mr2mk1g 10 #76 April 30, 2004 No - the Army brass knew all about this some time ago. The news, was not news to them, don't present speculation as knowledge. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #77 April 30, 2004 QuoteQuoteWhat's really kind of screwed up about this is that this incident was discovered a month ago and the perpetrators were removed from duty. No charges were filed against them until the 60 minutes piece. There goes more conspiracy theory. QuoteFrederick says Americans came into the prison: “We had military intelligence, we had all kinds of other government agencies, FBI, CIA ... All those that I didn't even know or recognize." Frederick's letters and email messages home also offer clues to problems at the prison. He wrote that he was helping the interrogators: "Military intelligence has encouraged and told us 'Great job.' " "They usually don't allow others to watch them interrogate. But since they like the way I run the prison, they have made an exception." "We help getting them to talk with the way we handle them. ... We've had a very high rate with our style of getting them to break. They usually end up breaking within hours." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- According to the Army’s own investigation, that’s what was happening. The Army found that interrogators asked reservists working in the prison to prepare the Iraqi detainees, physically and mentally, for questioning. Two weeks ago, 60 Minutes II received an appeal from the Defense Department, and eventually from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Richard Myers, to delay this broadcast Seems like they conspired to me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,106 #78 April 30, 2004 QuoteQuoteI met a guy year or so ago that is the the British Military. . . Well this young guy also has served in N. Ireland. He told me many stories of how he and his buddies thought it was real funny to kick little Irish kids when they walked by. He told me stories of how they beat the crap out of guys and how it was something they sometimes looked forward to . . . Hey Kallend - So by your logic here, the queen of England must apologize to the world and be overthrown/recalled/replaced. Go get her. Is QE2 their Commander in Chief?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #79 April 30, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteI met a guy year or so ago that is the the British Military. . . Well this young guy also has served in N. Ireland. He told me many stories of how he and his buddies thought it was real funny to kick little Irish kids when they walked by. He told me stories of how they beat the crap out of guys and how it was something they sometimes looked forward to . . . Hey Kallend - So by your logic here, the queen of England must apologize to the world and be overthrown/recalled/replaced. Go get her. Is QE2 their Commander in Chief? She's the Chief of State.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #80 April 30, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI met a guy year or so ago that is the the British Military. . . Well this young guy also has served in N. Ireland. He told me many stories of how he and his buddies thought it was real funny to kick little Irish kids when they walked by. He told me stories of how they beat the crap out of guys and how it was something they sometimes looked forward to . . . Hey Kallend - So by your logic here, the queen of England must apologize to the world and be overthrown/recalled/replaced. Go get her. Is QE2 their Commander in Chief? She's the Chief of State. Ummm, there's no such rank or title as THE chief of state. ChiefS of state is used to describe the leading political positions. http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/chiefs/chiefs187.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #81 April 30, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI met a guy year or so ago that is the the British Military. . . Well this young guy also has served in N. Ireland. He told me many stories of how . . . Ummm, there's no such rank or title as THE chief of state. ChiefS of state is used to describe the leading political positions. In any case, I admire Kallend for his consistency as I expect if the answer to his question on CinC for Britain was 'yes' in some form or another, then he'd likely stay on message. Otherwise, the question wouldn't be asked if that wasn't his intent. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pajarito 0 #82 April 30, 2004 QuoteSeems like they conspired to me. That's all fine and good PhillyKev. Why don't we all just wait and see what comes of it? Like I said, IMO, whoever was involved should pay the price. I just can't buy your politically motivated generalization that this is some sort of wide-spread commonality in the US Military. It certainly didn't seem that way during my service and I've had some experience in those types of situations. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mr2mk1g 10 #83 April 30, 2004 He's not saying the conspired about torturing people - but that they conspired about the timing of this when this story broke. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pajarito 0 #84 April 30, 2004 QuoteHe's not saying the conspired about torturing people - but that they conspired about the timing of this when this story broke. What's wrong with that. Simply because it might have gotten delayed a month doesn't make me jump to the conclusion that there's some sort of wide-spread conspiracy. I'd want to control the flow of information in order to limit rumors. Once the facts are in, i.e. who did what, when, why, where, how, and things are confirmed, then release to the press. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,063 #85 April 30, 2004 >What's wrong with that. Simply because it might have gotten delayed > a month doesn't make me jump to the conclusion that there's some > sort of wide-spread conspiracy. I'd want to control the flow of > information in order to limit rumors. That's pretty much what he said. They conspired to delay release of the story. There may have been a good reason for it; time will tell. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mr2mk1g 10 #86 April 30, 2004 I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that - I'm not making the accusation. I just clarified what his accusation was as their appeared to be a little confusion. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wmw999 2,524 #87 April 30, 2004 Quotewant to control the flow of information in order to limit rumors. Once the facts are in, i.e. who did what, when, why, where, how, and things are confirmed, then release to the press. Just about any organization wants to do that. However, when the story is big or hot enough, sometimes it's better to go ahead and release what you have, because it's better to release it yourself than to have it dug out by someone else. And this story shows why. Like with police officers who are accused of crimes, remove them from their jobs immediately, put them on the military equivalent of desk duty, and announce that it's being investigated. It's better than the perception that it's being hidden. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pajarito 0 #88 April 30, 2004 QuoteJust about any organization wants to do that. However, when the story is big or hot enough, sometimes it's better to go ahead and release what you have, because it's better to release it yourself than to have it dug out by someone else. And this story shows why. Like with police officers who are accused of crimes, remove them from their jobs immediately, put them on the military equivalent of desk duty, and announce that it's being investigated. It's better than the perception that it's being hidden. Ok....but I'm guessing that there has to be a balance. You don't want to release information that might turn out to not be true in the future. I'll agree that something this big would need to be gotten out ASAP but there has to be control in place. That's not necessarily indicative of bad motives. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rickjump1 0 #89 April 30, 2004 At least the President of the United States is involved now. I'm sure the people in question are going to get more than a slap on the wrist.Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pajarito 0 #90 April 30, 2004 QuoteAt least the President of the United States is involved now. I'm sure the people in question are going to get more than a slap on the wrist. I think PhillyKev and Kallend think GWB is probably involved. You know...in on the conspiracy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wmw999 2,524 #91 April 30, 2004 Quotethat there has to be a balance. You don't want to release information that might turn out to not be true in the future. I'll agree that something this big would need to be gotten out ASAP but there has to be control in place. That's not necessarily indicative of bad motives Absolutely true. That's the whole reason for publicizing that they're not on any sort of active duty until the investigation is complete -- it makes it clear that you're not taking a chance of whatever event happened, happening again. If a source to contact is provided, and is cooperative with the press (i.e. nice to them, not just saying whatever they want to hear), then it'll go a long way towards helping to keep the situation from getting out of hand from the start. Of course there will be people who will second guess and sensationalize it. Can't stop that. But if more people say "it looks like they're trying to get to the bottom of it" from the start, then you havent' pissed away as much good reputation. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gawain 0 #92 April 30, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI met a guy year or so ago that is the the British Military. . . Well this young guy also has served in N. Ireland. He told me many stories of how he and his buddies thought it was real funny to kick little Irish kids when they walked by. He told me stories of how they beat the crap out of guys and how it was something they sometimes looked forward to . . . Hey Kallend - So by your logic here, the queen of England must apologize to the world and be overthrown/recalled/replaced. Go get her. Is QE2 their Commander in Chief? She's the Chief of State. Ummm, there's no such rank or title as THE chief of state. ChiefS of state is used to describe the leading political positions. http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/chiefs/chiefs187.html Here's a more detailed example: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/uk.html#Govt "Executive branch: chief of state: Queen ELIZABETH II (since 6 February 1952); Heir Apparent Prince CHARLES (son of the queen, born 14 November 1948) head of government: Prime Minister Anthony (Tony) BLAIR (since 2 May 1997) cabinet: Cabinet of Ministers appointed by the prime minister elections: none; the monarchy is hereditary; following legislative elections, the leader of the majority party or the leader of the majority coalition is usually the prime minister"So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pajarito 0 #93 April 30, 2004 QuoteAbsolutely true. That's the whole reason for publicizing that they're not on any sort of active duty until the investigation is complete -- it makes it clear that you're not taking a chance of whatever event happened, happening again. If a source to contact is provided, and is cooperative with the press (i.e. nice to them, not just saying whatever they want to hear), then it'll go a long way towards helping to keep the situation from getting out of hand from the start. Of course there will be people who will second guess and sensationalize it. Can't stop that. But if more people say "it looks like they're trying to get to the bottom of it" from the start, then you havent' pissed away as much good reputation. AGREED.....yet another rarity! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites markd_nscr986 0 #94 April 30, 2004 You know Pajarito, John Kerry could be in on it too....after all Kerry and GWB are distant cousins and it might be a family thing!Marc SCR 6046 SCS 3004 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rickjump1 0 #95 April 30, 2004 Quote: I think PhillyKev and Kallend think GWB is probably involved. You know...in on the conspiracy... Quote I certaninly hope they don't lock up GWB with the Queen.Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pajarito 0 #96 April 30, 2004 QuoteYou know Pajarito, John Kerry could be in on it too....after all Kerry and GWB are distant cousins and it might be a family thing! You know.......You just never know......................... .....................Think about it.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #97 April 30, 2004 QuoteQuoteAt least the President of the United States is involved now. I'm sure the people in question are going to get more than a slap on the wrist. I think PhillyKev and Kallend think GWB is probably involved. You know...in on the conspiracy. I guess you missed the post where I said..."I don't blame Bush for this either." I never said, implied, or thought that these acts of toture are wide spread behavior in the military. However, coverups and secrecy of non-strategic or classified information is. Can you deny that? I personally have a friend that was in the Navy during Vietnam. He was in the galley when a southern white guy told a black guy from the bronx to get out of his seat. The black guy told him to fuck off, and the white guy and several of his friends picked him up and ran him through the industrial dishwasher putting him in the hospital with severe burns. The guys were transferred but no charges were ever made against them. That's one incident I personally know of. I'm sure there are many more. Are you going to pretend that the military doesn't play by their own rules and sweep things under the rug to avoid a bad public image? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pajarito 0 #98 April 30, 2004 QuoteI never said, implied, or thought that these acts of toture are wide spread behavior in the military. However, coverups and secrecy of non-strategic or classified information is. Can you deny that? Did you mean to say non-classified? Of course, classified stuff is kept secret. Maybe I just don’t follow you very well. QuoteI personally have a friend that was in the Navy during Vietnam. He was in the galley when a southern white guy told a black guy from the bronx to get out of his seat. The black guy told him to fuck off, and the white guy and several of his friends picked him up and ran him through the industrial dishwasher putting him in the hospital with severe burns. The guys were transferred but no charges were ever made against them. That's one incident I personally know of. I'm sure there are many more. Are you going to pretend that the military doesn't play by their own rules and sweep things under the rug to avoid a bad public image? Maybe….sometimes. I’d say they are few and far between, though. I’d say that they are very much isolated incidents. I’d say that acts of that nature would be dealt with in a harsh manner in these day & times by the military. I wouldn’t jump to the conclusion of a conspiracy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jumper03 0 #99 April 30, 2004 Quote>Don't be so quick to judge a whole nation by what 6 people did! We judged a whole nation by what 19 people did on 9/11/01. Then why haven't we invaded Saudi Arabia yet? JumpScars remind us that the past is real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,106 #100 April 30, 2004 QuoteQuoteAt least the President of the United States is involved now. I'm sure the people in question are going to get more than a slap on the wrist. I think PhillyKev and Kallend think GWB is probably involved. You know...in on the conspiracy. Where does the buck stop? Who is the Commander in Chief?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next Page 4 of 8 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
pajarito 0 #82 April 30, 2004 QuoteSeems like they conspired to me. That's all fine and good PhillyKev. Why don't we all just wait and see what comes of it? Like I said, IMO, whoever was involved should pay the price. I just can't buy your politically motivated generalization that this is some sort of wide-spread commonality in the US Military. It certainly didn't seem that way during my service and I've had some experience in those types of situations. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #83 April 30, 2004 He's not saying the conspired about torturing people - but that they conspired about the timing of this when this story broke. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #84 April 30, 2004 QuoteHe's not saying the conspired about torturing people - but that they conspired about the timing of this when this story broke. What's wrong with that. Simply because it might have gotten delayed a month doesn't make me jump to the conclusion that there's some sort of wide-spread conspiracy. I'd want to control the flow of information in order to limit rumors. Once the facts are in, i.e. who did what, when, why, where, how, and things are confirmed, then release to the press. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,063 #85 April 30, 2004 >What's wrong with that. Simply because it might have gotten delayed > a month doesn't make me jump to the conclusion that there's some > sort of wide-spread conspiracy. I'd want to control the flow of > information in order to limit rumors. That's pretty much what he said. They conspired to delay release of the story. There may have been a good reason for it; time will tell. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #86 April 30, 2004 I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that - I'm not making the accusation. I just clarified what his accusation was as their appeared to be a little confusion. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,524 #87 April 30, 2004 Quotewant to control the flow of information in order to limit rumors. Once the facts are in, i.e. who did what, when, why, where, how, and things are confirmed, then release to the press. Just about any organization wants to do that. However, when the story is big or hot enough, sometimes it's better to go ahead and release what you have, because it's better to release it yourself than to have it dug out by someone else. And this story shows why. Like with police officers who are accused of crimes, remove them from their jobs immediately, put them on the military equivalent of desk duty, and announce that it's being investigated. It's better than the perception that it's being hidden. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #88 April 30, 2004 QuoteJust about any organization wants to do that. However, when the story is big or hot enough, sometimes it's better to go ahead and release what you have, because it's better to release it yourself than to have it dug out by someone else. And this story shows why. Like with police officers who are accused of crimes, remove them from their jobs immediately, put them on the military equivalent of desk duty, and announce that it's being investigated. It's better than the perception that it's being hidden. Ok....but I'm guessing that there has to be a balance. You don't want to release information that might turn out to not be true in the future. I'll agree that something this big would need to be gotten out ASAP but there has to be control in place. That's not necessarily indicative of bad motives. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rickjump1 0 #89 April 30, 2004 At least the President of the United States is involved now. I'm sure the people in question are going to get more than a slap on the wrist.Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #90 April 30, 2004 QuoteAt least the President of the United States is involved now. I'm sure the people in question are going to get more than a slap on the wrist. I think PhillyKev and Kallend think GWB is probably involved. You know...in on the conspiracy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,524 #91 April 30, 2004 Quotethat there has to be a balance. You don't want to release information that might turn out to not be true in the future. I'll agree that something this big would need to be gotten out ASAP but there has to be control in place. That's not necessarily indicative of bad motives Absolutely true. That's the whole reason for publicizing that they're not on any sort of active duty until the investigation is complete -- it makes it clear that you're not taking a chance of whatever event happened, happening again. If a source to contact is provided, and is cooperative with the press (i.e. nice to them, not just saying whatever they want to hear), then it'll go a long way towards helping to keep the situation from getting out of hand from the start. Of course there will be people who will second guess and sensationalize it. Can't stop that. But if more people say "it looks like they're trying to get to the bottom of it" from the start, then you havent' pissed away as much good reputation. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #92 April 30, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI met a guy year or so ago that is the the British Military. . . Well this young guy also has served in N. Ireland. He told me many stories of how he and his buddies thought it was real funny to kick little Irish kids when they walked by. He told me stories of how they beat the crap out of guys and how it was something they sometimes looked forward to . . . Hey Kallend - So by your logic here, the queen of England must apologize to the world and be overthrown/recalled/replaced. Go get her. Is QE2 their Commander in Chief? She's the Chief of State. Ummm, there's no such rank or title as THE chief of state. ChiefS of state is used to describe the leading political positions. http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/chiefs/chiefs187.html Here's a more detailed example: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/uk.html#Govt "Executive branch: chief of state: Queen ELIZABETH II (since 6 February 1952); Heir Apparent Prince CHARLES (son of the queen, born 14 November 1948) head of government: Prime Minister Anthony (Tony) BLAIR (since 2 May 1997) cabinet: Cabinet of Ministers appointed by the prime minister elections: none; the monarchy is hereditary; following legislative elections, the leader of the majority party or the leader of the majority coalition is usually the prime minister"So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #93 April 30, 2004 QuoteAbsolutely true. That's the whole reason for publicizing that they're not on any sort of active duty until the investigation is complete -- it makes it clear that you're not taking a chance of whatever event happened, happening again. If a source to contact is provided, and is cooperative with the press (i.e. nice to them, not just saying whatever they want to hear), then it'll go a long way towards helping to keep the situation from getting out of hand from the start. Of course there will be people who will second guess and sensationalize it. Can't stop that. But if more people say "it looks like they're trying to get to the bottom of it" from the start, then you havent' pissed away as much good reputation. AGREED.....yet another rarity! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
markd_nscr986 0 #94 April 30, 2004 You know Pajarito, John Kerry could be in on it too....after all Kerry and GWB are distant cousins and it might be a family thing!Marc SCR 6046 SCS 3004 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rickjump1 0 #95 April 30, 2004 Quote: I think PhillyKev and Kallend think GWB is probably involved. You know...in on the conspiracy... Quote I certaninly hope they don't lock up GWB with the Queen.Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pajarito 0 #96 April 30, 2004 QuoteYou know Pajarito, John Kerry could be in on it too....after all Kerry and GWB are distant cousins and it might be a family thing! You know.......You just never know......................... .....................Think about it.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #97 April 30, 2004 QuoteQuoteAt least the President of the United States is involved now. I'm sure the people in question are going to get more than a slap on the wrist. I think PhillyKev and Kallend think GWB is probably involved. You know...in on the conspiracy. I guess you missed the post where I said..."I don't blame Bush for this either." I never said, implied, or thought that these acts of toture are wide spread behavior in the military. However, coverups and secrecy of non-strategic or classified information is. Can you deny that? I personally have a friend that was in the Navy during Vietnam. He was in the galley when a southern white guy told a black guy from the bronx to get out of his seat. The black guy told him to fuck off, and the white guy and several of his friends picked him up and ran him through the industrial dishwasher putting him in the hospital with severe burns. The guys were transferred but no charges were ever made against them. That's one incident I personally know of. I'm sure there are many more. Are you going to pretend that the military doesn't play by their own rules and sweep things under the rug to avoid a bad public image? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pajarito 0 #98 April 30, 2004 QuoteI never said, implied, or thought that these acts of toture are wide spread behavior in the military. However, coverups and secrecy of non-strategic or classified information is. Can you deny that? Did you mean to say non-classified? Of course, classified stuff is kept secret. Maybe I just don’t follow you very well. QuoteI personally have a friend that was in the Navy during Vietnam. He was in the galley when a southern white guy told a black guy from the bronx to get out of his seat. The black guy told him to fuck off, and the white guy and several of his friends picked him up and ran him through the industrial dishwasher putting him in the hospital with severe burns. The guys were transferred but no charges were ever made against them. That's one incident I personally know of. I'm sure there are many more. Are you going to pretend that the military doesn't play by their own rules and sweep things under the rug to avoid a bad public image? Maybe….sometimes. I’d say they are few and far between, though. I’d say that they are very much isolated incidents. I’d say that acts of that nature would be dealt with in a harsh manner in these day & times by the military. I wouldn’t jump to the conclusion of a conspiracy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jumper03 0 #99 April 30, 2004 Quote>Don't be so quick to judge a whole nation by what 6 people did! We judged a whole nation by what 19 people did on 9/11/01. Then why haven't we invaded Saudi Arabia yet? JumpScars remind us that the past is real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,106 #100 April 30, 2004 QuoteQuoteAt least the President of the United States is involved now. I'm sure the people in question are going to get more than a slap on the wrist. I think PhillyKev and Kallend think GWB is probably involved. You know...in on the conspiracy. Where does the buck stop? Who is the Commander in Chief?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next Page 4 of 8 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
pajarito 0 #96 April 30, 2004 QuoteYou know Pajarito, John Kerry could be in on it too....after all Kerry and GWB are distant cousins and it might be a family thing! You know.......You just never know......................... .....................Think about it.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #97 April 30, 2004 QuoteQuoteAt least the President of the United States is involved now. I'm sure the people in question are going to get more than a slap on the wrist. I think PhillyKev and Kallend think GWB is probably involved. You know...in on the conspiracy. I guess you missed the post where I said..."I don't blame Bush for this either." I never said, implied, or thought that these acts of toture are wide spread behavior in the military. However, coverups and secrecy of non-strategic or classified information is. Can you deny that? I personally have a friend that was in the Navy during Vietnam. He was in the galley when a southern white guy told a black guy from the bronx to get out of his seat. The black guy told him to fuck off, and the white guy and several of his friends picked him up and ran him through the industrial dishwasher putting him in the hospital with severe burns. The guys were transferred but no charges were ever made against them. That's one incident I personally know of. I'm sure there are many more. Are you going to pretend that the military doesn't play by their own rules and sweep things under the rug to avoid a bad public image? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #98 April 30, 2004 QuoteI never said, implied, or thought that these acts of toture are wide spread behavior in the military. However, coverups and secrecy of non-strategic or classified information is. Can you deny that? Did you mean to say non-classified? Of course, classified stuff is kept secret. Maybe I just don’t follow you very well. QuoteI personally have a friend that was in the Navy during Vietnam. He was in the galley when a southern white guy told a black guy from the bronx to get out of his seat. The black guy told him to fuck off, and the white guy and several of his friends picked him up and ran him through the industrial dishwasher putting him in the hospital with severe burns. The guys were transferred but no charges were ever made against them. That's one incident I personally know of. I'm sure there are many more. Are you going to pretend that the military doesn't play by their own rules and sweep things under the rug to avoid a bad public image? Maybe….sometimes. I’d say they are few and far between, though. I’d say that they are very much isolated incidents. I’d say that acts of that nature would be dealt with in a harsh manner in these day & times by the military. I wouldn’t jump to the conclusion of a conspiracy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumper03 0 #99 April 30, 2004 Quote>Don't be so quick to judge a whole nation by what 6 people did! We judged a whole nation by what 19 people did on 9/11/01. Then why haven't we invaded Saudi Arabia yet? JumpScars remind us that the past is real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,106 #100 April 30, 2004 QuoteQuoteAt least the President of the United States is involved now. I'm sure the people in question are going to get more than a slap on the wrist. I think PhillyKev and Kallend think GWB is probably involved. You know...in on the conspiracy. Where does the buck stop? Who is the Commander in Chief?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
