Photo Fight: Lieberman and Graham Threaten Senate Shutdown

goldendog said:

Word play..

Blackman called somebody's BOY = Slave.


Male called Petunia = Gay male

Click to expand...

You're ridiculous and you're making **** up. It's not petunia, it's pansy. Everyone knows that.

Now do you have anything to say about the topic or are you going to keep with the Sharpton schtick over your boy?

goldendog said:

Word play..

Blackman called somebody's BOY = Slave.


Male called Petunia = Gay male

Click to expand...

I said it in my previous post, but I think it needs more explanation.

Jallman and I disagree on almost everything, but he is not meaning "your boy" as racist. I'm quite sure the term "Your boy" is how others said the same thing to him regarding Bush.

I've known many racists in my time and Jallman isn't one of them.

TheNextEra said:

I said it in my previous post, but I think it needs more explanation.

Jallman and I disagree on almost everything, but he is not meaning "your boy" as racist. I'm quite sure the term "Your boy" is how others said the same thing to him regarding Bush.

I've known many racists in my time and Jallman isn't one of them.

Click to expand...

You know him from experience but somebody that doesn't could look at that post and see racial undertones couldn't they? Especially if they see it in repeated posts?

goldendog said:

You know him from experience but somebody that doesn't could look at that post and see racial undertones couldn't they? Especially if they see it in repeated posts?

Click to expand...

Absolutely, however, since I have known racists comments from racists I tend to look at them maybe as you do, I try not to jump to conclusions so radically without at least letting the person state their point of view.

Racism is BAD, I will agree. However, jumping to conclusions and accusing that someone may be racist is equally bad IMHO.

EDIT: It's like saying that someone who is black is a criminal.

I have a feeling given the back channeling and measures being taken to prohibit the release of these photos that they may make Abu Ghraib look like a physical by a doctor.

Click to expand...

AFAIK they are simply more of the same photos.
IOW photos taken by the yahoos at Abu Ghraib...
This is not a new case filed by the ACLU just recently..its years old.


No argument here for me. Releasing anything like this is simply giving propaganda to the enemy that will aid him in recruitment and a crime against those fighting for us.
If someone doesn't get that basic reality of warfare they need to be smacked upside the head until they do. In this Obama got good and smacked..even he woke up.

Triad said:

AFAIK they are simply more of the same photos.
IOW photos taken by the yahoos at Abu Ghraib...

Click to expand...

If they were just more of the same, there wouldn't be the need for secrecy.

TheNextEra said:

About as ridiculous as claiming that Bush's policies MAGICALLY stopped another terrorist attack.

You can't PROVE that his policies stopped an attack.

Click to expand...

US surveillance helped stop attack


You are correct it was not magic. It was a combined effort of taking down the walls of communications between state,local, and federal law enforcers that had been put in place by Jamie Gorelik. The international cooperation of police agencies, the new intelligence gathering polices, and the capture and successful waterboarding of KSM and friends.

"With God’s wiling [sic], we are terrorists to the bone. So, many thanks to God."
--KSM

"I decapitated with my blessed right hand the head of the American Jew," he boasted to a U.S. military tribunal on March 10, referring to our colleague Daniel Pearl. "For those who would like to confirm, there are pictures of me on the Internet holding his head."--KSM

"KSM also admitted to being "directly in charge" of "managing and following up on the Cell for the Production of Biological Weapons, such as anthrax and others, and following up on Dirty Bomb Operations on American Soil." Given such a confession, is it too much to ask the FBI to reconsider its dogmatic view that the 2001 anthrax attacks could only have had a domestic source?"

TheNextEra said:

Absolutely, however, since I have known racists comments from racists I tend to look at them maybe as you do, I try not to jump to conclusions so radically without at least letting the person state their point of view.

Racism is BAD, I will agree. However, jumping to conclusions and accusing that someone may be racist is equally bad IMHO.

EDIT: It's like saying that someone who is black is a criminal.

Click to expand...

I didn't accuse anybody of anything. I'm just questioning the repeated use of the phrase.

akyron said:

US surveillance helped stop attack


You are correct it was not magic. It was a combined effort of taking down the walls of communications between state,local, and federal law enforcers that had been put in place by Jamie Gorelik. The international cooperation of police agencies, the new intelligence gathering polices, and the capture and successful waterboarding of KSM and friends.

"With God’s wiling [sic], we are terrorists to the bone. So, many thanks to God."
--KSM

"I decapitated with my blessed right hand the head of the American Jew," he boasted to a U.S. military tribunal on March 10, referring to our colleague Daniel Pearl. "For those who would like to confirm, there are pictures of me on the Internet holding his head."--KSM

"KSM also admitted to being "directly in charge" of "managing and following up on the Cell for the Production of Biological Weapons, such as anthrax and others, and following up on Dirty Bomb Operations on American Soil." Given such a confession, is it too much to ask the FBI to reconsider its dogmatic view that the 2001 anthrax attacks could only have had a domestic source?"

Click to expand...

And these terrorists would not have been thwarted by the same means we have used?

Like I said you can't say such a thing.

There is nothing here that PROVES Bush's policies stopped that attack and that NORMAL vigilance wouldn't have.

TheNextEra said:

If they were just more of the same, there wouldn't be the need for secrecy.

Click to expand...

:2wave:

Obama asks court to block release of new Abu Ghraib images

Anna Seaman

President Barack Obama has asked a top court to block the release of another 2,000 images of abuse at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

The photos, which some reports have claimed depict scenes of sexual violence, are part of a large criminal file compiled from an investigation carried out at the prison in 2004, following revelations of abuse of detainees by US soldiers.

Despite initially promising to approve release of the photographs, Mr Obama reversed his decision, saying they would inflame the already fragile situation in Pakistan and endanger the lives of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The demand for the photos release had come from the American Civil Liberties Union, which won a lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act in Sept 2008.

But in a report filed against that motion on Thursday, Gen David Petraeus, who oversees military operations in the Middle East and Central Asia, said: “The official release of those images, even if redacted to obscure identifying information could reasonably be expected to adversely impact current military, political and civil efforts.”

On the same day, the White House also denied that the photographs showed any scenes of rape.

Detail of the content was revealed by Major Gen Antonio Taguba, the former army officer who conducted the original inquiry at Abu Ghraib. He told Britain’s Daily Telegraph newspaper that some photos taken by a female soldier showed a teenage boy being raped by a translator.

Click to expand...

Obama asks court to block release of new Abu Ghraib images - The National Newspaper



:doh

(I hate to ask..but do you know what you're talking about here?)

goldendog said:

I didn't accuse anybody of anything. I'm just questioning the repeated use of the phrase.

Click to expand...

I understand, but I was just telling you why he may have used it. I heard many on the left refer to Bush as "Your Boy" to other conservatives.

Triad said:

:2wave:


Obama asks court to block release of new Abu Ghraib images - The National Newspaper



:doh

Click to expand...

And again, if they were the same, you could just reiterate those that did it were punished. Nothing more. Instead he is making a big deal out of it like there is something more to them.

TheNextEra said:

Absolutely, however, since I have known racists comments from racists I tend to look at them maybe as you do, I try not to jump to conclusions so radically without at least letting the person state their point of view.

Racism is BAD, I will agree. However, jumping to conclusions and accusing that someone may be racist is equally bad IMHO.

EDIT: It's like saying that someone who is black is a criminal.

Click to expand...

Quoted again for truth. :2wave:

TheNextEra said:

I understand, but I was just telling you why he may have used it. I heard many on the left refer to Bush as "Your Boy" to other conservatives.

Click to expand...

Yes I do agree that some did call him Boy. I also noticed they called him other things way more often. But I have also noticed to some have started using "Your Boy" when referring to President Obama ten times more than anybody ever did for Bush. Perhaps Jall means nothing by it.

TheNextEra said:

And these terrorists would not have been thwarted by the same means we have used?

Like I said you can't say such a thing.

There is nothing here that PROVES Bush's policies stopped that attack and that NORMAL vigilance wouldn't have.

Click to expand...

"Abu Zubaydah became compliant after 35 seconds of the water treatment.

“It was like flipping a switch,” Mr. Kiriakou said of the shift from resistance to cooperation. He said he thought such “desperate measures” were justified in the “desperate time” in 2002 when another attack seemed imminent. "


Abu led to many more captures including KSM. Leading to the capture of those asian Islamic recruits and prevention of the library towers incident.

You cant prove other methods might have worked but you can prove that this did.

akyron said:

"Abu Zubaydah became compliant after 35 seconds of the water treatment.

“It was like flipping a switch,” Mr. Kiriakou said of the shift from resistance to cooperation. He said he thought such “desperate measures” were justified in the “desperate time” in 2002 when another attack seemed imminent. "


Abu led to many more captures including KSM. Leading to the capture of those asian Islamic recruits and prevention of the library towers incident.

You cant prove other methods might have worked but you can prove that this did.

Click to expand...

You can't disprove that other methods would have worked just as good. since they weren't tried.

Also, it WAS proven many innocent people WERE held in Abu because they were released.

I'd rather the RIGHT method used so we don't ruin people's lives. Imagine if in the U.s. we imprisoned people just because we heard hearsay information that they were guilty. It would be a mess.

goldendog said:

Yes I do agree that some did call him Boy. I also noticed they called him other things way more often. But I have also noticed to some have started using "Your Boy" when referring to President Obama ten times more than anybody ever did for Bush. Perhaps Jall means nothing by it.

Click to expand...

Well I can say Jallman didn't mean it that way and a board I was previsouly on for many years back the people on the left DID refer to Bush that way many times.

In fact, he was referred to as Chimp or "your Boy" many times.

Just because those terms are now being used for Obama doesn't mean they are racist, it just means they are turning the table.

TheNextEra said:

Well I can say Jallman didn't mean it that way and a board I was previsouly on for many years back the people on the left DID refer to Bush that way many times.

In fact, he was referred to as Chimp or "your Boy" many times.

Just because those terms are now being used for Obama doesn't mean they are racist, it just means they are turning the table.

Click to expand...

Yes turning the tables is fun isn't it?

goldendog said:

Yes turning the tables is fun isn't it?

Click to expand...

Honestly, not really.

From what I have seen it is really counter-productive.

Dems turn the tables on Republicans and then the Republicans turn the table on the Dems, then the cycle repeats.

I think many spend so much time hating the other side that they don't realize their side is doing just as much damage as the other side did, just in different areas.

TheNextEra said:

Well I can say Jallman didn't mean it that way and a board I was previsouly on for many years back the people on the left DID refer to Bush that way many times.

In fact, he was referred to as Chimp or "your Boy" many times.

Just because those terms are now being used for Obama doesn't mean they are racist, it just means they are turning the table.

Click to expand...

Plus, we've had our big blow ups over crap like that here on this board, too, and DP has basically adopted an unofficial member policy that you better be damned sure it's racism before you start bandying about that accusation.

Honestly, I had never heard the term "boy" being a racist thing before this election.

jallman said:

Honestly, I had never heard the term "boy" being a racist thing before this election.

Click to expand...

I have, and it's blatant, and usually that is not the only term used against a black person.

It is usually quite clear when someone is racist. Yes, I know politicians or professional racists maybe better at hiding that fact (much more in decades past than now), but anonymous posters are usually quite clear with their intentions. I do not see that in your posts at all.

Like I said, we disagree on many things, but I can't say you are a racist in any terms and in fact I don't think most of the conservatives here are.

TheNextEra said:

I have, and it's blatant, and usually that is not the only term used against a black person.

It is usually quite clear when someone is racist. Yes, I know politicians or professional racists maybe better at hiding that fact (much more in decades past than now), but anonymous posters are usually quite clear with their intentions. I do not see that in your posts at all.

Like I said, we disagree on many things, but I can't say you are a racist in any terms and in fact I don't think most of the conservatives here are.

Click to expand...

Oh we've had a few...most of them from Europe though. Which would be funny if it wasn't so friggin pathetic.

TheNextEra said:

You can't disprove that other methods would have worked just as good. since they weren't tried.

Also, it WAS proven many innocent people WERE held in Abu because they were released.

I'd rather the RIGHT method used so we don't ruin people's lives. Imagine if in the U.s. we imprisoned people just because we heard hearsay information that they were guilty. It would be a mess.

Click to expand...

They were tried and laughed at.


"Before the CIA used enhanced techniques . . . KSM resisted giving any answers to questions about future attacks, simply noting, 'Soon you will find out.' " Once the techniques were applied, "interrogations have led to specific, actionable intelligence, as well as a general increase in the amount of intelligence regarding al Qaeda and its affiliates."

"Before they were subjected to “enhanced techniques” of interrogation
that included waterboarding, KSM and Zubaydah were not only
uncooperative but also appeared contemptuous of the will of the
American people to defend themselves."



It looks like they were just waiting for a room at the ritz and a dinner meeting with a couple of harvard law grads to discuss their court strategy until the board came out. "I want my lawyer"

15-0

Once again you cannot prove what might have worked. Only what did.

Released Detainees Rejoining The Fight



"Mehsud said he spent two years at Guantanamo Bay after being captured in 2002 in Afghanistan fighting alongside the Taliban. At the time he was carrying a false Afghan identity card, and while in custody he maintained the fiction that he was an innocent Afghan tribesman, he said. U.S. officials never realized he was a Pakistani with deep ties to militants in both countries, he added. "


Was someone looking for examples of modern taqiyyah.?

akyron said:

They were tried and laughed at.

Click to expand...

So are you seriously trying to tell me that is ALL that was in the arsenal of interrogators? PUUUHLEASE.

Talk to me when you have something other than ridiculous things.

you're seriously trying to tell me that ALL of our interrogation methods could produce nothing so we had to resort to water boarding or other extended interrogation techniques now?

Then how is it we got SOLID information from people without water boarding them or sticking them naked in a cell?

celticlord said:

My criticism of Petraeus was that he commented on matters of policy that military men should not publicly discourse upon. Beyond that, I disagree with his interpretation things in that area.

In regards to what will and will not put the troops in harms' way....I defer to his judgment in those areas.

Click to expand...

Fair enough.

As a matter of logistics, there is a practical limitation to the number of roadside bombs and suicide bombers that can be let loose in a given time period. The relative calm of recent months suggests we are still well under that practical limit.

Click to expand...

I pretty much already alluded to that in my post. That's a matter of operational capability and/or capacity. This reads as if you are suggesting that they could in fact come after us more, they just aren't. I'm curious as to why you think that is. What information are perusing that leads you in this direction?

You oversimplify. Substitute "desire" for "willingness" and your argument gets stronger. Neither capacity nor willingness is entirely beyond our control, nor is it entirely within our control.

Click to expand...

Maybe I did oversimplify, but not by much. In order for your theory to hold water you must articulate in some way the reason for the reduction in violence. That all I've basically asked for. The "why." It's extremely important in the context of what impact these pictures will have on their willingness to attack. I believe their willingness is very much still there. This rise and fall in the number of attacks is a result of our operations against them, not a lack of willingness on their part.

I put it to you that the reduction in violence in recent months indicates our troops and the Iraqi forces have reduced the willingness and capacity of the insurgents to wage war. The increase in violence most recently suggests that trend is changing.

Click to expand...

Substantiating that we have been successful in interrupting their operations is fairly straightforward. Body counts, arrests, weapons seized...you have a solid base to work from. Winning the hearts and minds of the neighborhoods that support the militants, that is somewhat measurable. Articulating that we are demoralizing or somehow winning our enemies over is a much bigger statement and one that requires much more in terms of evidence. Nothing suggests that this is the case. In fact the recent increase in attacks is contrary to your statement. By virtue of the fact that attacks are getting more frequent we can tell their willingness seems to be very much intact.

The desire may not have changed, but the willingness certainly has.

Click to expand...

Please substantiate this, or is this simply your opinion?

I suspect it will increase their willingness to attack and kill our troops. That is not a risk I feel is wise.

Click to expand...

So in summation, you really can't support your opinion of what impact these photos will have in regards to actually increasing our enemies willingness or capacity to kill our troops. Nor can you substantiate the assertion that others have made that these photos will in fact lead to an increase in our soldiers being killed.

So my questions remain.

Anybody else?