"Vast majority" of Gitmo prisoners "never posed any real risk to America at all"

[Friday on my mind]

Re: "Vast majority" of Gitmo prisoners "never posed any real risk to America at all"

I think a lot of that was pressure. Remember this?

Excerpt from the Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder, he puts these things well. He is all over the fact I saw as obvious at the time that Bush wanted war regardless of any major reason not to attack Iraq.



Can you imagine that after a lie like that, Arab and Islamic public opinion would explode against US policy? Who would have guessed? Thanks George Bush! Is it just possible Chirac had more brains and insight than his counterpart in the US? :dunno:

And the american public blindly followed in the wake of 9/11.Support for the invasion was over 90% and the media overwhelmingly went along and cheerleaded the whole thing.They really failed in their job to be critical and scrutinize what was being put out by the administation at the time.And the only other major country that went along with the US was the UK.We had no support from the UN and rightfully so.Vietnam all over again.We will leave and it will be seen as a great blunder.The media as in the vietnam era was slow to do its job and tell us that.

 

[AFA]

Re: "Vast majority" of Gitmo prisoners "never posed any real risk to America at all"

And the american public blindly followed in the wake of 9/11.Support for the invasion was over 90% and the media overwhelmingly went along and cheerleaded the whole thing.They really failed in their job to be critical and scrutinize what was being put out by the administation at the time.And the only other major country that went along with the US was the UK.We had no support from the UN and rightfully so.Vietnam all over again.We will leave and it will be seen as a great blunder.The media as in the vietnam era was slow to do its job and tell us that.

Vincent Bugliosi the book's author also made the case about the support to go to war, that only 1 republican voted against it while the dems were basically split by some ratio I don't remember. He also pointed out the simple fact that most were taken in by the sincerity of Bush's lies and alleged proofs of WMD's, wanting to believe he would always tell the truth on such a grave matter. Boy were they wrong!

If you recall, not only did that insanity against even "French bread" and calling into question French bravery or lack of during WW2. (More stupid and ignorant assumptions). I can think of the French resistance fighting against overwhelming odds for example. There was a lot of noise about throwing the UN out of the US and getting out of it's membership, so the administration could rewrite even more laws regarding human rights. Now in 2008, there is still a large population that still wants to believe all of that despite obvious evidence. But who needs evidence?

Badges, we don't need no stinking badges!

 

[Friday on my mind]

Re: "Vast majority" of Gitmo prisoners "never posed any real risk to America at all"

Vincent Bugliosi the book's author also made the case about the support to go to war, that only 1 republican voted against it while the dems were basically split by some ratio I don't remember. He also pointed out the simple fact that most were taken in by the sincerity of Bush's lies and alleged proofs of WMD's, wanting to believe he would always tell the truth on such a grave matter. Boy were they wrong!

If you recall, not only did that insanity against even "French bread" and calling into question French bravery or lack of during WW2. (More stupid and ignorant assumptions). I can think of the French resistance fighting against overwhelming odds for example. There was a lot of noise about throwing the UN out of the US and getting out of it's membership, so the administration could rewrite even more laws regarding human rights. Now in 2008, there is still a large population that still wants to believe all of that despite obvious evidence. But who needs evidence?

Badges, we don't need no stinking badges!

Freedom fries lol:rofl:

 

[AFA]

Re: "Vast majority" of Gitmo prisoners "never posed any real risk to America at all"

Freedom fries lol:rofl:

I remember the little magnetic ribbons for your SUV to support the troops, made in where was it? Qatar, China, Iran? Do you think anyone saw the irony in that or just worried about the best placement for the best visibility so they could let their neighbors know their strong political beliefs, and stand up for what they felt?

 

[AFA]

Re: "Vast majority" of Gitmo prisoners "never posed any real risk to America at all"

Another exerpt;

Indeed, Bush and his people made their message that Hussein was involved so unambiguously clear, and did such a good job of convincing the American public of their lies, that after five years of revelations and the findings of the 9/11 Commission as well as the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that Hussein was not involved and not the tiniest speck of evidence surface showing any unbilical cord between Hussein and 9/11; in fact, after Bush himself finally admitted on September 17, 2003, that there was "no evidence"of Hussein being involved, and said at a news conference on August 21, 2006, that Hussein had, "nothing" to do with 9/11, a September 2006 national CNN poll showed, unbelievably, that 43% of Americans still believed that Hussein was involved! And as previously indicated, a June 2006 poll of American soldiers in Iraq showed that an astonishing 90% of them thought Hussein was involved in 9/11, that they were fighting to bring about justice adn to protect our country from futher attacks.

"Dad", a young soldier said to his father in a phone conversation before he was killed in Iraq, "if we don't fight them here , we will fing them on the streets of America. Thay proved that on 9/11. We don't want IED's and suicide bombers on the streets of America".

So we have the groteque spectacle of young Americans fighting bravely and dying in Iraqq thinking they are fighting the people responsible for 9/11, and Bush, knowing there is "no evidence" at all that Hussein or Iraq was involved in 9/11, seeing to it that the soldiers fighting and dying in Iraqq were never informed of this fact.

If in fact Bush lied to this country in taking us to war, these young American soldiers, from their graves, cry out for justice. And their surviving loved ones, who wll suffer unimaginably the rest of their lives over what happended to their son, father, or brother, cry out for justice. If they don't, it can only be because they are unware of Bush's monumental crime, unaware that Bush's lies led directly o the death of their loved ones.

 

[Facial_King]

Re: "Vast majority" of Gitmo prisoners "never posed any real risk to America at all"

You don't watch the news or read the newspaper, do you? :dunno:

Sigh..... yes, I read newspapers constantly, and watch tv news fairly regularly, in addition to reading a lot of internet news (sites for cable news channels, newspapers, and blogs). I read the Washington Post, NY Times, both Chicago papers, and LATimes, as well as the Wall Street Journal and an occasional perusal of USAToday. Boston Globe, Toronto Star, and International Herald Trib. as well. I've seen plenty of CNN, Fox, and MSNBC, as well as just plain ol' C-SPAN over the years...

With the exception of the first few weeks after we bombed Afghanistan, the media has butchered the US for having troops overseas.

Sorry, Chef, but that's absurd. You really don't remember the coverage leading up to the invasion and right up to Dubya landing on the aircraft carrier to declare "Mission Accomplished", do you? You don't remember the role of Judith Miller, do you? The media acted just as you apparently want them to act - as fawning lapdogs. They could barely contain themselves over how our forces "toppled" Baghdad and took over there.

They don't mention a thing about how 21 other countries have supplied troops and support our cause (Albania, Armenia, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, El Salvador, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Poland, Romania, South Korea, and the United Kingdom). The only time that those countries get mentioned is if one of their soldier's dies. All they do is report on how many soldiers have died. That's it. They hardly ever report on any progress that's been made...just the dead soldiers and other set-backs. Once again, pointing the blame towards the United States, and the United States alone, for having troops in Iraq.

"Don't forget Poland!" - hahaha. The sad fact is that 98% of the military force involved in Iraq has been American and British, with most of that being American. The U.S. essentially BRIBED the majority of those other countries with offers of cash, equipment, or both to join the "coalition". The coalition is largely a marketing program of the Bush White House. Dead troops ARE newsworthy (and who would really want to argue they're NOT?), as are dead civilians, as are citizens who didn't want the U.S. to "liberate" them in the first place, as are the citizens who want all the troops to leave, as was the complete and total lack of WMDs, which was the PRIMARY (and for all intents and purposes, the SOLE) justification for invasion. Those things are newsworthy. Rebuilding a school or an electrical system or a water system that you destroyed during the invasion? Well, newsworthy to some extent, but a strange idea of "progress," especially if the idea is that the Iraqi people are not, and were not, our enemies.

Plus, how many commercials do you see that support our government in any way, shape or form? ZERO. But, how many commercials do you see which show an Iraq War "veteran" (who is usually no more than 20-22 years old), bashing Bush and our government for sending them to Iraq in the first place? I see dozens of those commercials every single day. Why do you suppose that is?

I don't know about this. Political action groups can buy commercial time to say whatever they want. I don't consider commercials to be "the media" in any case...

Answer: Because the media does nothing but make the US look like the bad guy on a constant basis...even if that media is from our own country.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh
Chef, I don't know what's got into you, but this is just like you're reciting O'Reilly or Limbaugh or Coulter talking points here. Your assertion is simply false on its face.

Further, are you suggesting that you'd prefer a media that operated like a state-run media, complete with loyalty oaths to the administration? What's funny is that, at LEAST for the first year or so after we invaded, that's exactly how the media behaved.

 

[AFA]

Re: "Vast majority" of Gitmo prisoners "never posed any real risk to America at all"

By George, (smirk) I think he's ^ right!

 

[ChefChiTown]

Re: "Vast majority" of Gitmo prisoners "never posed any real risk to America at all"

Sorry, Chef, but that's absurd. You really don't remember the coverage leading up to the invasion and right up to Dubya landing on the aircraft carrier to declare "Mission Accomplished", do you? You don't remember the role of Judith Miller, do you? The media acted just as you apparently want them to act - as fawning lapdogs. They could barely contain themselves over how our forces "toppled" Baghdad and took over there.

Yes, when we initially invaded Iraq/Afghanistan, our media was very supportive. Everybody was. We televised the bombing for crying out loud. That's how much we wanted to see our revenge happen. Then, when Bush made his little "mission accomplished" statement, there was a brief moment of support...until the next morning came and every news and media outlet started ripping Bush and our government apart, listing a long list of reasons why the US needed to withdraw it's troops.

But, other than that, our media has slammed the US for being overseas.

"Don't forget Poland!" - hahaha. The sad fact is that 98% of the military force involved in Iraq has been American and British, with most of that being American. The U.S. essentially BRIBED the majority of those other countries with offers of cash, equipment, or both to join the "coalition". The coalition is largely a marketing program of the Bush White House. Dead troops ARE newsworthy (and who would really want to argue they're NOT?), as are dead civilians, as are citizens who didn't want the U.S. to "liberate" them in the first place, as are the citizens who want all the troops to leave, as was the complete and total lack of WMDs, which was the PRIMARY (and for all intents and purposes, the SOLE) justification for invasion. Those things are newsworthy. Rebuilding a school or an electrical system or a water system that you destroyed during the invasion? Well, newsworthy to some extent, but a strange idea of "progress," especially if the idea is that the Iraqi people are not, and were not, our enemies.

What about the positive things that have come out of the "war" in Iraq? Why doesn't the media ever talk about those things, yet, it focuses on all of the negatives on a constant basis?

When have you ever watched the news or picked up a newspaper and seen, "Since the United States first invaded Afghanistan, there have been no terrorist attacks in the US". Not once have I seen a newscaster that has said anything remotely close. Not once have I read a newspaper article that has said anything remotely close.

Our media talks about whatever will get ratings. That's why all you ever hear about on the news is soldiers dying, children getting shot, old people getting mugged, apartment buildings catching on fire, etc. The news hardly ever talks about how little Billy from around the corner donated his allowance to a homeless shelter, or how Joe Schmo pulled an old lady out of the way of a runaway bus. It's always negative, negative, negative, no matter what they discuss, including President Bush, our government and our military tactics.

I don't know about this. Political action groups can buy commercial time to say whatever they want. I don't consider commercials to be "the media" in any case...

Personally, I consider commercials to be 100% part of the media. A Pepsi commercial is part of the media, so why wouldn't political commercials be? :dunno:

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh
Chef, I don't know what's got into you, but this is just like you're reciting O'Reilly or Limbaugh or Coulter talking points here. Your assertion is simply false on its face.

Further, are you suggesting that you'd prefer a media that operated like a state-run media, complete with loyalty oaths to the administration? What's funny is that, at LEAST for the first year or so after we invaded, that's exactly how the media behaved.

Once again, I've stated that when we initially went overseas, our media was supportive. Other than that, our media has done nothing but make the US look like the big bad wolf. Not once have I watched the news or picked up a newspaper and seen something that hasn't ripped our government apart.

I don't know why you are giving me all sorts of "rolling eyes" and laughing at my point of view, but if you sincerely believe that our media doesn't tear our own country apart, I would really like you to show me something from the media in the past few years that would make me think otherwise.

 

[don_equis]

Re: "Vast majority" of Gitmo prisoners "never posed any real risk to America at all"

FYI,rights and protections guaranteed by the constitution apply to all persons accused of crimes by our judicial system or at least in theory they are supposed to.The supreme court had rendered several decisions already that what the Bush administration has done with the detainess has not complied with the the constitution. The "Hamdi" case being one example,the guy who was Bin ladens chauffeur and was recently finally given a trial.His sentence was basically the amount of time he has already been in custody(about 5 years) although the govt is appealing.What has happened in guantanamo would make the founders spin in their graves as the lack of due process afforded to those being held was one of the things the revolution was fought over.

So "We the People" refers to non americans citizens?

The founding fathers have been spinning on their graves since the federal goverment got bigger and vested with more powers and that just did not happened over night.

So since it seems like a lot of you are sooo worried about these folks what do you all sugest instead of these complaining and naive idealistics principles in which we are so evil to everyone else in the world. I already sugested to move them over here and have BBQ with them and pay them for all their mishaps but it got shot down by you guys...so then what??

As I remember back in 2003 when I was in Al Qaim near the Syrian Border in Iraq a lot of these folks that we were catching crossing the borders where coming over to fight us. In that same area the one know as Ambar Province and Talafar, Mosul they were major points of manufactoring companies for car bombs, so I think that at least a good amount of these folks are not so innocent when they were caught by american troops, but wait I forgot the troops are nothing but evil also...

 

[LBP 76]

Re: "Vast majority" of Gitmo prisoners "never posed any real risk to America at all"

Gitmo

The perfect example of America at it's very worst:

paranoid, bigoted and arrogant to the point of stupidity.

 

[semaaxeru]

Re: "Vast majority" of Gitmo prisoners "never posed any real risk to America at all"

You know I love it when America's faults are thrown out there in the public eye and some people act like other or their own nations aren't just as bad. How niave, how very niave.

I geuss it's one of the problems you have to face as being one of if not THE most influential nation in the world at the moment.

I guess I might have to learn some Chinese though, as they are poised to take over that mantel. Oh wait, shall we talk about their human rights policies? Maybe we should talk about Germany's past, Spain's maybe, or perhaps Britian's wonderfull past as a human rights advocate. Please spare me the bleeding heart critisms.

Like I said how very niave some people are, how very niave.

 

[LBP 76]

Re: "Vast majority" of Gitmo prisoners "never posed any real risk to America at all"

You know I love it when America's faults are thrown out there in the public eye and some people act like other or their own nations aren't just as bad. How niave, how very niave.

And which post in this thread demonstrated that? And in what way?

 

[semaaxeru]

Re: "Vast majority" of Gitmo prisoners "never posed any real risk to America at all"

And which post in this thread demonstrated that? And in what way?

So now where resorting to taking quotes out of context aye? The very nature of this thread demonstrates that. Why else would it have been posted?

 

[LBP 76]

Re: "Vast majority" of Gitmo prisoners "never posed any real risk to America at all"

So now where resorting to taking quotes out of context aye? The very nature of this thread demonstrates that. Why else would it have been posted?

How exactly did my question take your quote out of context?

 

[Torre82]

Re: "Vast majority" of Gitmo prisoners "never posed any real risk to America at all"

How exactly did my question take your quote out of context?

Be cautious, young jedi. Into his trap might you be lured. Keep your commonsense saber at the ready.

 

[bodie54]

Re: "Vast majority" of Gitmo prisoners "never posed any real risk to America at all"

but wait I forgot the troops are nothing but evil also...

Oh please with the drama.
Next to nobody in this country believes that.

 

[max0rz]

Re: "Vast majority" of Gitmo prisoners "never posed any real risk to America at all"

You know I love it when America's faults are thrown out there in the public eye and some people act like other or their own nations aren't just as bad. How niave, how very niave.

tut tut, as the great Bill O Reilly always says

''you shouldn't excuse bad behaviour by pointing to other bad behaviour''.

:helpme: :helpme:

 

[Dawn]

Re: "Vast majority" of Gitmo prisoners "never posed any real risk to America at all"

As I remember back in 2003 when I was in Al Qaim near the Syrian Border in Iraq a lot of these folks that we were catching crossing the borders where coming over to fight us. In that same area the one know as Ambar Province and Talafar, Mosul they were major points of manufactoring companies for car bombs, so I think that at least a good amount of these folks are not so innocent when they were caught by american troops, but wait I forgot the troops are nothing but evil also...

Not evil but definatly the bad guys of the story.

If my country (Canada) or your country (USA) had a foreign country army all over, the good guys would be the people fighting the invader. And if my or your neighboor country coming to help against the invaders, they will be considered as well the good guys.

Being good or bad, good or evil is totally relative and doesnt mean much in my opinion.

There is no good, bad or evil in a war : there is only broken lifes, dead corpses and lots of mournings.

 

[AFA]

Re: "Vast majority" of Gitmo prisoners "never posed any real risk to America at all"

Guantanamo Bay is just another colossal failure of the Bush administration.

It's ironic any way you slice it. After knowing there were no WMD's in Iraq (the motive being to get Saddam) and the story changed to bringing freedom and democracy to the Iraqi people suffering under Saddam, here was a US internment camp taking human rights away from many people simply in the wrong place. Under full supervision of the Bush administration the explaination sold was they weren't required to provide legal counsel because they weren't U.S. citizens.

 

[bodie54]

Re: "Vast majority" of Gitmo prisoners "never posed any real risk to America at all"

There is no good, bad or evil in a war : there is only broken lifes, dead corpses and lots of mournings.

Got to disagree with you when it comes to WWII.
That was definitely a just war.