We were so evil at Abu Ghraib

[Strike 5,553]

When did I ever say their actions were condoned? I said the lack of a clear policy on the treatment of prisoners probably contributes to the kind of thing you see at Abu Ghraib. Your smarmy sarcasm makes you sound like a defensive jerk.

 

Your suggestion that we don't have policies on the treatment of prisoners makes you look ignorant. Guess we're even

 

And, of course, I won't let the fact that you said we condoned torture actually mean we condoned torturing -120- prisoners

[MDC 7,431]

Your suggestion that we don't have policies on the treatment of prisoners makes you look ignorant. Guess we're even

 

And, of course, I won't let the fact that you said we condoned torture actually mean we condoned torturing -120- prisoners

 

Ever hear of Capt. Ian Fishback? He's the guy who was writing letters to Congress and particularly to John McCain to "clear up the confusion" because no one up the chain of command could tell him how they were expected to treat prisoners. If you opened a newspaper once in awhile you might have heard about it.

[Strike 5,553]

Ever hear of Capt. Ian Fishback? He's the guy who was writing letters to Congress and particularly to John McCain to "clear up the confusion" because no one up the chain of command could tell him how they were expected to treat prisoners. If you opened a newspaper once in awhile you might have heard about it.

 

Yeah, and? Define "clear up"? Do you expect the manual to be so specific as to say "do not put them in a pyramid formation"? Come on. At some point you have to trust the common sense of your military. If you think differently you're drinking too much Muhammad Kool Aid. And, of course, none of this changes the fact that you accused me of being defensive for laughing at you for saying we condoned torture, which is what you said

[MDC 7,431]

Yeah, and? Define "clear up"? Do you expect the manual to be so specific as to say "do not put them in a pyramid formation"? Come on. At some point you have to trust the common sense of your military. If you think differently you're drinking too much Muhammad Kool Aid. And, of course, none of this changes the fact that you accused me of being defensive for laughing at you for saying we condoned torture, which is what you said

 

You're right Strike: Capt. Ian Fishback doesn't know what he's saying, but to you it's common sense.

[Strike 5,553]

You're right Strike: Capt. Ian Fishback doesn't know what he's saying, but to you it's common sense.

 

Not what I said. But it's easy to dogpile on something when something bad happens. The question is what you do in the aftermath. Just because one, or even a group, of people says something should be done doesn't make it so, and neither of us is in the know enough to have any clue as to whether there should be a clarification.

 

What I do know is that you said we condoned torture and then said you didn't, and have been ignoring the fact that you got called out on that ever since. At least you're not spinning it like Torrid would. You're just hoping it will go away. LOL

[MDC 7,431]

Not what I said. But it's easy to dogpile on something when something bad happens. The question is what you do in the aftermath. Just because one, or even a group, of people says something should be done doesn't make it so, and neither of us is in the know enough to have any clue as to whether there should be a clarification.

 

What I do know is that you said we condoned torture and then said you didn't, and have been ignoring the fact that you got called out on that ever since. At least you're not spinning it like Torrid would. You're just hoping it will go away. LOL

 

Why would I be hoping it goes away? Making a prisoner stand naked in a 50 degree cell and periodically splashing cold water on them is IMO torture. Water boarding is IMO torture. These are approved interrogation techniques. Unless you're going to tell me these things aren't torture, we condone torture.

 

Far as whether the rules needed clarification, the charges of abuse are so widespread that I'm more inclined to believe a guy like Fishback or John McCain (who was tortured BTW) than you.

[Strike 5,553]

Why would I be hoping it goes away? Making a prisoner stand naked in a 50 degree cell and periodically splashing cold water on them is IMO torture. Water boarding is IMO torture. These are approved interrogation techniques. Unless you're going to tell me these things aren't torture, we condone torture.

 

Far as whether the rules needed clarification, the charges of abuse are so widespread that I'm more inclined to believe a guy like Fishback or John McCain (who was tortured BTW) than you.

 

Wow. So your original comment was about the military, and now you're bringing up actions of the CIA, and apparently it's not for general use but only approved for 6 specific individuals . Ugh. Never mind. You're as bad as Muhammad with your tangents, spin, and looking for ways out. And it's funny cause when we were simply discussing the military we kind of agreed.

[Voltaire 5,316]

Last time I checked people were prosecuted for their actions at Abu Ghraib. I missed the memo where we condoned it. Thanks for informing me

 

You did miss the memo. Those guys all testified they were encouraged to do it from higher up. I think it sucks that the big wigs condoned/tolerated/endorsed the whole thing and got off scott free and the sh*t was dumped on the lower enlisted folks.

[Strike 5,553]

You did miss the memo. Those guys all testified they were encouraged to do it from higher up. I think it sucks that the big wigs condoned/tolerated/endorsed the whole thing and got off scott free and the sh*t was dumped on the lower enlisted folks.

 

The last time I checked memo's were in writing, A**hole. Just so people couldn't testify to something different later.

[Voltaire 5,316]

The last time I checked memo's were in writing, A**hole. Just so people couldn't testify to something different later.

 

Well the Army does things a bit differently than the corporate world. There aren't any memos. Orders come down from the top. This sort of thing -so blatant and obvious- couldn't have happened without the consent/knowledge of higher ups and indeed all the troops involved said the same thing. These guys were either doing what they were instructed to do or were not disciplined for overstepping thier bouds. When the sh*t hit the fan by releasing the photos, these troops were scapegoated while the higher ups all suffered spontaneous amnesia and played CYA.

[Strike 5,553]

Well the Army does things a bit differently than the corporate world. There aren't any memos. Orders come down from the top. This sort of thing -so blatant and obvious- couldn't have happened without the consent/knowledge of higher ups and indeed all the troops involved said the same thing. These guys were either doing what they were instructed to do or were not disciplined for overstepping thier bouds. When the sh*t hit the fan by releasing the photos, these troops were scapegoated while the higher ups all suffered spontaneous amnesia and played CYA.

 

LOL. Of course you have proof of these allegations right A**hole?

[Voltaire 5,316]

LOL. Of course you have proof of these allegations right A**hole?

 

This blog is the best I can do right now. Promising links to the Washington Post link isn't working and the Chinese block BBC. Still serching for a more reliable mainstream media outlet.

 

http://the-reaction.blogspot.com/2005/05/n...ie-england.html

[Strike 5,553]

This blog is the best I can do right now. Promising links to the Washington Post link isn't working and the Chinese block BBC. Still serching for a more reliable mainstream media outlet.

 

http://the-reaction.blogspot.com/2005/05/n...ie-england.html

 

IOW you have no focking proof. Do you hate America as much as Torrid does? Seriously?

 

P.S. - A**hole!!!

[Voltaire 5,316]

IOW you have no focking proof. Do you hate America as much as Torrid does? Seriously?

 

P.S. - A**hole!!!

 

Every single link I open says the same thing, just not as good as that blog and not as complete as I would like. Here's the Baltimore Sun, but no, I'm still not satified and am still looking. Y'know it takes a while to read each link to see what it says.

 

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationwor...-iraq-headlines

[Voltaire 5,316]

This New Yorker article clearly shows how systemic the problem was at Abu Gharib, but it was published early on... it's clear there was more than just a few out of control lower enlisted folks.

 

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040510fa_fact

 

This link seems up to date and really reliable, what I've been looking for. It explains the fallout of the accusations. All the blame shifted to the lower enlisted. Some minor slap on the wrists for lower ranking officers but even the commanding general who was reduced in rank to colonel was cleared of any wrongdoing...

 

Though Brig. Gen. Karpinski’s performance of duty was found to be seriously lacking, the investigation determined that no action or lack of action on her part contributed specifically to the abuse of detainees at Abu Ghraib.

 

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/lib...0505-army01.htm

[MDC 7,431]

Wow. So your original comment was about the military, and now you're bringing up actions of the CIA, and apparently it's not for general use but only approved for 6 specific individuals . Ugh. Never mind. You're as bad as Muhammad with your tangents, spin, and looking for ways out. And it's funny cause when we were simply discussing the military we kind of agreed.

 

Actually fockstool, the point I was making was that 1) I don't like the idea of our servicepeople humiliating prisoners because it serves no purpose other than sadism and 2) I think the kind of thing you saw at Abu Ghraib is more likely to happen when there's no official policy on the treatment of prisoners.

 

In reply you've posted a lot of and sarcasm but nothing of substance. So let's just forget it, because you have nothing to say and I have no respect for your opinion anyhow.

[parrot 789]

Your suggestion that we don't have policies on the treatment of prisoners makes you look ignorant. Guess we're even

From the Taguba report;

 

“I witnessed prisoners in the MI hold section, wing 1A being made to do various things that I would question morally. In Wing 1A we were told that they had different rules and different SOP for treatment. I never saw a set of rules or SOP for that section just word of mouth. The Soldier in charge of 1A was Corporal Granier. He stated that the Agents and MI Soldiers would ask him to do things, but nothing was ever in writing he would complain (sic).”

[Strike 5,553]

Actually fockstool, the point I was making was that 1) I don't like the idea of our servicepeople humiliating prisoners because it serves no purpose other than sadism and 2) I think the kind of thing you saw at Abu Ghraib is more likely to happen when there's no official policy on the treatment of prisoners.

 

In reply you've posted a lot of and sarcasm but nothing of substance. So let's just forget it, because you have nothing to say and I have no respect for your opinion anyhow.

 

The point is that there is a policy on the treatment of prisoners. Your response to that is to post a link to some article about how the CIA has a special policy towards 6 specific individuals.

[Strike 5,553]

From the Taguba report;

 

“I witnessed prisoners in the MI hold section, wing 1A being made to do various things that I would question morally. In Wing 1A we were told that they had different rules and different SOP for treatment. I never saw a set of rules or SOP for that section just word of mouth. The Soldier in charge of 1A was Corporal Granier. He stated that the Agents and MI Soldiers would ask him to do things, but nothing was ever in writing he would complain (sic).”

 

From the New Yorker article:

 

"When asked why he did not inform his chain of command about the abuse, Sergeant Davis answered, “Because I assumed that if they were doing things out of the ordinary or outside the guidelines, someone would have said something."

[parrot 789]

From the New Yorker article:

 

"When asked why he did not inform his chain of command about the abuse, Sergeant Davis answered, “Because I assumed that if they were doing things out of the ordinary or outside the guidelines, someone would have said something."

If there were an effective policy in place with clearly laid out guidelines and procedures, he wouldn't have to have "assumed" anything. He would have known what was and was not out of bounds.

[Strike 5,553]

If there were an effective policy in place with clearly laid out guidelines and procedures, he wouldn't have to have "assumed" anything. He would have known what was and was not out of bounds.

 

Just because a soldier wasn't aware of the rules doesn't mean they don't exist. There is no doubt in my mind that we have rules in place for the treatment of prisoners. I also have no doubt that those rules were broken.

[parrot 789]

Just because a soldier wasn't aware of the rules doesn't mean they don't exist. There is no doubt in my mind that we have rules in place for the treatment of prisoners. I also have no doubt that those rules were broken.

If the soldiers on the ground don't know what the policy is and what the specific procedures are for adhering to it, it's not worth the paper it's written on.

[wiffleball 4,790]

All these rebuttals only further magnify my original point. The prisoners are BEGGING US TO RETURN!

 

Do you naysayers not see an irony in that?

 

Oh- You were expecting a Geek thread to stay ON POINT?

 

- our bad.

[Strike 5,553]

If the soldiers on the ground don't know what the policy is and what the specific procedures are for adhering to it, it's not worth the paper it's written on.

 

Maybe or maybe not. This discussion was about whether policies exist. Some have suggested that policies should be rewritten. I'm just saying that the policies already exist. Training and/or adhereance to those policies is a separate discussion. Also, the end soldiers just follow commands. If the higher ups knew and chose not to follow the procedures and guidelines they should be prosecuted.

[BlackPlague 1]

All these rebuttals only further magnify my original point. The prisoners are BEGGING US TO RETURN!

 

Do you naysayers not see an irony in that?

 

All that is magnified is that our methods of interrogation/torture are not as severe as the Iraqi's.

 

That doesn't make them any more justifiable or morally correct, IMO.

[MDC 7,431]

Dear Senator McCain:

 

I am a graduate of West Point currently serving as a Captain in the U.S. Army Infantry. I have served two combat tours with the 82nd Airborne Division, one each in Afghanistan and Iraq. While I served in the Global War on Terror, the actions and statements of my leadership led me to believe that United States policy did not require application of the Geneva Conventions in Afghanistan or Iraq. On 7 May 2004, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld's testimony that the United States followed the Geneva Conventions in Iraq and the "spirit" of the Geneva Conventions in Afghanistan prompted me to begin an approach for clarification. For 17 months, I tried to determine what specific standards governed the treatment of detainees by consulting my chain of command through battalion commander, multiple JAG lawyers, multiple Democrat and Republican Congressmen and their aides, the Ft. Bragg Inspector General's office, multiple government reports, the Secretary of the Army and multiple general officers, a professional interrogator at Guantanamo Bay, the deputy head of the department at West Point responsible for teaching Just War Theory and Law of Land Warfare, and numerous peers who I regard as honorable and intelligent men.

 

Instead of resolving my concerns, the approach for clarification process leaves me deeply troubled. Despite my efforts, I have been unable to get clear, consistent answers from my leadership about what constitutes lawful and humane treatment of detainees. I am certain that this confusion contributed to a wide range of abuses including death threats, beatings, broken bones, murder, exposure to elements, extreme forced physical exertion, hostage-taking, stripping, sleep deprivation and degrading treatment. I and troops under my command witnessed some of these abuses in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

 

This is a tragedy. I can remember, as a cadet at West Point, resolving to ensure that my men would never commit a dishonorable act; that I would protect them from that type of burden. It absolutely breaks my heart that I have failed some of them in this regard.

 

That is in the past and there is nothing we can do about it now. But, we can learn from our mistakes and ensure that this does not happen again. Take a major step in that direction; eliminate the confusion. My approach for clarification provides clear evidence that confusion over standards was a major contributor to the prisoner abuse. We owe our soldiers better than this. Give them a clear standard that is in accordance with the bedrock principles of our nation.

 

Some do not see the need for this work. Some argue that since our actions are not as horrifying as Al Qaeda's, we should not be concerned. When did Al Qaeda become any type of standard by which we measure the morality of the United States? We are America, and our actions should be held to a higher standard, the ideals expressed in documents such as the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

 

Others argue that clear standards will limit the President's ability to wage the War on Terror. Since clear standards only limit interrogation techniques, it is reasonable for me to assume that supporters of this argument desire to use coercion to acquire information from detainees. This is morally inconsistent with the Constitution and justice in war. It is unacceptable.

 

Both of these arguments stem from the larger question, the most important question that this generation will answer. Do we sacrifice our ideals in order to preserve security? Terrorism inspires fear and suppresses ideals like freedom and individual rights. Overcoming the fear posed by terrorist threats is a tremendous test of our courage. Will we confront danger and adversity in order to preserve our ideals, or will our courage and commitment to individual rights wither at the prospect of sacrifice? My response is simple. If we abandon our ideals in the face of adversity and aggression, then those ideals were never really in our possession. I would rather die fighting than give up even the smallest part of the idea that is "America."

 

Once again, I strongly urge you to do justice to your men and women in uniform. Give them clear standards of conduct that reflect the ideals they risk their lives for.

 

With the Utmost Respect,

 

-- Capt. Ian Fishback

 

1st Battalion,

 

504th Parachute Infantry Regiment,

 

82nd Airborne Division,

 

Fort Bragg, North Carolina

 

Does anyone really think this guy is just some rogue crackpot?

[parrot 789]

If we abandon our ideals in the face of adversity and aggression, then those ideals were never really in our possession. I would rather die fighting than give up even the smallest part of the idea that is "America."

This pinko f@g should move to France since he hates America so much.

[Voltaire 5,316]

These guys were national guardsmen, part timers for use in Emergency situations. They didn't know the procedures. The National Guard, you guys are picturing some elite unit or something. You'd be amazed at how litle they know or are capable of doing. There's only so much you can train for one weekend a month. It's more or less get caught up to speed as you go.

 

These guys didn't know what they were doing, wern't trained in what they were supposed to be doing and were totally left out to dry by their chain of command despite asking repeatedly for clairification.

 

If you learned CPR within the last year, you're probably as good and qualified at being an EMT technician as these guys are good and qualified at being prison guards.

[paulinstl 296]

Never said I delighted in people being tortured. So don't twist my words, sport.

 

I said there is a "little part in all of us which delights" in terrorists being humiliated. And I think I'm correct in that statement.

 

 

Nope. Maybe a litlte part in some of us, but definitely not all. What we have been doing is way more serious than mere humiliation, Sport. We're supposed to tbe the good guys, not stoop to the level of our enemies.

[TyCobb 0]

Nope. Maybe a litlte part in some of us, but definitely not all. What we have been doing is way more serious than mere humiliation, Sport. We're supposed to tbe the good guys, not stoop to the level of our enemies.

 

You'd rather us be the "bigger men", and that's admirable I suppose. But somehow from that you decide it's more outrageous for our guys to take mean pictures of their guys than for their guys to behead ours. Or at least you seem more outraged by your posts.

 

I just don't buy into your little moral equivelance theory. Sorry.

[paulinstl 296]

You'd rather us be the "bigger men", and that's admirable I suppose. But somehow from that you decide it's more outrageous for our guys to take mean pictures of their guys than for their guys to behead ours. Or at least you seem more outraged by your posts.

 

I just don't buy into your little moral equivelance theory. Sorry.

 

 

Wow! And you accuse me of putting words into your mouth? Yeah gotcha, I think beheading is better than taking "mean pictures". Gimme a break! The point that you won't concede is that we have adopted forms of punishment and interrogation that many people find immoral and a detriment to our cause, including former Secretary of State Colin Powell, The Supreme Court and the GOP controlled Senate Armed Services Committee.

 

Powell: "The world is beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism," Powell said, adding Bush's proposal "would put our troops at risk."

 

Supreme Court : "The center of the fight over detainees is Common Article 3 of the Geneva Convention, which establishes basic protections that must be offered to all combatants — whether they are terrorists, warring tribes, insurgents or any other kind of irregular fighter.

 

The detainee legislation was necessitated by a Supreme Court ruling in June that struck down the administration's rules for prosecuting accused terrorists, in part because the administration's system of military commissions violated Common Article 3 protections.

 

GOP controlled senate committee: "A Republican-controlled Senate committee dealt a blow to President Bush's national-security agenda Thursday, approving a bill that would give terrorism detainees more legal rights than the administration wanted."

 

The majority of Americans never take "delight" when anyone is tortured, anyone!

[ArnieBragg 1]

The majority of Americans never take "delight" when anyone is tortured, anyone!

 

Such a shame that TyCobb isn't part of that majority

[TyCobb 0]

Wow! And you accuse me of putting words into your mouth? Yeah gotcha, I think beheading is better than taking "mean pictures". Gimme a break!

 

Show a little outrage about the beheadings and not just about the "torture" and you could probably clear up people's misconceptions about you. Just a thought.

 

Till then you'll probably get "falsely accused" of a lot of things.

 

The point that you won't concede is that we have adopted forms of punishment and interrogation that many people find immoral and a detriment to our cause, including former Secretary of State Colin Powell, The Supreme Court and the GOP controlled Senate Armed Services Committee.

 

What I'd like to avoid is a dirty bomb or worse wiping out a major US city. If we have to rough up some Islamo-fascist terroirists to accomplish that, so be it.

 

Your little "give up our values to win the war and you lose both" Randi Rhodes attitude is a bit out of touch with reality for my taste. I'm all for standing for higher values ... but those will disappear quick if we lose this "War of Civilizations".

[mobb_deep 920]

who wants to cut and run?

 

we want actual planning, not "stay the course" , while there is no direction

 

also, democrtas would treat them better than republicans, so really they want us

 

 

No need to read any further. This about sums it up.

 

btw: us Libs didn't want to go in there in the first place so "cut and run" isn't very fitting.

[nobody 2,673]

waaahhh--they beat me to death and raped me in front of my family!

 

 

Americans were raping prisoners at Abu Grabass!?!?!

[drobeski 3,061]

The White House

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, D.C. 20016

 

Dear Concerned Citizen:

 

Thank you for your recent letter roundly criticizing our treatment of the Taliban and Al Qaeda detainees currently being held in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. My administration takes these matters seriously, and your opinion was heard loud and clear here in Washington.

 

You'll be pleased to learn that, thanks to the concerns of citizens like you, we are creating a new division of the Terrorist Retraining Program, to be called the "Liberals Accept Responsibility for Killers" program, or LARK for short. In accordance with the guidelines of this new program, we have decided to place one terrorist under your personal care.

 

Your personal detainee has been selected and scheduled for transportation under heavily armed guard to your residence next Monday.

 

Ali Mohammed Ahmed bin Mahmud (you can just call him Ahmed) is to be cared for pursuant to the standards you personally demanded in your letter of admonishment. It will likely be necessary for you to hire some assistant caretakers. We will conduct weekly inspections to ensure that your standards of care for Ahmed are commensurate with those you so strongly recommended in your letter.

 

Ahmed's meal requirements are simple, but we strongly suggest serving meals that do not require utensils, particularly knives and forks. Also, these should be "one-handed" foods; Ahmed will not eat with his left hand since he uses it to wipe himself after purging his bowels (which he will do in your yard) - but look on the bright side ... no increase in the toilet paper bill.

 

He generally bathes quarterly with the change of seasons, assuming that it rains, and he washes his clothes simultaneously. This should help with your water bill. Also, your new friend has a really bad case of body lice that hasn't been completely remedied. Please heed the large orange notice attached to your detainee's cage: "Does not play well with others."

 

Although Ahmed is sociopathic and extremely violent, we hope that your sensitivity to what you described as his "attitudinal problem" will help him overcome these character flaws.

 

Perhaps you are correct in describing these problems as mere cultural differences. He will bite you, given the chance, but his rabies test came back negative, so not to worry. We understand that you plan to offer counseling and home schooling. Your adopted terrorist is extremely proficient in hand-to-hand combat and can extinguish human life with such simple items as a pencil or nail clippers.

 

We do not suggest that you ask him to demonstrate these skills at your next yoga group. He is also expert at making a wide variety of explosive devices from common household products, so you may wish to keep those items locked up, unless (in your opinion) this might offend him.

 

Ahmed will not wish to interact with your wife or daughters (except sexually) since he views females as a subhuman form of property. However, he will be eager to assist with the education of your sons; have available for their use several copies of the Q'uran.

 

Oh - and rest assured he absolutely loves animals, especially cats and dogs. He prefers them roasted, but raw is fine, too, if they aren't more than 2 or 3 days dead.

 

Thanks again for your letter. We truly appreciate it when folks like you, who know so much, keep us informed of the proper way to do our job. We think this watching over each other's shoulder is such a good way for people to interact that we will be sending a team of federal officials with expertise in your line of work to your place of business soon, just to help you do your job better.

 

Don't be concerned that they have the power to close your business, seize your property, and arrest you for any violation of the 4,850,206 laws, codes, regulations and rules that apply to your profession. They're really there just to make sure you're doing everything the proper way. That is what you wanted, right?

 

Well, thank you for this opportunity to interact with such a valued member of the citizenry. You take good care of Ahmed - and remember...we'll be watching.

 

Cordially...Your Buddy, George W. Bush

[paulinstl 296]

Show a little outrage about the beheadings and not just about the "torture" and you could probably clear up people's misconceptions about you. Just a thought.

 

Till then you'll probably get "falsely accused" of a lot of things.

What I'd like to avoid is a dirty bomb or worse wiping out a major US city. If we have to rough up some Islamo-fascist terroirists to accomplish that, so be it.

 

That's another patheticly stupid leap of logic. I'm as outraged as anybody when those fockers do that. How is it that in your world one can't be outraged by the actions of our enemy and still believe that we should hold ourselves to a higher standard?

 

Your little "give up our values to win the war and you lose both" Randi Rhodes attitude is a bit out of touch with reality for my taste. I'm all for standing for higher values ... but those will disappear quick if we lose this "War of Civilizations".

 

I guess I'm in good company with Colin Powell and the SCOTUS. I happen to believe your attitude is a little out of touch with reality for my taste. You toe the line and support any actions this administration has taken. Many of which have been colossal blunders. Noone is so blind as he who will not see.

[kpbuckeye 3]

That's another patheticly stupid leap of logic. I'm as outraged as anybody when those fockers do that. How is it that in your world one can't be outraged by the actions of our enemy and still believe that we should hold ourselves to a higher standard?

I guess I'm in good company with Colin Powell and the SCOTUS. I happen to believe your attitude is a little out of touch with reality for my taste. You toe the line and support any actions this administration has taken. Many of which have been colossal blunders. Noone is so blind as he who will not see.

 

 

when is the last time you posted about your outrage over beheadings?

or anything that wasn't against 'satan bush'? If he tows the rep line, then you tow the dem line, so whats the difference?

[TyCobb 0]

That's another patheticly stupid leap of logic. I'm as outraged as anybody when those fockers do that. How is it that in your world one can't be outraged by the actions of our enemy and still believe that we should hold ourselves to a higher standard?

 

You're awefully good at insult. That sometimes indicates either frustration or weakness.

 

But I agree, one can show outrage at both. You don't, though. You choose to show outrage at Abu Ghraib only. That's my point.