US Troops Seize Office in Najaf

News.com (Australia) ^ | May 6, 2004 | "Correspondent"

[Sacajaweau]

Step 1: Act on existing intelligence.
Step 2: Kill the insurgent b*******.
Step 3: Gather weapon caches.
Step 4: Bury bodies
Step 5: See step 1

[Da Mav]

Australia.com eh.

The press isn't covering the war anymore, just the abuse at the prison. In fact it is not clear that most of the press is even aware that there is a war on.

[areafiftyone]

Its going to come up on Reuters any minute. All I have So far is 41 insurgents have been killed and no American casualties (Thank god!).

[No Blue States]

Wow, 41? Thats a serious beating. Thank goodness for no news of deaths on our side so far.

[BOBWADE]

I am sure they will chime in when another soldier dies. What a bunch of bums.

[bondserv]

the holy city of Najaf.

I think they have an issue discerning what Holy means. Like Paris is a holy city because Notre Dame is there.

[DoctorMichael]

Bttt

[ccmay]

We have obviously come to some kind of understanding with the Grand Ayatollah Sistani. He wants the jumped-up little Sadr pr**k gone too. And it sounds like the Shiite public is thoroughly sick of him too. We must figure we can do this without risking a general declaration of jihad.

[river rat]

I'm beginning to think we should pull our guys way back, out of harm's way......and let the thugs and lunatics "run things" for a while....

Then perhaps, some Iraqis would come forward in larger numbers to JOIN us in destroying the lunatics within their midst..

As it is....most are playing a fence sitting game...
They refuse to put their ass into the game....

Semper Fi

[Dr. Eckleburg]

This should be the lead story on every network.

Instead they're pandering to the phony POW charade. What soldier smiles so broadly FOR A CAMERA, knowing full well photos can fall into many hands.

God bless our troops.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Most of the press is "aware there's a war on."

They're just working for the other side.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

I like identifying which cities the evil-doers think are "holy."

Especially when we occupy them.

[fight_truth_decay]

Information from Reuters disputed by embedded Fox journalists in Iraq on "Al Sadr's office has been destroyed."

[fight_truth_decay]

Most of the press is "aware there's a war on." They're just working for the other side.."

Seems National Security is not first and foremost with the media now doesn't it! Whomever got those pictures to the press had to know they would be giving aid to the terrorists as would build more support to get out of Iraq not forgetting this information would put our men and women in a higher degree of risk should they be captured. A lot of unanswered questions here..who, what, when, where and how? And especially for what purpose?

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Initially I heard CBS had these photos and held them for a few months. (Yeah, right)

[Dr. Eckleburg]

The "purpose" of releasing these "photos" is pretty clear. Bush was not supposed to win in 2000, and he sure wasn't supposed to actually believe the sermons he's heard on Sunday mornings.

Iraq was a necessary stepping stone for whomever was in power in this country. That's life in the big city.

If Kerry's elected, he'll do EVERYTHING exactly the same as Bush is doing. Except he'll use a different vocabulary, and he'll push abortion rights and gay rights and tax increases relentlessly.

But Bush brought with him that ol' debil sea of the nagging Judeo-Christian world-view. (And here they thought they had gotten rid of us pests once and for all.)

The gnostic socialists will stop at nothing until they do.

[bondserv]

I like identifying which cities the evil-doers think are "holy."

Especially when we occupy them.

Irrational justification for further Jihadism. As if American troops carry some kind of taint that makes their land "less holy", a la GI's in Saudi Arabia justifying 9/11.

We are dealing with warped principles here.

[fight_truth_decay]

But who had photos in hand to leak them if in fact the Pentagon were in the process of bringing people to task on alleged abuse. Were they not working closely with the Red Cross since the first of the year to solve these allegations of reported abuse?

Why would any loyal American want to put our troops in more danger by feeding these photos which obviously would become "prime pr fodder" to the Arab world? to bin Laden? (Soros comes to mind.. smells funny!)

[Dr. Eckleburg]

I think 9/11 and the Iraq war have clarified the fact that there's a real split in this country between socialistic, gnostic, God-loathing, anti-semetic, anti-Christian, domestic evil-doers and all the rest of us.

If he had to win, then Bush, being S&B, was supposed to play the game better for their side. More abortions, more homosexuality, more taxes. And certainly lots more ecumenicism. I'm sure they cringe at the term "evil-doers" since socialists don't believe in evil, only expediency.

I fear the compromises taking place under the radar as we speak. No President gets a second term unless they play ball. Pathetic.

Maybe few compromises from Bush were forthcoming. So the direct attack prevails.

Everybody takes orders. It just depends on who you're listening to.

No king but Christ.