PDA

View Full Version : Geeez............



Qtec
06-01-2005, 06:27 AM
"In what has become a monthly session with reporters, Bush called "absurd" a human rights report condemning the U.S. treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

"It seemed to me they based some of their decisions on the word of -- and the allegations -- by people who were held in detention, people who hate America, people that had been trained in some instances to disassemble -- that means not tell the truth," Bush said."
<font color="blue">
Sorry GW, but NO IT DOESNT!
[ QUOTE ]
dis·as·sem·ble ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ds-smbl)
v. dis·as·sem·bled, dis·as·sem·bling, dis·as·sem·bles
v. tr.
To take apart: disassemble a toaster.

v. intr.
To come apart: The unit disassembles easily.
To break up in random fashion: The spectators began to disassemble.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

<hr /></blockquote>

Once again we get that, "they only say that because they hate America" $#it! .
I can hazzard a guess that it might have something to do with the, kidnapping, torturing detainees, rendering suspects to other countries for torture, detention without charge, denying legal representaion, etc, etc </font color>



Q /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Nightstalker
06-01-2005, 06:33 AM
What do you want, a cookie?

Wally_in_Cincy
06-01-2005, 06:39 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> Sorry GW, but NO IT DOESNT!
<hr /></blockquote>

Yeah, but I bet he doesn't use commas where apostrophes are supposed to be.

Qtec
06-01-2005, 06:42 AM
So you agree? You imply I got it right!
You only get a cookie when you do something right, or not?

Q /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Qtec
06-01-2005, 06:46 AM
Is that really the best you can do?

You do know its bad form to correct other posters on their spelling or grammar.

Q.... /ccboard/images/graemlins/ooo.gif

Fran Crimi
06-01-2005, 07:08 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr>
Once again we get that, "they only say that because they hate America" $#it! .
I can hazzard a guess that it might have something to do with the, kidnapping, torturing detainees, rendering suspects to other countries for torture, detention without charge, denying legal representaion, etc, etc </font color>



Q /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
<hr /></blockquote>


Works for me! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

How do you think we stopped another 9-11 type attack? Did you forget the plot a few years ago to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge, Midtown Tunnel and some other structure (I forget...the Holland Tunnel?)? We found one of the terrorists holed up here, denied him legal representation, and did what we had to, to get him to turn in his fellow terrorists. He did, and we found them sitting in their tenement flats with bombs fully assembled and a full set of plans, only days away from the attack.

What do you think would have happened if we let this guy call a lawyer?

I don't blame the President for publicly denying the allegations of torture and lack of legal representation. What's he going to say..."works for me"?

Fran~~~ I drive through the Midtown Tunnel practically every day. I figure that little 'illegal' incident very well could have saved my life.

eg8r
06-01-2005, 07:27 AM
[ QUOTE ]
You do know its bad form to correct other posters on their spelling or grammar. <hr /></blockquote> Yup, it is much better form for you to sit there and correct the President when he is not here to defend himself. You don't like hearing you screwed up, but you are quick to point out others. I guess as far as you are concerned if the person is not here to defend themselves, then all bets are off.

eg8r

Wally_in_Cincy
06-01-2005, 07:40 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> Is that really the best you can do?
<hr /></blockquote>

I can do better.

You're a big poopypants.

How's that? /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Nightstalker
06-01-2005, 08:05 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Wally_in_Cincy:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> Is that really the best you can do?
<hr /></blockquote>

I can do better.

You're a big poopypants.

How's that? /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif <hr /></blockquote>

LMAO, nice one. I agree. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Qtec
06-01-2005, 09:15 AM
No suprise.
Obviously this is your level of debating.
A 12 year old could do better. /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Q.its the truth.......... /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif.......have you anything [ sensible to say?]....didnt think so... /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Nightstalker
06-01-2005, 10:49 AM
Sorry if you mistook that comment for debating. I don't debate american politics with socialist euro-cretins.

Chopstick
06-01-2005, 11:06 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Wally_in_Cincy:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> Is that really the best you can do?
<hr /></blockquote>

I can do better.

You're a big poopypants.

How's that? /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif <hr /></blockquote>

That's not fair Wally. We don't know how big he is.

Qtec
06-01-2005, 11:25 AM
How quaint.

Q..thought so....

Gayle in MD
06-03-2005, 04:17 PM
Ed, you're a riot! Do you call into all the talk shows when they have people on who critisize the President to tell them not to talk about GW, aka, Little Bushy, because he isn't there to defend himself? I thought so LMAO! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Gayle in Md..... /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

eg8r
06-04-2005, 07:24 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Ed, you're a riot! Do you call into all the talk shows when they have people on who critisize the President to tell them not to talk about GW, aka, Little Bushy, because he isn't there to defend himself? I thought so LMAO! <hr /></blockquote> I am not sure what the humor is. I was not saying Q could not talk bad about the President, however he should not be asking someone else not to criticize him when he is doing the same of another person.

How do all these elementary little bits of information keep escaping you. Your hatred of Bush runs so deep, you believe I am defending Bush by pointing out Q hypocrisy. You need to slow down and take a second to think before you post. Every time Bush's name is mentioned you get looney and don't even bother to understand the subject matter.

I was not posting about Bush, HELLOOOOOO!!!!!!!! I was posting about Q. Read and understand before you reply, this game of yours is getting old and tired.

eg8r

highsea
06-04-2005, 11:29 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> "In what has become a monthly session with reporters, Bush called "absurd" a human rights report condemning the U.S. treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.<hr /></blockquote>From the WP: [ QUOTE ]
Washington Post
June 3, 2005
Pg. 23

Gitmo Grovel: Enough Already

By Charles Krauthammer

The self-flagellation over reports of abuse at Guantanamo Bay has turned into a full-scale panic. There are calls for the United States, with all this worldwide publicity, to simply shut the place down.

A terrible idea. One does not run and hide simply because allegations have been made. If the charges are unverified, as they overwhelmingly are in this case, then they need to be challenged. The United States ought to say what it has and has not done, and not simply surrender to rumor.

Moreover, shutting down Guantanamo will solve nothing. We will capture more terrorists, and we will have to interrogate them, if not at Guantanamo then somewhere else. There will then be reports from that somewhere else that will precisely mirror the charges coming out of Guantanamo. What will we do then? Keep shutting down one detention center after another?

The self-flagellation has gone far enough. We know that al Qaeda operatives are trained to charge torture when they are in detention, and specifically to charge abuse of the Koran to inflame fellow prisoners on the inside and potential sympathizers on the outside.

In March the Navy inspector general reported that, out of about 24,000 interrogations at Guantanamo, there were seven confirmed cases of abuse, "all of which were relatively minor." In the eyes of history, compared to any other camp in any other war, this is an astonishingly small number. Two of the documented offenses involved "female interrogators who, on their own initiative, touched and spoke to detainees in a sexually suggestive manner." Not exactly the gulag.

The most inflammatory allegations have been not about people but about mishandling the Koran. What do we know here? The Pentagon reports (Brig. Gen. Jay Hood, May 26) -- all these breathless "scoops" come from the U.S. government's own investigations of itself -- that of 13 allegations of Koran abuse, five were substantiated, of which two were most likely accidental.

Let's understand what mishandling means. Under the rules the Pentagon later instituted at Guantanamo, proper handling of the Koran means using two hands and wearing gloves when touching it. Which means that if any guard held the Koran with one hand or had neglected to put on gloves, this would be considered mishandling.

On the scale of human crimes, where, say, 10 is the killing of 2,973 innocent people in one day and 0 is jaywalking, this ranks as perhaps a 0.01.

Moreover, what were the Korans doing there in the first place? The very possibility of mishandling Korans arose because we gave them to each prisoner. What kind of crazy tolerance is this? Is there any other country that would give a prisoner precisely the religious text that that prisoner and those affiliated with him invoke to justify the slaughter of innocents? If the prisoners had to have reading material, I would have given them the book "Portraits 9/11/01" -- vignettes of the lives of those massacred on Sept. 11.

Why this abjectness on our part? On the very day the braying mob in Pakistan demonstrated over the false Koran report in Newsweek, a suicide bomber blew up an Islamic shrine in Islamabad, destroying not just innocent men, women and children, but undoubtedly many Korans as well. Not a word of condemnation. No demonstrations.

Even greater hypocrisy is to be found here at home. Civil libertarians, who have been dogged in making sure that FBI-collected Guantanamo allegations are released to the world, seem exquisitely sensitive to mistreatment of the Koran. A rather selective scrupulousness. When an American puts a crucifix in a jar of urine and places it in a museum, civil libertarians rise immediately to defend it as free speech. And when someone makes a painting of the Virgin Mary, smears it with elephant dung and adorns it with porn, not only is that free speech, it is art -- deserving of taxpayer funding and an ACLU brief supporting the Brooklyn Museum when the mayor freezes its taxpayer subsidy.

Does the Koran deserve special respect? Of course it does. As do the Bibles destroyed by the religious police in Saudi Arabia and the Torahs blown up in various synagogues from Tunisia to Turkey.

Should the United States apologize? If there were mishandlings of the Koran, we should say so and express regret. And that should be in the context of our remarkably humane and tolerant treatment of the Guantanamo prisoners, and in the context of a global war on terrorism (for example, the campaign in Afghanistan) conducted with a discrimination and a concern for civilian safety rarely seen in the annals of warfare.

Then we should get over it, stop whimpering and start defending ourselves.<hr /></blockquote>

DebraLiStarr
06-04-2005, 12:19 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Nightstalker:</font><hr> What do you want, a cookie? <hr /></blockquote>

http://www.geocities.com/dli41075/teehee.jpg

Gayle in MD
06-05-2005, 07:13 AM
From your post, "Yup, it is much better for you to sit there and correct the president when he is not here to defend himself."

Ed, you have made this statement many times on here. You have critisized me and others for critisizing the President when he is not here to defend himself, LOL.

Read Your own posts before you deny writing what is in them, and don't be so insulting when people point out to you how silly it is to suggest that people can't critisize politicians unless they are here to defend themselves. IMO, it is YOUR game which is getting old and tired....

And another thing, I have told you here many times, hatred is not something I am capable of, against anyone, so I am asking you as a friend, don't presume to know my thoughts and feelings better than I know them myself.

While I am against the war because history teaches us that occupations fail miserably, and because of the lies used by the President and his top officials to manipulate the American people, and because of the financial corruption and miserably poor planning which cost the lives of thousands of our young men, I do not hate Bush, or any other person, only the things he says and does.

Gayle in Md. BTW, Do you hate the Clintons, or John Kerry?

eg8r
06-05-2005, 04:07 PM
[ QUOTE ]
From your post, "Yup, it is much better for you to sit there and correct the president when he is not here to defend himself."

Ed, you have made this statement many times on here. You have critisized me and others for critisizing the President when he is not here to defend himself, LOL.
<hr /></blockquote> Once again here is more proof you are having some elementary problems with reading comprehension. I am being too nice but since you are having so much trouble, the subject matter was Q not liking the fact that he was corrected after he just made a post correcting someone else. If you get your head out of the sand and remove the actual names that were in the post, I think it would have been easier for you to play along. The problem is that your hatred speaks before you brain tells you mouth what to say. I hope you take a few hours and sort of chew on that little tidbit of info before you respond.

[ QUOTE ]
Read Your own posts before you deny writing what is in them <hr /></blockquote> Mention something that I have said contradictory to my post? I told you my post had nothing to do with W, it had everything to do with Q. Just a little tip for future references, when a person tells you in plain english what they are saying, be quiet for a minute and listen.

eg8r

eg8r
06-05-2005, 04:13 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Gayle in Md. BTW, Do you hate the Clintons, or John Kerry? <hr /></blockquote> That is a tough question, as I don't stand behind this facade of anti-hate which you have built up. I am sure I would have hated Kerry as president. However, as evidence I don't hate all Clintons, I would like to see Hillary run for office. It would be nice to see how the country feels (although I would hope she would get roasted by Laura Bush).

I hear you say you don't hate W, however your actions speak louder than your words.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
06-05-2005, 04:20 PM
QUOTE

EG8R....

Yup, it is much better for you to sit here and critisize the president when he is not here to defend himself.
UNQUOTE
Ed, you have posted these words to me before, almost exactly word for word. Reading your words certainly show a meaning that you think people shouldn't critisize the president unless he is here to defend himself.

As regards you "Little tip" it is very entertaining, since you perpetually insist that I hate George Bush, although I have written you many times that I have no hatred for any human being, In plain english perhaps You should be the one to be quiet for a moment and listen (Read) posts more carefully.

Nuff said....

Gayle in Md.

nhp
06-05-2005, 06:38 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
Gayle in Md. BTW, Do you hate the Clintons, or John Kerry? <hr /></blockquote> That is a tough question, as I don't stand behind this facade of anti-hate which you have built up. I am sure I would have hated Kerry as president. However, as evidence I don't hate all Clintons, I would like to see Hillary run for office. It would be nice to see how the country feels (although I would hope she would get roasted by Laura Bush).

I hear you say you don't hate W, however your actions speak louder than your words.

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>

John McCain rules!

::dives out thru a window::

eg8r
06-06-2005, 05:13 AM
[ QUOTE ]
As regards you "Little tip" it is very entertaining, since you perpetually insist that I hate George Bush, although I have written you many times that I have no hatred for any human being, In plain english perhaps You should be the one to be quiet for a moment and listen (Read) posts more carefully. <hr /></blockquote> I addressed this in the other reply to you. One more time, your actions speak louder than your words.

eg8r

hondo
06-06-2005, 06:16 AM
I bet he does.

Yeah, but I bet he doesn't use commas where apostrophes are supposed to be. <hr /></blockquote>

hondo
06-06-2005, 06:20 AM
I would have disagreed with you before I started
watching the series"24" and now I understand the need
to torture and maim political prisoners.



Works for me! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

How do you think we stopped another 9-11 type attack? Did you forget the plot a few years ago to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge, Midtown Tunnel and some other structure (I forget...the Holland Tunnel?)? We found one of the terrorists holed up here, denied him legal representation, and did what we had to, to get him to turn in his fellow terrorists. He did, and we found them sitting in their tenement flats with bombs fully assembled and a full set of plans, only days away from the attack.

What do you think would have happened if we let this guy call a lawyer?

I don't blame the President for publicly denying the allegations of torture and lack of legal representation. What's he going to say..."works for me"?

Fran~~~ I drive through the Midtown Tunnel practically every day. I figure that little 'illegal' incident very well could have saved my life. <hr /></blockquote>

Fran Crimi
06-06-2005, 08:06 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote hondo:</font><hr> I would have disagreed with you before I started
watching the series"24" and now I understand the need
to torture and maim political prisoners.
<hr /></blockquote>

Good one. Jack saves the world in 24 hours, once a season.

You want reality, watch Caddyshack. Now that's reality. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Fran ~~~~~ Be the ball

wolfdancer
06-06-2005, 09:16 AM
Q, perhaps he meant dissemble?

hondo
06-07-2005, 05:01 AM
That's exactly what he meant.



<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> Q, perhaps he meant dissemble? <hr /></blockquote>