This is what Donald Rumsfeld said over a year ago about the Afghanis held captive in Guantanemo:
"They will be handled not as prisoners of war, because they're not, but as unlawful combatants. Technically unlawful combatants do not have any rights under the Geneva Convention. We have indicated that we do plan to, for the most part, treat them in a manner that is reasonably consistent with the Geneva conventions, to the extent they are appropriate."
Why do you think those people were "re-classified"?
And why do you think they are not being held in the US?
You don't think, maybe, it's so that our government could torture them for information, do you?
I don't think that anyone would disagree (as we say every time we mention Osama and Saddam) that these are evil people.
But they ARE people, and they have rights (which is what the Geneva Convention established).
When those in our government break the rules, treaties, and agreements we've made with other countries in the world...what's to keep other countries from doing the same thing?
So when Bush says, "I expect our POWs to be treated humanely..." who's he kidding?
Some other lies that came in the media today.
The POWs were executed Who says that? Were there eyewitnesses? Both UK and US officials talk about executions without any proof.
Iraq has WMDThats what Hoon says. Because UK troops found 100 gasmasks and some suits. And that is a proof? Oh my God! How dumb can they get?
The US military has been forced to admit the 8,000 Iraqi soldiers they claimed to have captured last week are now battling British forces:
http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_764618.html
just listening to MSNBC " the rules of engagement for coalition forces are being rewritten but not on the books"
What a stinking mess.
And all this talk about how unfair the Iraqis are in their fighting.
How is it possible we have sunk this low in such a short time? The boy moron and his disgusting handlers have managed something I would never have thought possible.
They are so brave -- sitting here safe and free with others doing thier fighting. They are so brave!!!
You know, it's possible that in their heads they're not lying. They have pretended so much and for so long that they have made the axiom of ftelling the big lie enough come tru for them.
After all, twelve years of planning for, hoping for, playing war games about all this - and now they're here. But it doesn't seem to be going as planned. Those 8,000 captured turned up in another guise, and Rumsfeld yelled "unfair."
But neither he nor the rest ever actually participated in anything that had to do with real war, with casualties and losses and unecpected stuff like sandstorms - it was all play to them.
Maybe that's why this all seems a bit unreal. And, at the risk of sounding unpatriotic, I do resent the premption of some TV shows. As bad as most TV has become, it 's still better than "all war, all the time." At this rate, all we need are loudspeakers outside, blaring away.
15 Stories the Media has Bungled:
1. Saddam may well have been killed in the first night's surprise attack (March 20).
2. Even if he wasn't killed, Iraqi command and control was no doubt "decapitated" (March 22).
3. Umm Qasr has been taken (March 22).
4. Most Iraqis soldiers will not fight for Saddam and instead are surrendering in droves (March 22).
5. Iraqi citizens are greeting Americans as liberators (March 22).
6. An entire division of 8,000 Iraqi soldiers surrendered en masse near Basra (March 23).
7. Several Scud missiles, banned weapons, have been launched against U.S. forces in Kuwait (March 23).
8. Saddam's Fedayeen militia are few in number and do not pose a serious threat (March 23).
9. Basra has been taken (March 23).
10. Umm Qasr has been taken (March 23).
11. A captured chemical plant likely produced chemical weapons (March 23).
12. Nassiriya has been taken (March 23).
13. Umm Qasr has been taken (March 24).
14. The Iraqi government faces a "major rebellion" of anti-Saddam citizens in Basra (March 24).
15. A convoy of 1,000 Iraqi vehicles and Republican Guards are speeding south from Baghdad to engage U.S. troops (March 25).
Source: Editor & Publisher Online
What's the equivalent of a triple lie?
c.i.
The dang American media are getting their news straight from the horse's mouth -- and the horse doesn't know how not to lie. Except it's called PR.
The line that suspected chemical weapons have been found is constantly repeated, but the retractions are mumbled quietly. I'm willing to bet a plug nickel that fully 60% of Americans believe we have found chemical weapons in Iraq, when in fact we have not. In such manners are opinions manufactured. It's kind of like the original lie; that Saddam is connected to 9-11. A lie repeated often enough becomes the truth.
* * * * * * * * * *
The Bush Administration is apparently about to declare a 'rolling victory', which is such a stupid-smart idea that only Karl Rove could have though of it. Basically, we're going to declare the war won, even if we don't force the Saddam regime to surrender, and we're going to establish a parallel government ( and it will be done outside of Baghdad if things get too hairy trying to conquer that city). In some ways this is so stupid it's clever.
Why would one go to the trouble of actually winning a war when you can just say you won it?
If this is the new standard of reality, I would like to go on the record and say that my three-way with Elizabeth Hurley and Salma Hayek was a mind-blowing experience.
* * * * * * * * * *
The CIA has said that Saddam wants people to think he's alive.
Dohhhhhh........
Think about how stupid that statement is.
PDiddie, I havent run across that story before officially, but your suggested Bush strategy is entirely logical if one considers that Baghdad and the overthrow of Saddam were never the real objectives, but looting of the Iraqi oil reserves was.
Here you go, John; it's from those radicals at the Washington Post:
'Rolling' Victory Key to U.S. Endgame
The American Dollar, complete with Presidents, is to replace the Iraqi currency with their pictures of Saddam. A NEW STATE OR COLONY (OR GIANT CONCENTRATION CAMP) IS BEING BORN. What more proof do you need?
Rumsfeld just hasn't made the announcement ..... yet!
"...The line that suspected chemical weapons have been found is constantly repeated, but the retractions are mumbled quietly. I'm willing to bet a plug nickel that fully 60% of Americans believe we have found chemical weapons in Iraq, when in fact we have not. In such manners are opinions manufactured. It's kind of like the original lie; that Saddam is connected to 9-11. A lie repeated often enough becomes the truth..."
Of course, PDiddie, this happens with each issue, on a daily basis -- it has been the modus operandi of the old party formerly known as grand since the early days of Watergate. Worse, we are close to having proof that there is no opposition party, no Democrats who add up the lies and present them meaningfully. If we come out of this "war" and find that the administration cannot demonstrate that real WMD's have been found, and if at that point no Democratic candidate or senior party member DOESN'T raise the issue -- WHERE'S THE BEEF?!, we'll know that it isn't just the voting machines which have failed us...
In Austin, TX, there is a famous swimming hole. In the center of town an enormous spring of utterly clear water pours into a large limestone ravine in a long section of an old creek. As Austin has grown, the spring itself has been under threat of pollution from run-off, and each year the water (not chlorinated) becomes a little less pollution- and disease-free. The city is growing rapidly and each year brings a fresh crop of new residents who ooooh and aaah over the beauty of the place, the astonishment of finding such a huge, beautiful, clean place to swim in water which, winter and summer, stays at about 70 degrees. Over time, as the new resident becomes the long-term resident, he/she tries to explain to the newest newcomers that the water isn't as clear as it looks, isn't as clean as it used to be, has been condemned and closed off more than once, that we have to be careful and we have to take action. We "old residents" of politics, like the old swimmers of Austin, have watched the decline closely for years and years -- our benchmark of "cleanliness" goes 'way back, and even then our parents were telling us, "it ain't as clean as it once was." It's pretty hard for the oldsters to convince the younger folk that the decline is as serious as it is, and it's hard for the younger ones not to have hope, not to accept "how things are now" as the norm. We're going to have to make an effort to find the middle ground and take some kind of action.
Otherwise the next generation is going to be swimming in sh*t.
Well, yesterday I heard the news (and saw the video) of "the human remains of hundreds of tortured Iraquians". And today, an Iranian general says that hundreds of bodies discovered in a makeshift morgue by British forces near Basra are those of Iranian soldiers killed in the 1980s Iran-Iraq war, which couldn't been sent to Iran by Iraquian authorities due to the war.
Wait until the true death toll of coalition forces in Iraq is released, if ever. In other words, not the sanitised and much-reduced official version currently being reported to America by the media, but the vote-threatening genuine figures.
Some should prepare for a very nasty shock.
John Webb
Quote:
Wait until the true death toll of coalition forces in Iraq is released, if ever. In other words, not the sanitized and much-reduced official version currently being reported to America by the media, but the vote-threatening genuine figures.
Do you know something our is it wishful thinking on your part. Why would you believe that the US would hide the figures on casualties? The fact is that they could not be hidden for long and if they came out later they would really be as you say vote threatening.
Tartarin wrote:The dang American media are getting their news straight from the horse's mouth -- and the horse doesn't know how not to lie. Except it's called PR.
Insofar as the media are getting their news from Bush and his handlers, they are not getting it from the "horse's mouth" -- but rather from another part of a horse's anatomy.
