BS: Who's next? - today's political picture

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: robomatic
Date: 31 May 05 - 09:58 PM

Spock will need more than a tricorder to detect one true unallowed statement from a Hakman post in this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Little Hawk
Date: 31 May 05 - 09:16 PM

Thanks, Ake. :-)

Now here's my prediction for the next key move in politics:

William Shatner gets appointed by the UN to straighten out.... EVERYTHING.

"What took you so long to ask?" he remarks casually. He establishes a command bridge atop Mount Ararat and assembles a crack squad of World Emergency Response Team officers, including (of course) Leonard Nimoy, to manage the complete reorganization of World society along peaceful and productive lines. He forms a vice squad composed of leggy women who look like Angelina Jolie. Things heat up fast.

Six incredible months later, the few evil kingpins behind all the World's sorrow and pain have been decisively defeated by a combination of diplomacy, phaser blasts, and barechested fistfights mano-a-mano against Shatner himself. Their many henchmen and underlings have fled in disarray.

First the first time in human history everything is wonderful. Dictators are gone. George Bush is but a memory. The women are almost all beautiful, and dressed in snappy little skirts and jumpsuits that you have to see to fully appreciate. Nobody has bad teeth anymore, and everyone is smiling. Peace and prosperity are rampant. Things are so nice it's almost dull at times. Poverty and want are things of the past. Money has ceased to exist, because everyone can get all the stuff they need from replicators.

Bill, meanwhile, is getting a bit restless...a bit itchy...he needs action. The steady barrage of visits from gorgeous female diplomats representing the New World Federation has not proven enough to occupy his hungry mind.

"Leonard," he says one day, "Call up NASA and find out if there's any trouble on....Mars....or maybe Venus...and see about that new...space probe. I think it's time to play...."Rocket Man".

Nimoy raises an eyebrow and picks up the tricoder...

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: akenaton
Date: 31 May 05 - 06:47 PM

Little Hawk....

You remember that line in "vincent"? You know the one!


"this world was never meant for one as beautiful as you"....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Little Hawk
Date: 31 May 05 - 06:26 PM

You're right about that mantra, Ebbie.

The problem is, they have the wrong end in mind. They are seeking personal gain and they are seeking victory. If they would seek an end that benefited ALL parties mutually, then they would find both the correct means AND the correct end.

They believe in separation and division, not Unity, and that is their essential error. They believe in win/lose...but win/win is the only sane option.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Ebbie
Date: 31 May 05 - 03:52 PM

Donuel, I agree with you.

It's an old - but valid - phrase but- Little Hawk, mightn't all of those war mongers be said to pursue their aims with one mantra in common: The End Justifies the Means?

When one is convinced that the only sensible/good in the end/farseeing result will be the outcome of the course you want to take, many take that course, hang the road itself.

Like withholding mail from a young'un whom you are trying to "protect" from an unsuitable suitor or feeding your mate false information about his/her boss or company in order to get them to quit or manipulating an election so it will have the outcome you think essential, or whatever else one may find oneself tempted to do in the name of what we perceive as 'what's good for you... I suspect that most of these people consider themselves good (wo)men.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Little Hawk
Date: 31 May 05 - 03:21 PM

Torture has been pretty common in most (if not all) wars. It's also rather common in police establishments, even in places where that is supposed to be illegal. You have physical torture, and you have psychological torture, which is more subtle, but similarly devastating. War itself is a massive crime against humanity, a crime instigated by ambitious politicians, greedy business interests, and fanatical zealots of a religious or political sort. Pre-emptive war is nothing but aggression. Japan launched a pre-emptive attack on Pearl Harbour in 1941 (to protect their overseas empire supply lines of oil and maintain their war in China). Hitler launched what he claimed to be a response TO a supposed Polish attack (on a German radio station) in 1939! But it was actually just plain, outright aggression by Hitler. Stalin launched a similarly unjustified attack on Finland in 1939. Bush launched a similarly unjustified attack on Iraq recently. That his attack has resulted in torture, among other things, was inevitable as soon as that attack occurred. What he says about it is a moot point, propaganda, self-justification, smoke and mirrors.

(Bush, however, is no doubt quite sure that he is doing the right thing and protecting America.)

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Donuel
Date: 31 May 05 - 03:09 PM

Yes I realize that:)

Selective scrutiny may be closer to the bone.





Selective credibility scrutiny becomes quite evident when comparing the dissection of the good work of Dan Rather with the work of Robert Novak.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Ebbie
Date: 31 May 05 - 03:02 PM

Donuel, I'm sure you realize that questioning credibility is not an ad hominem attack. Credibility is the essence of any citation.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Donuel
Date: 31 May 05 - 02:51 PM

George W Bush quote:

"enemy combatents are deported to foreign countries where they are guaranteed of torture."

I heard him say it verbatim three times and watched him say it once.
It was shocking to hear him be that blunt as Dave said. That was one reason it stuck with me.
Now what seems to be equally as shocking is the ease and speed in which the Bush handlers seem to be able to redact and revise everything Bush says with the credo of "what Bush meant to say".
I too have found great difficulty finding the precise quote from 3 + weeks ago via google searches.

I have seen on several other occaisions regarding whitehouse.gov where the words of GWB actual quotes have been revised within hours of their original publication.

All the right wing has to offer in debate is ad hominum attacks of a personal nature involving manhood, crediblility, sanity, patriotism which right or wrong are free speech opinions, however leveling false criminal charges is fortunately litigable. :)

If I were sworn in court I would indeed testify that the quote is actual and accurate.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: GUEST,Wolfgang
Date: 31 May 05 - 06:12 AM

Donuel has a lot of fantasy. This trait can be seen in many of his posts.

That's why I like his cartoons and collages but have learned never to trust his quotes or facts.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: jpk
Date: 28 May 05 - 06:07 PM

yes mg you probly are an anti semite,to hate everyone has much as you do,you have to hate yourself first,ergo you hate at least one jew.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: dianavan
Date: 27 May 05 - 10:35 PM

NSD-77 appears to be a classified document. Apparently it is the document that deals with detaining citizens of other countries and sending them abroad to be tortured. It is unclear why the U.S. (or the president) thinks it is within their rights to do so or who gives them the power over innocent, Canadian citizens such as Maher Arar. Does anyone know anything more about this document?

I have followed the Arar case closely and applaud his efforts to seek justice for the torture he endured. His wife was strong and led the effort to call this case to the attention of the Canadian public.

Google: Arar Maher, if you want to see an example of U.S. policy toward the kidnapping and torture of innocent people.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Ebbie
Date: 27 May 05 - 10:32 PM

As you say, the Torah may be open to interpretation. But some have a better grasp of it than others.

"That which is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor. That is the Torah; the rest is commentary. Go and study it." Rabbi Hillel

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: GUEST
Date: 27 May 05 - 09:48 PM

So there you have it Ptr, your answers.

Some of the questions you asked make a lot of sense...the information regarding them is available from very reliable sources but no doubt will be completely dismissed as not true.
Unforunately you cannot make people see what they do not want to.

so:

let me just add this,

December 2002. Defense Secretary Rumsfeld authorized such interrogation techniques at Guantanamo as hooding prisoners, using dogs, forcing prisoners into "stress positions" for long periods, stripping them, shaving them and isolating them. All of these techniques violate the Geneva Conventions, but President Bush had previously declared that the Geneva Conventions did not apply to Al Qaeda. Bush later rescinded those tactics and signed off on a shorter list of 'exceptional techniques,' including 20-hour interrogations, face slapping, stripping detainees to create 'a feeling of helplessness and dependence,' and using dogs to increase anxiety. Another legal review further narrowed the list, and Mr. Rumsfeld issued yet another memo on April 16, 2003. August 24, 2004. The Schlesinger Panel, an independent panel appointed by the Secretary of Defense in August 2004, found that the memos "confused field commanders, who thought that harsh interrogations were allowed.

and this

January 25, 2002. A memorandum from White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales to President Bush stated: "As you have said, the war against terrorism is a new kind of war. The nature of the new war places a high premium on other factors, such as the ability to quickly obtain information from captured terrorists and their sponsors in order to avoid further atrocities against American civilians…." The new situation "renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions…."
(Gonzales was later appointed by President Bush and approved by the Senate to become the U.S. Attorney General.)

Gonzales said that a key advantage of declaring that Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters do not have Geneva protections is that it "substantially reduces the threat of domestic criminal prosecution under the War Crimes Act. It is difficult to predict the motives of prosecutors and independent counsels who may in the future decide to pursue unwarranted charges based on Section 2441 [The War Crimes Act]."

January 26, 2002. Secretary of State Colin Powell responded to the Gonzales memo. He argued that declaring the Geneva Conventions inapplicable would "reverse over a century of U.S. policy and practice in supporting the Geneva Conventions and undermine the protections of the laws of war for our troops." He also wrote that it would "undermine public support among critical allies."

I won't go any further..all these 'statements' are verifiable with little effort from reputable sources both in the media and on the Web.

But it would seem that this post will only be viewed as yet more evidence of wrong-doing presented by Bush haters here on the Mudcat. That, unfortunately, is not True.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: DougR
Date: 27 May 05 - 07:57 PM

Guest Ptr: Ok, I will attempt to address your questions written May 27 at 2:20 P.M. For your convenience, I have numbered your paragraphs so that you will have no difficulty matching my replies to your inquiries.

1. A lot more evidence of wrong-doing than has been presented by Bush haters here on the Mudcat.
2. I do believe that prisoners are often sent back to their country of origin (that's actually what Bush said). I do not know if, after they arrive, they are tortured, nor do I believe you or your friend AKE knows that either. Bush might know, but if they are, he is not stupid enough (despite your opinion of him) to state it.
3. Yes, I deny that Gonzalez issued a report stating what you declare that he did.
4. Yes, I deny that Rumsfield authorized torturing of any sort.
5. Not a question. It's a statement.
6. Same as 5.
7. Same as 5.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: GUEST,Louis
Date: 27 May 05 - 05:13 PM

Yes. I do. I like French women even more.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Once Famous
Date: 27 May 05 - 05:08 PM

Does anyone here like french food?

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: akenaton
Date: 27 May 05 - 04:32 PM

petr...You have my sympathy in your attempts to bring this discussion back on track.
Its frustrating to think that this thread, started by Don, could have taken us right to the heart of the "democracy" argument, and perhaps we could all have learned something.

Instead, the thread has disintegrated into petty personal squabbling and nit picking over Dons'form of words from some who should know better!!

I notice your questions to the right remain unanswered, don't hold your breath, as an answer means having to address the problem in the first place ...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Once Famous
Date: 27 May 05 - 03:29 PM

You are not a Jew, guest. You are just an asshole and if you don't see the anti-semetism that blatently is here you are an unwiped asshole.

Take your armband off an reveal yourself, Adolph.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: GUEST
Date: 27 May 05 - 03:11 PM

I'm a practicing Jew too Martin. That's IF you are Jewish. And a lot of what you've said makes me doubt that you are. Did you get your brown shirt back from the cleaners yet ?

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Once Famous
Date: 27 May 05 - 02:38 PM

Guest, I don't have to justify to you jackshit. Torah is open to interpretation. I would say that you know nothing about it. Calling a practicing Jew an anti-semite shows your Nazi heritage. It's expected of your type here.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 27 May 05 - 02:31 PM

Thank you, Donuel, for amplifying somewhat your source for the GWB almost-quote. I've been unable so far, on the web, to find anything to that effect, but that proves nothing of itself.

The statement as you report it is surely a "statement against interest", as the lawyers say, but then GWB, as we all know, doesn't have the greatest intellectual control over his mouth and he just might have slipped and said the truth. I can't believe that he'd have intended to say something so self-damaging.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 27 May 05 - 02:20 PM

Id actually like to know from all the Bush supporters, what would it take to change their minds in their blind support of this administration.

do they deny or disbelieve policies of rendition (sending terror suspects to be tortured in third countries) exist?

do they deny that Gonzales as White HOuse counsel prior to being appointed AG, actually issued a report stating that torture should be defined only when the act brings on 'organ failure?'
and that Geneva Convention should be brushed aside,

do they deny that Rumsfeld personally authorized 'torture lite' interrogation techniques which included the use of dogs, sexual humiliation etc.. (of course the lowest ranking soldiers always take the fall, with no one in any position of authority being charged with anything)

right now in Canada, Maher Arar (who, while changing flights, in the US was shipped to Syria where he was jailed and tortured for 2 years)
there is a public enquiry going on and he is also suing Rumsfeld and Ashcroft, so if it hasnt become news in the US it will.

they either deny it or they feel it is justified.

its hypocritical to talk about the democratic rights of the Iraqi people, all the while ignoring the democratic rights of the Uzbeks, where President for Life Islam Karimov (whose troops shot at demonstrators and killed 500 people two weeks ago) is Americas friend and ally and (beneficiary of 500$ Millions in aid since he provided air bases).

simple straightforward question, lets see if they can answer, without resorting to ad hominem attacks - in which case they are out of their depth and not worthy of further discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: DougR
Date: 27 May 05 - 02:16 PM

Donuel: Ebbie posed a reasonable question. Your reply is less than forthright. What you "heard" Bush say isn't quite the same as directing her to a legitimate source.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Alba
Date: 27 May 05 - 02:10 PM

ROFL and I still can't get it right....ah bugger it..:>)

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: GUEST,Alba
Date: 27 May 05 - 01:44 PM

...and a how to compose a sentence 'check' too Matt it would seem, on part part anyway.. lol
What I meant to say was..
"Date: 27 May 05 - 08.26 am and 08:40 AM was me actually. The Mudcat was down and I neglected to put anything in the 'From' box.

Judith

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: GUEST,Alba
Date: 27 May 05 - 01:38 PM

From: GUEST
Date: 27 May 05 - 08.26 am and 08:40 AM was me actually the Mudcat was down and neglected to put anything in the 'From' box.

I find nothing in my questions directed to Donuel that express Anti- Semitic views?

Judith

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Matt_R
Date: 27 May 05 - 01:33 PM

This thread needs a spell check.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: GUEST
Date: 27 May 05 - 01:29 PM

What Amos said.

Martin is the exact opposite of what ever Jewish person I've ever met is like. He doesn't follow any of the ideals that can be found in the Torah - so the only way to accurately describe him is as an anti-semite. You have to do more than read the Torah - you have to live it.

I read some books by John Grisham. That doesn't make me a lawyer.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Amos
Date: 27 May 05 - 11:38 AM

There's no question that your statements are blunt, Martin. Blunt is what you do best. But truthful? No. They are distorted, spiteful, and full of anger, which is almost the opposite of truth. As for practicing, I think that's a good thing. You need a lot of it.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Ebbie
Date: 27 May 05 - 11:17 AM

In his usual brilliant manner dubya may well have said something of the sort. The man is incapable of making a clear statement.

In a fairly cursory search, I went from a blog (where anyone can say anything as a matter of opinion) to The Weekly Standard where I found this:

"Question: Mr. President, under the law, how would you justify the practice of renditioning, where U.S. agents . . . [send] terror suspects abroad, taking them to a third country for interrogation? . . .

"Answer: . . . We operate within the law and we send people to countries where they say they're not going to torture the people. But let me say something: The United States government has an obligation to protect the American people. It's in our country's interests to find those who would do harm to us. . . . We still [are] at war.

"SO SPOKE PRESIDENT Bush at a press conference on April 28, 2005. There is, however, a contradiction in the president's stated objective to use torture-free rendition as an effective counterterrorist weapon, to wit: Some of the countries to which prisoners have been rendered do use torture. Morally, operationally, and politically, then, the United States has got itself into a muddle through its embrace of rendition--that is, the transfer of American-held terrorists and terrorist suspects into the hands of foreign security and intelligence services."


The Article

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Once Famous
Date: 27 May 05 - 11:01 AM

Or straight from your asshole, Guest if you are the same one from before.

Anti-Semetic? Right. A practicing Jew as myself. You don't know your ass from a crater.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: GUEST
Date: 27 May 05 - 08:40 AM

Agreed, but truly in this case it would be prudent to have those words "straight from the Horses Mouth" so to speak!

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Donuel
Date: 27 May 05 - 08:26 AM

Words from the mouth of GWB never cease to dismay.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: GUEST
Date: 27 May 05 - 08:26 AM

Donuel. NPR has extensive archives and without a specific date it is difficult to find "a comment".
Can you remember what the Programme was and/or the date it was aired?
Thanks

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Alba
Date: 27 May 05 - 08:16 AM

yes Bobert, Amnesty International has some very disturbing information.
I was looking into this Thread last night and found an article dated March 6th 2005: Rendition
I will, due to the gravity of the subject, look into the Archives of NPR today when I have time.
Word of Mouth on this particluar issue isn't enough for me.
I am sure you understand that Donuel.
Jude

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Bobert
Date: 27 May 05 - 07:42 AM

In fact the Bush administration has been very involved in torture, except they have come up with another name fir it. They call it "rendering", where by they "render" someone to another country where tortute is an accepted practice...

And BTW, Amnesty International just released a report that was quite critical of the treatment of the people the Bush administration is holding in Guantanemo Bay and if you'll go to washingtonpost.com you'll find an artickle describing where the Koran was indeed disrespected even though the Bush administration is trying to downplay it... I find it interesting that they all but nuked Newsweek last week for printing a story that contained a paragraph about the Koean being disrespected and here a week later they are sayin' "Well, yeah, we mighta done a little of that but we was jus' funnin'"

I guess they will soon resort to defending their lies with the Clinton defense stategy of "depends what is... is?"

(No, Bobert. They couldn't care less about defending their lies. They just make up bigger and better ones to cover the last batch. Remember WMD's?)

Nevermind....

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Donuel
Date: 27 May 05 - 07:23 AM

The CIA program of outsourcing torture is called rendition and the tortured are called rendered when flown to a foreign country and tortured. For over a year the administration claimed that they did not sanction US torture, valuable information has been obtained from foreign tortured detainees.

A little over 2 weeks ago on radio I first heard George W Bush respond to a question about rendition and then witnessed his response on TV:
"they (the terrorists) will be flown to a foreign country with the guarantee of torture". GWB

Facts are facts but the only thing alarming was the straight up confession by the President of US sponsored torture without the flowery embelishment of the Orwellian code words like rendition.

If you want to hear him say it I suggest you search NPR.com
When this policy of rendition has been reported by the Washington Post there has been no outcry.

Outlines of the actual Uzbekistan torture techniques include boiling people to death.
Last week Uzbekistan had their own Tianamon Square type event where hundreds of demonstrators were killed. Although some were still alive they were buried in mass graves in only 3 hours with is a new speed record.

If you want to compare these atrocities with Darfour they may seem minor with regards to sheer numbers. Still if you support Bush you support a torture President. In for a penny, in for a pound... or you might want to draw a line at abject torture. Simply denying what he does and says is not good enough, nor is calling people who point to what is happening; insane, liars, unmanly, unpatriotic and criminal good enough any longer.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Bill D
Date: 27 May 05 - 12:04 AM

here is the clearest accusation I found after a moderate search thru some pages using "Bush torture deported" as my search terms.

There are a LOT of comments out there about sanctioning torture, justifying torture...etc...but obviously, the only direct quote from GW are about officially condemning torture.

Donuel may or may not have overdone the graphic (he certainly did not base it on any clear & unambiguous quote), but there is much to answer for in the current administration.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: GUEST
Date: 26 May 05 - 11:02 PM

Why should I want to talk to someone as anti-semitic as you ? I really don't care for bigots like yourself. And please stop thinking about my balls. You would be better off spending time reading the Torah and trying to live up to the ideals you'll find there. Have you picked it up latly Martin ??

PS - CF Martin and Orville Gibson just called. They want their names back. You've abused them long enough.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Once Famous
Date: 26 May 05 - 10:50 PM

Guest, you are truly a douche bag. PM me with your thoughts if you have any balls, which you don't.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: robomatic
Date: 26 May 05 - 06:30 PM

Hakman we've already established that you do not abstain from personal attacks your own self. You also have a perceived problem in that you interweave fantasy with reality in your many thread headers in this forum. That's okay, just don't go all self righteous when it gets pointed out.

And it WILL get pointed out. Lots of sharp folk in this forum.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: jpk
Date: 26 May 05 - 06:12 PM

ya know,sometimes torture works,i'll start gripping, when we start hacking ther damn heads off.till then,o'well

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: GUEST
Date: 26 May 05 - 05:56 PM

Martin - You're the anti-semetic. You're the one that doesn't take the teachings of your own religion to heart. Read it in your own words as follows :

"I don't wish the horror of a parent watching their child die on anyone"

"I hope all of you who do not agree that her parents have no say get to watch your child die before your eyes, also"

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Once Famous
Date: 26 May 05 - 05:43 PM

Interesting how this is now about terry shiavano again.


I don't wish the horror of a parent watching their child die on anyone. that's the point. My heart went out to her parents who clung to life. Breathing, heartbeat, HOPE, etc.

Alba, you should never hopefully be in that position of someone else with possible less than disirous motive making that decision for any of your kids.

I stand by what I said.

And Guest, what does Passover got to do with anything except to just prove another anti-semetic Mudcat attitude that idiots like you have now made this place famous for?

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Alba
Date: 26 May 05 - 05:23 PM

Martin....what has PC got to do with your comments on the other Thread?

"I stand by what I said"

Do you truly wish that on my Son and myself and the countless other Parents that post here that disagree with your point of view.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: GUEST
Date: 26 May 05 - 05:04 PM

And you celibrate Passover ?

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 May 05 - 05:03 PM

There has got to be a better way of getting one's rocks off than that.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: Once Famous
Date: 26 May 05 - 04:58 PM

Guest, yes here's my comment:

In case you haven't noticed, I could give a crap about being politically correct here.

If you are offended by bluntly truthful statements, that's your problem.

I stand by what I said. Nice life you have BTW, poking through old threads to find things that people said. Like you were a shithead lawyer doing a despostion.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's next? - today's political picture
From: akenaton
Date: 26 May 05 - 04:39 PM

Donuel has a valid point, I have been waiting to see who would be the first to post on the shame of Americas new' "Saddam".

Apparently This monster Karimov likes to boil his victims alive and the American govt look the other way as they have a massive base in Uzbekestan, and they believe Karimov to be a strong man who can keep down the "Islamists"
Does that seem familiar to anyone?
Does it make anyone think that all the rhetoric about spreading democracy is a sham?....I wonder......Ake