Whos watching who

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Another liberal watch dog group reporting --however done a search and can't seem to find them having any probs with assinations heheadings ect--from the terrorist--I am sure Algezzerra with jump on before days end in support of their sister affilations--

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&e=3&u=/nm/20050125/ts_nm/iraq_rights_dc

liberal logic from above article--per their report

"The Iraqi interim government is not keeping its promises to honor and respect basic human rights. Sadly, the Iraqi people continue to suffer from a government that acts with impunity in its treatment of detainees."

Hmmm Common sense would indicate to me they are suffering far more from being assasinated--beheaded--killed in suicide bombing--having structures destroyed as they are being built--ect than than from the treatment of those being capture for said etrocities.--What say you????

 

[kosar]

Wayne,

Who exactly would you have Human Rights Watch appeal to regarding the assasinations? Should they put out a report that states that peoples human rights are being violated by being beheaded? I think that's a little beyond their scope, mission statement and mostly, it's just silly.

Their job isn't to comment on things like that and it's not to comment on the tens of thousands of civilians that we've killed. If the government that we've installed is carrying on the tradition of torture, don't you find that a little ironic and also newsworthy?

It's a worn, weak argument to say that , 'well, they're shooting people and beheading people, so we can do anything we want.' Or whining that human rights groups are taking an interest in the kind of government that we're supporting in Iraq and reporting on same.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

My point is you have NYT/Algezera/liberal media run endless from page storries on prison abuse and terrorists rights--and deaths of soilders and civilians but somehow fail to see that those they are trying to protect are the same that cause all the atrocities they whine about. My questions is who do you hope is wishing for failure of elections more--the terrorist or liberals--if you don't think the French-NYT-along with many left wingers here--and I am not putting Dems in general that catagory--aren't hoping for failure in Iraq I would question your objectivity. I can think of 3 in this little forum (not you) that would fit in this catagory.

 

[kosar]

I'm not really sure why anybody would hope for failure in the Iraqi elections except for maybe Al-Jazeera. It's just that some are a little more realistic than others. And don't you think that the fact that the government that we installed has admitted to torturing prisoners is newsworthy? Isn't that kind of an indication, along with about 1000 other things, that we cannot break this cycle that is so ingrained over there?

This has nothing to do with the media or anything like that. This has to do with common sense and the educated idea that we're hitting our head up against a wall, over and over and then complaining that we have a headache.

We can continue to blame the media for this mess, or we can try to finally come to grips with reality.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

"Another liberal watch dog group reporting --however done a search and can't seem to find them having any probs with assinations Beheadings ect--from the terrorist--I am sure Algezzerra with jump on before days end in support of their sister affilations--"

took 4 hours a 12 minutes----Just up on Algezeera--

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/8AD9E8A4-80EC-43AF-81E2-4A69D08861C6.htm

 

[kosar]

"Another liberal watch dog group reporting --however done a search and can't seem to find them having any probs with assinations Beheadings ect--from the terrorist--I am sure Algezzerra with jump on before days end in support of their sister affilations--"

Did you read my first post regarding Human Rights Watch and groups of it's kind? You can do a search all day and i'm pretty sure you won't find them or The Red Cross condemning the beheadings or condemning us blowing up civilians.

Do you think this story is newsworthy, ironic, important for our credibility? Or do you think it should be ignored, just like shots of coffins coming home are buried (no pun intended)?

 

[djv]

I guess for those who think Iraq is a neat place they should move there. Elections for Iraq is worth all it's cost our country. Strange because we never were given that for a reason for going there till the first two reasons failed.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Yep DJV and some never found reason to do anything except Somolia's "French " manuever.

While the -Peloski's-Boxer's Kennedy's have all the critisisms--they unfortunately have NO answers as did our past administration.


" The USA stood by and did little as hundreds of U.S. soldiers and Marines were murdered in Lebanon and Saudi Arabia, as two U.S. embassies were blown up, as a U.S. warship was attacked. And remember the World Trade Center was first bombed in 1993. What did we do about it?"

and you know what the consequences of that was-----

 

[djv]

Like I say Iraq just Is not the new Florida of the world. And why Reagan did nothing about Lebanon I don't know. And Saudi would be one of those countries ahead of Iraq that needed our attetion. Iran was first but we blew it.

 

[Master Capper]

Way off base again your starting to sound like Rush (the dope man) Limbaugh! First of all, to achieve democracy the country needs to treat it's criminals like humans as we all know that such a wide net is being cast right now to attempt to quell the bombings that with such a wide net there are going to be innocent people that get caught up in the net. To showcase Iraq as the crowning beacon jewel of democracy in the Middle East it must be shown that human rights are a top priority (unlike Bush's beliefs) and that cruel and vicious treatment will not be tolerated. If this whole mission is to show the surrounding countries that democracy can work then we cannot let this abuse continue or else what glimmer of hope do these people have as it seems to them that democracy is just a title for the same old intimidation tactics. One thing you fail to mention is that Iraq nor it's citizens never asked the U.S. to come in and help them so in many of their minds this is a hostile invasion and if you compound that with the fact that many of these people have went without adequate water supplies, electricity and sewer since the invasion was probably the worst planned invasion in my history, you should see why the insurgency has been so successful! You may oppose everything Kennedy and Boxer speak of but I highly doubt you can supply answers to their questions that would actually make sense and if we did not have people like this questioning the sloppy operations and false words of this administration then we would be opening ourselves up to complete failure. You can be sure that the next time bush plans to attack another country the process will come to a grinding halt until he can provide concrete answers on why we must do this, no longer will he be trusted on his word as his word is worthless at this point.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

"First of all, to achieve democracy the country needs to treat it's criminals like humans"

Does not surprise me "your" 1st priority for democracy is for
he criminal element.

"One thing you fail to mention is that Iraq nor it's citizens never asked the U.S. to come in and help them"

--and just how are they suppose to do that--send us an email?
or do you think they should have went out on limb again like in 92 and get massacred again?

"You can be sure that the next time bush plans to attack another country the process will come to a grinding halt until he can provide concrete answers on why we must do this, no longer will he be trusted on his word as his word is worthless at this point."

Evidently you missed the election on who trusts who.
Haven't found an issue yet he voted for before he voted against it