
 
PDiddie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 May, 2004 09:19 am
The chutzpah is simply amazing.

The Pentagon apparently shorted the Senate committee 2000 pages of the Taguba report:

Quote:
Another big stack of pages is causing concern over at the Senate Armed Services Committee, which is investigating abuses at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison. Committee aides discovered belatedly that their copy of the 6,000-page report on prison abuses produced by Major General Antonio M. Taguba might not be complete. The copy they got after Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's testimony on May 7 was a thick document with 106 annexes, and it was quickly arranged into separate binders. Only later did the committee stack up all the pages, compare them with a ream of 6,000 blank pages and decide that at least 2,000 pages were missing. "We'd certainly like to know why they're missing," said Republican Senator John McCain. Pentagon spokesman Larry Dirita insisted, "If there is some shortfall in what was provided, it was an oversight." Committee staff members haven't actually counted the pages. Chairman John Warner will investigate this week to see what is missing.


Time.com

And that isn't even the lead paragraph...
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 May, 2004 09:29 am
Thanks PD. Real boy scouts these fellows.
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 May, 2004 10:09 am
http://www.allhatnocattle.net/bush-jackdaniels2.jpg
0 Replies
 
PDiddie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 May, 2004 10:23 am
LMAO
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 May, 2004 06:24 pm
DEFINITIONS OF THE PROBLEM AND SUMMARIES OF THE SOLUTION

On the Left

Problem
People living in the western nations -- particularly those living in the US -- support Israel causing a portion of Islam to develop the TMM (i.e., Terrorist Murderers and Maimers).

Solution
Exterminate the people of Israel and the people of the US.

On the Right

Problem
The TMM (i.e., Terrorist Murderers and Maimers) have threated to kill and maim and have actually murdered and maimed people living in Israel, and people living in the Western Nations -- particularly, the people living in the US.

Solution
Exterminate or incarcerate the TMM.



How'm I doin' so far?
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 May, 2004 06:40 pm
What the ___ are you doing, ican?
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 May, 2004 07:00 pm
edgarblythe wrote:
What the ___ are you doing, ican?


Thanks for ____ing asking? Smile

I'm trying to determine what is the left's consensus of on what the problem is.

I'm trying to determine what is the right's consensus of on what the problem is.

What problem? you might ask. The one having to do with the TMM(i.e., Terrorist Murderers and Maimers). Let's call that the TMM problem.

Is the TMM problem caused by US failures to manage its Iraq and Quantanimo prisons properly? Perhaps, but I for one do not think so.

Is the TMM problem caused by US failures to properly distinguish between non-TMM gatherings and TMM gatherings? Perhaps, but I don't think so.

Was the TMM problem caused by Bill Clinton? Perhaps, but I don't think so.

Was the TMM problem caused by George Bush? Perhaps, but I don't think so.

Was the TMM problem caused by John Kerry? Perhaps, but I don't think so.

What is the solution to the TMM problem? Is it electing George Bush? Perhaps, but I don't think so. Is it electing John Kerry? Perhaps, but I don't think so. Is it electing someone else? Perhaps, but I don't think so.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 May, 2004 07:43 pm
(scratches head) Good luck.
0 Replies
 
mporter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 12:55 am
The problem is caused, basically , by the fact that there is a sliver of Islam which is radically opposed to the West because of the West's alleged secularism and modernity, which the radical fundamentalists believe it is their duty to Allah to eliminate.
Anyone who can prove that Bernard Lewis's thesis with regard to the world wide danger of a small group of religious fanatics who will die to advance the will of Allah, is wrong,is invited to give evidence.

If Lewis is correct, then the fundamentalist Arab believers are dangerous to the entire world-the US, the Phillippines, Bali, Chechen, Israel, Saudi-Arabia, Iraq, Iran. All these are places where the fundamentalist crazies have martyred themselves.

Would these people stop if we were to withdraw from Iraq?

Would the martyrs in Palestine cease if we were to withdraw from Iraq?

Would Pakistan become peaceful if we were to withdraw from Iraq?

Would the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan become peaceful if we were to withdraw from Iraq?

Would there be no more suicide bombings like the US Cole if we were to withdraw from Iraq?

Would there be no more massive tragedies like the WTC on 9/11/2002 if we were to withdraw from Iraq?

The answers to all the above is NO.

The left does not understand that the Islamic radicals view any hesitancy on the part of the West as weakness. The WTC tragedy would be just a beginning if we were to turn tail and leave Iraq before a Democratic government is installed.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 01:22 am
Very well said, Mporter. Idea
0 Replies
 
mporter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 01:41 am
Thank You, OCCOM BILL, with all of the left wing liberals on these posts, it is rare to get someone agreeing with you. However, I am not looking for agreement as much as I am looking for proof and verification. I find the postings of people who do not live in the USA who feel that they know all about our country most insulting.

I am sure that none of them REALLY know the spirit of John Galt, who you wisely include in your posts. Most of the liberals from outside the USA, as you may have gathered hate the USA with an unreasoning fury, probably based on envy.

Again, OCCOM BILL- Thanks.
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 05:54 am
Let me see now .... was it the left or right that started this clusterf**k?
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 06:02 am
Hi, Gel; where ya been?
Getting out of Iraq is just the tip of the problem. We all know the "sliver" of muslim terrorists exists. That's all the more reason to stop the Bush policies that widen that sliver.
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 06:36 am
Hey Edgar .... mostly outside, love this warm weather Smile

Don't blame the boy, he is too simple minded to cause this much trouble .... hell he's still learning to ride a bike.

Check out the signatures on this puppy if you want to lay blame. (note the date)


June 3, 1997

American foreign and defense policy is adrift. Conservatives have criticized the incoherent policies of the Clinton Administration. They have also resisted isolationist impulses from within their own ranks. But conservatives have not confidently advanced a strategic vision of America's role in the world. They have not set forth guiding principles for American foreign policy. They have allowed differences over tactics to obscure potential agreement on strategic objectives. And they have not fought for a defense budget that would maintain American security and advance American interests in the new century.

We aim to change this. We aim to make the case and rally support for American global leadership.

As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world's preeminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?

We are in danger of squandering the opportunity and failing the challenge. We are living off the capital -- both the military investments and the foreign policy achievements -- built up by past administrations. Cuts in foreign affairs and defense spending, inattention to the tools of statecraft, and inconstant leadership are making it increasingly difficult to sustain American influence around the world. And the promise of short-term commercial benefits threatens to override strategic considerations. As a consequence, we are jeopardizing the nation's ability to meet present threats and to deal with potentially greater challenges that lie ahead.

We seem to have forgotten the essential elements of the Reagan Administration's success: a military that is strong and ready to meet both present and future challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and purposefully promotes American principles abroad; and national leadership that accepts the United States' global responsibilities.

Of course, the United States must be prudent in how it exercises its power. But we cannot safely avoid the responsibilities of global leadership or the costs that are associated with its exercise. America has a vital role in maintaining peace and security in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. If we shirk our responsibilities, we invite challenges to our fundamental interests. The history of the 20th century should have taught us that it is important to shape circumstances before crises emerge, and to meet threats before they become dire. The history of this century should have taught us to embrace the cause of American leadership.

Our aim is to remind Americans of these lessons and to draw their consequences for today. Here are four consequences:

• we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;

• we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;

• we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;

• we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.

Such a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity may not be fashionable today. But it is necessary if the United States is to build on the successes of this past century and to ensure our security and our greatness in the next.

Elliott Abrams Gary Bauer William J. Bennett Jeb Bush

Dick Cheney Eliot A. Cohen Midge Decter Paula Dobriansky Steve Forbes

Aaron Friedberg Francis Fukuyama Frank Gaffney Fred C. Ikle

Donald Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad I. Lewis Libby Norman Podhoretz

Dan Quayle Peter W. Rodman Stephen P. Rosen Henry S. Rowen

Donald Rumsfeld Vin Weber George Weigel Paul Wolfowitz


SOURCE
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 08:39 am
mporter wrote:
The problem is caused, basically , by the fact that there is a sliver of Islam which is radically opposed to the West because of the West's alleged secularism and modernity, which the radical fundamentalists believe it is their duty to Allah to eliminate.
...
... the fundamentalist Arab believers are dangerous to the entire world-the US, the Phillippines, Bali, Chechen, Israel, Saudi-Arabia, Iraq, Iran. All these are places where the fundamentalist crazies have martyred themselves.


I too think this is the problem. It is a growing problem; that sliver you mentioned has grown rapidly with each FATWA the TMM issued. We must solve it sooner or later: sooner will cost fewer lives.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 08:47 am
Gelisgesti wrote:
Quote:

June 3, 1997

...

we need to

increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;

we need to

strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;

we need to

promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;

we need to

accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.



We must first exterminate or incarcerate the TMM (i.e., Terrorist Murderers and Maimers), before any of these foregoing needs can be met.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 09:20 am
edgarblythe wrote:
Hi, Gel; where ya been?
Getting out of Iraq is just the tip of the problem. We all know the "sliver" of muslim terrorists exists. That's all the more reason to stop the Bush policies that widen that sliver.


That sliver has had and does have a life of its own. Not anything Carter, Reagan, Bush 41, Clinton, or Bush 43 did or are doing contributes to the widening of that sliver. The problem is what they did not or are not doing. None of the foregoing presidents have removed (i.e., exterminated or incarcerated) that sliver. So far, only Bush 43 has taken action to try and remove that sliver. Perhaps his action will succeed; perhaps it won't. However, one thing we have learned is that attempting to contain rather than remove that sliver has not worked.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 May, 2004 09:47 am
Shall we ask the UN to take over removal of the TMM from Iraq and Afghanistan?
--The UN failed in its inspections to discover Saddam-Iraq's financing and equiping of the TMM.
--The UN was a knowing and willing participant in Saddam's Oil-for-Food money redistribution to the TMM.
--The UN fled Bagdad after about 2 dozen of its employees were murdered in Bagdad by a TMM bomb blast.

No! Let's not ask the UN to take over removal of the TMM from Iraq and Afghanistan.

Shall we ask John Kerry to take over removal of the TMM from Iraq and Afghanistan?
--Bush has made many strategic and tactical mistakes.
--Bush advocates US persistence in removal of the TMM.
--Kerry has made many oral mistakes.
--Kerry advocates asking the UN to take over removal of the TMM from Iraq and Afghanistan?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 07/12/2025 at 11:10:22