I know, "It's not Fox News!" But who are you going to believe, Woman Molestor O'Reily or your lying eyes?

How about niether?

How about getting a credible source for your first link.

As to your second link, I read it. it was an account from Abu Graib. That is one witness statement. We all know what went on there.

How F#@**%^g dare you even post something like this!

What about the 2 US soldiers who were tortured last week.

How about their screams when the terrorists cut their genitals off while they were still alive.

The soldiers torture is fact !

Your story is bull#.

Originally posted by SIRR1
How F#@**%^g dare you even post something like this!

So, because 2 soldiers were tortured, it's ok for us to torture them and rape and sodomise them? How dare YOU!!!!!!

edit: BTW, abu graib was a long time before these 2 soldiers. Maybe the 2 soldiers were payback for all this crap? Think for yourself for once instead of letting fox news do it for you.

[edit on 6/22/2006 by Griff]

I honestly hope you are not so ignorant to believe that crappola. What about the 2 men that were just tortured and killed.
Come on that's crap and you know it. Post some actual evidence before posting this kind of garbage. I don't much care for rummy either but ...come on here.
Dime store theatrics and tabloid garbage is not evidence. These sources are not very vredible.

So, now the Washington Post is not reliable? I guess we can call Richard Nixon and tell him (if he weren't dead) that it's all a mistake. Woodward is not reliable. Go back to work.

I agree the Rumsfeld corrolation is not credible but the Washington Post is a very respected publication. And we do know that torture WAS in effect at Abu Graib. So, don't tell me I'm ignorant.

Originally posted by SIRR1
The soldiers torture is fact !

Where you There?

Your story is bull#.

Where you There also?

You do know what 'misinformation' means, right?

I mean, saying 'Person X order action Y", and then saying "some guy says Y happened", well, thats at least a let down, if not an outright lie.

Huge claim.

Evidence?

Without evidence, this says more about the source than the accused.

I'll buy into 6% of what the washington post says as accurate. But that's my own opinion. You may not have to like it but that's my opinion on it. Never said torture was a good thing either. I personally do not support torture, but aside from the little amounts of torture these butt heads had to put up with it pales to waht the iraqis have done and are doing to people. I figure that people who totally buy into anything that the media says are either blind or ignorant. So like it or not if the shoe fits. You may not like it but the post does not exactly impress me. Most all of the media that is pro either side of the aisle say what they want and manipulate facts and opinions. There is not a great deal of the media that impresses me anyway.
I meant also crappola about the post. These 2 men were brutilized and violently tortured. I honestly hope you are not planning on looking the mens families in the face and say to them, "it's okay."
They were tortured and that angers any civilized person. Dogs are treated better than what the bad guys deserve here. That's my own little opinion. But the post again is not the only source of information out there. After a few others come up with information then I'll buy it. Your first source is not reliable and the post would do anything to get at Bush. As for bush and comapany not caring- I think you are wrong. You prove me different in that opinion. I never bought the garbage about sodomy at all. That's all garbage. As for it being a payback - bite me!

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by SIRR1
How F#@**%^g dare you even post something like this!

So, because 2 soldiers were tortured, it's ok for us to torture them and rape and sodomise them? How dare YOU!!!!!!

edit: BTW, abu graib was a long time before these 2 soldiers. Maybe the 2 soldiers were payback for all this crap? Think for yourself for once instead of letting fox news do it for you.

[edit on 6/22/2006 by Griff]

You are assuming that this happened. It didn't.

It would have been plastered all over the media years ago along with Abu.

Naked man and barking dogs compared to mutilation until death...

People just don't get it. From the Hanoi Hilton until now. Radicals are just running the show from the Middle East to the 'States.



[edit on 22-6-2006 by Anon4this1]

Originally posted by Griff
So, now the Washington Post is not reliable? I guess we can call Richard Nixon and tell him (if he weren't dead) that it's all a mistake. Woodward is not reliable. Go back to work.

I agree the Rumsfeld corrolation is not credible but the Washington Post is a very respected publication. And we do know that torture WAS in effect at Abu Graib. So, don't tell me I'm ignorant.

New York Times=Washington Post=Wolf Blitzer et. al

Hold on, what are peoply denying here?

That peopel were abused at Abu Garaib?

Are you kidding?

Congress was shown pictures that they described as too horrible and sadistic to even release to the media. What has been released, is a small, 'more acceptable to the public' portion of what actually happened.

If people are swearing to have witnessed these things, there shoudl be an investigation, and if anyone did the stuff alleged in the WP pdf, they shoudl be shot.

Originally posted by Yumi
So it is ok for your soldiers to rape and sodomize 14 year boys because they tortured two US Soldiers who had invaded their country?

What does that have to do with Rumsfeld ordering it, which is the topic of this thread, as you have created it?

Originally posted by Nygdan
Hold on, what are peoply denying here?

That peopel were abused at Abu Garaib?

Are you kidding?

Congress was shown pictures that they described as too horrible and sadistic to even release to the media. What has been released, is a small, 'more acceptable to the public' portion of what actually happened.

If people are swearing to have witnessed these things, there shoudl be an investigation, and if anyone did the stuff alleged in the WP pdf, they shoudl be shot.

Originally posted by Yumi
So it is ok for your soldiers to rape and sodomize 14 year boys because they tortured two US Soldiers who had invaded their country?

What does that have to do with Rumsfeld ordering it, which is the topic of this thread, as you have created it?

Yeah, those naked men bugged me.

No, we were talking about the boys being sodomized in the prison. Not the naked dudes being humiliated to "wear them down".

Here's something 4 ya. Ask anyone on active flying status (USAF) about Fairchild and POW training. Ask if they were ever nude. If they answer "no" then they are lying.

Again, stop comparing apples to cut-up oranges. Stop sympathizing and start loathing and despising the true enemy of the civilized world. Rummy is not the enemy.

Otherwise, I hear Quebec is nice...

Originally posted by Anon4this1


Again, stop comparing apples to cut-up oranges. Stop sympathizing and start loathing and despising the true enemy of the civilized world.

How patriotic of you.

Originally posted by missed_gear


The Washington Post link is to an archived pdf. ‘document’…nothing more.

What are you talking about? So, a document that was for "official use only" isn't reliable? I swear you Bush supporters have blinders on all the time. And they have the nerve to call me ignorant?