JoshK Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 ...is a cumgurgling cocksmoker. Thank you, we now return you to your normally scheduled programming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cracked Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 It's intelligent, reasonable, convincing posts like this that make me want to vote for Kerry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshK Posted May 10, 2004 Author Share Posted May 10, 2004 HAHHA. I'm not saying I am putting my weighty and influencial endorsement behind anybody...just expressing my opinion about the pile of shit that is our defense secretary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mal_Con Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 (edited) But Schrub said he is doing, "a superb job" Edited May 10, 2004 by Mal_Con Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martlet Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 HAHHA. I'm not saying I am putting my weighty and influencial endorsement behind anybody...just expressing my opinion about the pile of shit that is our defense secretary. Translated as: "I'm really too stupid to form my own opinion, so I'm just going to repeat what I read on NAMBLA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshK Posted May 10, 2004 Author Share Posted May 10, 2004 HAHHA. I'm not saying I am putting my weighty and influencial endorsement behind anybody...just expressing my opinion about the pile of shit that is our defense secretary. Translated as: "I'm really too stupid to form my own opinion, so I'm just going to repeat what I read on NAMBLA What the fuck is NAMBLA? Yeah, it's my opinion that he is an asshole and a terrible descretary of defense. I formed that just fine, thanks. So you support Rumsfeld? Ha...fucking moron. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martlet Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 HAHHA. I'm not saying I am putting my weighty and influencial endorsement behind anybody...just expressing my opinion about the pile of shit that is our defense secretary. Translated as: "I'm really too stupid to form my own opinion, so I'm just going to repeat what I read on NAMBLA What the fuck is NAMBLA? Yeah, it's my opinion that he is an asshole and a terrible descretary of defense. I formed that just fine, thanks. So you support Rumsfeld? Ha...fucking moron. So, what makes a good Secretary of Defense? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshK Posted May 10, 2004 Author Share Posted May 10, 2004 HAHHA. I'm not saying I am putting my weighty and influencial endorsement behind anybody...just expressing my opinion about the pile of shit that is our defense secretary. Translated as: "I'm really too stupid to form my own opinion, so I'm just going to repeat what I read on NAMBLA What the fuck is NAMBLA? Yeah, it's my opinion that he is an asshole and a terrible descretary of defense. I formed that just fine, thanks. So you support Rumsfeld? Ha...fucking moron. So, what makes a good Secretary of Defense? Well, we could start with somebody that doesn't feed us lies and doesn't cover up violations of the geneva convention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martlet Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 What geneva convention violations did he cover up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dberdinka Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 ....is a poet. He really is, in some sort of Zen/Western fusion. He reveals both deep truths and reflections on our society in a manner that combines straightforward honesty with subtle humor. He might be a deuche-bag otherwise but he does have a way with words. Following all copied from Slate. The Unknown As we know, There are known knowns. There are things we know we know. We also know There are known unknowns. That is to say We know there are some things We do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, The ones we don't know We don't know. —Feb. 12, 2002, Department of Defense news briefing Glass Box You know, it's the old glass box at the— At the gas station, Where you're using those little things Trying to pick up the prize, And you can't find it. It's— And it's all these arms are going down in there, And so you keep dropping it And picking it up again and moving it, But— Some of you are probably too young to remember those— Those glass boxes, But— But they used to have them At all the gas stations When I was a kid. —Dec. 6, 2001, Department of Defense news briefing A Confession Once in a while, I'm standing here, doing something. And I think, "What in the world am I doing here?" It's a big surprise. —May 16, 2001, interview with the New York Times Happenings You're going to be told lots of things. You get told things every day that don't happen. It doesn't seem to bother people, they don't— It's printed in the press. The world thinks all these things happen. They never happened. Everyone's so eager to get the story Before in fact the story's there That the world is constantly being fed Things that haven't happened. All I can tell you is, It hasn't happened. It's going to happen. —Feb. 28, 2003, Department of Defense briefing The Digital Revolution Oh my goodness gracious, What you can buy off the Internet In terms of overhead photography! A trained ape can know an awful lot Of what is going on in this world, Just by punching on his mouse For a relatively modest cost! —June 9, 2001, following European trip The Situation Things will not be necessarily continuous. The fact that they are something other than perfectly continuous Ought not to be characterized as a pause. There will be some things that people will see. There will be some things that people won't see. And life goes on. —Oct. 12, 2001, Department of Defense news briefing Clarity I think what you'll find, I think what you'll find is, Whatever it is we do substantively, There will be near-perfect clarity As to what it is. And it will be known, And it will be known to the Congress, And it will be known to you, Probably before we decide it, But it will be known. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshK Posted May 10, 2004 Author Share Posted May 10, 2004 What geneva convention violations did he cover up? Torturing or humilating prisoners is a violation of the geneva convention. As somebody aruging anything about a secretary of defense, you should know this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 ............great spokesman as he never really says anythig. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martlet Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 What geneva convention violations did he cover up? 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". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cracked Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 I'm just an uneducated young moron, but blaming Rumsfeld for the torture/humiliation is like blaming Bush if your box is lost by the postal service. In both scenarios the people lowest on the ladder fucked up, yet you blame the people at the top. Now, blaming him for not apologizing enough, or for not parading the abuse around, is something else. But saying that he is responsible for the abuse and should resign strikes me as silly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 I'm just an uneducated young moron, but blaming Rumsfeld for the torture/humiliation is like blaming Bush if your box is lost by the postal service. In both scenarios the people lowest on the ladder fucked up, yet you blame the people at the top. Now, blaming him for not apologizing enough, or for not parading the abuse around, is something else. But saying that he is responsible for the abuse and should resign strikes me as silly. Here is a link to what the military press is saying. I don't know the slant (liberal/conservative) of these publications, but I would think they would be supportive of the military. "The entire affair is a failure of leadership from start to finish" is what they are saying if you don't want to click on the link. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 link to story Top brass 'picked man who ordered torture' By William Lowther in London May 10, 2004 THE torture tactics used to "soften up" Iraqi detainees at Baghdad's Abu Ghraib jail began under orders from the highest level of the US defence administration, it was claimed yesterday. The creation of torture units was the consequence of orders by the Defence Department – headed by Secretary Donald Rumsfeld – to prise information out of prisoners. Last August, the Department ordered General Geoffrey Miller – then in charge at Camp X-Ray in Guantanamo Bay – to go to Iraq to find ways to improve the flow of intelligence from detainees, an investigation by Britain's Mail on Sunday newspaper has found. The general recommended creating a single central interrogation unit at Abu Ghraib. It was in this unit where the degradation of Iraqi prisoners – now graphically exposed by more than 1000 photographs – took place. Unit members, acting to the orders of Military Intelligence officers, carried out the sexual sadism and other abuses which have shamed the US – and there is still worse to come. [...] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martlet Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 it was claimed yesterday. By who? His mother? The lady at the store? Great journalism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cracked Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 (edited) Interesting link, j_b, but what makes me suspicious is the 'reportedly' statements. Any moron can write anything he wants with such a disclaimer in front of it. If true, that's horrible, and Rumsfeld should be thrown into jail, but I find it hard to imagine that a guy smart enough to get into the position that he's in would be stupid enough to authorize or, worse, order this kind of treatment. Those involved in politics tend not to undermine themselves, that's their enemies' jobs. Edit: Martlet beat me to it. Edited May 10, 2004 by cracked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronB Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 What geneva convention violations did he cover up? 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cracked Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 What's that web of lies got to do with the mistreatment of prisoners in Iraq? As far as I can tell, NOTHING. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martlet Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 What geneva convention violations did he cover up? 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? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason_Martin Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 What geneva convention violations did he cover up? 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronB Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 What's that web of lies got to do with the mistreatment of prisoners in Iraq? As far as I can tell, NOTHING. 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martlet Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 What geneva convention violations did he cover up? 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". What's that web of lies got to do with the mistreatment of prisoners in Iraq? As far as I can tell, NOTHING. 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cracked Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 Dammit, Martlet, can you drop your jackass attitude? Where's the evidence that a news release was issued back in January? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.