A disgusting vat of filth that no self-respecting intelligent person would wade into.

[SlaveNoMore]

Penske_Account
2! I bet Jeffrey Dahmer wishes he had had it so tough as these islamofacist terrorists.

I’ve just returned from a one-day press trip to Guantanamo Bay, on which there will be more to say. But an observation while digesting the experience —

Only in America would you find authorities trying to cope with terrorist detainees by over-feeding them. We of the media were served the same halal meal as that offered to the detainees, which meant a lunch including — this is only a partial list — spiced meat patty, egg salad, tuna, yogurt, fresh dates, freshly baked bread, juice, and a down-home Middle Eastern dessert, which left us licking from our fingers the honey and nuts of the same baklava we were told is served to Hambali, Abu Zubaydah, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the rest of the gang. Of course, this being Ramadan, the detainees have the option of dining on a different schedule, fasting by day and tucking into the baklava at night. All told, they are offered a menu that provides 4,200 calories per day — more than the 3,800 allotted for a U.S. combat soldier in Iraq.

Apparently, Al Qaeda is eating this up. Guantanamo officers say that while most of the detainees upon arrival at Gitmo ranged from underweight to normal, today the 460 or so held on the base range from normal to overweight to mildly obese. Even the two detainees currently on hunger strike, being fed through tubes, are close to normal weight. We were told that one detainee, who apparently cleans his plate — or his styrofoam meal box — weighs 410 pounds, though we did not get to see him (it is against the Geneva Conventions to put prisoners on display, so our military follows the same rule for the Gitmo detainees). “His choice,” said one of our Gitmo guides. At risk of triggering a human-rights campaign for Guantanamo Lite, I have to wonder if there’s method to this menu. There’s something very disturbing about coddling terrorists, but in some ways this helps cut them down to size: Yep, it’s Al Qaeda… with a weight problem.

link

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Cletus Miller
The water volume of all ice caps is about 2% of the volume of the oceans (and seas, etc.). The difference in the density of water b/t 20 degrees celsius and 0 degrees celsius is a little less than 1%. For illustrative purposes (i.e. I know that this would not happen), if the oceans are 20 deg and half of the ice caps melted, lowering the oceans' overall temperature to 0 degrees celsius, then the total volume of the ocen would be approximately the same.

but Penske and I would have to cancel our baby seal hunts each Feb. right?

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
The clinton were where i first heard that. I blame them. I blame them as a fuction converging on infinity.

Yes. Quotes from the Dems and more quotes

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002


"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

Bill Clinton Feb 1998: "If Saddam rejects peace, and we have to use force, our purpose is clear: We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."

Madeleine Albright, (Clinton Secretary of State) Feb 1998: "We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and the security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction."

Sandy Berger, (Clinton National Security Advisor) Feb 1998 : "[Saddam will] use those weapons of mass destruction again as he has ten times since 1983."

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
.... which left us licking from our fingers the honey and nuts of the same baklava

Obviously torture. Some fool is putting honey in their Baklava.

[Adder]

Originally posted by Diane_Keaton
You don't think Hussein fits within "Islamofacsist?" Islamic. Pretty fascist. I don't know why people make a big deal out of the Hussein-as-secular-dude point. Like we should be thankful he was holding back and protecting us from Muslims even crazier than him. (Thanks!) That's not a lot of solace. How long would he have been the "repressor of Radical Islam"?

Because to the extent that we are at war with Islamic fundamentalism, he was not a problem in that regard.

The fact that you can fit him into some made up buzzword (i.e., Islamofacism) does not change that.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Adder
Because to the extent that we are at war with Islamic fundamentalism, he was not a problem in that regard.

The fact that you can fit him into some made up buzzword (i.e., Islamofacism) does not change that.

Thanks. There were so many things wrong with her initial comment I fell apart trying to coherently and concisely list them. Your response cut through all my shit and got to my point.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
but Penske and I would have to cancel our baby seal hunts each Feb. right?

Seems likely. Either that or the lack of sea ice will make it really easy for the casual clubber to join in the fun!

[Diane_Keaton]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
We of the media were served the same halal meal as that offered to the detainees, which meant a lunch including — this is only a partial list — spiced meat patty, egg salad, tuna, yogurt, fresh dates, freshly baked bread, juice, and a down-home Middle Eastern dessert,

Did the spiced meat patty contain eggplant? If so, that would be very upsetting to Sebby. Anyhow, Middle Eastern "desserts" (or any dessert served by any Jew or Muslim) suck badly so while I started to get hungry at the beginning of this, no more.

[Adder]

Originally posted by nononono
I find it, as a sort of an aside, completely ridiculous that people are so sensitive that we had to shut down the place. Fixing the fuck-up in Abu Ghraib's case could have been accomplished by a clean-up and punishment of all responsible or involved, not necessarily a shuttering. I can understand wanting to raze Dachau. I can understand bulldozing countless prisons in Saddam's Iraq. I would imagine Ho Chi Minh City has a couple of spots no one should have to pass by. But what Lynndie England and her moronic band of trash did doesn't come close to the kind of power and terror exercised in those other examples (which is not to say they might not have done much worse, had they the unfettered power and brainstems to do so). Soccer in Iraq, anyone? http://espn.go.com/oly/s/2002/1220/1480103.html
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/si_...son_of_saddam/

Guantanamo doesn't even come close.

I thought the shuttering of Abu Ghraib had more to do with its Saddam-era history than Ms. England.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Adder
I thought the shuttering of Abu Ghraib had more to do with its Saddam-era history than Ms. England.

It just wasn't a good photo-op locale - though I think they now store the "Mission Accomplished" banner there.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Thanks. There were so many things wrong with her initial comment I fell apart trying to coherently and concisely list them. Your response cut through all my shit and got to my point.

Sebby, its sad that you miss the big picture. It's all part of a whole. Hamas, Hezbollah, Fatah, Syria, the Sunni/Baathists in Iraq, the Wahhabbis, the Saudi royal family, the Mullahs in Iran, the Islamofacists throughout the region, Al Qaeda, et al. They have a common goal, subjugate and destroy the West, its values and freedoms. First stop Israel, next America (Europe has already capitulated). The varying factions of this coalition of evil might not always get along and it might not be a fully coordinated conspiracy, but the common end allows for cooperation where paths intersect. Saddam and bin Laden probably never broke bread, but in that world the game is not 6 degrees of separation, its more like 2.

That someone as bright as you fails to see the danger is motivqting me to go out and buy another couple of assault weapons for my arsenal......we are opening the door to the enemy and the clock is ticking.....

[Diane_Keaton]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
There were so many things wrong with her initial comment I fell apart trying to coherently and concisely list them. Your response cut through all my shit and got to my point.

Read deeper and you'll see you're being corrected for saying "Islamofascism" (your term, not mine) instead of Islamic fundamentalism.

Anyhow, you said the fact of Hussein's secular rule nullifies the argument that the war is against Islamic fundamentalism. But..if there were already Islamic fundamentalists in Iraq bent on destroying the U.S.*, how would a few more years of Hussein's secular rule have helped? Buying time?

(Unless you buy the idea that there were no fundamentalists in Iraq before the war and the U.S. "created" them).

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Diane_Keaton
Read deeper and you'll see you're being corrected for saying "Islamofascism" (your term, not mine) instead of Islamic fundamentalism.

Anyhow, you said the fact of Hussein's secular rule nullifies the argument that the war is against Islamic fundamentalism. But..if there were already Islamic fundamentalists in Iraq bent on destroying the U.S.*, how would a few more years of Hussein's secular rule have helped? Buying time?

(Unless you buy the idea that there were no fundamentalists in Iraq before the war and the U.S. "created" them).

Or the idea that the Islamic fundamentalists in Iraq had other fish to fry until we invaded.

One thing that pretty clearly comes out of The Looming Tower is that Islamic fundamentalists really weren't thinking about the U.S. much until bin Laden and Zawahiri came along. They were much more focused on non-fundamentalist regimes closer to them -- usually their own governments.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by nononono
Remember all that talk about winning hearts and minds? Same goes here. If our troops are commonly referred to as "torturers," soon enough we all start thinking it's probably at least somewhat true. And if we believe that of ourselves, and consequently don't trust our military, that certainly helps the enemy.

Right as to his second question. But Adder also asked who is calling US troops, in general, torturers? ("in general" as opposed to just those who actually tortured US troops). Slave seemed to be directing his comment at someone -- either on this board, or elsewhere, I can't be sure. So, who?

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Um. DailyKos? The Huff Post? The NYT? Dick Durbin? Barney Frank? The UN? Amnesty International?

Cite, please.