A group of World War II veterans wonât get to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the Allied invasion of France next month the way they wanted the Army decided theyâre too old to safely parachute into Normandy.
Ummm... The Army's probably right...
``I am depressed. I was really looking forward to it,ââ said Howard Greenberg, 79. ``My reason for wanting to do it was to honor two Jewish friends of mine who were killed in World War II. I resent being told Iâm not physically fit. I only weigh 11 pounds more than I did the day I was discharged.ââ Greenberg, a retired optometrist in suburban Bay Village, served with the 11th Airborne in the Pacific during the war and jumped into Normandy in 1994 on the 50th anniversary of D-Day. That time, President Clinton gave the ultimate approval that allowed 38 veterans to jump near Ste.-Mere-Eglise, the D-Day objective of the 82nd Airborne Division. Some of them landed on a herd of French cows.
Bob McCaffery, chairman of the Friends of D-Day 2004, the group raising money to pay for the jump, said he was notified of the Armyâs decision on Thursday. ``The Army realized that these guys have trained and they are the exception among average 80-year-olds,ââ said McCaffery, of Las Vegas, Nev. ``But they said the risk of an injury happening at a ceremony of this magnitude was just too great.ââ McCaffery had hoped President Bush would intercede this time, in part because the first President Bush parachuted when he was 75. McCaffery said the group will appeal to the White House, but acknowledged the situation is complicated by other events going on to mark the anniversary. White House spokesman Trent Duffy said the White House typically reviews such requests. Army Col. Dan Wolfe, executive officer of the World War II Commemoration Committee, did not return a call to his office seeking comment Saturday.
Greenberg said he was aware of the danger. In 1995, he was one of six WWII paratroopers who went to Russia for an airborne tribute. His jump was canceled after the man who jumped before him was killed when his parachute failed to open. In 2000, while performing a tribute near Fort Bragg, N.C., another member of Greenbergâs group was killed when his parachute did not open properly.
``My wife was not crazy about me jumping again,ââ Greenberg said.
Islamist MPs have decided to file a request to quiz Kuwaiti Information Minister Mohammad Abolha-ssan about a concert by young stars of the Lebanese reality TV show âStar Academy,â a spokesman said yesterday. âThe Islamist Block met today (Saturday) and decided to file a request to grill the information minister within the next few days,â MP Faisal al-Muslim told reporters after the meeting. âThis programme (Star Academy) is silly and indecent. It promotes corrupt values that undermine the family and Islamic morals,â said Muslim.
Of course, most things do that, don't they?
The Islamic Block consists of about 15 lawmakers in the 50-member house and is comprised of MPs who belong to various Islamist political groupings in addition to independents.
They'd appear to have a lot of time on their hands...
The concert was held on Thursday amid tight security as some 500 Islamist activists staged a demonstration outside the hall where the show was being staged. According to organizers, the show attracted several thousand people, mostly teenagers. The programme, a copy of a French show of the same name, had female and male Arab teenagers living together ahead of a talent contest and was aired by Lebanonâs private satellite television LBCI. Egyptâs Mohammed Attiya was elected the winner while Kuwaiti Bashar Al Shatti was the runner-up. Shatti was given a heroâs welcome by thousands of young fans when he returned to Kuwait last month.
The six-member Gulf Cooperation Council yesterday approved a funding plan for the much-talked-about GCC power grid project, which is estimated to cost $6 billion. âGCC electricity ministers approved the special mechanism for funding the project,â Kuwaiti Energy Minister Sheikh Ahmad Fahd Al-Sabah said, adding that the project would be implemented âvery soon.â The first phase, which involves linking the grids of Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Qatar, will cost $2.25 billion and is in the prequalification stage, Sheikh Ahmad told reporters after a meeting of GCC ministers in Kuwait City.
Tying themselves to the Magic Kingdom; there's a smart idea.
Saudi Arabia will contribute about 40 percent of the first-phase cost, Kuwait 36.5 percent, Qatar 13.5 percent and Bahrain about 10 percent, Sheikh Ahmad said. The Dammam-based Gulf Electricity Link Authority (GELA) will oversee implementation. The second phase involves linking the grids of Oman and the United Arab Emirates. The resulting two mega-grids will be joined in the final phase. The GCC states began discussing the project some 20 years ago to integrate their transmission systems, make better use of their power-generating capacity and contribute to the development of the GCC common market. But the plan was not given a kickstart until the establishment of GELA in 2001. According to Mohammed Al-Zarah, chief executive of the authority, the project would be implemented in three phases between 2004 and 2010.
Wonder how many do-nothing Saudis are going to be employed?
The huge project, once implemented, will save the GCC states billions of dollars, as it will reduce the cost of generating power. Studies have shown that the cost of linking the GCC power grids will be lower than the setting up of several new power generation plants in the Gulf region. The power grid will ensure regular power supply to thousands of industrial units operating in the Gulf countries, thus helping to boost their productivity substantially.
They might even have a measurable industrial output by then.
I suppose it'll give the terrs something else to boom...
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/09/2004 12:28:21 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
With all that open desert and the output of solar cells going up how long before these clowns get into the elctricity export market. Damn, they might survive the death of the oil economy yet
Two sensational murder cases in Oman involving two Western women have been referred to the grand mufti for a final decision on their fate, which could include a death sentence. An Omani criminal court reached a verdict on Saturday against Dana Gerlish, a German physiotherapist, and her wheelchair-bound Omani alleged lover â both in their 30s â were accused of murdering her father. The prosecution had alleged that Gerlish, who pleaded not guilty to premeditated murder, decided to have her father killed because he opposed the relationship with her alleged lover, whose name has not been divulged in Omani media. Gert Manfred Gerlish, 53, a car mechanic, was shot in the head at point blank range in Muscatâs upmarket Qurum district in early December.
The verdict will only be made public on 17 July the source said. Grand Mufti Shaikh Ahmad bin Muhammad al-Khalili has 60 days to "look into the case and give his opinion," before it can be publicised. The mufti is authorised either to uphold the sentence or reduce it. He reviews such cases along with the sultanateâs top two legal and criminal affairs advisors. Referring a verdict to the grand mufti "is a normal procedure in cases where the death penalty is involved," the source said. "You can only deduce that itâs the death penalty."
Minutes after the verdict was reached in the Germanâs trial, the court made another confidential ruling in the case of an American accused of killing her husband. The verdict against Rebecca Thompson, 43, will also be made public on 17 July. Thompsonâs son by a previous marriage, William Derek Green, 14, and two 17-year-old Omani boys, were also charged in connection with the case. All three pleaded not guilty. Oil worker Mark Lee Thompson was battered to death on 30 December last year and his body partly burnt. During the trial, which concluded 21 April, Thompsonâs wife claimed she was provoked into hitting and killing her husband with an iron bar. Defence lawyers hope "provisions of the penal code related to provocation" may reduce the wifeâs sentence to a year, a legal source said at the time.
I'm not too fired up over either of these cases. Murder most foul is still murder most foul, even when it occurs in Arabia.
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
05/09/2004 12:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Things are not always as they seem when abuse and alcholisim is involved. You should know your facts before making harmful comments maybe you will have to stand in judgment for making bad charechter calls someday.
The mother of an American jailed on terrorism charges in Peru told an international court on Friday that her daughter should be freed because Peru's judicial system is inept.
It was ept enough to jug Lori, wasn't it?
Rhoda Berenson testified before the San Jose-based Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which has the power to legally require member nations, such as Peru, to comply with its rulings. The court agreed to hear Lori Berenson's case after she claimed that Peruvian courts denied her due process. She is serving a 20-year sentence on a conviction for collaborating with Peruvian terrorists.
Something about being caught red-handed...
In her testimony, Rhoda Berenson charged that the Peruvian judicial system permitted human rights violations. She also argued there was bias against her daughter that prevented a fair trial.
They are rather biased against terrorists, aren't they?
In one instance, she said U.S. officials told her that Peru's president had appeared on television in 1995 and mentioned her daughter by name, saying she was collaborating with terrorists.
Which in fact she was.
Lori Berenson was convicted by a secret military court the next year and sentenced to life in prison for being a leader of the Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement and plotting a thwarted attack on Peru's Congress. That decision was overturned in 2000. The following year she was convicted in a civilian court on the lesser charge. Lori Berenson, who has more than a decade remaining on her sentence, denies the charges.
"Wudn't me! I'm innocent, pure as the driven snow!"
Last year, she married Anibal Apari, 40, whom she met when both were serving time in a different prison.
I'm sure he's a fine specimen.
Rhoda Berenson said the regular Peruvian judicial system committed the same mistakes and human rights violations as the military tribunal.
"After all, they jailed my baby!"
She said family members had heard a tape from January 1998 in which Vladimiro Montesinos, Fujimori's shadowy and feared spy chief, says he will make an example out of Lori Berenson.
And he did. Now left-wing American moonbats know that traveling to Peru for La Revolucion isn't such a smart idea.
The judges also listened to the testimony of Fausto Alvarado, who served as Peru's Secretary of Justice until February. Alvarado and the Peruvian government opposes the petition to overturn Berenson's sentence. Testimony and final arguments concluded late Friday. The court issues its decisions an average of six months after the hearings.
Lori ought to do the whole twenty, but I'm guessing she and her nutso family are just going to wear everyone down.
Just another argument in favor of banging terrs when you catch them. Jug 'em, and you get the stuff going on, year after year, with eventually one court or the other springing them, even though the victims are still dead. Bang 'em, and all they get is occasional flowers.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/09/2004 12:13:33 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
When in Rome, don't try to overthrow the government.
#2
It's too bad the Berenson family didn't make its big fuss directly to Lori way back when there was still time to convince her to stop her stupid intrigues.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
05/09/2004 1:51 Comments ||
Top||
#3
It's too bad the Berenson family didn't make its big fuss directly to Lori way back when there was still time to convince her to stop her stupid intrigues.
"So, Lori, what are your plans after graduation?"
"I'm going to move to South America and become involved in a revolutionary guerilla movement."
"That's nice, dear."
"Gee, why don't you go into marketing instead, like your cousin Ernie? He's got a good job with Procter & Gamble in their bathroom cleaner division."
"Nope, revolutionary guerilla movements it is for me. I just wouldn't be any good at marketing. Now, assasinating people, blowing up buildings, terrorizing peasants--that I know how to do."
"Well, it is true I could never get you to clean the bathroom, that's for sure!"
"Oh, Mom, you're such a card!"
Posted by: Mike ||
05/09/2004 7:09 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Maybe there should be a special fund, to help defray the costs of hearing protection for her prison guards, capable of protecting against sustained shreaking levels of 140dB with peak protection of 250dB.
Such gear should be available off the shelf for anyone who works on running 747 engines.
#6
you know that when she finally gets out she'll demand to bring her POS husband to the U.S. as well, right? F 'em and the parents. Sounds a lot like St. Pancake's parents blather
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/09/2004 11:21 Comments ||
Top||
In this week's Spectator British MEP Daniel Hannan publishes a scathing attack on the EU's culture of corruption - and the Brussels' press corps willing complicity in making sure whistleblowers' tales never see the light of day. Hannan cites the scandalous treatment of German investigative reporter Hans-Martin Tillack as representative of the EU's "looking-glass world." Tillack - who is broadly Europhile - has conducted a long investigation into the Eurostat corruption scandal.
When he broadened his brief to look into allegations that EU officials failed to act on whistleblower tip-offs, Olaf, the EU's anti-corruption unit, ordered Belgian police to swoop. Not on the dodgy officials Tillack looked set to expose - but on the reporter himself. Tillack was held for seven hours without access to a lawyer. His private files and bank accounts were seized. Five years of work uncovering EU corruption was confiscated by the people he was investigating.
Hope he kept back-ups.
The silence from Tillack's fellow professionals was deafening. Hannan writes,
Journalists, after all, are usually exercised by the mistreatment of other journalists. When similar things happen in Zimbabwe, they are the subject of stern editorials. Yet here is the EU intimidating its critics with all the crudeness of a tinpot dictatorship. A message is being semaphored to the Brussels press corps: stick to copying out the Commissionâs press releases and youâll be looked after; make a nuisance of yourself and youâll regret it. As the EU correspondent of a British newspaper told me mopily last week, âIf they can do this to a German Europhile and get away with it, people like me might as well pack up and go home.â
Things got worse for Tillack. Attending a meeting of MEPs, he was barracked for "giving ammunition to anti-Europeans:"
Ah yes, the anti-Europeans: a useful phrase to cover anyone with the slightest qualms about how the EU operates. Someone says that there is too much waste in the structural funds? Well he would, wouldnât he: heâs a bigot. A newspaper is calling for the CAP to be scrapped? Thatâs just its way of saying it hates foreigners. As Commissioner (Neil) Kinnock memorably told The Spectator, critics of the EU are xenophobes at heart â and no less so âjust because they happen to speak fluent Catalan or whateverâ.
So, apart from fear of being labelled a racist, what keeps Brussels' journalists tame? Hannan says that many Brussels correspondents are actually in the pay of the EU, "advising" on media relations boards, editing official newsletters and so long. They have become part of the system they were sent to investigate - and the chances of them challenging a nice little earner like that are minimal.
Brussels-based journalists spin the official EU story to readers at home while pocketing the same readers' tax Euros to "consult" the commission on dealing with the media. Some officials, Hannan claims, even expect copy approval of articles written about them. The EU even set up its own news agencies to ensure it gets a good press. News channel Euronews gets funding from the European Commission. Hannan asked Commission President what he got for his money:
(Prodi's) reply was beyond parody. Yes, he said, he did give it grants, but such grants âin no way restrict the editorial freedom of the beneficiary, who must, however, respect the image of the European institutions and the raison dâêtre and general objectives of the Unionâ.
The result? Coverage of EU issues so shiny-happy that it makes North Korean propaganda look as anti-government as the BBC's Today programme.
The distinct absence, in some British newspapers at least, of coverage of this week's latest corruption scandal would seem to prove Hannan's case. With journalists so eager to attack Britain's Prime Minister on his support for everything from university fees and the war in Iraq - not to mention the gleeful publication of far-from-convincing evidence of 'torture' by British soldiers - the press has earned a reputation for fearlessness.
Brussels news, however, is a shocking exception. The only explanation can be that rather preventing the rise of Big Brother, when it comes to EU news, many journalists have become Big Brother.
The inevitable result of the lack of a First Amendment combined with democracy "from the top down" combined with corruption and human nature.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/09/2004 6:07:30 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
The hypocrisy, double standards and political bias of most in the major news media was evident in the meager coverage given a remarkable press conference held in Washington, D.C., on May 4. A group calling themselves "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" declared John Kerry to be "unfit to be commander in chief." The group includes 19 of the 23 officers who served in Kerry's swift boat squadron during the time he was in Vietnam, and every officer in his chain of command, up to Rear Adm. Roy Hoffman, who oversaw all swift boats in Vietnam at the time Kerry was there. Most of their ire was directed at Kerry's false accusation that servicemen routinely committed war crimes. But Kerry's shipmates also accused him of having "withheld and/or distorted material facts as to your own conduct in this war."
Lt. Cmdr. Grant Hibbard, Kerry's immediate superior, said he doubted Kerry deserved the first of the three Purple Hearts he was awarded during his four months in Vietnam: "The briefing of some members of the crew the morning after revealed that they had not received enemy fire," Hibbard said. "And yet Lt. j.g. Kerry informed me of a wound, he showed me a scratch on his arm and a piece of shrapnel in his hand that appeared to be from one of our own M-79s [grenade launcher]. It was later reported to me that Lt. Kerry had fired an M-79 and it had exploded off the adjacent shoreline."
Hibbard's doubts are shared by Louis Letson, the physician who treated Kerry for his wound at the Cam Ranh Bay medical facility: "The story he told was different from what his crewmen had to say about that night. According to Kerry, they had been engaged in a fire fight. He said that his injury had resulted from this enemy action. Some of his crew confided that they did not receive any fire from shore, but that Kerry had fired a mortar round at close range to some rocks on shore. The crewman thought that the injury was caused by a fragment ricocheting from that mortar round when it struck the rocks. That seemed to fit the injury which I treated." Customarily, service members are recommended for decorations by their immediate superior. But Hibbard said he didn't recommend Kerry for that Purple Heart, and doesn't know how he got it.
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/09/2004 11:24 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
If a Republican had tried to run this kind of bulls**t war record past the public, the press would have had him out of the race by now. How can these clowns claim they're not biased?
Posted by: Infidel Bob ||
05/09/2004 11:48 Comments ||
Top||
#2
If Canidate Bush had a letter signed by the people he served with saying about the same as the Kerry deal. It's pretty obvious what the drumbeat would have been.
Instead of a WoT we'd be hell bent on a war on glogal warming. Let the FBI worry about those pesky terroist attacks. Throw the book at them they'd say.
All other things being equal, the picture and story behind it are why Bush will beat Kerry. It Felt Like He Was Trying To Protect Me.
We ran this a couple days ago...
President Bush was working the crowd at a campaign stop in Lebanon, Ohio, when a voice rose above the excited din: "This girl lost her mom in the World Trade Center on 9/11." Bush stopped in his tracks, turned around and without fanfare, wrapped his arms around 15-year-old Ashley Faulkner, hugging her to his heart. "It felt like he was trying to protect me," the teen told The Post yesterday. "Here is the most powerful guy in the world, and he wants to make sure I feel safe," the high-school junior said. "He took 20 seconds to give me a hug for no other reason but to comfort me." Ashley's dad was equally impressed with the president's simple, heartfelt gesture ' and moved by his daughter's response. "That's more emotion than she's shown in 2 1/2 years" since 9/11, said her father, Lynn. "The man just transformed before our eyes. He changed from this very powerful, very important person into a man, and a husband and a father," said Faulkner, 50, of Mason, Ohio. "It was remarkable."
"A very honest sort of sadness came over his face," he said. "He backed up to where Ashley was, looked down at her and asked, 'How are you doing'' Then he gently put his hand around her back and pulled her head to his chest to hug her. Ashley sort of snuggled into him and said, 'I'm OK.'" As Faulkner reached for his camera, "The president looked up, right into my eyes, and told Ashley, 'I can see you have a father who loves you very much.' " Bush is genuinely and honestly a believer in what he is doing. Unlike Kerry, who swings to wherever the polls and speechwriters tell him and has only the goal of being president (much like Nixon, Kerry is driven by his desire to be president with no other reason for many of his actions), Bush, for better or worse, goes with his moral center. And thats what earned him his respect (and votes) from those of us in "Flyover country", whom the Liberal Elitists look down upon. Bush lacks the patrician arrogance that Kerry innately posesses - and the emotions in this picture are things that Kerry and his most ardent supporters cannot produce, nor even begin to understand.
"Smedley! Get The Senator someone to show compassion to!"
"Yes, Mrs. Heinz-Kerry!"
Posted by: OldSpook ||
05/09/2004 10:13:21 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This is why they hate Bush so much - because they do not have the same moral core and it is painful for the "Hate Bush" to be confronted with the truth. Nothing pains a bad person so much as to be confronted with a flawed but good person. Its akin to the hate the US gets from the totalitarians and others of that ilk in the middle-east.
They hate because the mere existence of somone like Bush invalidates their core beliefs. The fact that a conservative can be compassionate, that conservative policies (yet again - remembe Reagan?) have gotten us out of a recession, the fact that conservative social policies are gaining momentum. And instead of adapting to the world, they instead try to tear down the person that has detroyed their cherished but wrong beliefs. The more successful Bush and conservatives has been, the more shrill and violent the opponents have become.
But they cannot change the truth, and thats what will get them in the end. Hate and bile are self destructive emotions - the Republican party nearly destroyed itself over Clinton. The Democrats and the left are now doing far worse to themsleves over Bush. Things like wishing for "a million Mogadishus", slamming a true hero who gave his life helping his fellow Rangers (Ted Rall and UMAss bozoz on TIllman), etc. It willeat them from the inside out. Its already done so partially - and produced the hollow man - John Kerry - as their candidate.
#10
I notice "Man Bites Dog" is trying pathetically to change the subject.
Typical. Thanks for demonstrating such loser actions - and spewing more bile. YOu didnt address the genuine emotions, the words written, nor the events of the article. Instead you post a link to some tired old disproven leftie screed.
You've proved my point for me about the loonies on the left far better than any words I could have written. Your hatred has blinded you and your obivious bile at your betters is eating you up from the inside. Good luck trying to live with whats left of yourself, you poor pathetic subhuman shill.
#11
Oh, and by the way "MDB", thats you your side is losing: you are wrong, and you do not even begin to understand that you ARE wrong, much less the reasons why. Your hatred and rigid idealogy have force you into a corner where you cannot escape except thru violence or illogic. Thats why your life is so painful that you have to lash out at others - you cannot fdace the trucht that you are wrong at the core of your being.
The good thing is, unlike your type who spit on thier opponents and leave them to rot when you "win", our side tends to help and pray for those whome we defeat.
Its called "genuine compassion" - something you are utterly bereft of. You are good at pretending to have it, but not good at actually havin real compassion.
Posted by: Man Bites Dog TROLL ||
05/09/2004 12:49 Comments ||
Top||
#18
[Troll droppings deleted]
Posted by: Man Bites Dog TROLL ||
05/09/2004 12:49 Comments ||
Top||
#19
Anybody have a clue what fever swamp MBD lives in? San Francisco? Unfortunately there are parts of the country that this sort of drivel passes for intelligent conversation. I'm sorry to say I even heard this sort of garbage in San Diego. I think MBD is a Kerry operative assigned to roil the blogosphere.
Because he's good at fabricating from whole cloth?
Any reason why Fred doesn't list the poster's IP address? I'm curious as to where this clown is coming from. Of course I'm in Seattle. Which should make me a prime suspect as a Kerry operative.
#22
10 years of Howard Stern while a President was getting a blow job in the white house (and then he jacked-off, asshole wouldn't even give Monica the pleasure).
Heard this though regarding shock talking Howei. His current ass clowning has to do about the satelite channel. A place he wishes to go.
So MBD you'll always be able to tune into your toilet.
#24
Man Sucks Dog points out that no matter how big the government--and even though we GOP believe in as small a government as possible, it's wartime and a big federal government is almost unavoidable. Ask FDR's ghost!--President Bush always makes time to hug and comfort a little girl who lost her mother.
I'd say from the expression on his fact that President Bush was miffed that the press took the picture and that he was trying to keep this private.
Thank God he's so unlike his predecessor, Bubba Photo Op.
Posted by: Jen ||
05/09/2004 15:37 Comments ||
Top||
#25
MDB I did say a prayer for you at mass - and put you in the Prayer Intentions book for the other masses ther rest of the week.
Several thousand Catholic prayers will be said for your healing.
As for Bush looking older - the Presidency does that to everyone. Compare Clinton on Inagauration day to him when he left office - or Bush I for that matter. There is an enormous amount of stress on that job, and it ages people rapidly.
The only guy it didnt do that to, that I can recall, is Jerry Ford, and he was also our only unelected president: appointed to VP to replace Agnew, then took over when Nixon resigned.
Then again, Ford didnt serve a full term, and was likely the most laid-back guy to ever hold that office. After all he is the only President that became more well known for his snap hook and shanks drives off the tee than his policies.
#26
Jen: I'd say from the expression on his fact that President Bush was miffed that the press took the picture and that he was trying to keep this private.
Posted by: Man Bites Dog TROLL ||
05/09/2004 15:55 Comments ||
Top||
#28
[Troll droppings deleted]
Posted by: Man Bites Dog TROLL ||
05/09/2004 15:55 Comments ||
Top||
#29
Oh, for Chrissakes just JUMP you poor, sick bastard.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
05/09/2004 16:12 Comments ||
Top||
#30
*man sucks bites dog, you've got a virus on your computer, dumbass.
Posted by: Halfass Pete ||
05/09/2004 16:51 Comments ||
Top||
#31
Mike and his revolutionary village people friends just hate America and wants to start a new country that mirrors Hollywood, where sterotypes are reality, materialism is the only religion, and no one cares about the power of a hug. If Big Mike is freak'n out this bad, Bush must be doing something right.
Posted by: Man Bites Dog TROLL ||
05/09/2004 17:19 Comments ||
Top||
#33
[Troll droppings deleted]
Posted by: Man Bites Dog TROLL ||
05/09/2004 17:19 Comments ||
Top||
#34
ZF, President Bush still doesn't look too happy about the privacy of the moment being spoiled.
The father said that it was the most emotion his daughter had shown since 9/11 and I'll bet she was finally crying.
I can relate to this in a personal way because my father died suddenly when I was about the same age as Ashley Faulkner.
Posted by: Jen ||
05/09/2004 17:33 Comments ||
Top||
#35
Anyone notice why MBD was double-posting this whole time?
*pings RedSnapper to get deleted as a TROLL*
Posted by: Edward Yee ||
05/09/2004 17:33 Comments ||
Top||
#36
redsnapper
Since when did Nazis permit dissent within their own party? The Gubernator clashes with Bush on a number of issues. And since when did Nazis have multiracial cabinets?
#37
Jen, to me the expression seems to convey the feeling Bush was experiencing looking at the husband of a 9/11 victim. He seems to be sharing the father's pain just as the daughter's. The wonderful thing about this photo is that Bush had no reason to think that anyone, other than the family, would ever see it. No mugging for the press, this is genuine.
#38
Too true, Anon4777.
All I know is that President Bush is doing this *for me*.
I wish that I could hug and comfort every one of those people who lost loved ones on 9/11 (and since in the WOT) but I can't.
But the President can and does do it on my behalf as well as his own.
Bless their hearts!
Posted by: Jen ||
05/09/2004 18:20 Comments ||
Top||
#40
Redsnapper: Your village called. They've noticed their idiot is missing and are willing to take you back.
Wanker.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
05/09/2004 20:35 Comments ||
Top||
#41
snapperhead, you Dim Libs have your tin foil beanies on way too tight!
Posted by: Jen ||
05/09/2004 20:36 Comments ||
Top||
#42
[Off-topic or abusive comments deleted]
Posted by: Man Bites Dog TROLL ||
05/09/2004 22:01 Comments ||
Top||
#43
ManSucksDog, the US is doing great and good things in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
You just made the $200 trill figure up.
And who knew there was a "Euro-democracy?"
What the EUros have going is mainly dressed-up socialism, heading towards Soviet Communism if France and Germany have their way.
President Bush is no crook. That would be the idol of you guys on the Left--Bill Clinton--the Arkansas Crook who took from the pardoned like Marc Rich, the ChiComs, and who's been known to take more than a trip or 2 to Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, etc., etc.
Posted by: Jen ||
05/09/2004 22:07 Comments ||
Top||
#44
Yeah, real sincere! In the first chapter of Craig Unger's "House of Bush; House of Saud," he documents the forcedown of an airliner that was carrying a heart to a dying transplant seeker, as the Crook prepared to fly 140 Saudis - many terrorist supporters - to escape US justice. When stupidity prospers, none dare call it stupidity.
Real integrity and public purpose!
http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0228/ridgeway.php
Posted by: Man Bites Dog TROLL ||
05/09/2004 10:36 Comments ||
Top||
#45
Yeah, real sincere! In the first chapter of Craig Unger's "House of Bush; House of Saud," he documents the forcedown of an airliner that was carrying a heart to a dying transplant seeker, as the Crook prepared to fly 140 Saudis - many terrorist supporters - to escape US justice. When stupidity prospers, none dare call it stupidity.
Real integrity and public purpose!
http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0228/ridgeway.php
Posted by: Man Bites Dog TROLL ||
05/09/2004 10:36 Comments ||
Top||
#46
Boo Hoo! What a compassionate guy! Howard Stern doesn't get a single fine for 10 years. One week after he favors Kerry over the Texas Crook, Colin Powell's brother at the FCC, starts the repression rolling. Real publlic purpose!
Jen loves Big Government and equally intelligent - cough! - flatterers.
Posted by: Man Bites Dog TROLL ||
05/09/2004 12:49 Comments ||
Top||
#47
Boo Hoo! What a compassionate guy! Howard Stern doesn't get a single fine for 10 years. One week after he favors Kerry over the Texas Crook, Colin Powell's brother at the FCC, starts the repression rolling. Real publlic purpose!
Jen loves Big Government and equally intelligent - cough! - flatterers.
Posted by: Man Bites Dog TROLL ||
05/09/2004 12:49 Comments ||
Top||
#48
OldSpook:
Pray for restoration of your critical faculty.
Reverend Moon-Bush! Reverend Moon-Bush! Saudis are good! Saudis are good! Arbusto was good business! Arbusto was good business!
Posted by: Man Bites Dog TROLL ||
05/09/2004 15:55 Comments ||
Top||
#49
OldSpook:
Pray for restoration of your critical faculty.
Reverend Moon-Bush! Reverend Moon-Bush! Saudis are good! Saudis are good! Arbusto was good business! Arbusto was good business!
Posted by: Man Bites Dog TROLL ||
05/09/2004 15:55 Comments ||
Top||
#50
Ignorance ain't bless:
http://www.nytimes.com/ref/books/bush-books.html
Posted by: Man Bites Dog TROLL ||
05/09/2004 17:19 Comments ||
Top||
#51
Ignorance ain't bless:
http://www.nytimes.com/ref/books/bush-books.html
Posted by: Man Bites Dog TROLL ||
05/09/2004 17:19 Comments ||
Top||
#52
Sincere? I think not. Stage managed? Possibly. Nothing is beyond this man. Say goodbye to freedom and democracy and hello the new Nazi party.
#53
Fred Pruitt:
Notice how the self-loving regulars love the useless $200,000,000,000 democraticization squanderage in Afghanistan and Iraq, while they don't trust Euro-democracy? Why? They are deferring judgement to the Texas Crook, who has no paymasters in Europe. His bosses are all in Riyadh. "Islam is peace."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010917-11.html
Posted by: Man Bites Dog ||
05/09/2004 22:01 Comments ||
Top||
John Kerry said something amazing the other day. He was talking to the Wall Street Journal and was asked about his many attacks on ââBenedict Arnold CEOsââ -- for example: ââWe will repeal every single benefit, every single loophole, every single reward for any Benedict Arnold CEO or corporation that take American jobs overseas and stick you with the bill.ââ (Kerry in Virginia, Feb. 10)
Senator Flippy has now decided this line is nonoperative. As he told the chaps at the Journal, ââYou know, I called a couple of times to overzealous speechwriters and said âLook, thatâs not what Iâm saying.â Benedict Arnold does not refer to somebody who in the normal course of business is going to go overseas and take jobs overseas. That happens. I support that. I understand that. I was referring to the people who take advantage of noneconomic transactions purely for tax purposes -- sham transactions -- and give up American citizenship. Thatâs a Benedict Arnold. You give up your American citizenship but you want to continue to do business.ââ
Got that? When Kerry talks about ââany Benedict Arnold CEO or corporation that takes American jobs overseas,ââ heâs not referring to someone who ââtakes jobs overseas.ââ Perish the thought! Heâs all in favor of taking jobs overseas. It wasnât him who attacked all those ââBenedict Arnold CEOs,ââ just his ââoverzealous speechwriters.ââ And the minute he discovered it was going on, he called them to say, ââLook, thatâs not what Iâm saying.ââ
I mean, OK, it was what he was saying in the narrow technical sense of words emerging from between his lips, day after day, night after night, all through primary season. I had a quick rummage through the Nexis database, and found a mere 746 citations for Kerry and the expression ââBenedict Arnold.ââ I myself have personally been present on three occasions when he attacked ââBenedict Arnold CEOsââ who ââtake jobs overseas,ââ and on two of them he didnât have a TelePrompTer or even a script. He just stood in front of us and the words came out of his mouth, almost as if they were what he himself believed.
Happily, heâs now explained to us that what he was saying is not what he was saying. Heâs like one of those sitcom actresses -- Cybill Shepherd, say -- who complain the writers didnât get her character right until the second season. But now Johnnifer Kerriston has got his character down pat. Although we all left those New Hampshire campaign rallies with the impression that ââBenedict Arnoldââ was a term he reserved for CEOs who ââtake jobs overseas,ââ itâs clear it now refers to CEOs who ââgive up American citizenship.ââ This is apparently a huge problem. Because of tax loopholes, thousands of CEOs find it advantageous to take out Mexican citizenship, swim back to America and work as ââundocumented executives.ââ
Well, itâs good to know the senator has finally found a way to neutralize the flip-flop question. Many of us assumed that, when he was for the war and then he was against it and then he was for it again, that he kept changing his mind. But now itâs possible he was just being entirely consistent -- heâs always been for it, or against it, itâs just that his ââoverzealous speechwritersââ kept putting the wrong words in his mouth.
"Some Son of a bitch put the wrong words in my mouth!"
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/09/2004 9:05:20 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
BTW: "Johnnifer Kerriston" - that might really stick! you read it here first....
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/09/2004 9:38 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I'm old enough to remember every Democratic presidential candidate from JFK on (the real JFK, John Kennedy, not this Epsilon-Minus Submoron who's styling himself the "new" JFK), and I don't remember any who came across as more of a jerk than John Kerry. He's shifty, he's irresolute, he's pompous, he's boring, and he's also apparently a couple of pom-poms short of a full pep squad.
The idea of this guy being President is a little unsettling.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
05/09/2004 9:52 Comments ||
Top||
#3
You know, I called a couple of times to overzealous speechwriters and said 'Look, thatâs not what Iâm saying.'
Uh-huh. Sure you did. Pull the other one.
Lying crapweasel.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
05/09/2004 10:41 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I f**king swear, I don't believe this little s**t could poor piss outin of a boot if the instructions were written on the heel.
Posted by: l Bones Johnson ||
05/09/2004 10:43 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Maybe Kerry's speech writers should enroll in the 'Dr. Seuss School of Rhyme And Meter'. Like AlGore did during the 2000 Florida recount.
"I will count them on my hand.
I will count them in the can..."
Kerry wouldn't make any more sense, but it
would be much more entertaining.
Posted by: Jack Deth ||
05/09/2004 12:14 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Accccck!
Reminds me of Marhsall Petain!
AcccccccccccK!
Give me the daisy, give me the daisy, give me the daisy, give me the daisy! Acccccccccccccck!
#7
Isn't it strange - he always blames somebody. Just like the Arabs blaming somebody else for their crap.
Posted by: marek ||
05/09/2004 13:29 Comments ||
Top||
#8
I'm trying to imagine the rudderless John effin Kerry as a war time CINC. Might be like General Gaston Billotte during the spring of 1940 as described in The Fall of France:
...morale at Billotte's headquarters in Douai was at rock bottom. On 15 May, Major Archdale, the British liason officer attached to Billotte, saw several officers in tears. For the next two days, to their growing frustration, neither the British nor the Belgians received a word from Billotte. Achdale, alarmed at the 'malignant inaction' he observed around Billotte, arranged for him to visit Gort's headquarters on 18 May. This meeting achieved nothing except to reveal to the British the depths of Billotte's despair and the fact that he had no plan of any kind. On the drive back to his headquarters, he told Archdale: 'I'm shattered and I can't do anything against these Panzers.'
'My God, how awful to be allied to so temperamental a race', commented (British General Henry) Pownall.
#9
Methinks Manbitesog is dumber than a bucket of hair, along with his liberal Democrat buddies (John Kerry included). by the way, I'm a Heartless Libertarian.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
05/09/2004 21:18 Comments ||
Top||
Kerry continues to be as opportunistic as a Clinton and as bright as a Gore. The following is from a Kerry campaign mailing
  "Over the past week we have all been shocked by the pictures from the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq," wrote Ms. Cahill. "John Kerry has called on Donald Rumsfeld to resign, and today weâre asking you to support him by adding your name to the call for Rumsfeld to resign." In addition to allowing recipients to sign a petition demanding that Mr. Rumsfeld resign, the e-mail also permitted recipients to donate cash online.
Posted by: RWV ||
05/09/2004 12:19:29 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I will wait until Al Jizz and whomever else has some has finished editing the pics we are about to see.
#2
It would seem Mr. Kerry will stop at absolutely nothing in his obsession to secure the White House.
While America is in war for her national survival the front runner for a party playing the same power politics game as always, instead of trying to unite the voters, Kerry's pack of elitist neo-socialists seek only to divide the very fibre of our threatened nation, for the sole self serving reason of regaining absolute power over the American people, in order to continue the Clinton era, worse than before.
Division among the American public only serves the radical Islamic enemy.
How does John Forbes Kerry sleep at night?
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
05/09/2004 0:45 Comments ||
Top||
#3
How does John Forbes Kerry sleep at night?
Very well. People with no shame and no conscience usually do.
He's not anti-war; he's on the other side - just like in 1971.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
05/09/2004 0:52 Comments ||
Top||
#4
You're 100% correct, he is on the enemy's side, for his own purpose, then as now, climbing the political ladder for greed & total power.
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
05/09/2004 0:55 Comments ||
Top||
#5
I'm not sure though. Alfred, Simone or Theodore?
#6
The past 3 month of this election year came to a complete boil over for me today.
All day I have been reminding myself of how I felt that faithful day. And for the life of me I can't understand why those images are not broadcast everyday into American homes is beyond me! Instead we get sedition and a power grab over what is right for our country. When was the last time you cried about that day
EFL
Deep divisions are emerging at the top of the U.S. military over the course of the occupation of Iraq, with some senior officers beginning to say that the United States faces the prospect of casualties for years without achieving its goal of establishing a free and democratic Iraq. Their major worry is that the United States is prevailing militarily but failing to win the support of the Iraqi people. That view is far from universal, but it is spreading and being voiced publicly for the first time. Army Maj. Gen. Charles H. Swannack Jr., the commander of the 82nd Airborne Division, who spent much of the year in western Iraq, said he believes that at the tactical level at which fighting occurs, the U.S. military is still winning. But when asked whether he believes the United States is losing, he said, "I think strategically, we are." Too bad he doesnât provide any details, because his comment doesnât track well with whatâs going on across Iraq, and his region has always been the major problem.
Army Col. Paul Hughes, who last year was the first director of strategic planning for the U.S. occupation authority in Baghdad, said he agrees with that view and noted that a pattern of winning battles while losing a war characterized the U.S. failure in Vietnam. "Unless we ensure that we have coherency in our policy, we will lose strategically," he said in an interview Friday. Again, generalized blather that doesnât track with observed reality. He doesnât see the coherence of current strategy? Perhaps current strategy is flawed, but how about some specifics -- no, make that LOTS of specifics -- on exactly how, and exactly what he suggests as alternative.
The emergence of sharp differences over U.S. strategy has set off a debate, a year after the United States ostensibly won a war in Iraq, (ostensibly?!!! The ability to write and publish sentences like this is what has made modern elite journalism the laughable product it is)
about how to preserve that victory. The core question is how to end a festering insurrection that has stymied some reconstruction efforts, made many Iraqis feel less safe and created uncertainty about who actually will run the country after the scheduled turnover of sovereignty June 30. Inside and outside the armed forces, experts generally argue that the U.S. military should remain there but should change its approach. Some argue for more troops, others for less, but they generally agree on revising the stated U.S. goals to make them less ambitious. They are worried by evidence that the United States is losing ground with the Iraqi public. Translation: we donât really have any ideas, except to ditch our objectives and settle for something less.
Some officers say the place to begin restructuring U.S. policy is by ousting Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, whom they see as responsible for a series of strategic and tactical blunders over the past year. (specific list, please?)
Several of those interviewed said a profound anger is building within the Army at Rumsfeld and those around him. (thatâs nice, now how about some ideas that make sense?)
A senior general at the Pentagon said he believes the United States is already on the road to defeat. "It is doubtful we can go on much longer like this," he said. "The American people may not stand for it -- and they should not." (if our military were generally made of stuff like this, weâd perform like the Iraqi Army of old -- pathetic!)
Asked who was to blame, this general pointed directly at Rumsfeld and Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz. "I do not believe we had a clearly defined war strategy, end state and exit strategy before we commenced our invasion," he said. "Had someone like Colin Powell been the chairman [of the Joint Chiefs of Staff], he would not have agreed to send troops without a clear exit strategy. The current OSD [Office of the Secretary of Defense] refused to listen or adhere to military advice." What a load of hooey. "If only we had Colin charge". We had a clearly defined war strategy -- which worked brilliantly despite your objections, pal, and with only 2/3 of even Rummyâs plan due to the 4th ID sitting on ships while the fighting was going on. "Exit strategy" is a concept for journalists and academics. Success is the concept we expect of public officials. We always have the option of adjusting our acceptable end-state. Again, exactly what "exit strategy" would this genius have incorporated in the ignored advice, and how would it be any different than conquer, pacify, stabilize, and adapt as you do so?
"Thereâs no question that weâre facing some difficulties," Wolfowitz said. "I donât mean to sound Pollyannaish -- we all know that weâre facing a tough problem." But, he said, "I think the course weâve set is the right one, which is moving as rapidly as possible to Iraqi self-government and Iraqi self-defense." Wolfowitz, who is widely seen as the intellectual architect of the Bush administrationâs desire to create a free and democratic Iraq that will begin the transformation of the politics of the Middle East, also strongly rejected the idea of scaling back on that aim. "The goal has never been to win the Olympic high jump in democracy," he said. Moving toward democratization in Iraq will take time, he said. Yet, he continued, "I donât think the answer is to find some old Republican Guard generals and have them impose yet another dictatorship in an Arab country." But Wolfie doesnât understand -- all US objectives must be achieved instantly, painlessly, and in a way that ensures an expansion of the budget for Army heavy divisions. Geez, what a rube he must be.
The top U.S. commander in the war also said he strongly disagrees with the view that the United States is heading toward defeat in Iraq. "We are not losing, militarily," Army Gen. John Abizaid said in an interview Friday. He said that the U.S. military is winning tactically. But he stopped short of being as positive about the overall trend. Rather, he said, "strategically, I think there are opportunities." The prisoner abuse scandal and the continuing car bombings and U.S. casualties "create the image of a military thatâs not being effective in the counterinsurgency," he said. But in reality, "the truth of the matter is . . . there are some good signals out there"... Much more at the link... The anger and bitterness of the Army is never explained. Vague and sometimes obviously ill-founded gripes about strategy hardly explain it. Is there anything more at work here than the fear of Rummy changing the service most in need of dramatic change? Was the Crusader cancellation an unforgivable assault on the establishment? Is it the frustration of having been proved spectacularly wrong about both Afghanistan and Iraq, where the decision to discard much of the consensus professional advice was vindicated?
With all due respect to the Army, most of which helps make our armed forces the best and most admirable ever fielded, there seems to be a group of officers who are strategically clueless, parochial, whiny, and spineless. Itâs hard to imagine this sort of crew in WWII -- weâd have reconsidered the war after Kasserine Pass, and one week of Okinawa would have been "game over" for these guys.
Itâs eerily appropriate that Tom Ricks did this article for the WaPo. He wrote the infamous "quagmire" article last March, arguably the dumbest war article ever published in the modern era. Seems he went to many of the same "sources" for this -- the whiny, apocalyptic, vague, substance-free bitching sounds familiar.
#1
The Army has not learned a thing.Need a Marine in charge in Iraq to finish the job.Afterwards,we can then start being nice,and bring the Army back in to keep order.
#2
What is at work here is at least 8 years of Clinton approved promotions at the General officer level. What kind of soldiers did he promote and which did he let go? Why did Rummy have to go outside the current active oficers to get Schoomaker when it was time to name a new Chief of Staff?
If this continues, the lesson todays lieutenants and captains will learn is that like Vietnam, we didn't loose the war in Iraq, but unlike it, we lost it in the Pentagon. That could mean a better Army in 20 years, but I fear for what happens in the meantime.
Posted by: Mr. Davis ||
05/09/2004 17:39 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I'm sorry, fellow RBers, but I don't buy any story from the WashBrainPost, especially stories like this one that put the top brass in a bad light.
SOP for the WaPo every d*mn day.
Posted by: Jen ||
05/09/2004 17:45 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Funny, Rich, I was going to make some crack about putting more Marines in charge, too. But I don't know if that's really relevant here. I'm just speculating when I talk about Army resentment over "transformation" and Rummy's successful and wise rejection of conventional Army planning for the two wars -- I think to draw firm conclusions about cause and effect here would be as silly as the misinformed pundits who off-handedly refer to "the neocons," as if that's a meaningful concept either in general or in particular relationship to some actual problem being discussed.
I think there are a lot of fine Army officers at all levels -- and we've seen some great performance in Iraq. I also think there must be some interesting, concrete, insightful criticism of our tactics/strategy in Iraq -- it's just that we never, ever, hear it. Just the usual vague, general, and/or off-base sniping and sweeping conclusions, cherry-picked from the usual suspects, as in this article.
Even if -- like very bad poker players -- pre-emptively abandon our higher goals even before we've given them any time, the achievement of lower goals (basic stabilization, preserving territorial integrity and a non-hostile government) will still take time and, tragically, lives. Drive-by regime change can be the call in certain places (it's practically the right call and the actual policy in Afghanistan), but not in Iraq. These general officers might want to remind themselves that real strategic life is not a systems analysis model or a painless, plannable simulation.
#5
There likely is some concern about keeping large amounts of troops in Iraq for an undefined time.Distorts budgeting,training,planning,etc.
However,it should also be remembered the senior Army Brass hates Rumsfeld.He tried to cancel the Army's pet projects-new SP,Comanchee helo-and brought in a retired Green Beret to be top General(conventional Army establishment hates SF).Rumsfeld believes combo small powerful computers,improved comm has revolutionized warfare and Army doesn't "get it";while Army believes no was ever killed by a radio-it's firepower radio can call that kills.Frustrations among top Generals have been brewing,esp.because they couldn't speak out both because troops are in field,and if military is seen criticizing Bush Admin.it would be a boost to Kerry,who the Army sure doesn't want.If Bush looks sure to be reelected we will see alot more stories on how military is winning war,but politicians are screwing up peace.
Posted by: Stephen ||
05/09/2004 18:21 Comments ||
Top||
#6
like this one that put the top brass in a bad light
Never Rong! Never Rong!
#7
Never Rong! Never Rong!
That would be the WashedUpPost who acts that way.
The Post doesn't know *squat* about this...notice how their sources are always unnamed?
I would be very ANGRY if the Pentagon were leaking war plans to the WaPo in the middle of this--or any--way.
As if they would. Which they didn't.
Posted by: Jen ||
05/09/2004 19:47 Comments ||
Top||
#8
I would be very ANGRY
Always rite! Always rite!
A Special Forces officer aimed higher, saying that "Rumsfeld needs to go, as does Wolfowitz."
Asked about such antagonism, Wolfowitz said, "I wish they'd have the -- whatever it takes -- to come tell me to my face."
Yeah, he could fill in for Rummy if anything happened.
Posted by: Mr. Davis ||
05/09/2004 20:15 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Deep divisions are emerging at the top of the U.S. military over the course of the occupation of Iraq, No need to read further. Lots of good points here, but it's all presented within their "occupation" framework which is not a realistic way to view this war.
This isn't a war we can "pull out" of. It's like a forest fire that we can see will consume us if we don't put it out. Iraq and Afghanistan are backfires that may help us to slow the flames, but it won't stop the fire. There is no "pulling out" of this war. The war will, by it's very nature, come to us. Those who think we can don't understand what is happening. But eventually, they will be forced to grasp it.
Posted by: Anny Emous ||
05/09/2004 21:36 Comments ||
Top||
#14
I'm w/Jen, not buying this article either. Top Brass - at least in the Corps, don't speak out on strategic policy that's going on - it's taboo. We also don't second guess the secdef/secnav/jcs or C-n-C on or off the record. This article is prolly 90% b.s.
BTW - just had a good buddy come back from 6 months in Baghdad/an nasiriyah - said the media is full of shit. 80-85% of the people he met love the heck out of the Marines. He even got lost in Baghdad one day out looking around, said the locals couldn't do enough to help him out. Even had some women propose marriage (that's prolly bullshit between me & you - but I believe the rest).
by John Iwaski, Seattle Post-Intelligencer Rather amazing to see such sentiments reported in the ultraliberal Post-Intelligencer ("As intelligent as a fence post."). EFL. Hat tip: LGF.
The abuse of Iraqi prisoners at the hands of U.S. soldiers draws intense reactions from some who left Iraq to find freedom in Washington state, but prolonged outrage isnât one of them. While some local Iraqis are bothered by the images, others welcome them. . . . Imad al-Turfy, another Everett resident, shows no sympathy for the prisoners, saying their treatment paled when compared with the horrors inflicted under Saddam Husseinâs regime. "They raped our women. They killed our kids. So thereâs hatred between us, the people here, and the people in Iraq," he said, referring to the Shiite Muslims who emigrated and the Sunni Muslims who ruled Iraq under Saddam. "Anything coming to them would make me happy." . . . Al-Turfy said he could "tell a million stories" about Saddamâs abuses: the people who were blown apart by dynamite or thrown off 20-story buildings, or the family that was buried alive in a car in Baghdad. "You canât imagine," he said. "They killed us like rats. Like anything cheap." So to view photos of prisoners in humiliating positions -- one month after seeing another chilling image, the charred and mutilated corpses of Americans hanging from a bridge over the Euphrates River -- was "worth it, because they did the same to us," al-Turfy said, a comment echoed by several other Iraqis.
Mosafer Al-Yaseri, a Lynnwood resident, said that the abuse by some soldiers should not taint the overall efforts of the U.S. Army. "(The Iraqis) feel soldiers come from good families. Over there, there are 135,000 soldiers. Out of that, 10 people are bad," he said. His cousin, Salam Al-Yaseri, said that the images were "not good for the American government or the American people. ... As you know, we are Muslims. This is a very bad thing in our religion. The people that did this did not (represent) the American people." [Hussein Al-Muhanna, who came to the United States in 1993,] said the photos of prisoners were "embarrassing for me." Though at least some of those depicted were loyal to Saddam, "I still do not want the American Army to do that," he said. These people have the right perspective. I suspect, from the polling data Iâve seen reported the last few days, that most Americans do too: the abuse was wrong and should be punished, but it doesnât taint the whole country and doesnât mean our project in Iraq is irredeemably lost.
One wonders if the media or members of a certain political party will get it eventually.
Posted by: Mike ||
05/09/2004 7:23:11 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Hello? Is anyone in there?
Those photos are faked. The have been Photoshopped or run through the GIMP.
These photoes appear to be part of a propoganda campaign against our troops.
#2
When the people in the photos (the Americans) say they are real I tend to believe them. I have seen nothing to convince me they are faked, especially when Mr. Rumsfeld in his testimony on Friday said he was told back in January there were photographs. There seem to be hundreds if not thousands of photographs as well as videos. The pictures of British and American troops sexually abusing Iraqi women have been proved to be fakes.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
05/09/2004 8:43 Comments ||
Top||
#3
A distinction needs to be made. And as it is, it is not being made. The pr0n photos are released to be as real as the others we know to be real.
We know now some photos are faked but we do not know which ondes.
My whole argument is that there is a good probability that some of the photoes Rumsfeld is talking about are fake or at least have been planted. I don't want the Pentagon staff traipsing down a road to please American leftists if even one photo is faked or planted.
And the photoes that are available that are real, the other 99.999 percent of soldiers who did not commit these crimes deserve to know who took the photos and why, why the deeds were done, who told them to do the deeds and why, and who knew about the deeds and the photos, and who did and did not inform command of these things.
And you gotta admit in the passed week no one the press has been prudent about any photos, or any element in this story. They have taken the photos, published them without getting any infromation answering the above, I think, rather critically important questions, before they were published.
I think in the end this will not be the American media's finest hour, especiually if we find one photo with so much as a single pixel changed.
In fact, I think they need to be hauled before the bar to explain their participation in the disemination of enemy war propoganda.
#7
Well said Badanov. Their really has been no attempt, as far as I can tell, regarding the whowhatwhenwherewhy thing on the photos. Not that any of that shit happened. If the photos were to be used in the winning of the war or to be used in the loseing of the war.
A coordinated attack on Rumsfield, even before he testified, even a call for him to step down by my local paper, a Mcclatchy rag, along with calls from outraged dem-enemy congressmems and then a well planned demo at that hearing against Rums, not against the war or it's all about oil. Nope, Rumsfield.
I'm not trying to be a conspiracy guy. Just have questions and I'm easily lead.
WE DO NOT KNOW how close the American effort in Iraq may be to irrecoverable failure. We are inclined to believe, however, that the current Washington wisdom--that the United States has already failed and there is nothing to do now but find a not-too-damaging way to extricate ourselves--is far too pessimistic, a panicked reaction to the difficulties in Falluja and with Moktada al-Sadr, as well as to the disaster of Abu Ghraib. We are also appalled at the cavalier and irresponsible way people on both left and right now suggest we should pull out and simply let Iraq go to hell. We wonder how those who, rightly, complain about the American mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners, can blithely consign the entire Iraqi population to the likely prospect of a horrific civil war and the brutal dictatorship that would follow. Spare us that kind of "humanitarianism" ... More at the link. Good article.
Ask commanders on the ground either in Iraq or Afghanistan what the absolute âmust haveâ item is this year, and more than anything else, most will tell you they want a small, tactical, unmanned aerial vehicle (TUAV) called the Shadow, along with the trained Soldiers to operate it. Army National Guard Soldiers from both Maryland and Pennsylvania are responding to that need, and have been mobilized for up to two years to learn to fly and maintain this highly sought after piece of battlefield equipment. Twenty-four Soldiers from Marylandâs 629th Military Intelligence Battalion as well as 20 Soldiers from Pennsylvaniaâs 56th Infantry Brigade are currently undergoing an extensive training program at Fort Huachuca, Ariz., before being deployed overseas sometime later this year. âIâm really looking forward to this mission,â said Spc. William J. Sowa, who was called away from his job as an intelligence analyst assistant at the National Ground Intelligence Center in central Virginia. âIâm very proud to be flying these UAVâs.â Sowa, who spent some active duty time in the Air Force before joining the Maryland Guard, said he likens his mission as a UAV pilot to that of the Air Forceâs famous flying sergeants of World War II. âIt has been a long time since an NCO has climbed into an airplane and flown a combat mission in a war,â said Sowa. âUAV pilots donât actually climb into a cockpit and take off,â he said, âbut we are flying that aircraft. It is the closest an Army enlisted soldier can get to piloting an aircraft in a combat environment, and I think that is a really high honor.â
Each Shadow TUAV system consists of four air vehicles, two ground control stations and associated components and support equipment. Each UAV is intended to provide coverage of a brigade area of interest for up to four hours at 50 kilometers from the launch and recovery site and its highly sophisticated camera system can identify vehicles up to 8,000 feet above ground. âItâs a lifesaving device,â said Staff Sgt. Gabriel Golden of Hagerstown, Md. âItâs a way to keep people from getting killed on the battlefield, and this piece of equipment is much easier to replace than someoneâs life,â said Golden.
Lt. Col John Kelleher of the office of the assistant secretary of the Army, said in Operation Iraqi Freedom the Shadow has been flown at more than four times its projected operational tempo and commanders continue to ask for more UAVâs. Army officials are working hard to meet this demand. In a training program that would normally take 23 weeks and three days to complete, these Army National Guard Soldiers have been told they need to fully qualified and mission ready in just over 16 weeks. âItâs very hectic. Iâve already been to the two-way shooting range once,â said Golden, âbut this is a different environment. Iâm just waiting to do my part.â
During the course, Soldiers receive instruction from FAA certified instructors on flight line operations, military intelligence, preflight operations as well as several weeks of actual flight training - the equivalent of 34 undergraduate college credit hours. âThey are handling it extremely well,â said Charles M. Rossman, chief instructor at the U.S. Army UAV Training Center. âWe were given an end date for this group of soldiers and in order to meet that date we had to make things happen.â Soldiers are currently scheduled to complete their training and graduate on June 3. Rossman said the Army currently has fewer than 300 trained UAV pilots in the force and these citizen soldiers are the first to receive this training and equipment.
Operating under a newly created Mobilization Program of Instruction, these Maryland and Pennsylvania Army National Guard Soldiers are in training 12 hours a day, six days a week, said Rossman. âThese National Guard Soldiers are seasoned and mature; they have been through all these things before and they recognize the importance of what they are doing,â said instructor Jerry Dryer. âThey step up to the plate and know exactly what is expected of them and the meet and exceed that in every way.â
âWeâre set up, we have a mission and we know what weâre doing,â said Sgt. David Bogle, a King of Prussia, Pa., native and Pennsylvania Guardsman. âThat is what keeps you awake at 6:30 p.m., on a Saturday night after 12 hours of power point slides.â
âThatâs what the National Guard is,â said Spc. Thomas W. Gregg, âWeâre more mature, and weâve had a lot more life experiences than most Soldiers.â Gregg, a University of Maryland student who was just one semester away from a degree in History and Ancient Studies and married just ten days before being mobilized, compares his deployment to that of the character Odysseus in Homerâs The Odyssey. âI have my loved ones back home waiting for me and I have to go through this odyssey before I can come back.â
In what will likely be a two-year mobilize, train, deploy scenario, these Maryland and Pennsylvania Army National Guard Soldiers are part of a historic transformation initiative announced last spring by Lt. Gen. H Steven Blum, the chief of the National Guard Bureau. Blum said America insists on a relevant, reliable and ready National Guard that is transformed for the 21st century. âWe, the Guard, must provide the kind of forces that America needs.â
âThe National Guard is a real breath of fresh air to work with,â said Dryer. âThey bring real world experiences with their jobs back home in terms of performance, in terms of logistics and in terms of knowing what it takes to make things happen.â
Posted by: tipper ||
05/09/2004 2:02:34 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
My only comment is to agree with the sentiment at the end of the article. Viz. Weâre set up, we have a mission and we know what weâre doing,â said Sgt. David Bogle, a King of Prussia, Pa., native and Pennsylvania Guardsman. âThat is what keeps you awake at 6:30 p.m., on a Saturday night after 12 hours of power point slides
And believ me, death by power point is no joke!
See you in Iraq.
Posted by: N Guard ||
05/09/2004 10:24 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Just be careful. Them little engines can still cut your finger off and put out an eye. I'm still trying to figure what manner of control line they use.
The UN forces Kerry wants to turn our security over to...
German troops serving with the Kfor international peacekeeping contingent in Kosovo have been accused of hiding in barracks "like frightened rabbits" during the inter-ethnic rioting that erupted in the province in March. calling Jimmy Carter!
A hard-hitting German police report sent to the Berlin government last week criticises the troops for cowardice and for their failure to quell the rioting in which 19 people died and about 900 others were injured. The charges - the most serious made against the German army since the Second World War - have been levelled by police officers serving with Unmik, the United Nations civil administration in Kosovo. During the two-day riots between Albanian and Serbs, an Albanian mob burnt and looted 29 Serb churches and monasteries in the southern city of Prizren, and caused several thousand Serbs to flee their homes.
Leaked excerpts from the report on the conduct of the 3,600-strong German contingent based in Prizren disclose that Unmik police were left to fend for themselves at the height of the rioting. "Despite continuous appeals for help from Kfor, nobody from the military appeared to back up the police," the report said. "Kfor proved to be incapable of carrying out the duties to which it has been assigned." Further damning evidence, based on interviews with Unmik officers, Serb church leaders and unnamed UN officials in Prizren, was published in Der Spiegel magazine. The magazine concluded: "The German soldiers ran away and hid like frightened rabbits in their barracks. They only reappeared in armoured vehicles after the Albanian mob had wreaked its havoc and left a trail of destruction."
Col Dieter Hintelmann, who heads the German Kfor contingent in Prizren, insisted that his men had simply obeyed Kfor rules of engagement. They prohibit troops from protecting buildings and allow the use of firearms only in self-defence. "We were acting exactly according to the rules," he said. However, the Unmik officers claim that the Kfor troops had breached their rules of engagement because they failed to protect them even though they were legally bound to do so. The allegations have come as a severe embarrassment to Gerhard Schroderâs government, which in the past has gone out of its way to praise the German Kfor contingent for the role it played in the troubled province through its excellent contacts with local people.
After the rioting, Serb Orthodox church leaders in Kosovo described the German deployment in the region as a mistake, and demanded the troops withdraw. So far, the German government has refused to acknowledge publicly the complaints made in the police report. However, the defence ministry is believed to be recommending that the law be changed, allowing soldiers to use tear gas grenades for riot control. Jeebus....how hamstrung can the peacekeepers be? Ridiculous rules of engagement, corrupt and inept leaders, unrealistic goals...yadda yadda
It's a function of command by committee.
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/09/2004 9:54:48 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Well, we wanted to make the "militaristic" Germans less so. Guess we succeeded.
And the UN is who Kerry and the LLL want to turn our security over to. Guess again, assholes.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
05/09/2004 10:09 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Don't count on the Germans being less militaristic. They have just lost the edge that experience brings. I'd prefer they didn't get it back.
Posted by: Mr. Davis ||
05/09/2004 10:30 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Mr. Davis - if they did get it back and all they did was go after Frogistan again, I wouldn't care.
Poland or the Czech Republic, on the other hand....
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
05/09/2004 10:37 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Calling military men "cowards" has interesting consequences. Depending on the severity of the ego bruise, this could put a damper on a lot of EU army initiatives--the implication being that the "impotent" EU military cannot project strength, so national militaries must be preserved.
No bloc can hope to be a "power center" in the world through economics alone--that is a fantasy of bureaucrats, who want everyone to follow them because they can taste test the difference between brands of caviar.
Imagine a pissant like Saddam, marching across Europe and conquering nations; or, more realistically, insurgent groups rising up and overthrowing those weak nations from within. Most likely through just intimidation--even threats terrify pasty-faced, bulbous socialists.
"Give us this or we will riot." "Give us that or we will plant bombs."
Contemptous of those who bow before them, and rightfully so.
Posted by: Mr. Davis ||
05/09/2004 10:46 Comments ||
Top||
#6
EU army initiatives
Anonymoose - isn't that a double oxymoron? :-p
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
05/09/2004 10:49 Comments ||
Top||
#7
One of the strengths of the US military is that the troops always know what they are fighting for. They may not agree with the objectives, but they always know what's expected of them and that's why they're willing to fight and, if need be, to die.
A government with no moral center and no clear understanding of its future cannot expect its soldiers to fight and die for nothing. It's hard to blame German soldiers for not going in harm's way when they are sent forth by their government without purpose, without undertstaning, and without clear direction.
For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle? 1st Corinthians 14.8
#8
A German senior officer who refused to do the right thing because he was just following orders-what a suprise!
Seriously,I could easily sympathize w/the Col.If he did send his troops out,and civilians were injured,he would have been accused of inflaming the situation.Also,I do not see any indication that more senior officers ordered him to intervene-surely calls to higher HQ's were made.Transcription of radio traffic would be interesting.
Posted by: Stephen ||
05/09/2004 17:50 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Bad News: The German army no longer has effective field strength
Iranâs armed forces closed Tehranâs new international airport on its first day of scheduled flights on Saturday. Security fears were cited in a statement carried on the official IRNA news agency, but that may refer to a dispute involving the foreign consortium that built and was to have run the Imam Khomeini airport, 30 miles south of Tehran. State airline Iran Air took over the new airportâs operation from a Turkish-Austrian consortium Tepe-Akfen-Vie (TAV) on Friday. "Unfortunately officials at the airport ignored the security measures... on not deploying foreign groups at this vital center in the country," the joint-armed forces statement said, although Iran Air is now in charge at the airport.
The airport has proved controversial with the conservative press rallying behind domestic airlines that said TAV had not prepared it to international standards. Before the airport was to open, two local airlines said they would refuse to transfer their flights in protest at a government decision to hand over operation of the airportâs only existing terminal to the TAV consortium. "We are not flying from an airport run by dagnabbed foreigners," Ali Abedzadeh, director of state-owned Aseman Airline, was quoted as saying by Economic Hayat-e No daily on Wednesday.
The joint-armed forces said in the statement they allowed only one of six planned flights from Dubai to land before shutting the airport. "The airport was closed until further notice," the statement said. The flights were diverted to the old Mehrabad airport in central Tehran, a Mehrabad spokeswoman said. The head of Iranâs Aviation Organization told the ISNA students news agency he opposed the closure. "The security forces have no right to close the airport and it is illegal in terms of both domestic and international laws," said Hassan Hajalifard, adding one of the flights had been diverted to the central city of Isfahan. Iran has said it intends to move all international flights to the $475 million airport by the end of July 2004. The new airport was inaugurated 30 years after the project was conceived.
That's nothing compared to what the "Stop O'Hare Expansion" group has done.
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
05/09/2004 12:31:18 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
[Troll droppings deleted]
Posted by: Man Bites Dog TROLL ||
05/09/2004 1:54 Comments ||
Top||
#2
The mullahs' airport is still the best place on the planet for skate-boarding, roller-blading, go-carting, power-walking, and just plain casual strolling. If the Iranians did rodeos, then it would be a great place for a rodeo too.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
05/09/2004 1:54 Comments ||
Top||
The media industry has been infested by the rise of pseudo-journalists who go against journalism's long tradition to serve the public with accurate information, Los Angeles Times Editor John S. Carroll told a packed room in the Gerlinger Lounge on Thursday. Carroll delivered the annual Ruhl Lecture, titled "The Wolf in Reporter's Clothing: The Rise of Pseudo-Journalism in America." The lecture was sponsored by the School of Journalism and Communication.
"All over the country there are offices that look like newsrooms and there are people in those offices that look for all the world just like journalists, but they are not practicing journalism," he said. "They regard the audience with a cold cynicism. They are practicing something I call a pseudo-journalism, and they view their audience as something to be manipulated." In a scathing critique of Fox News and some talk show hosts, such as Bill O'Reilly, Carroll said they were a "different breed of journalists" who misled their audience while claiming to inform them. He said they did not fit into the long legacy of journalists who got their facts right and respected and cared for their audiences. Talk about the biggest HYPOCRITE! The times is strewn with articles that have questionable content and in some cases outright lies! Remember the ânewsâ about some women who claimed Arnold grouped them TEN years ago! That story âbrokeâ right before the election! And the LA LA Times polls that had Bustamante and Arnold âNeck and neckâ going into the election! This @$$hat couldnât find the truth if it were standing in front of him. At least the kids in school got a look at what âyellow journalismâ look like. I bet he loves the journalistic integrity of Al Jazera and Pravda!
Posted by: Cyber Sarge ||
05/09/2004 10:47:17 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
When I read this, I thought "What a lying sack of shit." I couldn't even get all the way through, I was so disgusted.
Scary thing is, I think he believes this crap. THAT'S why I don't trust the "professional" journalists.
I bet he loves the journalistic integrity of Al Jazera and Pravda
Of course he does; the LA Times is just a West Coast version of them.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
05/09/2004 10:54 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Carroll doesn't believe it - he can't after the way his paper tried to re-elect Gray Davis. I fwd'd this to Patterico - he'll do a nip-n-tuck on it. He lives for reaming the LA Dog-trainer
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/09/2004 11:13 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Any suprise this is occuring at a Leftish University?
Carroll cited a study released last year that showed Americans had three main
misconceptions about Iraq: That weapons of mass destruction had been found, a connection between al-Qaeda and Iraq had been demonstrated and that the world approved of U.S intervention in Iraq. He said 80 percent of people who primarily got their news from Fox believed at least one of the misconceptions. He said the figure was more than 57 percentage points higher than people who get their news from public news broadcasting.
"How in the world could Fox have left its listeners so deeply in the dark?" Carroll asked.
He added that a difference exists between journalism and propaganda.
Anyone know what study he is quoting? Was it a LALA Poll?
#4
When I stopped consuming the offal pumped out by the leftists' ABCNBCCBSPBSAPNYTIMESDCPOSTLATIMESREUTERSBBC old media propaganda machine and turned for NEWS and !!!COMMENT labeled as COMMENT!!! to the FNC and the Washington Times and the myriad sources accessed via the new electronic medium, I knew objective !!!NEWS!!! and !!!COMMENT labeled as COMMENT!!! for the first time. AMERICANS as a people are no longer left with no choice but to be misinformed, disinformed, uninformed and lied to by marxist democrat party shitmongers including danny rather and penis jennings. Today, I AM INFORMED!!!
#5
Carroll cited a study released last year that showed Americans had three main
misconceptions about Iraq: That weapons of mass destruction had been found, a connection between al-Qaeda and Iraq had been demonstrated and that the world approved of U.S intervention in Iraq.
Two of those are true, and for the third -- "the opinions of worthless people are worthless".
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
05/09/2004 11:45 Comments ||
Top||
#6
I posted this in the comments section of the story. It has to be reviewed by a 'comments editor' before it gets posted. Gee, I wonder if it will? :
'I'm sure the robber-barons of the past were upset when
their monopolies were broken, too. Well, get ready for
more of that thar newfangled Fox news, internet
reporting, blogs, etc...Mr. Carroll.
Sadly, this report about Carroll doesn't mention WHY
there is a vastly successful market for so-called
'pseudo-journalism'. Maybe it's because Mr. Carroll and
his ilk have badly mismanaged their stewardship of 'real
journalism'?
I'll give you some free advice, Mr. Carroll. These smug
proclamations about how you (and CNN and NYT et. al.) are
the 'real' journalists, while the newer upstarts are not,
is part of the reason why the general population
distrusts you.
The 'real journos' have made some real whopping mistakes,
but you don't hear the corrections trumpeted as loudly as
the false headlines, do you Mr. Carroll? Those misleading
stories also tend to tilt one way, politically. Ever
wonder why that is?
Have you ever been intellectually curious enough to
discover why the 'real journos' are mostly from one
party, and overwhelmingly vote for one particular party,
Mr. Carroll?
This little something called the Internet is going to
change everything in your 'profession', Mr. Carroll. It's
already started to...'
Posted by: Les Nessman ||
05/09/2004 13:16 Comments ||
Top||
#8
THE L.A. DAVIS TIMES LOST OVER 15,000 SUBSCRIBERS OVER THAT FIASCO WITH ARNOLD.CARROL FLUBBED HIS WAY THROUGH TRYING TO EXPLAIN THAT ONE AWAY AND WAS NOT CONVINCiNG AT ALL,THE LIAR.
Posted by: Man Bites Dog TROLL ||
05/09/2004 15:48 Comments ||
Top||
#10
MBD - give it a rest, will ya'? You give fucking idiots a bad name.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
05/09/2004 16:11 Comments ||
Top||
#11
In a scathing critique of Fox News and some talk show hosts, such as Bill O'Reilly, Carroll said they were a "different breed of journalists" who misled their audience while claiming to inform them.
Isn't this known as the pot calling the kettle black?
#12
Bomb, Bill O'Reilly tells people that he is giving 'commentary' Carroll (And Jennings, and Rather, and the others) freely mix their 'commentary' (or the DNC 'talking points') in with the news without attributing which is which.
"All over the country there are offices that look like newsrooms and there are people in those offices that look for all the world just like journalists, but they are not practicing journalism,"
And prime examples can be found at 202 West 1st Street in Los Angeles.
Posted by: Old Grouch ||
05/09/2004 22:06 Comments ||
Top||
#14
..(And Jennings, and Rather, and the others) freely mix their 'commentary' (or the DNC 'talking points') in with the news without attributing which is which.
I first noticed a very long time ago that Peter Jennings had a tendency to do that sort of thing. Needless to say, I don't watch ABC News anymore, at least not when he's "reporting" it.
#15
FOX: central organ of Reverend Moon-Bush's robot army.
"Islam is peace. Islam is peace. Islam is peace.
Shiites love Americans. Shiites love Americans. Shiites love Americans. Crush Howard Stern. Crush Howard Stern. Crush Howard Stern."
Posted by: Man Bites Dog TROLL ||
05/09/2004 15:48 Comments ||
Top||
#1
Choice quote:"Ask you (sic -EI) leader Dr. Ayman Zawahiri about the torture he received in Egyptian jails.."
Zawahiri is the Iraqis' leader?Come again?
Posted by: El Id ||
05/09/2004 6:23 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Jeez, didn't you think the item just below the main one stating that many of the photos of rapes committed by US troops we have yet to see have been faked and are Al Qaeda propoganda?
I would think in this apparent propoganda campaign someone would be on the lookout for crap like this.
#4
Has anyone identified anyone in these photos? Did the General who commented on these photos regard these photos as real without considering who they came from? Have the photos been analyzed to detect out of place pixels, etc? Have the files the photos represent, been analized for their origins?
The photo of the woman? That is the FIRST Iraqi woman with red hair I have ever seen in any setting.
Look at the disclaimer on the site. Jewish pornographic sites for soldiers? JEWISH??
Doesn't it strike anyone as odd that soldiers would be wearing S&M masks in a prison, items known to be used in S&M porn?
Doesn't it strike anyone as odd that soldiers in Iraq are wearing green cammo and not desert cammo?
You will notice the claim about confidential sources. Read: planted.
#5
Also, since when did our armed forces allow BEARDS? And every last one of the men have a supsicious "tan" to them.
Posted by: Charles ||
05/09/2004 8:37 Comments ||
Top||
#6
One more thing to consider:
If some of these photos turn out to be faked, and I am talking about the pron ones, not the ones with identifiable soldiers making asses of themselves mugging for a camera, but the really creepy ones ( and I think the creepy ones are faked ): That CBS has released them without verifying their authenticity, they are as guilty of disemination of enemy war propoganda, as if they produced them themselves.
I think it is time that Dan Rather and CBS are held to account at the very least for their vacuous news judgement. The same goes for any news outlet which published these photos without making any attempt at verifying them.
Remember folks. No difference. bin Laden may as well have been on CBSs payroll.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
President Bush was working the crowd at a campaign stop in Lebanon, Ohio, when a voice rose above the excited din: "This girl lost her mom in the World Trade Center on 9/11." Bush stopped in his tracks, turned around and without fanfare, wrapped his arms around 15-year-old Ashley Faulkner, hugging her to his heart. "It felt like he was trying to protect me," the teen told The Post yesterday. "Here is the most powerful guy in the world, and he wants to make sure I feel safe," the high-school junior said. "He took 20 seconds to give me a hug for no other reason but to comfort me." Ashley's dad was equally impressed with the president's simple, heartfelt gesture ' and moved by his daughter's response. "That's more emotion than she's shown in 2 1/2 years" since 9/11, said her father, Lynn. "The man just transformed before our eyes. He changed from this very powerful, very important person into a man, and a husband and a father," said Faulkner, 50, of Mason, Ohio. "It was remarkable." 
