lord_casek Posted December 9, 2007 Share Posted December 9, 2007 anyone have any comments on the revelation that the cia had destroyed videotapes? i think its fairly obvious that there was torturing/illegal coercion going on, the excuse that they were afraid of those tapes falling into al qaida's hands are bullshit. plus, assuming the UK govt has seen more than the public, than its surprising that the day after this revelation five UK residents were being shipped back. basically, what happens now? with destroyed videotapes, i'm anticipating a supreme court ruling that is favorable to detainees. is this the end of a bad dream? or are they just going to be transferred to federal prisons across america? or stay in gitmo, but have the right to a fair and speedy trial (with all the constitutional implications that go along with it). ps. purple mushroom you are very narrow sighted for the sake of your ideology. its pretty typical of 12oz, but you just came off like a supreme dumbass. shine on. what about the admission on one of those tapes that there was an ISI connection? new article in huffington post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theo Huxtable. Posted December 9, 2007 Author Share Posted December 9, 2007 i think december will be the least deadliest month for US troops in iraq since the war began. at the end of the month let's see how close i am to being right. "al qaeda in iraq" has been getting their asses handed to them from so many different angles that they no longer have the propensity to ignite violence to the same scale that they once did. however, al qaeda in iraq may be down, but don't count them out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_casek Posted December 9, 2007 Share Posted December 9, 2007 and i was just reminded of a play-by-play at a football game. sickening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theo Huxtable. Posted December 9, 2007 Author Share Posted December 9, 2007 how is it sickening? that i'm glad/hopeful violence is on a downward trend, and that fewer american (and iraqi) people are getting killed? hopefully these people can live in a peaceful society and americans can leave. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_casek Posted December 9, 2007 Share Posted December 9, 2007 how is it sickening? that i'm glad/hopeful violence is on a downward trend, and that and fewer american (and iraqi) people are getting killed? hopefully these people can live in a peaceful society and americans can leave. oh, no, i didn't direct that at you so much as i did at the comment. it just reminded me of why i don't watch tv news. every time it sounds like a play by play. which team goes to the bowl game type deal. the plan isn't for them to live in peace. it's for the region to break out in sectarian violence and seperate. we'll see what happens now that the bush whitehouse is breaking ranks and all the rats are jumping ship. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theo Huxtable. Posted December 9, 2007 Author Share Posted December 9, 2007 i doubt the US wants sectarian violence. it in no way helps US interests. general patraeus' strategy of funding sunni militias to fight al qaeda has been working. now all he has to do is stop shia death squads from exacting their violence on sunnis. and they need to take out that muqtada al-sadr character. dude's a nuisance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_casek Posted December 9, 2007 Share Posted December 9, 2007 http://www.danielpipes.org/article/3423 http://www.cfr.org/publication.html?id=6559 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MayorMeanBeans Posted December 9, 2007 Share Posted December 9, 2007 what about the admission on one of those tapes that there was an ISI connection? new article in huffington post. ISI connection with what? i think its fairly undisputed that there are many within the ISI that are fairly sympathetic with Salafi tendencies. there was the ISI shake-up in late 2001 that ousted whatever his name was as the Afghan invasion was starting... the ISI was implicitly blamed by various whos-whos in the CIA as to why Osama was never caught. Can you link me the article? I just spent 10 minutes on Huffington Post looking for it. edit- typo on the year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_casek Posted December 9, 2007 Share Posted December 9, 2007 sure thing http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gerald-posner/the-cias-destroyed-inter_b_75850.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MayorMeanBeans Posted December 10, 2007 Share Posted December 10, 2007 k i just read it. and though it does raise some questions- i think the implications are not as big as the ones raised by the tape being destroyed in the first place. 1. people knew before zubaydah spoke about the ISI that the ISI was sympathetic to the Taliban. it has been widely presumed that they were the ones who got everyone out of Tora Bora. Not surprising. 2. the saudi connection has been something that the '911 truth' camp have been whoring over since the start. however- the saudis are not one voice. the prince that that article refers to is hardly a top official. just because he gave money to al qaeda does not mean that the saudi govt. did. again, i dont think anyone disputes the presence of Salafis in Saudi Arabia. 3. if this Saudi prince who gave money is presumably also a Salafi, does him getting liposuction fit with that profile? i dont know. but if this info is correct (it very well might be), believe the cia went on some assassinating trips. the plane accident- i would argue that that couldve been the pakistani govt just as much as the cia (though the cia has violated pakistani airspace in the past). my point is this- because there are rogues in each govt (in both cases it seems they were expunged), that does not mean our "allies" are plotting against us, or double agenting us. again, i think the higher significance is that the tapes showed torture. if torture is the only basis of keeping someone confined for 5 years, than surely the supreme court would throw that out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MayorMeanBeans Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 if it comes out for sure that there was water boarding on those tapes (i think its fairly obvious judging by the cia agent on bbc), does that mean that jose padilla's conviction is overturned? because he was fingered out by zubaydah after a day of waterboarding, therefore its clearly not reliable. a retrial without the evidence from zubaydah would probably mean hes freed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theo Huxtable. Posted December 11, 2007 Author Share Posted December 11, 2007 is water boarding really torture? you lay a guy down on a board at a certain angle, and pour water in his nose. wow. there's no physical harm and no one can die from it. it only affects the suspect psychologically. compare that to saddam hussein's death chambers. compare that to the countries that *really* torture. anyway, didn't cheney already publicly admit that the CIA waterboarded Khaled Sheikh Mohammed? i could be wrong. but i'm pretty sure he admitted to waterboarding in general. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_casek Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 is water boarding really torture? you lay a guy down on a board at a certain angle, and pour water in his nose. wow. there's no physical harm and no one can die from it. it only affects the suspect psychologically. compare that to saddam hussein's death chambers. compare that to the countries that *really* torture. anyway, didn't cheney already publicly admit that the CIA waterboarded Khaled Sheikh Mohammed? i could be wrong. but i'm pretty sure he admitted to waterboarding in general. waterboarding was torture to the u.s. during wwII, so it shouldn't be any different today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MayorMeanBeans Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 regarding podilla and other trials- if the confession of someone else was the main evidence against you, and your accuser destroyed it. regardless of whether or not it fits which torture indicator you want, this still sounds a lot like a mistrial. police can't say they got a gun with your fingerprint on it, lose the gun and the results, but still try to claim that you're guilty. beyond a reasonable doubt. and if it is torture, than that evidence is inadmissible, and a new trial. with not much evidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_casek Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 Hersh: children raped at Abu Ghraib, Pentagon has videos http://www.boingboing.net/2004/07/15/hersh-children-raped.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fist 666 Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 wow... that would make my uniform a little dirtier... sometimes... wow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_casek Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 wow... that would make my uniform a little dirtier... sometimes... wow. it's the CIA that has to cover their asses now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fist 666 Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 eh, it might be on them legally speaking, but as far as my job goes, i think the world public puts it on me, and i don't blame them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smooth bruce Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 I don't see why you have to say "fuck the troops". Kinda uncalled for. They aren't the ones making the major decisions. Being a grunt doesn't dissolve you of responsibility. man, wow. i knew this purple mushroom dude liked to talk shit, but man, don't say "fuck our troops". i don't believe in this war at all but i don't dare blame our troops for any of that. Explain how a 21st century army operates without massive numbers of individual soldiers. not by a shit head like you, anyway. have some respect. No, fuck em. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fist 666 Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 and fuck einstein for killing all them japs... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smooth bruce Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 Thats probably the stupidest attempt at a comparrison I have ever seen and explains why you are in the military. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theo Huxtable. Posted December 12, 2007 Author Share Posted December 12, 2007 Do you say fuck Australian troops too? Why are you always sassy & angry towards everyone here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_casek Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 Being a grunt doesn't dissolve you of responsibility. Explain how a 21st century army operates without massive numbers of individual soldiers. No, fuck em. the military is made up of volunteers. it goes like this: president/pentagon/generals/etc........./troops. the troops are volunteers. volunteering their lives for their country. they are there to do a job. just carrying out orders from higher up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fist 666 Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Thats probably the stupidest attempt at a comparrison I have ever seen and explains why you are in the military. you're right, placing blame on those whose involvement in key-decisions-made is ABSOLUTELY NONEXISTENT is totally preposterous. my bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawood Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 the military is made up of volunteers. it goes like this: president/pentagon/generals/etc........./troops. the troops are volunteers. volunteering their lives for their country. they are there to do a job. just carrying out orders from higher up. let's talk real. Most of them (not all) are dropouts or losers. Or Criminals trying to do something with their lives figuring, I can get a pension, a salary, kill a few sand niggers, see the world, etc. I have some cats I grew up with in the military right now and usually military type dudes are 3 types in my opinion. (maybe more, but this is just my humble estimation) 1. you have the gung ho military type rah-dood who was probably brought up in a military or police family and will be die hard because he has a tradition to uphold. These guys are the truest of dicks. 2. You have the regular family/working guy who went into the military for education or training. A lot of these guys come home jaded, like Damn...I didn't know our military was so fucked up. They've seen to much and want out. 3. You have the criminals, the losers, the ex drug addicts or thugs who just want to go prove they're a big guy too so they blow up houses of worship, rape women, kill everything in sight and pretty much reek havoc on anything in their sight. I don't have a very high opinion of military people in America, Europe, Australia fighting in this war, so my opinions are going to biased, but I do realise that a lot of them are not into the whole helping the man build the evil capitalist big brother empire thing. They're just trying to learn a trade or get some life experience or whatever. For argument's sake I say they're responsible for their own actions. At the end of the day, they made the choice to go to Iraq and become a mechanism in the evil capitalist big brother empire machine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_casek Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 let's talk real. Most of them (not all) are dropouts or losers. Or Criminals trying to do something with their lives figuring, I can get a pension, a salary, kill a few sand niggers, see the world, etc. I have some cats I grew up with in the military right now and usually military type dudes are 3 types in my opinion. (maybe more, but this is just my humble estimation) 1. you have the gung ho military type rah-dood who was probably brought up in a military or police family and will be die hard because he has a tradition to uphold. These guys are the truest of dicks. 2. You have the regular family/working guy who went into the military for education or training. A lot of these guys come home jaded, like Damn...I didn't know our military was so fucked up. They've seen to much and want out. 3. You have the criminals, the losers, the ex drug addicts or thugs who just want to go prove they're a big guy too so they blow up houses of worship, rape women, kill everything in sight and pretty much reek havoc on anything in their sight. I don't have a very high opinion of military people in America, Europe, Australia fighting in this war, so my opinions are going to biased, but I do realise that a lot of them are not into the whole helping the man build the evil capitalist big brother empire thing. They're just trying to learn a trade or get some life experience or whatever. For argument's sake I say they're responsible for their own actions. At the end of the day, they made the choice to go to Iraq and become a mechanism in the evil capitalist big brother empire machine. you successfully described the army. i know some good, hard-working people in other branches. the air force is a whole other world. also, the navy (excluding marines, most are chumps). the 2012 plan is for the air force to rejoin the army. so, that might be out the door. as for the army, it's filled with illegals and gang members now. whole platoons of crips, bloods, latin kings, etc. these are the fuckheads who would follow orders to try and disarm the american people. not gonna happen. they will get a one way ticket straight to hell (by way of barrel of a 12 gauge. i wanna quote cee lo. "But I kept seeing the same headlights running stop signs and red lights I done prepared myself to die if it's my time to go He said ; "you know what it is, you done seen it before" This sad, of course I'ma be mad Well here you can have it god damnit if you want it that bad You would try to take from me, my nigga I ain't no star I value both of our lives more than this car You lucky nigga, I used to be you Shit and I'd bust a hole in your chest somebody could see through Now remember, shit, you could've died tonight And I would've been in the right I ain't even pissed you could just drop me off at the house Cause I ain't really dying by nothin like this He-he-he-he-he-he Everythang cool my nigga, you could just drop me off at the house Knahmsayin?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_casek Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 http://www.time.com/time/photoessays/2007/deserters_nosh_a/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fist 666 Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 you successfully described the army. haha. it burnses us. i can't make much defense towards dawood's insults to the us army enlisted population. i do not have the longest military experience here, but i've seen some, i think enough to comment. the only thing that didn't sit well was "3. You have the criminals, the losers, the ex drug addicts or thugs who just want to go prove they're a big guy too " so dawood, you've lived your life piously in its entirety? you didn't live a thug life and straighten out w/ the help of religion? why talk down on those who are trying to get their shit together? everyone on this board is a criminal, probably a drug user, and probably most of us thugged the fuck out too. i think most in the army are people without much direction. lots of them are just fuckbags, too, though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theo Huxtable. Posted December 13, 2007 Author Share Posted December 13, 2007 i agree that there are a lot of losers in the military, especially the lifers. but i don't think it's "most". two of my boys that were in the military with me went to school when they got out; one has a degree and the other is working on one. but i must say a lot of people that join the jihad and become mujahideen are also losers most are single men from 18-35 that can't get laid. i'm not just saying this out of spite. i've read about the typical profile of a suicide bomber, and many are uneducated, unattractive, angry, petty criminals that never amounted to anything, and are thus easily lured by propaganda of becoming a "hero" to their people and getting to sleep with virgins. they beat, rape, and behead women for wearing jeans. they're intolerant of not only those that are non-Muslims, but those Muslims that do not practice their own sect of Shi'a or Sunni Islam. they hate jews, they hate christians, they hate hindus, buddhists, agnostics, atheists, polytheists, etc. many of them are common thugs with murderous intentions, and use "jihad" as an excuse to slaughter innocent men, women, and children. there's losers on both sides Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
war terror Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 true... i just wish we werent over there at all... i havent been paying much attention lately... i just get pissed off..... btw thanks for the thread...........:cool: 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.