Posted on 05/20/2004 4:54:06 PM PDT by TexKat
He is letting them given themselves enough rope right now. I know it's frustrating, but the truth is on Bush's side. Have patience. He knows full well that his enemy is with the American press as much as the terrorists.
Man, you hit the nail on the head! It is sad but true. I keep waiting for the rope to cinch up real tight.
Dittos
Excerpt:
Senate wants Gitmo 'torture' videos, too
By Shaun Waterman
UPI Homeland and National Security Editor
Published 5/19/2004 8:01 PM
Videotapes that ex-inmates say show guards beating prisoners at the U.S. military detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, have been reviewed by the inspector general of the Navy and will be provided to senate investigators, a military spokesman told United Press International.
U.S. officials insist that detainees are treated and interrogated humanely at Guantanamo and that any abuse is immediately reported and punished. Nonetheless, news of the existence of the tapes raises the prospect of more images of alleged U.S. brutality emerging, broadening and deepening the scandal over what Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld called the "radioactive" pictures of detainees being abused at the now twice-notorious Abu Ghraib prison complex in Iraq.
One set of the Guantanamo allegations centers on the actions of the Immediate Response Force, a special team of guards tasked to deal with detainee misconduct and violence. In recent media interviews and letters to U.S. senators, three Britons who were held at the camp until their release in March 2004 described several incidents in which they say the team savagely assaulted inmates.
I was not expecting for you to say anything negative about Rumsfeld. I simply posted an excerpt from the attached article.
I wonder if they might not have overplayed their hand. We shall see. I think the fact that the "abuse scandal" did not have the legs they imagined it would nor the seemingly small damage it caused Bush may bear my notion out.
But you are right - the GOP needs to understand what Nancy boys they look like in their inability to react in a united and rigorous counter attack.
Actually Indie, according to Rummy, the Geneva Conventions do apply in Iraq.
However, they do not in the case of Afganistan, where we were after Taliban/Al Queda/Bin Laden types.
Whats the difference?
The Davidians were machine gunned trying to escape the flames and tanks, and the Iraqis have a bag on their bruised head.
They may apply to Baathists and Fedayeen, but I think Syrians and AQ are fair game, or should be.
Never thought I'd be able to say this, but there are rumblings of discontent in the Seattle media as well. I'm getting the impression that while the direction of fire is definitely toward Bush and his administration, by now the purpose of it is revealed as self-aggrandizment on the part of Pulitzer-happy greedheads in the media who frankly don't care who gets hurt, whether it be Bush or the troops or the Iraqis or a fellow named Berg. When their public really does become bored, they're often the last to know, because in the final analysis they're writing and broadcasting for and to themselves.
Enough already! Those diaperheads should simply be lucky that they were not summarily executed!
I just posted on another thread that I got polled by an official scientific poll tonight.
Along with prison abuse, approve/disapprove of GWB in certain areas (job approval, economy and Iraq), if election held today who would I vote for, the Nick Berg video and gas prices, it had several questions on the media in particular (also some of the above was framed in relation to them).
I found this fascinating.
It was done by the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism at ASU and was not nationwide but statewide.
The media questions were if they've covered the prison story too much, should they get the pictures that are out there, should they have shown Nick Berg's beheading, are they trustworthy (with four choices ranging from very to extremely un), does the first amendment go too far in protecting them and should the government have the right to review and revise media stories.
I answered yes on too much coverage, said they are extremely untrustworthy, the first amendment does not go too far and no, the government should not have the right to review and revise.
interesting, no?
I have to believe the Bush campaign has some increduluous information that they will reveal at an opportunistic time in the campaign that will blow the press and the dems out of the water. You're absolutely right that they are biting their lip at this point. The "bleeding hearts" out there have very short memories(primarily due to low IQ's), so the closer to the election that it's revealed, the more likely it will be retained when they go to the polls.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.