I followed a link from the Military.com newsletter to an article about an award-winning AP photographer from Iraq who's been 'detained' and imprisoned without charges for 19 months.
After reading the article I went to check out the comments (Join the Discussion) and was disturbed and disgusted by what I read.
(Because the URL is so long for the comments/discussion page here's a shortened URL http://tinyurl.com/295q3o .)
I suggest you read the article, then the comments, and judge for yourself...
Here are some examples from the "discussion":
-------------------------------------------
"I can't believe it took us this long to capture him. Doesn't surprise me at all."
-------------------------------------------
"Just an AP photographer? Hell, I think nearly the whole lot at AP is a cheering section for the terrorists."
---------------------------------------------
quote:
Originally posted by 67NOV:
Just an AP photographer? Hell, I think nearly the whole lot at AP is a cheering section for the terrorists.
"You and me both Sir."
---------------------------------------------
"Michelle Malkin has links to the pictures he's taken... all of insurgent activity, apparently without any fear on his part. If he isn't collaborating with them I'll eat my hat."
--------------------------------------------
"About time the military starts investigating all of this so called "journalists"
First AP,next CNN and finally Aljazeera "
--------------------------------------------
"Well, I've been wrong before, but I think burying this turd in a holr with his head sticking up and letting locals stone the head would probably be a good idea. I'm just old-fashioned like that."
--------------------------------------------
"Well, when you serve, maybe you'll think differently about those who are Terrorists. Enjoy being Protected by others"
--------------------------------------------
- And when someone posted a dissenting view, here's what some wrote:
"Actually, What is laughable,... no it's more like pathetic is all the clueless mouth diarrhea from liberals on this site."
-------------------------------------------- Followed by:
"LMAO, good show, sir. I will buy you a beer for that one. BeerGulp, ahhh.....the beer is nice and cold."
--------------------------------------------
"A corporation will stand behind it's employee regardless of the scurrilousness of the employee only to protect their own image.
We probably have tons of terrorists who have infiltrated many businesses in the U.S. ready to strike. Many others have lawn services.
I am sure the U.S. military wouldn't make these claims without substantial evidence. Of course he is probably photographing military operations and smuggling it to the insurgency in his nose. Can you imagine how many volumes of micro file you can stuff in that jobaruby?
Yikes so that is where all the air is going."
-------------------------------------------
"GEEEEEEEZ! The article states they're going to turn the AP photographer guy over to the Iraq authorities in a few days, so what are all these libs crying about!
Remember, that AP photographer isn't an American and isn't in the USA, he's in a foreign country. Things work differently over there and when under arrest you don't have any rights over there. So if they want to lock the guy up and never let him out, shut him up, or torture him to with in an inch of his life to find out what he knows....... well, that's just how it goes. That's how they do it over there. The guy is a terrorist and his efforts have no doubt cost others their lives, so......... this guy is getting what he deserves, whether you agree with it or not."
------------------------------------------
- There's more, but that's enough to give you the general flavor. As I said, only one person showed any sense of decency (and respect for the rule of law) and supported the AP photographer.
The feeling I got when reading these comments was that they could have been written by those who committed the atrocities at Abu Ghraib. The absolute lack of humanity and the disregard for human rights goes against what I thought the US military stood for and has spent blood protecting.
I have to wonder how prevalent is this ignorant and malevolent attitude in our servicemen and women?
Is this some of what you get when you send people to fight and die in an asymmetric war?
Is it what happens to soldiers when they see their comrades get blown up daily by fighters who look just like the ones they're there to protect?
Does it come from bad leadership?
Just where in hell do these comments come from?
Showing posts with label military. Show all posts
Showing posts with label military. Show all posts
Friday, November 23, 2007
Sunday, November 11, 2007
Bush Opts For Time Off Rather Than Honor Veterans
I'm not surprised that president Bush is down in Texas spending most of the day at his ranch on a day that America honors it veterans. Despite his brief appearance at a Veterans' Day speech in Waco Texas, he plans to veto $3.5 billion for veteran's benefits Democrats had to insert into the latest defense appropriations bill.
When it comes to honoring military veterans all he gives them is lip service, but today he's barely making the effort to do that. It seems that he thinks of them as a great backdrop for a speech, or as fodder in his neocon approach to international relations, but not enough to spend a whole day honoring them publicly.
As our military is currently overstretched, overworked, underpaid, and under-rested, he's well rested, under worked, and overpaid.
Bush is not even trying to appear interested in the welfare or the sacrifices of those who served our nation.
If Bush wants to truly honor our veterans he should start by keeping them out of unnecessary wars, providing them with adequate equipment when deployed, giving them the required time between deployments, and taking care of (and fully funding) all their medical/psychological needs.
To me this says about all you need to know about what George Bush thinks of those who wear the military uniform (and actually serve).
When it comes to honoring military veterans all he gives them is lip service, but today he's barely making the effort to do that. It seems that he thinks of them as a great backdrop for a speech, or as fodder in his neocon approach to international relations, but not enough to spend a whole day honoring them publicly.
As our military is currently overstretched, overworked, underpaid, and under-rested, he's well rested, under worked, and overpaid.
Bush is not even trying to appear interested in the welfare or the sacrifices of those who served our nation.
If Bush wants to truly honor our veterans he should start by keeping them out of unnecessary wars, providing them with adequate equipment when deployed, giving them the required time between deployments, and taking care of (and fully funding) all their medical/psychological needs.
To me this says about all you need to know about what George Bush thinks of those who wear the military uniform (and actually serve).
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Mika Brzezinski, don't slant the facts!
I'm sitting here watching MSNBC [Morning Joe] at 6 AM and here's how Mika Brzezinski characterized
last night's vote "on capital hill now, a major blow to Democrats after senate Republicans blocked a bill to give US troops more time at home between deployments. The proposal largely seen as a Democratic attempt to challenge president Bush's war policy fell four votes short of the sixty needed to cut off debate... ".
"largely seen as a Democratic attempt to challenge president Bush's war policy"... excuse me?
and
"a major blow to Democrats"? How about a major blow to our overextended troops instead?
By that you're saying that this wasn't a bill about trying to save our military from unending tours wringing the last blood and sweat from our service men and women and sending them home in many cases broken in mind and body? No, to you this is all about the Democrats trying to stick it to the president, eh? You are as twisted as Chris Mathews. You've spent most of your life in the Washington scene, both of you, and you are much too close to the players in this disaster called the Bush presidency.
Your characterization of the Democratic effort to get our troops some much needed rest is a slap in the face to our service members who have suffered while the media (like you) perpetuate the
president's fraud!
And while I'm at it, the morning after one of Keith Olbermann's special comments I heard you utter "chill out..." after playing a clip.
NO, Keith shouldn't "chill out", he's the only one of you who has the character and guts to say [on prime time TV] what the majority of Americans are saying, and the rest need to hear.
You are part of the problem that allowed the fraud leading up to the war to become public perception, and that led us to commit our troops and ultimately to the deaths of close to four thousand of them.
Now you're still at it. Turn around what you said and you're closer to the truth.
And I'm not naive, I realize that politics are involved, but the bottom line of the bill was to aid our troops, and instead of saying that, you chose to perpetuate the Republican fraud and mislead your viewers, the 'fraud' being that Democrats don't support the troops, which is a flat out LIE and you know it!
last night's vote "on capital hill now, a major blow to Democrats after senate Republicans blocked a bill to give US troops more time at home between deployments. The proposal largely seen as a Democratic attempt to challenge president Bush's war policy fell four votes short of the sixty needed to cut off debate... ".
"largely seen as a Democratic attempt to challenge president Bush's war policy"... excuse me?
and
"a major blow to Democrats"? How about a major blow to our overextended troops instead?
By that you're saying that this wasn't a bill about trying to save our military from unending tours wringing the last blood and sweat from our service men and women and sending them home in many cases broken in mind and body? No, to you this is all about the Democrats trying to stick it to the president, eh? You are as twisted as Chris Mathews. You've spent most of your life in the Washington scene, both of you, and you are much too close to the players in this disaster called the Bush presidency.
Your characterization of the Democratic effort to get our troops some much needed rest is a slap in the face to our service members who have suffered while the media (like you) perpetuate the
president's fraud!
And while I'm at it, the morning after one of Keith Olbermann's special comments I heard you utter "chill out..." after playing a clip.
NO, Keith shouldn't "chill out", he's the only one of you who has the character and guts to say [on prime time TV] what the majority of Americans are saying, and the rest need to hear.
You are part of the problem that allowed the fraud leading up to the war to become public perception, and that led us to commit our troops and ultimately to the deaths of close to four thousand of them.
Now you're still at it. Turn around what you said and you're closer to the truth.
And I'm not naive, I realize that politics are involved, but the bottom line of the bill was to aid our troops, and instead of saying that, you chose to perpetuate the Republican fraud and mislead your viewers, the 'fraud' being that Democrats don't support the troops, which is a flat out LIE and you know it!
After last night's vote, any Republican who claims to support the troops and who voted against the Webb amendment is a bald-faced liar. And I fully expect each and every one of them to be called on it.
Think of it this way, if the military was a automobile, the Republicans and the president have stolen it and are driving the military/auto on it's rims and the engine is about to blow up because it being driven so hard for so long.
Q: Why were they allowed to steal the car?
Think of it this way, if the military was a automobile, the Republicans and the president have stolen it and are driving the military/auto on it's rims and the engine is about to blow up because it being driven so hard for so long.
Q: Why were they allowed to steal the car?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)