Martlet

The same could be said for 99% of the shit posted here. If people wanted to read your crap, they could open the news paper. Oh wait, they can't. Most of what the moonbats here post is false. Well, they could always read the NYT, I suppose. At least the information I post is accurate, and you obviously do read that blog, moron.

I love following Hanoi John's campaign. I'm almost going to be sorry when he loses and falls out of the public eye. He and Fat Teddy should have their own tv show. I'd watch it faithfully. First, he's going to get those damn "Benedict Arnold" CEOs: But, anyone that tells the people they are going to stop outsourcing is a damned liar, right Hanoi John? And anyone that would lie to the American people wouldn't do it on purpose. It's all the fault of those damn overzealous speech writers, the bastards. Keeping track of Hanoi John's waffles is a full time job.

Where the hell do you get your information? It was released to the news, investigated, and people were ARRESTED and CHARGED before the pictures even became public. You can repeat the same lies over and over, it doesn't make them true. Talk about blindly following your false beliefs when the facts are right in front of you. I'll give you an "A" for tenacity, though. "F" for intelligence, "A" for tenacity. If you think I'M dumb, go read some of the bullshit lies the moonbats are posting.

And now your the idiot with nothing to add, but can't help but post anyway.... Heck, I'd ignore me too if every time I made false statements it was pointed out. I have noticed the biggest mouths of the group, and the biggest liars, have quieted down some.

Correct. The Geneva Conventions don't apply to stateless terrorist members. Many of the insurgents fall into that class. It could also be argued that they don't apply to those that refuse to follow them as well.

Holy Crap, the moonbat gets it! I may decide I like you eventually.

Which spouts would you like sources for, peanut gallery?

Ahhhh, Ms. haven'thadanoriginalthoughtofmyownsincenickelpissyourpantsnight, I don't drink from cans. Busch bar bottles, 9.99 at cumbys. I toss the bottles out the window of my truck for you hippies to pay your rent. If you don't think I'm smart, you must think the morons that I've repeatedly proven wrong are real dumb.

I'm a yank, though.

Are you kidding me? I wouldn't ever miss a chance to prove you wrong, moonbat.

Google it.

That's funny. It also fits most of the moonbats that have been posting.

Time to get that tinfoil hat tuned.

The Million Mom March was almost a million mom's short this year. It's a good thing, too. I just decided to pick up an AR-15 to do a little deer hunting with this fall.

yeah, I saw that. "declined to give details".

Torturing or humilating prisoners is a violation of the geneva convention. As somebody aruging anything about a secretary of defense, you should know this. I'm sorry. I wasn't aware that issuing a news release about the abuse 3 days after it was reported was considered "covering up". One of the cool things they taught me in GED class was how to use Google. I thought I might try this newfound skill to see if Rumsfeld was involved in any type of cover-up. First of all, we know that it is a violation of the Geneva convention to humilate prisoners. Rumsfeld himself pointed this out here. Secondly, there was an internal report made by the Red Cross which indicated that there were prison abuses going on months ago. You can read about that here. Thirdly, Rumsfeld knew about the abuses but did his best to keep them quiet. In fact, Bush was upset that he didn't know about the abuse prior to seeing it on television. You can read about this here. So the question is: Did Rumsfeld cover up the abuses? I think the answer is both yes and no. By not pursuing the reports vigorously and dealing with the issue immediately through his very position as secretary of defense, he became part of the scandal. He kept the information from the public, from congress, and from the president. The question becomes whether or not this was an active cover-up or whether he just didn't think it was that big a deal. To be perfectly honest, I feel like he was probably in the latter camp. He just didn't think that the issue would come out -- he certainly didn't believe pictures would be available to the public -- so he really didn't do anything about it. Was he actively lying...? Probably not. Was what he did wrong? Absolutely. I think Rumsfeld needs to be fired and that the prison needs to be torn down. These symbolic steps -- which are non-partison steps -- would help rebuild some of the ever slipping faith that the middle east has in the united states occupation. Jason I'm sorry, I don't mean to point out that perhaps you should have spent less time using the great googling skills you got out of your GED classes and more time reading what you quoted. Again, I didn't realize that issuing a news release 3 days after it was reported was considered "covering up". I was sticking to the topic of the thread.. Sorry I didn't go along with the drift. If I remember, it was something like D.R. being a cum sucking dirtbag or whatever. Ahh, perhaps if you'd quoted what you were referring too instead of something completely off topic we'd have followed you.

Torturing or humilating prisoners is a violation of the geneva convention. As somebody aruging anything about a secretary of defense, you should know this. I'm sorry. I wasn't aware that issuing a news release about the abuse 3 days after it was reported was considered "covering up". You are dumb.. Sorry to bring this link up again, but this may refresh your memories. Web of lies. Speaking of dumb, could you explain to me what that video had to do with covering up geneva convention violations?

By who? His mother? The lady at the store? Great journalism.

I'm sorry cracked. Email me and I'll tell you how to ignore users or not click threads, then you won't have to see me. Of course, if you'd stayed in school you could figure it out on your own, but I don't mind helping.

Ahhh, only looking for seasoned responses from me, the only person that has discredited the majority of the moonbat barking. You'll make a good partisan goosestepper someday, minxie.

marylou, you almost fit the definition of moonbat perfectly. The fact that you don't understand it, only bolsters the moniker.

Ahhh, backed into a corner, are we? It's funny you should require this of me, and not your counterparts. Particularly funny since THEY made the initial claims, and were quickly proven to be full of shit. You may want to go back and look at my SUBSTANTIATED points. I'm too busy proven you idiots wrong to write you a civics lesson. Read the news.

Torturing or humilating prisoners is a violation of the geneva convention. As somebody aruging anything about a secretary of defense, you should know this. I'm sorry. I wasn't aware that issuing a news release about the abuse 3 days after it was reported was considered "covering up".

What geneva convention violations did he cover up?

How do those moonbat liberals dream up this stuff? I ask myself that all the time.