Liar, Liar, pants on fire

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Let `em go free so they can kill more Americans and their own people.
 
nbcrusader said:
What would you rather do with the insurgents?

Why beat around the Bush? We have no intentions of releasing them, nor do we have any intentions of making them not guilty in a "trial."

Get out yer guns and kill 'em all!

Melon
 
80sU2isBest said:
Let `em go free so they can kill more Americans and their own people.

What would you do with the American invaders in Iraq?

The ones who have used napalm to kill thousands.
 
Last edited:
false dicotomies

80sU2isBest said:
Let `em go free so they can kill more Americans and their own people.



so it's that


or


this

01.jpg
bgfm39.jpg
040508Iraqi-Prisoner-Abuse.jpg
 
If you vote Democrat, you hate America. It's as simple as that. I'd like to thank Herr Rove for pointing this out to us.
 
nbcrusader said:
What would you rather do with the insurgents?

umm...hold them in a way compatible with basic human rights? I didn't know an abuse scandal and a huge public embarrassment for the American forces was necessary in preventing insurgents from "killing more Americans and their own people."
 
80sU2isBest said:
Let `em go free so they can kill more Americans and their own people.

How is it we make such leaps of logic?

So you either torture them or set them free. These are our only choices?:scratch:
 
Yeah. Put the people on trial for whatever crimes they've committed, and let those who've suffered at their hands decide on the best punishment for them.

But this sort of place doesn't really help matters, especially since America gets all upset when other countries do the same sort of thing. Consistency is good.

Angela
 
nbcrusader said:
Uh, the original post suggested that Abu Ghraib be torn down, not expanded.

This has nothing to do with how insurgents are treated.

So then what did Bush mean by saying he was going to tear it down? Wasn't it due to the treatment of prisoners?
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:
So then what did Bush mean by saying he was going to tear it down? Wasn't it due to the treatment of prisoners?

Bush was probably trying to be Reagan ('Tear down this wall, Mr Gorbachev'). And failing miserably, as usual.

Bush is a fratboy who likes to wear cowboy hats to remind the public of a President who played cowboys in movies. Pretty funny, when you think about it. :wink:
 
financeguy said:


What would you do with the American invaders in Iraq?


Amazing that the UN Security Council has passed multiple resolutions recognizing the US actions in Iraq you would imply that we are invaders.

Or is the UN wrong?
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


So then what did Bush mean by saying he was going to tear it down? Wasn't it due to the treatment of prisoners?

Care to provide links to the quotes. Was it before or after the US soldiers fucked up?

My recollection was it was before and in reference to the horrors of the prior regime. But I am old, sleep deprived, and not sure my memory is working.
 
VertigoGal said:


umm...hold them in a way compatible with basic human rights? I didn't know an abuse scandal and a huge public embarrassment for the American forces was necessary in preventing insurgents from "killing more Americans and their own people."

The sad part is that it probably helped the insurgency. Unfortunately, it would lead the general public to make the conclusion that all American soldiers are like this and that the administration condoned it.

Neither of which is true.
 
Dreadsox said:



My recollection was it was before and in reference to the horrors of the prior regime. But I am old, sleep deprived, and not sure my memory is working.

it was after

and a response to it
 
Thanks for refreshing my failing memory....

Sounds like he should follow through with his words.
 
Follow-through isn't one of Bush's strong points, an unfortunate thing for those who believe his promises, a sorry trait in a world leader.
 
What evidence is there that every single one of the people sent to Gitmo is a terrorist? Other than the fact they were picked up somewhere in Afghanistan, we have none other than being told they are bad people. They have released many prisoners from Guantanamo over the past few years, prisoners who were " enemy non-combatants". This is evidence that not everyone there is a terrorist otherwise no one would have been released. I guarantee some of those guys just happened to be in a house in a village after a firefight, and the troops moved in and grabbed every male in the area assuming they were all Taliban.

The US military is not infallible, ask the families of the people who died when a US sub surfaced under a Japanese fishing vessel, the marines armoured vehicle hit 2 little South Korean girls, a marine jet cut the cable of an Italian gondala in the Italian alps killing 20 people or the accidentally dropped bombs on a Canadian regiment in Afghanistan. My point is just because the military says they are all terrorists, it doesn't mean it is so.
 
trevster2k said:
What evidence is there that every single one of the people sent to Gitmo is a terrorist? Other than the fact they were picked up somewhere in Afghanistan, we have none other than being told they are bad people. They have released many prisoners from Guantanamo over the past few years, prisoners who were " enemy non-combatants". This is evidence that not everyone there is a terrorist otherwise no one would have been released. I guarantee some of those guys just happened to be in a house in a village after a firefight, and the troops moved in and grabbed every male in the area assuming they were all Taliban.

.... My point is just because the military says they are all terrorists, it doesn't mean it is so.


They are picking up peolpe on sweeps with the understanding that some are not guilty.

They are paying other Afghans for turning people in. People are acting on grudges.

They are casting the net too wide.
 
deep said:



They are picking up peolpe on sweeps with the understanding that some are not guilty.

They are paying other Afghans for turning people in. People are acting on grudges.

They are casting the net too wide.


Vakhitov said he had been kidnapped by members of the radical Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan and taken to Afghanistan, where he was sold to U.S. officials for $5,000 as a terrorist.

He and six other Russians were released last year and sent back to Russia, where he said they were being persecuted because they had not been properly cleared or issued with the necessary documents.

Russian ex-Guantanamo inmate tells of Koran abuse
Tue Jun 28, 2005 07:56 AM ET

By Sonia Oxley

MOSCOW (Reuters) - A Russian citizen released last year from Guantanamo Bay prison said on Tuesday U.S. guards at the camp regularly threw copies of the Koran into toilets.

Earlier this month, the U.S. military described cases of "mishandling" of a Koran by U.S. personnel at the naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, including splashing it with urine and kicking it.

"In Cuba, they used to take them (the Koran) and throw them, take them and throw them, into lavatories or elsewhere. It happened regularly and this was to provoke protests," Airat Vakhitov, told reporters.

"In the summer of 2003, there was a big hunger strike, which 300 people took part in, over the abuse of the Koran."

Muslims consider the Koran the literal word of God and treat each book with deep reverence.

Vakhitov's comments were similar to those in an article published by Newsweek magazine in May and later retracted, which said interrogators at the prison had flushed at least one copy of the Koran down a toilet to make detainees talk.

The story sparked violent protests in some Muslim countries.

The magazine said it could not substantiate the report that an internal military inquiry found that the Koran had been abused at the jail.

The United States holds about 520 detainees from more than 40 countries at the Guantanamo prison camp, which it opened in January 2002 in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on the United States. Many have been held for more than three years and only four have been charged.

INNOCENT

Vakhitov, 28, who wants the United States publicly to absolve him, is suing the U.S. government.

"This is not about any kind of compensation. I want the United States to publicly acknowledge my innocence," he said, adding that a U.S. civil court would be looking at his case.

Vakhitov said he spent 18 months at the camp locked in a tiny cell and allowed out for a 15-minute walk twice a week and a shower twice a week.

"There was sleep deprivation...there were instances when they set dogs on us," he said of his jailers. "During prayer time, they played loud music."

He said officials at the camp admitted to him that they knew he had nothing to do with al Qaeda, the group believed to be behind the Sept. 11 attacks.

"The questions focused on my participation in cooperation with the special services -- they said: 'We know you have absolutely nothing to do with al Qaeda, we consider you a Russian intelligence officer'."

Vakhitov said he had been kidnapped by members of the radical Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan and taken to Afghanistan, where he was sold to U.S. officials for $5,000 as a terrorist.

He and six other Russians were released last year and sent back to Russia, where he said they were being persecuted because they had not been properly cleared or issued with the necessary documents.

"Whenever there is an outbreak of violence or a blast in our region...they arrest us," he said.
 
Back
Top Bottom