Oh SNAP! (Condi Hearings)

User avatar
ottokbre
deaf.
Posts: 1996
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 8:54 am
Location: sanfranzizko

Re: Oh SNAP! (Condi Hearings)

Post by ottokbre » Thu Jan 20, 2005 2:03 pm

"The biggest regret is that we didn't stop 9/11. And then in the wake of 9/11, instead of redoubling what is our traditional export of hope and optimism we exported our fear and our anger. And presented a very intense and angry face to the world. I regret that a lot."
- Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage

THATS why Colin Powell has to go.
boobs are life's fountain

chris harris
speech impediment
Posts: 4270
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 5:31 pm
Location: Norman, OK
Contact:

Re: Oh SNAP! (Condi Hearings)

Post by chris harris » Thu Jan 20, 2005 2:25 pm

ottokbre wrote:"The biggest regret is that we didn't stop 9/11. And then in the wake of 9/11, instead of redoubling what is our traditional export of hope and optimism we exported our fear and our anger. And presented a very intense and angry face to the world. I regret that a lot."
- Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage

THATS why Colin Powell has to go.
that's also why Condi shouldn't have been confirmed.

Tim Casey
pushin' record
Posts: 290
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Re: Oh SNAP! (Condi Hearings)

Post by Tim Casey » Thu Jan 20, 2005 2:58 pm

What I don't understand is how all these people could fuck up so badly - publicly demonstarting their idiotic incompetence - and then get rewarded for it.

These bastards should be in jail. Or better yet, use them as Humvee armor.

If you think we're in trouble now, wait until Cowboy george decides that Iran has got to go. We'll be sending ten-year-olds into Iran with cap guns and "FUCK ISLAM" written on their chests.

This is the end of the US as a force for good in the world. Most of the world thinks WE'RE the bad guys now. (I know, I know - the neocons like fieryjack don't care what the rest of the world thinks. After all, what the fuck does the rest of the world know....)

User avatar
lastpicked4kickball
alignin' 24-trk
Posts: 74
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 5:13 pm
Location: Seattle area
Contact:

Re: Oh SNAP! (Condi Hearings)

Post by lastpicked4kickball » Thu Jan 20, 2005 3:05 pm

I can tell you we have been protecting middle east oil traffic for decades now, and that our influence there is soley monetarily driven, and for U.S. "Benefit" as they call it. Even before the second war on Iraqi soild insued we were taking and boarding barges that were blacklisted by middel east governments. I participated in it on operation southern watch in 2001 and in 2003, also was deployed during the beginning of OIF. We were out there before thie whole thing started and I am 100% sure that my superiors new it was coming before we even deployed. The thing is what the "U.S." stands to gain will never affect us, it's only going to line the OPEC pockets and those agendas of our Goiv't officials. Our best interest only come into play on commercials. It's sad, and I hate it, and it's a travesty since they seem to have no real idea when anyone is going to pull out or the whole thing will settle down really. It burns me up to no end knowing that in some part no matter how small it really was, I had a hand in spinning this cog. So there you have it, I spilled my guilt.
Just trying to get through life without looking stupid! Not workin' out so far for me...

User avatar
bad_dude_69
re-cappin' neve
Posts: 681
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2004 8:40 pm
Location: Chicago - IL

Re: Oh SNAP! (Condi Hearings)

Post by bad_dude_69 » Thu Jan 20, 2005 3:13 pm

don't feel so bad, 'cuz if you pay taxes, work, or spend money in the U.S., you're already spinning the cog.
medicate? oh, i thought you said "meditate."

User avatar
ottokbre
deaf.
Posts: 1996
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 8:54 am
Location: sanfranzizko

Re: Oh SNAP! (Condi Hearings)

Post by ottokbre » Thu Jan 20, 2005 3:54 pm

SENATOR BARBARA BOXER: Now, last Thursday, we find out that after the Senate unanimously approved an amendment to restrict the use of extreme interrogation measures by American intelligence officers, you wrote a letter along with Mr. Bolten to the members of the Conference Committee asking them to strike that language from the final bill. Unfortunately, that is what they did at your request. Now [Can you bring this over here so I can see it?] I want to read you the operative language that you asked to be struck from the bill that was struck from the bill. "In general? -- and by the way, this is written by Joe Lieberman and John McCain. John McCain, a man who knows what torture is. So he wrote this with Joe Lieberman. "In general, no prisoner shall be subject to torture or cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment that is prohibited by the Constitution, laws or treaties of the United States." Pretty straightforward, pretty elegant, bipartisan, passed the Senate, that amendment unanimously, every single member. A letter comes, and the newspaper writes that at your request, at the urging of the White House, congressional leaders scrapped a legislative measure last month that would have imposed new restrictions on the use of extreme interrogation measures by American intelligence officers. In a letter to members of Congress, sent in October and made available by the White House on Wednesday this was last week, Condoleezza Rice, the National Security Adviser, expressed opposition to the measure on the grounds that it, quote, ?provides legal protections to foreign prisoners to which they are not now entitled under applicable law and policy.? Now, my understanding of this is that is a restatement of what the law is.

CONDOLEEZZA RICE: It was our view in the administration, that first of all this is covered in the Defense Authorization Bill, which the President did sign.

SENATOR BARBARA BOXER: This has to do with the intelligence community, not the military. It's not covered.

CONDOLEEZZA RICE: Secondly, -- but all government agencies were covered in the Defense Authorization.

SENATOR BARBARA BOXER: This was just the intelligence officers. Go ahead.

CONDOLEEZZA RICE: All government agencies were covered in the Defense Authorization, so intelligence was covered.

SENATOR BARBARA BOXER: No it, was not.

CONDOLEEZZA RICE: It's our view. Secondly, the -- we did not want to afford to people who did not -- shouldn't enjoy certain protections, those protections. And the Geneva Conventions should not apply to terrorists like Al Qaeda. They can't, or you will stretch the meaning of the Geneva Conventions.

(now remember, in the US, not everyone gets to enjoy the freedom of not suffering torture!)
boobs are life's fountain

TrumpsHair
buyin' gear
Posts: 525
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 1:47 pm

Re: Oh SNAP! (Condi Hearings)

Post by TrumpsHair » Thu Jan 20, 2005 5:54 pm

sserendipity wrote:
TrumpsHair wrote:Do you think she's ever given W a handjob? I'm guessing, Yes!
I don't think it ever happened, but I'm sure they've both thought about it.
But won't you agree that when he's screwing Laura, he's probably fantasizing about Condi, and her deep, dark snatch? Although Condi is butt-ugly IMO.

User avatar
andyg666
re-cappin' neve
Posts: 669
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2003 9:25 am
Location: Witchtown, MA
Contact:

Re: Oh SNAP! (Condi Hearings)

Post by andyg666 » Thu Jan 20, 2005 8:17 pm

Spotty wrote:Hey Andyg666......
What exactly is going on in your avatar?
Strange little scenario (or so it seems.......)
i'm flipping off george W and rudi guiliani who are actually made of wax. this happened in a wax museum in cooperstown NY. condi rice was actually sucking Ws waxy dick while that picture was taken.

Ivon
steve albini likes it
Posts: 366
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2004 4:13 am

Re: Oh SNAP! (Condi Hearings)

Post by Ivon » Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:09 pm

lastpicked4kickball wrote:I can tell you we have been protecting middle east oil traffic for decades now, and that our influence there is soley monetarily driven, and for U.S. "Benefit" as they call it. Even before the second war on Iraqi soild insued we were taking and boarding barges that were blacklisted by middel east governments. I participated in it on operation southern watch in 2001 and in 2003, also was deployed during the beginning of OIF. We were out there before thie whole thing started and I am 100% sure that my superiors new it was coming before we even deployed. The thing is what the "U.S." stands to gain will never affect us, it's only going to line the OPEC pockets and those agendas of our Goiv't officials. Our best interest only come into play on commercials. It's sad, and I hate it, and it's a travesty since they seem to have no real idea when anyone is going to pull out or the whole thing will settle down really. It burns me up to no end knowing that in some part no matter how small it really was, I had a hand in spinning this cog. So there you have it, I spilled my guilt.
Very interesting to read some first hand details. If you hadn't been there and were just posting info that you'd either read or 'heard' about, some could write it off as left wing propoganda and heresay. But, taking you at your word, I can't. I believe it's been about the bottom line as far as the middle east and petrol interests are concerned since the US started giving lubed hand jobs to Saudi royalty back in the 1940s (I think that's when it was...that's off the top of my head). Anyway, try not to feel bad about it. You've actually been over there and witnessed first hand 'what's up'. That's to your advantage when expressing your views. I only know what I've read and and heard 'cause I've never served.

User avatar
lastpicked4kickball
alignin' 24-trk
Posts: 74
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 5:13 pm
Location: Seattle area
Contact:

Re: Oh SNAP! (Condi Hearings)

Post by lastpicked4kickball » Fri Jan 21, 2005 10:56 pm

Iwokojance,
Thanks, I have been dealing with it pretty well, I just have to accept that it's a paycheck for now, and that I am going to be out of there in a year and a half. I think I am a rare sort in my command, beings that most of them don't adhere to the "No political swaying or influence of other personnel" policy that the military is supposed to follow. I hear a lot of the ignorant and uninformed views of my co-workers who ,when the facts are put in front of them, task me with mundane crap to disuade me from further discussing it with them.
Just trying to get through life without looking stupid! Not workin' out so far for me...

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests