Plenty of THAT to go around these days, no doubt about it. Thanks for understanding.
two for twelve
- Thread starter buddy
- Start date
Plenty of THAT to go around these days, no doubt about it. Thanks for understanding.
well then,have the balls to cut off funding and end the "debacle".....
that`s what everybody wants....right?...don`t have the DEMOCRAT votes,you say?....
hopefully the surge will fail....then maybe your representatives will grow enough sac to pulll out the rug....
untill then,they`re afraid to put their money where their mouths are....
i hate when that happens...
no he di`int.....:nono:
one thing offends me here...i don`t talk down to anyone on the site.....i respect most on here......i just calls `em as i sees em....and btw,"i`m a scared little man"......:scared
this thread was a one-way hatefest until i weighed in........you just don`t like hearing another point of view......
my,oh my....slapped old wease with a little verbal "jew"-jitsu,there sauly.....
:142smilie
well done....
Or one could say that they are supporting the president one last time after being lied to, misled and generally being bent over.
Well, not the democrats being bent over, but all the young men and women and their families who have died and who been maimed over a bunch of nothing.
The toothless Saddam is gone! His sons are gone!
Thank the good Lord, since people like you really gave a shit about those poor Iraqi civilians since....ummmm.....you were told to.
Sad and pathetic.
pointy of view? what point of view? i can't understand 90% of your babbling. For example, why did you mention global warming?
The one-way "hatefest" as you called it was all directed towards the administration and it's decisions. Nobody in this thread said something about another poster until YOU chimned in with:
and then...
and then you insinuate that people here want the US to fail.
...So you can call it just your point of view if you want, but it generally is nothing more than insults and scattered apocolyptic one-liners . If you ever want to simply discuss facts, without wandering all over the place - dragging global warming into an Iraq debate, accusing people of being anti-American, calling them moonbats etc - then that would be wonderful. I welcome such a discussion with you.
But you are a very hostile poster, who quickly plays the "lighten up" card when someone dosn't understand you. It's tiresome. You think maybe just once you could enter a subject you disagree with and calmly list some facts, refrain from name-calling, keep it to the subject at-hand and wait for a civil discussion?
now,we both know that the democratic leadership(pelosi/murtha/kennedy et al) are doing everything in their power to undermine,if not defeat the surge......
murtha`s on videotape stating as much....
thankfully,the new moderate dems are smarter than that...
gives me hope....
and i`ll gladly give you the benefit of the doubt regarding you hoping for our success in iraq.....
you`re a good man and you occasionally surprise me...
look out,here comes the oblgatory saul "cut and paste rant about my "babbling" and "moonbats"...:shrug:
lol.....sauly.....you telling me that the harmless,actually endearing term "moonbats" gets your panties in a bunch?.....
c`mon...it`s a term of endearment...seriously....
and btw...being a good catholic,i forgave buddy....
Surge what Surge? Other countries pulling not adding troops. Are we the surge. Dem's should make it simple. Surge and Iraq government do what they promise by July 1st 07. Put Screws to it if they don't. Everyone out by January 1st 08. Leave 20000 in Kuwait if they need a little hit and run once in a while. Then Pull them by July 1st 08.
Stop screwing with this civil war.
Stop screwing with this civil war.
Had to go to Kuwait news paper for this one
Baghdad security crackdown seriously curbs killings of US soldiers
MIL-IRAQ-US SOLDIERS
Baghdad security crackdown seriously curbs killings of US soldiers
BAGHDAD, March 14 (KUNA) -- The rate of killings of US troops in Iraq has been on the decline, down by 60 percent, since the launch of the new security measures in Baghdad, according to statistics revealed by the Multi-National Force -Iraq Combined Press Information Centre.
Only 17 members of the US military in Iraq have been killed since February 14 till March 13, compared to 42 from January 13 to February 13; the rate was on the decline during the first month of the security crackdown, compared to a month before.
Two of the 17 soldiers died at US Baghdad camps of non-combat causes.
The remarkable decrease in killings among the US troops came at a time when more of these troops were deployed in the Iraqi capital, especially in districts previously regarded as extremely hazardous for them such as Al-Sadr City, Al-Azamiyah, and Al-Doura.
Meanwhile, US attacks on insurgent strongholds north of Baghdad curbed attacks against helicopters. Before the new security plan, many such craft were downed leaving 20 soldiers dead.
The US army in Iraq had earlier said that sectarian fighting and violence in Baghdad had dropped sharply, by about 80 percent, since the launch of the plan.
http://www.kuna.net.kw/Home/Story.aspx?Language=en&DSNO=961365
Baghdad security crackdown seriously curbs killings of US soldiers
MIL-IRAQ-US SOLDIERS
Baghdad security crackdown seriously curbs killings of US soldiers
BAGHDAD, March 14 (KUNA) -- The rate of killings of US troops in Iraq has been on the decline, down by 60 percent, since the launch of the new security measures in Baghdad, according to statistics revealed by the Multi-National Force -Iraq Combined Press Information Centre.
Only 17 members of the US military in Iraq have been killed since February 14 till March 13, compared to 42 from January 13 to February 13; the rate was on the decline during the first month of the security crackdown, compared to a month before.
Two of the 17 soldiers died at US Baghdad camps of non-combat causes.
The remarkable decrease in killings among the US troops came at a time when more of these troops were deployed in the Iraqi capital, especially in districts previously regarded as extremely hazardous for them such as Al-Sadr City, Al-Azamiyah, and Al-Doura.
Meanwhile, US attacks on insurgent strongholds north of Baghdad curbed attacks against helicopters. Before the new security plan, many such craft were downed leaving 20 soldiers dead.
The US army in Iraq had earlier said that sectarian fighting and violence in Baghdad had dropped sharply, by about 80 percent, since the launch of the plan.
http://www.kuna.net.kw/Home/Story.aspx?Language=en&DSNO=961365
Dogs you are unreal:
Seriously curbs killing of American soldiers. ONLY 17 died last month.
Budget deficit SHRINKS to$52 billion.
I hope you don't believe what you are saying half the time because we are in big trouble even if 30% of people think like you. I have a story from my wife's nephew who I am pretty close with. That has been in Iraq since early December. This a real person who is there and you can't spin with Clinton's BJ or some left blogs.
This is what he told me in email I got 3 days ago. He one of guards that is guarding something like 5000 prisoners. He had always said he believes in what he is doing. He was proud to be in the army and wanted to serve. This kid is 20. Well to make a long story short the British used to patrol and protect the camp he is in. Now that they have redeployed or went home and the a direct quote from him "The so-called Iraqi army" has taken over. They lost 3 soldiers in a road side bomb and have been mortar attacked just about every day. He went on to say they don't know who they can trust in the "Iraqi Army" and moral has steadily declined. He also said most of the time when there are roadside bombs or ied's it's like the people or insurgents knew where to be at. He said that some of prisoners start to act up and fight with the guards when there are attacks.I could go on with more stuff but will stop there.
IF you think this surge is going to work then you are just plain brainwashed or are a clone of Dick Cheney.
jc
Seriously curbs killing of American soldiers. ONLY 17 died last month.
Budget deficit SHRINKS to$52 billion.
I hope you don't believe what you are saying half the time because we are in big trouble even if 30% of people think like you. I have a story from my wife's nephew who I am pretty close with. That has been in Iraq since early December. This a real person who is there and you can't spin with Clinton's BJ or some left blogs.
This is what he told me in email I got 3 days ago. He one of guards that is guarding something like 5000 prisoners. He had always said he believes in what he is doing. He was proud to be in the army and wanted to serve. This kid is 20. Well to make a long story short the British used to patrol and protect the camp he is in. Now that they have redeployed or went home and the a direct quote from him "The so-called Iraqi army" has taken over. They lost 3 soldiers in a road side bomb and have been mortar attacked just about every day. He went on to say they don't know who they can trust in the "Iraqi Army" and moral has steadily declined. He also said most of the time when there are roadside bombs or ied's it's like the people or insurgents knew where to be at. He said that some of prisoners start to act up and fight with the guards when there are attacks.I could go on with more stuff but will stop there.
IF you think this surge is going to work then you are just plain brainwashed or are a clone of Dick Cheney.
jc
Actually, the rate of deaths of our soldiers has been going down for about 18 months. That's great.
And the sectarian violence and deaths have gone way up in the same timeframe.
Bottom line- all hell has broken loose, as of about, oh, 18 months ago, it's become apparent to most that there WILL be a continuation of this civil war until the end of time.
There is no 'win' to this thing.
Or how about this, for the few left standing like Wayne and Weasel:
We WON. We got Saddam and his sons. We WON!!!!
so,should we give the surge one last chance?.....
or just walk away.....leaving iraq,the oil,the strategic position and all iraqi allies that believed in us to iran and al qaeda?.....
i`m askin`?...
I think most people just don't see how all these things hinge on this final 'surge'. If it aint happ'nin, then it aint happening regardless of a few thousand extra troops.
That said, I personally don't have a problem with the surge. It's like we're already pot-committed, so what's a few more chips? I don't blame people for criticizing it or arguing against it though. They have every right to, without being accused of undercutting the troops. There are enough solid reasons to be against it for it to be a valid debate.
There's only so much we can accomplish militarily. Like someone just said, we won the military battle a long time ago. The things we want now are really up to the Iraqis. We obviously can't blanket everything. At some point, we have to leave. We can't be occupiers forever. We can't make peace between rival factions. Some things simply can't be forced.
As for the security of oil fields and borders and such - well, we rolled the dice with this invasion and some things came up craps. No matter what we do, we will have to face the reality that Iraq is now home to many more terrorists and Iranian influence than pre-invasion. No matter how much force we use, this is a prevailing fact.
This is my feeling on Iraq:
We give the Iraqi government till the end of the summer to get control of the sectarian killings. That will give them over 6 months since the beginning of the year, which I doubt will happen since they haven't gotten control yet in about what 4 years. If this is still widespread pull out all US troops out of harms way and redeploy if you will out of unstable killing zones. Bring them to assist the Iraqi troops when needed if they are over whelmed. By Jan 1 2008 bring half home. If all this crap is still going on convince the gov't to split Iraq into 3 pieces with equal oil revenue. If they don't want to that pull all troops out in summer of 2008. I would like that but we will have troops in Iraq for another 20 years with the mess this administration has gotten us into. Don't worry the oil will flow with Kuwait and Saudi Arabia our so called friends. We'll still have troops in Kuwait and Saudi if we must.
Now I can hear every neocon saying Iran will take over. Iran sees what has happened to Iraq and I doubt they will chance a full blown war with us. I also don't think the world will them to get nuclear
weapons.
I have a few questions for you gardenweasel. How long do we stay the course in Iraq? Maybe the violence has slowed but what do we do keep with this surge for the next 10 years? What would be your plans for the next 1-2 years? Our country has about maxed out our credit card with all debt we have so I do pay for another 2 maybe 5 years? Raise Taxes?
All I know is this administration has screwed this whole thing up and isn't getting any better so it's time to let somebody else try to get us out of this mess.
jc
We give the Iraqi government till the end of the summer to get control of the sectarian killings. That will give them over 6 months since the beginning of the year, which I doubt will happen since they haven't gotten control yet in about what 4 years. If this is still widespread pull out all US troops out of harms way and redeploy if you will out of unstable killing zones. Bring them to assist the Iraqi troops when needed if they are over whelmed. By Jan 1 2008 bring half home. If all this crap is still going on convince the gov't to split Iraq into 3 pieces with equal oil revenue. If they don't want to that pull all troops out in summer of 2008. I would like that but we will have troops in Iraq for another 20 years with the mess this administration has gotten us into. Don't worry the oil will flow with Kuwait and Saudi Arabia our so called friends. We'll still have troops in Kuwait and Saudi if we must.
Now I can hear every neocon saying Iran will take over. Iran sees what has happened to Iraq and I doubt they will chance a full blown war with us. I also don't think the world will them to get nuclear
weapons.
I have a few questions for you gardenweasel. How long do we stay the course in Iraq? Maybe the violence has slowed but what do we do keep with this surge for the next 10 years? What would be your plans for the next 1-2 years? Our country has about maxed out our credit card with all debt we have so I do pay for another 2 maybe 5 years? Raise Taxes?
All I know is this administration has screwed this whole thing up and isn't getting any better so it's time to let somebody else try to get us out of this mess.
jc
1)do we make this deadline public policy?.....anyone with 2 i.q. points to rub together knows that the insurgents/terrorists/baathists/ will know that,too.........
do you show your hand in poker?....a self defeating strategy.....thats why the murtha`s love it....
2)split the oil revenue?.....hasn`t that been an issue from the jump?...isn`t that a beef of the baathists?....how do you do that?...that`s like saying give the palestinians a state....
how do you do it?.....been trying for decades...carter,clinton...sadat got assassinated by his own people....
you think that all the sunnis and shi`a live in separate neighborhoods?...little separate enclaves?.....they`re all mixed up...living all over the place...it`s not like the kurds all huddled up cozily in the north....
simple,right?...wrong....
3)we`ll still have troops in saudi arabia and kuwait?......if my history`s right,our troops being in kuwait and saudi arabia were part of the reason why bin laden wants us all dead....
he`s calling the shots in the middle east...he makes foreign policy for all middle eastern countries..right?.......we do as he says....we can`t have allies like the saudis and kuwait....
or,so bin laden has proclaimed...leaving iraq doesn`t change that....we have to abandon the holy land...period....and that ain`t happening....
bin laden doesn`t make u.s. foreign policy...
4)what about afghanistan?....you think the taliban and al qaeda are gonna give up in afghanistan?....you think that if we leave iraq,afghanistan becomes palm springs?.....or do you think it will embolden them?....
i mean,that was the right war..wasn`t it?...
5)you don`t think "the world" will let iran have nuclear weapons?.....
what about oil-for-food, the u.n. program that was supposed help iraq pay for food and medicine for the women and children who were suffering from the impoverishment by u.n. sanctions since the gulf war ended?....hussein tolerated these sanctions, even though he had no wmds.... why did he do that?...why go through all the economic problems from not accommodating the u.n?....
has anyone ever written a story about this?...is there a single journalist who cared? ......
anyway, the program turned out to be a stupendous fraud that lined the pockets of hussein and some 700 companies doing business with him..... our various "allies", whose governments,btw,were criticizing the u.s. for invading for oil and money....
the left and msm played up the u.n. as the more moral alternative to the u.s. and bush's way....
they said the sanctions were working and that iraq was being successfully contained.....
how can anyone believe that iraq was being contained knowing what we know now?....it's in that volcker report and you can google it....
hell,we have what?...way over 100,000 troops on the ground in iraq and we can`t keep the iranians from smuggling troops and weapons into iraq....
pretty ironic...if the world had shown a united front,saddam`s still there and he`d have thrown open his doors....
the world?....the u.n.?....that undermined every effort we undertook to make sanctions work?....
now china,russia and france do big business with iran......in russia`s case,they sell them weaponry that they`ll eventually use against us....
we`re not gonna get their cooperation....
6)we need to radically change our rules of engagement and stop fighting a politically correct war....it`s to long to go into here...
look...iraq is just a part of our conflict with radical islam...an important part....
how we gonna pay for this?.....how`d we do it in ww2?...we`re in much better shape economically today..with over 95% of our population employed and 70% owning homes ....
. war bonds?...sacrifice?.....sacrifice?...wtf does that word mean?....
unfortunately,that`s not a joke... the greatest generation has passed on.....and left a shell of it`s former self to carry on...
we`re in trouble...and it goes much farther than iraq...
i believe the democrats will probably win in 2008...so,what does that do for us?....
1). on missile defense of america — democrats voted against it.
2). on the patriot act.. democrats voted against it.
3). on tapping foreign terrorists’ phone calls to the u.s... democrats voted against it.
4). on tracing terrorists’ money flow between foreign banks ..democrats voted against it.
5). on building a border wall to control illegal immigration and stop dope — dealers, terrorists and criminals ...democrats voted against it....and unfortunately,bush is with them....he has his head so far up calderon`s ass he smells like mrs calderon...
6). on interrogating captured terrorists — 194 democrats voted against it.
7)on telling the world (and our enemy) about a timetable for withdrawing from and deserting iraq — this is democrats’ retreat and defeat plan...
8)we have an elitist left wing media that gives out defense secrets like candy...dishonest s.o.b.`s that confuse and deliberately mislead the american public.....the t.v. networks have lost 50% of their audience and still refuse to change their one-sided news coverage....
9)democrats won`t allow us to build nuclear plants...or drill off the florida coast or in anwar....
these aren`t kennedy`s....or truman`s...this is a radical leftist bunch that can`t see the forest for the trees...
all they understand is that bush stole the election and clinton was lynched(and i agree with that)..and that our temperature goes up one degree every hundred years....
i could go back and list 40 years of foreign policy f-ck ups by the democrats starting with the johnson administation...through carter f-cking the shah and leading to the rise of the mullahs.....up to the present problems(outlined above)......
think about us leaving iraq...iran gaining strength and influence(which they would)..and maybe a nuclear weapon....
and how we stop them from crippling our oil dependent economy....
we couldn`t.....because a nuclear war in the middle east ruins our economy and inevitable draws us in to defend our fellow democracy israel....
changes our lives forever....
"the world"(the u.n.) couldn`t get out of the closet with their hand on the doorknob....
Last edited:
DTB: Are you familiar with the phrase "You can't polish a turd"?
I'm glad to see you are reading the newspapers of Kuwait. Lots of CrackerJack info. Your technique is flawless when it comes to showing the liberal bias in the media
That's top shelf. What was your search technique? Bright side of complete meltdown in Iraq? Positive spin on mounting death toll in Middle Eastern hell hole?
Saul- if you're keeping score, there were 105 "..."'s in Weasel's last post. Some were only two dots; some several more (apparently for emphasis). But I know you're interested, so I tallied them up for you.
Don't know what it takes for it to sink in that we are at war and deaths occur in war--Sheez
If some of you could convince me that your concern was for troops--it be a diff story--but from most excuses it reaks political agenda.
I'll tell you diff between you and this conservative--neocon if you will--
I have dogged Clinton to death and I challenge anyone to find anything but agreeing on his going into Somolia--Granted I didn't like his exit--Johnson is another Dem that got us into war--again I backed him and military once committed--if our next pres is Dem you can bet your ass I'll be behind them and troops once we are committed and not looking for political motives why we shouldn't be there.
When our troops are involved I'll be for victory regardless of my views if we should be there- and will back the pres whether its Hilliary or whoever in all efforts to win--but will dog any pres in retreat.
You can be naive to think your not any safer with the likes of these fellows below off the streets--and consider the plots we wouldn't have found out had we used your name rank and jihad # form of questioning you advocate--you all need to stick to your protesting/liberal blogs-media--and let those keeping you safe do their job--
WASHINGTON (AP) - Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the suspected mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, confessed to that attack and a chilling string of other terror plots during a military hearing at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, according to a transcript released Wednesday by the Pentagon.
"I was responsible for the 9/11 operation from A to Z," Mohammed said in a statement read during the session, which was held last Saturday.
The transcripts also refer to a claim by Mohammed that he was tortured by the CIA, although he said he was not under duress at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo when he confessed to his role in the attacks.
In a section of the statement that was blacked out, he confessed to the beheading of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, The Associated Press has learned. Pearl was abducted in January 2002 in Pakistan while researching a story on Islamic militancy. Mohammed has long been a suspect in the killing.
Using his own words, the extraordinary transcript connects Mohammed to dozens of the worst terror plots attempted or carried out in the last 15 years?and to others that have not occurred. All told, thousands have died in operations he directed.
His words draw al-Qaida closer to plots of the early 1990s than the group has previously been connected to, including the 1993 World Trade Center truck bombing. Six people with links to global terror networks were convicted in federal court and sentenced to life in prison.
It also makes clear that al-Qaida wanted to down a second trans- Atlantic aircraft during would-be shoe bomber Richard Reid's operation.
Mohammed said he was involved in planning the 2002 bombing of a Kenya beach resort frequented by Israelis and the failed missile attack on an Israeli passenger jet after it took off from Mombasa, Kenya. He also said he was responsible for the bombing of a nightclub in Bali, Indonesia. In 2002, 202 were killed when two Bali nightclubs were bombed.
Other plots he said he was responsible for included planned attacks against the Sears Tower in Chicago, the Empire State Building and New York Stock Exchange, the Panama Canal and Big Ben and Heathrow Airport in London?none of which happened.
He said he was involved in planning assassination attempts against former Presidents Carter and Clinton, attacks on U.S. nuclear power plants and suspension bridges in New York, the destruction of American and Israeli embassies in Asia and Australia, attacks on American naval vessels and oil tankers around the world, and an attempt to "destroy" an oil company he said was owned by former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger on Sumatra, Indonesia.
He also claimed he shared responsibility for assassination attempts against Pope John Paul II and Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf.
In all, Mohammed said he was responsible for planning 28 attacks and assisting in three others. The comments were included in a 26-page transcript released by the Pentagon, which blacked out some of his remarks.
Mohammed also claimed he was tortured by the CIA after his capture in according to an exchange he had with the unidentified military colonel who heads the three-member panel that heard his case.
"Is any statement that you made, was it because of this treatment, to use your word, you claim torture," the colonel asked. "Do you make any statements because of that?"
Portions of Mohammed's response were deleted from the transcript, and his immediate answer was unclear. He later said his confession read at the hearing to the long list of attacks was given without any pressure, threats or duress.
The colonel said Mohammed's torture allegations would be "reported for any investigation that may be appropriate" and also would be taken into account in consideration of his enemy combatant status.
In one rambling remark apparently spoken through a translator, Mohammed appeared to express some regret for some of the casualties of 9/11.
"When I said I'm not happy that 3,000 been killed in America, I feel sorry even. I don't like to kill children and the kids," the transcript said.
The Pentagon also released transcripts of the hearings of Abu Faraj al-Libi and Ramzi Binalshibh. Both refused to attended the hearings, though al-Libi submitted a statement.
Binalshibh, a Yemeni, is suspected of helping Mohammed with the Sept. 11, 2001, attack plan and is also linked to a foiled plot to crash aircraft into London's Heathrow Airport. Al-Libi is a Libyan who reportedly masterminded two bombings 11 days apart in Pakistan in December 2003 that targeted Musharraf for his support of the U.S.-led war on terror.
The hearings, which began last Friday, are being conducted in secret by the military as it tries to determine whether 14 alleged terrorist leaders should be declared "enemy combatants" who can be held indefinitely and prosecuted by military tribunals.
If, as expected, the 14 are declared enemy combatants, the military would then draft and file charges against them. The detainees would then be tried under the new military commissions law signed by President Bush in October.
Hearings for six of the 14 have already been held, though only three transcripts have been released. The military is not allowing reporters to attend the sessions and is limiting the information it provides about them, arguing that it wants to prevent sensitive information from being disclosed.
The 14 were moved in September from a secret CIA prison network to the prison at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, where about 385 men are being held on suspicion of links to al-Qaida or the Taliban.
Mohammed's confession was read at the hearing by a member of the U.S. military who is serving as his personal representative.
The transcripts also lay out evidence against Mohammed, saying that a computer seized during his capture included detailed information about the Sept. 11 plot?ranging from names and photos of the hijackers to photos of hijacker Mohammad Atta's pilot's license and even letters from al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden.
Al-Libi made a statement through his personal representative largely claiming that the hearing process is unfair and that he will not attend unless it is corrected.
"The detainee is in a lose-lose situation," his statement said.
Binalshibh's hearing was conducted in his absence. Military officials expected some of the 14 suspects not to participate.
Legal experts have criticized the U.S. decision to bar independent observers from the hearings from the high-value targets. The Associated Press filed a letter of protest, arguing that it would be "an unconstitutional mistake to close the proceedings in their entirety."
Mark Denbeaux, a Seton Hall University law professor who represents two Tunisians held at Guantanamo, said that based on the transcripts, Mohammed might be the only detainee who would qualify as an enemy combatant.
"The government has finally brought someone into Gitmo who apparently admits to being someone who could be called an enemy combatant," Denbeaux, a critic of most of the detentions, said in a telephone interview from London. "None of the others rise to this level. The government has now got one."
Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch, questioned the legality of the closed-door session and confession and whether the confession was the result of torture.
"We won't know that unless there is an independent hearing," he said. "We need to know if this purported confession would be enough to convict him at a fair trial or would it have to be suppressed as the fruit of torture?"
The military held 558 combatant status review tribunals between July 2004 and March 2005 and the panels concluded that all but 38 detainees were enemy combatants who should be held. Those 38 were eventually released from Guantanamo.
If some of you could convince me that your concern was for troops--it be a diff story--but from most excuses it reaks political agenda.
I'll tell you diff between you and this conservative--neocon if you will--
I have dogged Clinton to death and I challenge anyone to find anything but agreeing on his going into Somolia--Granted I didn't like his exit--Johnson is another Dem that got us into war--again I backed him and military once committed--if our next pres is Dem you can bet your ass I'll be behind them and troops once we are committed and not looking for political motives why we shouldn't be there.
When our troops are involved I'll be for victory regardless of my views if we should be there- and will back the pres whether its Hilliary or whoever in all efforts to win--but will dog any pres in retreat.
You can be naive to think your not any safer with the likes of these fellows below off the streets--and consider the plots we wouldn't have found out had we used your name rank and jihad # form of questioning you advocate--you all need to stick to your protesting/liberal blogs-media--and let those keeping you safe do their job--
WASHINGTON (AP) - Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the suspected mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, confessed to that attack and a chilling string of other terror plots during a military hearing at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, according to a transcript released Wednesday by the Pentagon.
"I was responsible for the 9/11 operation from A to Z," Mohammed said in a statement read during the session, which was held last Saturday.
The transcripts also refer to a claim by Mohammed that he was tortured by the CIA, although he said he was not under duress at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo when he confessed to his role in the attacks.
In a section of the statement that was blacked out, he confessed to the beheading of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, The Associated Press has learned. Pearl was abducted in January 2002 in Pakistan while researching a story on Islamic militancy. Mohammed has long been a suspect in the killing.
Using his own words, the extraordinary transcript connects Mohammed to dozens of the worst terror plots attempted or carried out in the last 15 years?and to others that have not occurred. All told, thousands have died in operations he directed.
His words draw al-Qaida closer to plots of the early 1990s than the group has previously been connected to, including the 1993 World Trade Center truck bombing. Six people with links to global terror networks were convicted in federal court and sentenced to life in prison.
It also makes clear that al-Qaida wanted to down a second trans- Atlantic aircraft during would-be shoe bomber Richard Reid's operation.
Mohammed said he was involved in planning the 2002 bombing of a Kenya beach resort frequented by Israelis and the failed missile attack on an Israeli passenger jet after it took off from Mombasa, Kenya. He also said he was responsible for the bombing of a nightclub in Bali, Indonesia. In 2002, 202 were killed when two Bali nightclubs were bombed.
Other plots he said he was responsible for included planned attacks against the Sears Tower in Chicago, the Empire State Building and New York Stock Exchange, the Panama Canal and Big Ben and Heathrow Airport in London?none of which happened.
He said he was involved in planning assassination attempts against former Presidents Carter and Clinton, attacks on U.S. nuclear power plants and suspension bridges in New York, the destruction of American and Israeli embassies in Asia and Australia, attacks on American naval vessels and oil tankers around the world, and an attempt to "destroy" an oil company he said was owned by former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger on Sumatra, Indonesia.
He also claimed he shared responsibility for assassination attempts against Pope John Paul II and Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf.
In all, Mohammed said he was responsible for planning 28 attacks and assisting in three others. The comments were included in a 26-page transcript released by the Pentagon, which blacked out some of his remarks.
Mohammed also claimed he was tortured by the CIA after his capture in according to an exchange he had with the unidentified military colonel who heads the three-member panel that heard his case.
"Is any statement that you made, was it because of this treatment, to use your word, you claim torture," the colonel asked. "Do you make any statements because of that?"
Portions of Mohammed's response were deleted from the transcript, and his immediate answer was unclear. He later said his confession read at the hearing to the long list of attacks was given without any pressure, threats or duress.
The colonel said Mohammed's torture allegations would be "reported for any investigation that may be appropriate" and also would be taken into account in consideration of his enemy combatant status.
In one rambling remark apparently spoken through a translator, Mohammed appeared to express some regret for some of the casualties of 9/11.
"When I said I'm not happy that 3,000 been killed in America, I feel sorry even. I don't like to kill children and the kids," the transcript said.
The Pentagon also released transcripts of the hearings of Abu Faraj al-Libi and Ramzi Binalshibh. Both refused to attended the hearings, though al-Libi submitted a statement.
Binalshibh, a Yemeni, is suspected of helping Mohammed with the Sept. 11, 2001, attack plan and is also linked to a foiled plot to crash aircraft into London's Heathrow Airport. Al-Libi is a Libyan who reportedly masterminded two bombings 11 days apart in Pakistan in December 2003 that targeted Musharraf for his support of the U.S.-led war on terror.
The hearings, which began last Friday, are being conducted in secret by the military as it tries to determine whether 14 alleged terrorist leaders should be declared "enemy combatants" who can be held indefinitely and prosecuted by military tribunals.
If, as expected, the 14 are declared enemy combatants, the military would then draft and file charges against them. The detainees would then be tried under the new military commissions law signed by President Bush in October.
Hearings for six of the 14 have already been held, though only three transcripts have been released. The military is not allowing reporters to attend the sessions and is limiting the information it provides about them, arguing that it wants to prevent sensitive information from being disclosed.
The 14 were moved in September from a secret CIA prison network to the prison at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, where about 385 men are being held on suspicion of links to al-Qaida or the Taliban.
Mohammed's confession was read at the hearing by a member of the U.S. military who is serving as his personal representative.
The transcripts also lay out evidence against Mohammed, saying that a computer seized during his capture included detailed information about the Sept. 11 plot?ranging from names and photos of the hijackers to photos of hijacker Mohammad Atta's pilot's license and even letters from al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden.
Al-Libi made a statement through his personal representative largely claiming that the hearing process is unfair and that he will not attend unless it is corrected.
"The detainee is in a lose-lose situation," his statement said.
Binalshibh's hearing was conducted in his absence. Military officials expected some of the 14 suspects not to participate.
Legal experts have criticized the U.S. decision to bar independent observers from the hearings from the high-value targets. The Associated Press filed a letter of protest, arguing that it would be "an unconstitutional mistake to close the proceedings in their entirety."
Mark Denbeaux, a Seton Hall University law professor who represents two Tunisians held at Guantanamo, said that based on the transcripts, Mohammed might be the only detainee who would qualify as an enemy combatant.
"The government has finally brought someone into Gitmo who apparently admits to being someone who could be called an enemy combatant," Denbeaux, a critic of most of the detentions, said in a telephone interview from London. "None of the others rise to this level. The government has now got one."
Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch, questioned the legality of the closed-door session and confession and whether the confession was the result of torture.
"We won't know that unless there is an independent hearing," he said. "We need to know if this purported confession would be enough to convict him at a fair trial or would it have to be suppressed as the fruit of torture?"
The military held 558 combatant status review tribunals between July 2004 and March 2005 and the panels concluded that all but 38 detainees were enemy combatants who should be held. Those 38 were eventually released from Guantanamo.
Last edited:
