home

Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday

By Jeralyn, Section War In Iraq
Posted on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 10:59:08 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

There's been a second attack by suicide bombers at Abu Ghraib prison. Reportedly, four civilians were injured.

In related news, taking reality tv to new heights or lows, depending on your viewpoint, an Iraqi television station is broadcasting confessions of alleged terrorists obtained during interrogations.

A man, appearing disheveled and uncomfortable, sits on a wooden chair in a dim room of what appears to be a police station.

As an interrogator peppers him with questions, the man says he was part of a gang that kidnapped and murdered Iraqis during the past two years in order to create a split between Shi'ite and Sunni Iraqis. But he says his acts were not holy war. They were blasphemous.

Police say his name is Ramzi Hashem and he carried out the bombing nearly two-years ago at a Shi'ite shrine in Najaf that killed senior Shi'ite cleric Mohammed Bakr al-Hakim and 100 followers.

During the interrogation Ramzi Hashem also admits to committing rapes and taking drugs. Prisoners in other interviews on the program say they were paid an average of $150 per killing and after committing 12 murders were given the title of prince (emir) and paid a salary.

< Protest Stops CIA Recruiting Event at NYU | Murder Documentary Tonight on Sundance Channel >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday | 43 comments (43 topical)
    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 11:37:32 AM EST
    Uh, if they have confessed, how are they "alleged" terrorists?

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 11:58:14 AM EST
    'Uh, if they have confessed, how are they "alleged" terrorists?' frankly I don't think I'd trust these confessions.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 12:31:36 PM EST
    Our news down here had a one line thing on this attack, now that is saying a-lot! about the cover-up of this war, by the news people and our non government. Hey Bush where is Bin Laden?

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#4)
    by Che's Lounge on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 12:41:43 PM EST
    Must be real tough to find them. They all loudly proclaim their resistance. Desparate.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#5)
    by Quaker in a Basement on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 12:53:14 PM EST
    Uh, if they have confessed, how are they "alleged" terrorists?
    Next question: how did their "confessions" end up on TV?

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 02:04:46 PM EST
    Because the US is paying for this terrorism-porn. Iyad Allawi murdered six detainees just before the 'former' CIA agent took power in Iraq -- in front of US military. Is that simply a king's power? Bush has killed 100,000+, surely almost all innocent civilians. What was their crime? The Terrorist-in-Chief says their crime was wasn't being able to vote under the US-installed Dictator before Allawi. Can't have demockery, er, mocked by non-voters. This is similar to the mass murder of detainees in front of US military that took place in Afghanistan, when Taliban warlords in US employ shot 'air holes' in loaded semitruck containers -- loaded with people, who bled real blood out the holes so made. Thugs in suits are plotting their next predation, their next terrorist exercise in racism. And they pause from time to time, and look out the windows onto Pennsylvania Avenue, where the people's protest of their crimes has been moved away for the 'security' of these terrorists. Kinda like how Osama bin Laden was 'moved away' from Tora Bora, for his own safety, or how Bush refused to allow the military to kill Zarkawi the three times they had him in the gunsights. Terrorists must stick together. It's hard work.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 02:17:48 PM EST
    Paul in La La land Bush has killed 100,000+, Dude....do you ever say anything else? Your posts are getting very boring .... Bush refused to allow the military to kill Zarkawi the three times they had him in the gunsights. They have good weed in LA huh? LOL... I'm sure they called GW up & said..."OK we got him in our sites...can we shoot him"... LMAO....!!!!

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#8)
    by Sailor on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 02:51:12 PM EST
    Before mocking others you should do a bit or research: NBC News:Jim Miklaszewski, Correspondent NBC News Updated: 7:14 p.m. ET March  02, 2004 With Tuesday’s attacks, Abu Musab Zarqawi, a Jordanian militant with ties to al-Qaida, is now blamed for more than 700 terrorist killings in Iraq. But NBC News has learned that long before the war the Bush administration had several chances to wipe out his terrorist operation and perhaps kill Zarqawi himself — but never pulled the trigger..... People were more obsessed with developing the coalition to overthrow Saddam than to execute the president’s policy of preemption against terrorists,” according to terrorism expert and former National Security Council member Roger Cressey...... Military officials insist their case for attacking Zarqawi’s operation was airtight, but the administration feared destroying the terrorist camp in Iraq could undercut its case for war against Saddam. And I'm sorry you're bored with bush killing 100k+, I'm sure he'll kill more for you. As for the 'confessions', maybe they are true, maybe not, but I know I can get anyone on this site to say the exact same words if I used some of those 'fraternity pranks' on them.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#9)
    by scarshapedstar on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 03:28:28 PM EST
    Truly, Jim is one of the great legal minds of our time.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 03:41:44 PM EST
    sailor - And I am sure you supported the role assigned to the CIA/FBI before 9/11. I wonder, why do you bring such stuff up? To see if someone will, again, point out that Clinton let OBL slip through his fingers? What good comes fromm such back biting? Quaker - Who cares? Now if you want to say they are confessions, say so. At least you will have a position. But to answer, why not put them on TV? bryan - I know, I know. Chain of evidence. No one else saw them do it, so why should we believe them? Gesh. Scar - True.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#11)
    by roy on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 03:56:33 PM EST
    Why didn't these freedom fighters attack the prison when Hussein's goons were torturing people to an even greater extent than our guys are?

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 03:56:40 PM EST
    Hey everyone. Ever hear of a guy named "Curveball" How can we trust anything we are told by this Admin?

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#13)
    by Darryl Pearce on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 04:53:19 PM EST
    Why didn't these freedom fighters attack the prison when Hussein's goons were torturing people to an even greater extent than our guys are? 'Cuz Saddam Hussein was far more brutal than we are?

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#14)
    by john horse on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 05:04:30 PM EST
    Speaking of goons torturing people in Iraq, the State Department recently cited Iraq as one of the countries practicing torture and various other human rights abuses. Strange that the Iraqi government can't do anything about foreigners who torture their citizens and the American government can't seem to do anything about the Iraqi government torturing their own citizens. However, these practices do provide a steady stream of contestants for that hit Iraqi tv show "Confess Your Crime."

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#15)
    by John Mann on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 05:15:51 PM EST
    ''Cuz Saddam Hussein was far more brutal than we are?" Well, that's what we've had hammered into our consciousness since 1990 when Bush the Dumb was setting the stage for his invasion and slaughter of hundreds of thousands. Many people took the reports of Saddam's bad boy antics at face value, even though there was very little direct evidence of them. We see videos of people in a village who were gassed, but we have no idea where the village was or who did the gassing. It might just as well have been in Iran as Iraq. We see photos and video of "mass graves" but no evidence as to who dug them and whom was buried in them. We see a video over and over again of a bunch of guys being hauled out of a town hall while Saddam sits on the stage smoking a cigar - but we have no idea who those people actually were and what actually happened to them. On and on it goes.. a litany of lies and half-truths propagated by Bush the Dumb and Bush the Dumber, their apologists and their stooges, all designed to show Saddam Hussein as a monster. And it worked. The truth is that Saddam was just another Middle Eastern tyrant (installed and kept there with the help of Uncle Sam), and he was never a problem until the Bush clowns decided they needed his oil. The fact is that Bush the Dumb and Bush the Dumber have killed, maimed, wounded and made homeless far more innocent Iraqis than Saddam ever dreamed of since 1991 and the first Massacre in the Desert. So the Iraqi resistance fighters are attacking Abu Ghraib? Good luck to them.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#16)
    by Johnny on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 05:25:58 PM EST
    John Mann is fearless, the wing-nut trolls are going to try and tear him a new one using the exact same instances hementioned in his post. Oughta be interesting.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 05:31:35 PM EST
    Roy, Thugocrats throughout the Middle East controled all aspects of their societies, with a wide network of internal spies and informants. If someone came under the slight suspicion of treason or sedition, the Internal Police would quickly take you down to that Garden Spot that is known as Abu Ghraib. Funny thing is that many here are indignant about the Panty Raids and Pig Piles, that our soldiers did, and not the Mediaeval Torture Chambers that the Baathist ran in there. But I digress. Saddam had no qualms of unleashing his thugs to get Mediaeval on any real or imagined enemy of the state. The same treatment was extended to not only the "perp" but his family and community at large. If a community came under suspicion, it was Standard Operating Procedure to cordon off a whole town, send in the tanks kill off every living human being therein and flatten the village to the ground. Should I remind anyone on the treatment of the Kurds and Shiites? By the way Irak is not the sole example of this. Similar treatment has been given to Syrian, Jordanian and Lebanese Communities. The Ottomans subjected the whole region to this Mediaeval practice. As such, their Dictators gladly pay this favor forward. No wonder that with this level of subjugation, no one dared lift a finger against Saddam.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#18)
    by Darryl Pearce on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 05:50:36 PM EST
    Yes, we are not as brutal as Saddam Hussein. But we are brutal. And the brutality flies in the face of the ideals that United States should stand. I remain, as always, dedicated to that Great Task: a gov't of, by, and for the people. I remain opposed to governments (shadow and otherwise) that "disappear" people into outlaw detention facilities (be they gulags or tropical islands).

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#19)
    by soccerdad on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 05:50:40 PM EST
    and right on cue a wing nut troll

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#20)
    by Sailor on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 05:52:09 PM EST
    ppj - I was specifically resonding to BB's post commenting on PinLA: PinLA- "Bush refused to allow the military to kill Zarkawi the three times they had him in the gunsights." BB - "They have good weed in LA huh? LOL... I'm sure they called GW up & said..."OK we got him in our sites...can we shoot him"... LMAO....!!!!" I simply pointed the misguided bb to the link confirming what PinLA said.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#21)
    by roy on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 06:16:49 PM EST
    John Mann,
    So the Iraqi resistance fighters are attacking Abu Ghraib? Good luck to them.
    I wonder if they're the same resistance fighters who would rather blow up their neighbors than let them have a say in how things are run. Or the same who would rather murder students than let them hang out and listen to music. It may be legit to resist American occupation, but I think they're really resisting their own fall from domination of their neighbors.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#22)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 06:26:37 PM EST
    Soccerdad - my friend - thanks for the wellwishes.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#23)
    by John Mann on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 06:34:49 PM EST
    roy mumbled: "I wonder if they're the same resistance fighters who would rather blow up their neighbors than let them have a say in how things are run. Or the same who would rather murder students than let them hang out and listen to music." I don't know, roy. What do you think?

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#24)
    by john horse on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 06:52:49 PM EST
    Darryl Pearce, I, too, agree with your sentiments. Human rights abuses, torture, and secret detentions are against our ideals and should be condemned no matter who commits them. What you said were values that I thought most of us on the left and right shared. However, our friends on the right can only limit their criticism of human rights abuses to those committed by Saddam. When it comes to human rights abuses committed by our government or the current Iraqi government, they are silent. It takes courage to tell those who are on your own side that what they have done or are doing is wrong and maybe there are some conservatives out there who can transcend partisan politics for principles, but I'm not holding my breath.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#25)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 07:55:15 PM EST
    "Posted by John Mann: "Well, that's what we've had hammered into our consciousness since 1990 when Bush the Dumb was setting the stage for his invasion and slaughter of hundreds of thousands." That would be rather late in the "hammering." The Anfal occured in 87, and the genocide against Kurds began ten years earlier. On top of that, the Iraq-Iran war, which killed a million soldiers and accomplished NOTHING, started by Hussein (with US backing). "Many people took the reports of Saddam's bad boy antics at face value, even though there was very little direct evidence of them." Thanks for playing. We have 16 TONS of Hussein's gov't documents in our National Archive, materials seized by Kurds during their takeover of N. Iraq offices after the Gulf War. They include shoot-to-kill orders, lists of the villages depopulated, etc. The only reason these massive evidences have not been produced is that "US" complicity in Hussein's crimes is ubiquitous in those papers. We do know, as a FOIA fact, that Reagan/Bush sold Hussein both chemical and biological WMD, though they denied it at the time. This while pretending to be following treaties -- treaties which Bush has used as toilet paper, having run out of the Bill of Rights two-plies. "We see videos of people in a village who were gassed, but we have no idea where the village was or who did the gassing. It might just as well have been in Iran as Iraq." Well, that's flat-out wrong. The village photos we all saw were from Hallabja, and the murderer was Hussein, not Iran. There is ZERO evidence that Iran has EVER used chemical or biological weapons against civilians. The CIA is the only source of your doubts. Hussein committed genocide. That isn't a myth, no matter how much Bushliar has dressed himself in false righteousness capturing him (and then repeating his crimes). I have personally fought US-support for Hussein for twenty years, so that's in part me hammering on you. I disagree that USPNAC (and previous illegal operations using the US military) is 'less brutal' than Hussein. First, Hussein was installed by the US, and only removed when he refused to allow a pipeline to Jordan. Second, Centcom is carrying out a range of ongoing warcrimes, which now include the use of incendiary bombs on a trapped 'ghetto' of Fallujan civilians, and possibly other chemical weapons as well. There have been very grave warcrimes committed that we haven't heard about -- YET.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#26)
    by Darryl Pearce on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 07:57:53 PM EST
    Power corrupts. Secrecy abuses. God help us. We're on our own.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#27)
    by John Mann on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 08:41:27 PM EST
    "Thanks for playing. We have 16 TONS of Hussein's gov't documents in our National Archive, materials seized by Kurds during their takeover of N. Iraq offices after the Gulf War." And zero tons of WMD, which as we all remember, was the stated reason for going to war on Iraq. You don't show any more evidence than I do in support of your points, but I'll concede. Saddam was a bad guy. But was he enough of a bad guy to kill hundreds of thousands of Iraqis in the name of democracy?

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#28)
    by Che's Lounge on Mon Apr 04, 2005 at 10:59:52 PM EST
    You won't hear from too many wingnuts about Hussein's crimes because they know that we made him.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#29)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 12:50:00 AM EST
    The purpose of Bush's invasion was NOT to remove Hussein; like his father, invading Panama and killing thousands of civilians, to get Noriega -- boy, there was an enemy worth slaughtering completely innocent families for. The purpose of Bush's invasion was what John Kerry said it was in the first debate, before 60 million Americans: 'We now have permanent airbases in Iraq, and the United States has NO legitimate policy of staying in Iraq.' Since Bush clearly has no compunction about killing Arabs, and even gets man-chuckles of approval from the racist Republican party for it, the only reason to remove Hussein himself is because he refused to put in pipelines, and was a thorn in the oil industry's side. But Bush's purpose was to put in 16 or so airbases-- four at least are as big as they come. This so he could carry out the racist USPNAC plan of dictating economic, national, and social reality in the ME. The plan is quite overtly out for anyone to read--they brag about their brazenness quite openly--and which cheerily announces that in order to proceed, USPNAC will need a second "Pearl harbor." Mission accomplished. Hussein was a very evil person (though FAR less evil then Henry F. Kissinger). Bush is in competition, somewhere around Milosevich, far worse than a Noriega or a Pinochet. He definitely doesn't want to place second in an Ugly contest with Saddam Hussein. What would his mother say? But he plays for all the marbles, and that's what the racist Christian white supremacists at the heads of the military-industrial corporations (and now their media) like.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#30)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 01:16:17 AM EST
    John, I found out about the 16 tons from Samantha Power, Genocide: A Problem from Hell, which is an excellent book and not tilted excessively to the Left. Very informative about the history of the international law concept of genocide, the long fight for genocide treaties which the US signed under Reagan, and which Bush (and Bolton if the rubbberstamp still works) are trying to dismantle. Along with all agreements about anything at all. Pure tyranny by a unelected fascists with a very low opinion of Americans. The Pope supposedly mused that Bush might be the Anti-Christ. I guess he couldn't stand the suspense -- and has gone to ask.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#31)
    by John Mann on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 05:37:48 AM EST
    Thanks for that info, Paul. I will have a look at it. Speaking of the Antichrist, I remember back in the early 80s when a lot of right wing religious loonies (most especially those with radio programs) were putting forth the idea that Ronald Reagan might be The Man. This was because of the 6 letters in each of his names, Ronald Wilson Reagan. I don't know if George W. Bush is the Antichrist or not, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if he managed to destroy most of the world outside Crawford, TX by the time he's finished.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#32)
    by Che's Lounge on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 07:57:04 AM EST
    The Archeangel George. Would he voluntarily discorporate?

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#33)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 08:11:25 AM EST
    PIL - Perhaps you can tell us why we have no legitimate interest in Iraq. I mean besides you not wanting us to. And could you provide us some links showing the sale of WMD's by Reagan to Saddam? No? I didn't think you could.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#34)
    by Sailor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 08:27:09 AM EST
    ppj, here's the link you craved, next time do you own work, simply googling 'regan saddam chemical weapons' turns up about 226,000 hits. There were senate invcestigations and everything. You can look up those minutes yourself.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#36)
    by John Mann on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 01:34:22 PM EST
    Jim wondered imperialistically: "PIL - Perhaps you can tell us why we have no legitimate interest in Iraq." Glad to help, Jim: because Iraq is a sovereign nation that didn't request your presence. Any more questions?

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#37)
    by John Mann on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 01:48:00 PM EST
    Jim also asked: "And could you provide us some links showing the sale of WMD's by Reagan to Saddam? No? I didn't think you could." Well, I can, Jim. Here's one from your favorite "news" network, Faux. Oh, and here's another one written by that icon of liberal thinking, Robert Novak. You should trying posting your own links sometime, Jim; doing your research for you like this is like shooting a family of Iraqis in a Hyundai... er, fish in a barrel.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#38)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 02:21:17 PM EST
    yes, GWB is the anti-christ!

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#39)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 05:03:19 PM EST
    Jim, doing today's lying: "Posted by PPJ: "PIL - Perhaps you can tell us why we have no legitimate interest in Iraq." You misquote John Kerry, probably intentionally. He said, "We now have permanent airbases in Iraq, and the United States has NO legitimate policy of staying in Iraq.' I know it's hard to understand dependent clauses, Jim. Maybe you should have kept your eyes open during elementary school. "And could you provide us some links showing the sale of WMD's by Reagan to Saddam? No? I didn't think you could." This hilarious demand for links is in stark contrast to the fact that you never address contradictions to your uncorroborated worldview. Anytime anyone posts data, you turn up your nose and make an ad hominem. And then slink away. And so you will again. "Reports by the US Senate's committee on banking, housing and urban affairs -- which oversees American exports policy -- reveal that the US, under the successive administrations of Ronald Reagan and George Bush Sr, sold materials including anthrax, VX nerve gas, West Nile fever germs and botulism to Iraq right up until March 1992" 10 Second Google Search

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#40)
    by jondee on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 05:38:13 PM EST
    St.Ron the befuddled sold them to Iraq and Iran. But he,(cue music)" made us feel good about ourselves again". And he never cut-and-ran or flip-flopped.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#41)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 08:38:23 PM EST
    et al - Ah, so you are saying that we exported arms materials to Saddam during his war with Iran. Now why would we do that? Can you say: An enemy of my enemy is my friend. (DA - Since I have used that point on you at least once before, I find it astounding that you struck at it again. And amusing.) sailor - A shabby trick, but from time to time the dark side pulls me over. It is just so much fun to have you guys make my point. I promise not to do it again. PIL - And no, I didn't misquote Kerry. Do you see any quotation marks around the question in my 9:11AM comment? I mean you being such an english expert, perhaps it was just your snarky attempt to make a snarky comment. Then again, maybe a dependent clause got in your eyes. BTW - PIL, I post link after link, you just don't want to believe'em. Your problem, not mine. et al - Nations have interests, not friends. We helped the USSR in WWII, despite our certain understanding it was not our friend. We have helped other countries since then, such as the Afghan's fight against the Soviets, and Iraq's fight against Iran. Heck, we even tried to help Iran against Iraq, for money to help the opponents of the Sandinistas. We are in Iraq as Phase one in the WOT. Read Bush's 9/20/01 speech, then is '02 and '03 STOTU. Sorry you don't like the strategy, but it appears to be working.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#42)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 08:48:03 PM EST
    John M - If Saddam had nothing to hide, why was he offering $2M to WMD inspector? Hey, I know. He was just being a good guy. And then: "Iraq, March 12 - In the weeks after Baghdad fell in April 2003, looters systematically dismantled and removed tons of machinery from Saddam Hussein's most important weapons installations, including some with high-precision equipment capable of making parts for nuclear arms, a senior Iraqi official said this week in the government's first extensive comments on the looting." NYTIIMES March1305 Look up naive in the dictionary John, you'll find your picture.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#43)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Apr 06, 2005 at 01:29:11 AM EST
    Posted by Jim: "Can you say: An enemy of my enemy is my friend." Changing the subject becomes you, Jim. You just finished accusing us of making it up. We just proved you wrong. Your response, is the classic winger defense: 'Although I just called you a liar and you disproved the contention, what I was lying about was justified by being justified by self-interest. Why are you against self-interest?' It doesn't work ON US, but it works on YOU. And that's why it is called SELF-delusion. If you walk away thinking you proved US liars, you are delusional. "PIL - And no, I didn't misquote Kerry. Do you see any quotation marks around the question in my 9:11AM comment?" Then you were simply changing the subject to ignore what I said was the purpose of Bush's invasion (and which Kerry confirmed as anomalous and ILLEGAL). Not demockery or human kindness, but installation of 16 permanent airbases, in order to carry forward a totally ILLEGAL series of aggressions against HIS (and Cheney's) former business partners. "I mean you being such an english expert, perhaps it was just your snarky attempt to make a snarky comment." Snarky? I was quoting John Kerry in order to clarify the reason for Bush's invasion of Iraq. YOU were the one being 'snarky.' "BTW - PIL, I post link after link, you just don't want to believe'em. Your problem, not mine." You post no more links than anyone else. And your links are uniformly from the propaganda stream that has already been DEBUNKED long before. "Heck, we even tried to help Iran against Iraq, for money to help the opponents of the Sandinistas." Heck, we even committed illegal and unconstitutional acts in order to support right-wing terror organizations in Central America. Heck, twere nothing, except to the people slaughtered by those squads. Those Catholic nuns, and those journalists. "We are in Iraq as Phase one in the WOT. Read Bush's 9/20/01 speech, then is '02 and '03 STOTU. Sorry you don't like the strategy, but it appears to be working." "Not demockery or human kindness, but installation of 16 permanent airbases, in order to carry forward a totally ILLEGAL series of aggressions against HIS (and Cheney's) former business partners." That's what you (and Bush) call the WOT, and it is ILLEGAL. It was a CONSPIRACY from the start of the Bush administration, as attested by numerous sources. That effect of 911 predated 911 by at least 8 months. Wow, that's some time warp you pretend to believe in. The strategy is based on lies, and collective guilt theories which belie the GENOCIDE that has already been committed. Those war crimes are not going away "a senior Iraqi official said this week in the government's first extensive comments on the looting. NYTIIMES March1305" Judith Miller and her LIES, fed to her by Negroponte and Allawi's cohorts in the CIA, Iraqi branch. We've seen enough of those lies already. She has ZERO credibility, and that goes for the NYT as well.

    Re: Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday (none / 0) (#45)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Apr 06, 2005 at 08:17:50 AM EST
    DA - You look so cute defending Saddam. You remind me of the Left defending Stalin after Kruschev criticized him. Saddam was faking out his local rivals by pis*ing off the world's superpowers by pretending to violate the UN's resolutions that kept him power in GW1. Sure. Duhhhhhh. DA. You can't believe that. You must be smarter than that. PIL - Point is, dude, you jumped and made a snarky attack without reading. I asked a simple question and you spewed nonsense for at least 1000 words. Tell me PIL. Are you capable of understanding any subtle things? Do you think people and government do things for only one reason? We invaded Iraq for multiple reasons. Get smart enought to figure that out.

    Another Attack on Abu Ghraib Monday | 43 comments (43 topical)