Thanks for slapping us awake.

What you describe is not America. America has been hijacked.

Rodehard's comment followed by Mul's pic illustrates perfectly why I am so disgusted by the left's point of view!

Terrorists cut heads off, so we should imprison people without charges or trial for 4 years.

Makes prefect sense to some I guess.

Yup. Some guys cut off a guys head, so it's off to the gulag for everyone until we sort things out.

Mul posting WTC pix in 5.. 4... 3...

At least Thom fully understands the situation.:D

http://www.ytedk.com/car1sm.jpg

Oops, my bad...That is a picture of the murder scene of the leading alcohol addled opponent to the war on terror.

Here ya go...

http://a188.g.akamaitech.net/f/188/9.../10pm/ny_7.jpg

Does that mean we lock up all the Americans responsible for this?

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/04/02/1048962796085.html

You are a hollow man Mul. Thats all youve got.

Wasnt Osama Bin Laden resposible for that event? Where is he now? What, not in Iraq? Maybe in Afghanistan? Maybe in Pakistan? But arent they allies....Free, you say? Making rock videos and yucking it up some where in the Moslem world? Damn.

Nice obfuscation. When in doubt, pull out the WTC. This is guaranteed to inflame/arouse nationalist sentiment and inhibit any reasonable examination of the issue (this or any other)Can we have the battered fireman holding flag now?

The US should bring down an appropriate sentence on anyone it holds who was involved in acts of terrorism. Trouble is, there is no attempt being made to demonstate that any one in Guanatanamo (or Bagram, or god knows where in Eatsern Europe) has anything to do with terrorism.

And oddly, not everyone shares your unshakeable faith in the US miliatary to determine these things, and sadly, to tell the truth about them.

But its good to see you back on form Mul. You got a bit of a rogering yesterday, and I was bit worried that you were retreating into Armeggoadon and calling down a Holy Host. But youve paused, reflected and come out swinging with decapitated Americans and the WTC attack. Bravo, old man.

Thanks. Don't forget my artful dragging in of the murderous top brass of the DemocRAT party...I thought that was unusually clever on my part.

Too bad I can't show you the photo of the two dozen people killed in the attack on the homes, in which one was alleged to have Saddam Hussein visiting it, but you see, those folks were blown into small pieces or so much red mist by the numerous 2000 pound bombs dropped on them.

Further, but far from last, I don't care how many feckless mercenaries are beheaded, I hope the Iraqi's kill them all.

Your fascist, bloodthirsty point of view is already well known, Tim. Why post your unAmerican position yet again?

You mean communist/Islamofascist would be totalitarian dictators, don't you?...Because a majority of Iraqis want freedom and understand that it is the fascist camel jockeys that are the everlasting problem in the ME.

You forgot to add American military to your "I don't care how many feckless mercenaries [and American military] are beheaded, I hope terrorists kill them all."

edit: for clarity.

Today I was walking and stepped in some fastpat, I had to wipe it off on the curb but it still stank, so I had to wash it off my shoe.

So, IYO, objecting to the deprivation of a person's liberty, indefinately without charge or trial, is uniquley an affliciction of the left?

Think carefully before answering.

What, if you are to project your belief system on a subhuman, would you rather...1) death or 2) imprisonment until an end to the liberation?

More Bush'ist gibberish.

You're on fire this evening Mul.


If, in the absence of an argument, you must resort to this type of thing, please try harder and at least, give us a laugh, eh?

Perjaps you restate your proposition in something approaching coherent thought?

I really think you are losing it Mul. Get some one to lay hands on you immediately.

I thought he was already in a massage protologists able, er, hands?

Well, its just an observation, but I think Mul has been unusually ineffective in this thread. Where normally he is capable of producing documents which definately connect AlQ to Saddam, proof that WMD do in fact exist in Iraq, concrete evidence of the leftist liberal media conspiracy- on this topic he is really struggling for traction. And its really such a simple question- demonstrate how what is happening at Guanatammo is consistent with US constitutional principles.

Doesnt seem so hard, really. Unless ofcourse- when you really stand back and look at it, strip away the homeland security neo con rhetoric- there is really no acceptable answer.

The real question is

Who Would Jesus Torture.

Lake of fire...eternity is a long time.

I imagine there is a place set aside for the godless souls that concocted Guanatanamo Bay in the Christian paradigm. Intersting, when Church leaders the world over have spoken out against the trvesity of Guanatamo, you seem to claim the will of God? That this is a Christian act? Fascicnating.

I think I am more of a Christian than you, Mul. And Im an atheist.


'Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted. Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled. Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God. Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are ye, when men shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad, for great is your reward in heaven; for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.'"

When a child of Satan quotes the Bible, I find no meaning.

You reject the One, you are subject to the other.

BTW...We are a SECULAR nation with SECULAR LAWS.

I don't trust the Catholic church or the pedophiles they call priests, or those that conceal them, or those that worship idols, or those that support and collaborate with communist regimes.

You introduced your peculiar view of Christianity to this thread Mul.

Well, which is it? Is Guanatamao just under God's laws? Or is it sound under secular law?

I invite you to listen to that still, small voice Mul.

Our dominantly Christian nation is overly generous to those who want to kill us because of liberal homosexual supporters, promiscuity advancers, and drug proponents, like you Stewie...It is folks like you and your liberal ilk that make them feel justified in their brutality and hatred of America...Despite that we treat them quite nicely given their feces throwing tendencies and sperm flinging at American servicemen who are charged with their care.

This is a secular issue. Tell where the Constitutional principles of the United States apply to the situatiuon at Gunatanamo. Tell me why it is accepatble to treat non US citizens in a manner that is totally illegal for US citizens. I remind, you this is not about guilt or innocence. Try them If guilty, hang them.

Come Mul, at least try.

http://www.npr.org/programs/atc/feat...graner_200.jpg

Detainee Manadel al-Jamadi in Abu Ghraib prison after being cared for by US servicemen.

The terrorist POS died of wounds inflicted in the field...You will get a chance to ask him soon enough.

Six pages and still no answer.

This isnt like you at all, Mul. Whatever could be the matter?

You never posed an honest question.

RE your dead terrorist friend above: "Navy SEALs apprehended al-Jamadi as a suspect in the Oct. 27, 2003, bombing of Red Cross offices in Baghdad that killed 12 people."

Mssr Jamadi was a murderer of innocent women and children. I aint talking about collateral damage, I am talking pure malicious evil, directly targeting women and children.

One of how many deaths in custody?

"Jamadi was then moved to Abu Ghraib for further interrogation. At the prison, MPs stretched Jamadi's arms directly behind him and shackled his wrists to window bars. If the arms bear the full weight of the body, the position can be extremely painful. But MPs later told CIA investigators that Jamadi had been given enough slack to kneel or stand."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4977986

Photographs of grinning GIs crouched over the iced-down, battered corpse of Manadel al-Jamadi were among the most horrific images of the 2003 Abu Ghraib prison scandal. The photos became one of the most powerful symbols for those who opposed to the American invasion of Iraq.

The Iraqi insurgent died within hours of his capture, while being interrogated by the CIA. A military autopsy ruled Jamadi's death a homicide, but no one has been held accountable for his death.

An NPR special report recounts the final hours of Jamadi's life, compiled from a review of thousands of CIA and military documents. Interviews with those present the night he died reveal the techniques used to extract information from Jamadi, and also show a discrepancy between military police and CIA agents about what happened just before his death.

Jamadi's Capture

The assignment was clear: kill or capture Jamadi. The CIA had identified the Iraqi as a former officer in Saddam Hussein's army and a key leader of a terrorist cell. He was also considered a suspect in an attack on the al-Rashid Hotel during a visit by Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz in October 2003.

At 2 a.m. on Nov. 4, 2003, a convoy of humvees and blacked-out CIA Chevy Suburbans entered a deserted street in a hostile Baghdad suburb. The humvees stopped in front of a three-story apartment building, and a platoon of Navy SEALs tumbled out of the humvees and raced up the stairs.

SEAL Dan Cerrillo described the capture to CIA investigators six months later. As Cerrillo placed a charge on the apartment, the door opened. Cerrillo rushed the door, striking Jamadi with it.

Then, according to the report, Cerrillo hit Jamadi "in the face with two fists and attempted to wrestle the subject to the ground, but Jamadi resisted and they engaged in hand-to-hand combat." After a considerable struggle, Jamadi was eventually subdued and cuffed by Cerrillo, a hood was placed over his head, and he was taken first to an Army base, then to the SEALS field base, known as Camp Jenny Pozzi.

Jamadi was interrogated there for nearly an hour and a half. Eyewitnesses interviewed by CIA investigators say Jamadi was seated and stripped, and cold water was poured over him. A Navy SEAL said at one point, the interrogator leaned into a pressure point on Jamadi's chest with his foreman.

Jamadi was then moved to Abu Ghraib for further interrogation. At the prison, MPs stretched Jamadi's arms directly behind him and shackled his wrists to window bars. If the arms bear the full weight of the body, the position can be extremely painful. But MPs later told CIA investigators that Jamadi had been given enough slack to kneel or stand.

During this new round of questioning by CIA agents, Jamadi slumped forward, with his weight on his shackled wrists. MPs, while trying to reposition Jamadi, discovered he was dead. His death occurred within five-and-a-half hours of his capture.

Death Ruled a 'Homicide'

Nearly two years later, the CIA is still investigating Jamadi's death. A military autopsy labeled his death a homicide, due to "blunt force trauma to the torso complicated by compromised respiration."

Autopsy photos show lacerations and multiple bruises on Jamadi's feet, thighs and arms. His most significant injuries -- five broken ribs -- are not visible in the photos. There were no bruises in that area, leading military medical examiners to say that the fractures were probably caused by a slow, deliberate application of force, such as someone kneeling on his chest.

NPR consulted Dr. Edmund Donoghue, chief medical examiner of Cook County, Ill., and president of the American Academy of Forensic Scientists, on the military's autopsy report. Donoghue agreed with its findings.

How Jamadi was shackled "makes it very difficult to breathe because you are suspended in a very awkward position," Donoghue told NPR. "When you combine it with having the hood over your head and having broken ribs, it's fairly clear that this death was caused by asphyxia because he couldn't breathe properly," said Donoghue.

It remains unclear at what point Jamadi's ribs were broken.

Military officials who investigated the Abu Ghraib scandal made it clear that at the time of Jamadi's interrogation, the CIA was playing outside the rules.

A 2004 report by Major General George Fay concluded: "CIA detention and interrogation practices led to a loss of accountability, abuse, reduced interagency cooperation, and an unhealthy mystique that further poisoned the atmosphere at Abu Ghraib."

The SEALs denied hitting Jamadi with enough force during his capture and transport to cause any lethal injury. The leader of the SEAL platoon, Lt. Andrew Ledford, was acquitted on charges of dereliction of duty for allowing his men to beat Jamadi. Careers were wrecked but no one was convicted of a crime. No action has been taken by the CIA.


Human rights groups and some members of Congress have expressed frustration with the slow pace of the CIA's response in this and other cases of alleged detainee abuse by the agency. In an Army trial scheduled for December, the CIA will again be under scrutiny for its role in the death of an Iraqi general, who was stuffed into a sleeping bag and died, according to an autopsy, of asphyxia due to smothering and chest compression

This is a dishonest qiuestion? Fascinating.

Posted for aboiut the tenth time for your consideration....

"Tell me why it is accepatble to treat non US citizens in a manner that is totally illegal for US citizens. I remind, you this is not about guilt or innocence. Try them If guilty, hang them."

Stupid question. They are not American citizens and not protected by American law. They are enemy combatants not protected by the Geneva convention, as they were not uniformed state soldiers.

Like you anti-American lefties, fastpatsy, commondreams.com, or antiwar.com would shut your treasonous mouths if we did...Please...Your comment has the value of a lefty b1tching about discretionary spending.

So you are saying that its acceptable to treat non US citizens in a manner that is unacceptable, and in fact, illegal, for US citizen to be treated. Is that correct?

If that is correct, what effect do you think is having in the way the rest of the world, specifically but not exclusivley the Islamic world, might view the foreign policy actions and motives of the USA?