Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Posted: 11/21/2007 12:05:57 PM EDT
U.S. defends AP photographer's detention in Iraq
Wed Nov 21, 10:36 AM ET
The U.S. military on Wednesday defended its 19-month detention of an award-winning Associated Press photographer it has accused of working with insurgents in Iraq, saying he remained a "security threat."

Bilal Hussein, who began working with the news agency in 2004, has been in U.S. military custody in Iraq since he was detained in April 2006 in the city of Ramadi, 110 km (68 miles) west of Baghdad, according to the AP website.

The AP has called for the immediate release of the photographer, who was part of an AP photo team that won a Pulitzer prize in 2005.

Since Hussein's arrest, "this case has been reviewed a number of times by the standing board that does periodic reviews of individuals in detention," U.S. military spokesman Major- General Kevin Bergner told a news conference.

"In each instance the recommendation was to continue detention because of the continued security threat that he represented."

Bergner declined to discuss the evidence against Hussein, who took pictures for the AP in western Anbar province, which until a tribal security push began last year was the heartland of Iraq's Sunni Arab insurgency.

Earlier this week, the Pentagon called Hussein a "terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP." Berger said only that Hussein had been detained "as a result of his interactions with insurgent activities."

The military has said in the past that Hussein was detained for possessing materials used to make roadside bombs, insurgent propaganda, and a surveillance photo of a coalition installation.

AP president and chief executive officer Tom Curley said this week in a statement: "While we are hopeful that there could be some resolution to Bilal Hussein's long detention, we have grave concerns that his rights under the law continue to be ignored and even abused."

Military officials are expected to file a formal complaint against Hussein in Iraq's Central Criminal Court.

"We are now at a point where that case is to be conveyed ... for judicial consideration," Bergner said.

Hussein, 36, is just one of a number of Iraqi journalists who have been held by the U.S. military without being charged. Reuters journalists have also been detained by the U.S. military for months and later released without charges.

Link
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 12:06:50 PM EDT
We should release him from US custody. Into the custody of the Egyptians.
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 12:08:03 PM EDT
Terrorists infiltrating the media... who work with the military side-by-side...

Honestly, that's fvcking brilliant if Al Qaeda pulled it off.
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 12:15:37 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/21/2007 12:17:09 PM EDT by JonasWright]


Earlier this week, the Pentagon called Hussein a "terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP." Berger said only that Hussein had been detained "as a result of his interactions with insurgent activities."


A statement not backed up by anybody or anything. Of course the Pentagon refuses to produce whatever evidence it supposedly has and has not allowed the AP regular access

I'll state publicly ANY country, ANY where, who charges ANY body for a crime without allowing the body of evidence to be examined or presenting charges is a failing and unjust country.

As far as anybody can tell, essentially this guy is in jail for taking pictures of the other side.


Link Posted: 11/21/2007 12:19:35 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JonasWright:


Earlier this week, the Pentagon called Hussein a "terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP." Berger said only that Hussein had been detained "as a result of his interactions with insurgent activities."


A statement not backed up by anybody or anything. Of course the Pentagon refuses to produce whatever evidence it supposedly has and has not allowed the AP regular access

I'll state publicly ANY country, ANY where, who charges ANY body for a crime without allowing the body of evidence to be examined or presenting charges is a failing and unjust country.

As far as anybody can tell, essentially this guy is in jail for taking pictures of the other side.




Come back when you learn something. Ever heard of "sources and methods". This ain't the civilian world, sonny. If evidence is presented, it will be in a secret court, as it should be. You do not have a "need to know" regarding the evidence we have against him.
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 12:23:36 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/21/2007 12:24:11 PM EDT by Dave_A]

Originally Posted By JonasWright:


Earlier this week, the Pentagon called Hussein a "terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP." Berger said only that Hussein had been detained "as a result of his interactions with insurgent activities."


A statement not backed up by anybody or anything. Of course the Pentagon refuses to produce whatever evidence it supposedly has and has not allowed the AP regular access

I'll state publicly ANY country, ANY where, who charges ANY body for a crime without allowing the body of evidence to be examined or presenting charges is a failing and unjust country.

As far as anybody can tell, essentially this guy is in jail for taking pictures of the other side.




He's not being held on charges...

He is being detained, IN A WARZONE, for acting in support of hostile forces (wouldn't be the first)...

The status is closer to POW/enemy-combatant, than it is to suspected criminal...

That status does not require charges or evidence....

That status allows him to be detained until the end of hostilities....
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 12:24:33 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JonasWright:


Earlier this week, the Pentagon called Hussein a "terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP." Berger said only that Hussein had been detained "as a result of his interactions with insurgent activities."


A statement not backed up by anybody or anything. Of course the Pentagon refuses to produce whatever evidence it supposedly has and has not allowed the AP regular access

I'll state publicly ANY country, ANY where, who charges ANY body for a crime without allowing the body of evidence to be examined or presenting charges is a failing and unjust country.

As far as anybody can tell, essentially this guy is in jail for taking pictures of the other side.





Did you miss this part?


The military has said in the past that Hussein was detained for possessing materials used to make roadside bombs, insurgent propaganda, and a surveillance photo of a coalition installation.


Link Posted: 11/21/2007 12:27:21 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Fly-Navy:
Terrorists infiltrating the media... who work with the military side-by-side...

Honestly, that's fvcking brilliant if Al Qaeda pulled it off.


Why presume that "infiltration" is even needed? IMHO, you imagine a far greater degree of integrity on the media's behalf than I've seen evidence of.


Link Posted: 11/21/2007 12:30:38 PM EDT

Originally Posted By GBME:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:


Earlier this week, the Pentagon called Hussein a "terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP." Berger said only that Hussein had been detained "as a result of his interactions with insurgent activities."


A statement not backed up by anybody or anything. Of course the Pentagon refuses to produce whatever evidence it supposedly has and has not allowed the AP regular access

I'll state publicly ANY country, ANY where, who charges ANY body for a crime without allowing the body of evidence to be examined or presenting charges is a failing and unjust country.

As far as anybody can tell, essentially this guy is in jail for taking pictures of the other side.





Did you miss this part?


The military has said in the past that Hussein was detained for possessing materials used to make roadside bombs, insurgent propaganda, and a surveillance photo of a coalition installation.




Which makes him an enemy combatant, if we're nice, and a spy if we're feeling pissed...

I hope he likes his cell, because as long as we're engaged in Iraq, we have no reason to let him out of it (Well, except to turn him over to the locals... Who would hang his ass quite promptly)....
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 12:32:19 PM EDT

Originally Posted By GBME:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:


Earlier this week, the Pentagon called Hussein a "terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP." Berger said only that Hussein had been detained "as a result of his interactions with insurgent activities."


A statement not backed up by anybody or anything. Of course the Pentagon refuses to produce whatever evidence it supposedly has and has not allowed the AP regular access

I'll state publicly ANY country, ANY where, who charges ANY body for a crime without allowing the body of evidence to be examined or presenting charges is a failing and unjust country.

As far as anybody can tell, essentially this guy is in jail for taking pictures of the other side.





Did you miss this part?


The military has said in the past that Hussein was detained for possessing materials used to make roadside bombs, insurgent propaganda, and a surveillance photo of a coalition installation.




Might that be because we was a reporter covering the insurgents? I'm doing a story on meth production right now, and have info on my computer about how its done.

According to this Daffy Duck logic we can now infer that "OH NOEZ JW IS MAKING TEH METH!" And again, if they have evidence why won't they present it? Is or is not Iraq a sovereign nation capable of holding its own trials?

A cadre of respected journalists who have worked with this man have said trying to link him with the terrorist is utter and total shit.

Link Posted: 11/21/2007 12:38:51 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

Originally Posted By GBME:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:


Earlier this week, the Pentagon called Hussein a "terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP." Berger said only that Hussein had been detained "as a result of his interactions with insurgent activities."


A statement not backed up by anybody or anything. Of course the Pentagon refuses to produce whatever evidence it supposedly has and has not allowed the AP regular access

I'll state publicly ANY country, ANY where, who charges ANY body for a crime without allowing the body of evidence to be examined or presenting charges is a failing and unjust country.

As far as anybody can tell, essentially this guy is in jail for taking pictures of the other side.





Did you miss this part?


The military has said in the past that Hussein was detained for possessing materials used to make roadside bombs, insurgent propaganda, and a surveillance photo of a coalition installation.




Might that be because we was a reporter covering the insurgents? I'm doing a story on meth production right now, and have info on my computer about how its done.

According to this Daffy Duck logic we can now infer that "OH NOEZ JW IS MAKING TEH METH!" And again, if they have evidence why won't they present it? Is or is not Iraq a sovereign nation capable of holding its own trials?

A cadre of respected journalists who have worked with this man have said trying to link him with the terrorist is utter and total shit.



Not a chance in hell....

Posession of IED components = Enemy Combatant = you're lucky no one shot your ass, welcome to your cell...

The man was using press credentials to support the enemy... He was captured... And he is being treated much better than is required for such cases (spies do not have much protection under the law of war)...
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 12:39:47 PM EDT

Originally Posted By prk:

Originally Posted By Fly-Navy:
Terrorists infiltrating the media... who work with the military side-by-side...

Honestly, that's fvcking brilliant if Al Qaeda pulled it off.


Why presume that "infiltration" is even needed? IMHO, you imagine a far greater degree of integrity on the media's behalf than I've seen evidence of.




Hey brother, I'm in the military... my distrust and distaste of the media is as strong as anyone else's.
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 12:39:58 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:


Earlier this week, the Pentagon called Hussein a "terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP." Berger said only that Hussein had been detained "as a result of his interactions with insurgent activities."


A statement not backed up by anybody or anything. Of course the Pentagon refuses to produce whatever evidence it supposedly has and has not allowed the AP regular access

I'll state publicly ANY country, ANY where, who charges ANY body for a crime without allowing the body of evidence to be examined or presenting charges is a failing and unjust country.

As far as anybody can tell, essentially this guy is in jail for taking pictures of the other side.




He's not being held on charges...

He is being detained, IN A WARZONE, for acting in support of hostile forces (wouldn't be the first)...

The status is closer to POW/enemy-combatant, than it is to suspected criminal...

That status does not require charges or evidence....

That status allows him to be detained until the end of hostilities....


He is being held in his own country, and not being told why. Nor is he or anyone being given a substantial reason to deprive him of his liberty and the right to free press that we supposedly value in this country.
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 12:40:06 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

Originally Posted By GBME:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:


Earlier this week, the Pentagon called Hussein a "terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP." Berger said only that Hussein had been detained "as a result of his interactions with insurgent activities."


A statement not backed up by anybody or anything. Of course the Pentagon refuses to produce whatever evidence it supposedly has and has not allowed the AP regular access

I'll state publicly ANY country, ANY where, who charges ANY body for a crime without allowing the body of evidence to be examined or presenting charges is a failing and unjust country.

As far as anybody can tell, essentially this guy is in jail for taking pictures of the other side.





Did you miss this part?


The military has said in the past that Hussein was detained for possessing materials used to make roadside bombs, insurgent propaganda, and a surveillance photo of a coalition installation.




Might that be because we was a reporter covering the insurgents? I'm doing a story on meth production right now, and have info on my computer about how its done.

According to this Daffy Duck logic we can now infer that "OH NOEZ JW IS MAKING TEH METH!" And again, if they have evidence why won't they present it? Is or is not Iraq a sovereign nation capable of holding its own trials?

A cadre of respected journalists who have worked with this man have said trying to link him with the terrorist is utter and total shit.



Well that cadre you speak of has a high percentage of military haters. And it is clear you fall into that category yourself.
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 12:41:41 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:


Earlier this week, the Pentagon called Hussein a "terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP." Berger said only that Hussein had been detained "as a result of his interactions with insurgent activities."


A statement not backed up by anybody or anything. Of course the Pentagon refuses to produce whatever evidence it supposedly has and has not allowed the AP regular access

I'll state publicly ANY country, ANY where, who charges ANY body for a crime without allowing the body of evidence to be examined or presenting charges is a failing and unjust country.

As far as anybody can tell, essentially this guy is in jail for taking pictures of the other side.




He's not being held on charges...

He is being detained, IN A WARZONE, for acting in support of hostile forces (wouldn't be the first)...

The status is closer to POW/enemy-combatant, than it is to suspected criminal...

That status does not require charges or evidence....

That status allows him to be detained until the end of hostilities....


He is being held in his own country, and not being told why. Nor is he or anyone being given a substantial reason to deprive him of his liberty and the right to free press that we supposedly value in this country.


I personally would have no qualms with a bullet being put in his head. I'd volunteer for the honor of doing it myself, and then watch a movie that night and get a good nights sleep.
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 12:42:19 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:


Earlier this week, the Pentagon called Hussein a "terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP." Berger said only that Hussein had been detained "as a result of his interactions with insurgent activities."


A statement not backed up by anybody or anything. Of course the Pentagon refuses to produce whatever evidence it supposedly has and has not allowed the AP regular access

I'll state publicly ANY country, ANY where, who charges ANY body for a crime without allowing the body of evidence to be examined or presenting charges is a failing and unjust country.

As far as anybody can tell, essentially this guy is in jail for taking pictures of the other side.




He's not being held on charges...

He is being detained, IN A WARZONE, for acting in support of hostile forces (wouldn't be the first)...

The status is closer to POW/enemy-combatant, than it is to suspected criminal...

That status does not require charges or evidence....

That status allows him to be detained until the end of hostilities....


He is being held in his own country, and not being told why. Nor is he or anyone being given a substantial reason to deprive him of his liberty and the right to free press that we supposedly value in this country.


Yeah, and I'm going to cry myself to sleep tonight over that.



He chose to run with terrorists, well now he gets locked up with them. At least he has friends close by.
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 12:43:56 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Dave_A:


Not a chance in hell....

Posession of IED components = Enemy Combatant = you're lucky no one shot your ass, welcome to your cell...

The man was using press credentials to support the enemy... He was captured... And he is being treated much better than is required for such cases (spies do not have much protection under the law of war)...


IED components, which is what? Copper? Powder? Nails? Explosive charges with "Die Yankee bastard" written on the side?

If they have a case against this guy then why the hell won't they present it? If they had indisputable evidence why are they holding it back and making themselves look bad?

Charge him or release him. Shit unholy - we're starting an Iraqi government with absolutely no respect for legitimate judicial process and declaring "victory."
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 12:45:39 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/21/2007 12:47:04 PM EDT by packinheavy]

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

snip

A cadre of respected journalists......



I thought that was kind of like the Easter Bunny or better yet, the Passenger Pigeon. Because they did exist once, but good luck finding one now. Definitely not with the AP.

By the way, since you are a journalist yourself, this wouldn't be anything like the thin blue line they accuse the cops of? Would it?
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 12:45:56 PM EDT

Originally Posted By jkstexas2001:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

Originally Posted By GBME:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:


Earlier this week, the Pentagon called Hussein a "terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP." Berger said only that Hussein had been detained "as a result of his interactions with insurgent activities."


A statement not backed up by anybody or anything. Of course the Pentagon refuses to produce whatever evidence it supposedly has and has not allowed the AP regular access

I'll state publicly ANY country, ANY where, who charges ANY body for a crime without allowing the body of evidence to be examined or presenting charges is a failing and unjust country.

As far as anybody can tell, essentially this guy is in jail for taking pictures of the other side.





Did you miss this part?


The military has said in the past that Hussein was detained for possessing materials used to make roadside bombs, insurgent propaganda, and a surveillance photo of a coalition installation.




Might that be because we was a reporter covering the insurgents? I'm doing a story on meth production right now, and have info on my computer about how its done.

According to this Daffy Duck logic we can now infer that "OH NOEZ JW IS MAKING TEH METH!" And again, if they have evidence why won't they present it? Is or is not Iraq a sovereign nation capable of holding its own trials?

A cadre of respected journalists who have worked with this man have said trying to link him with the terrorist is utter and total shit.



Well that cadre you speak of has a high percentage of military haters. And it is clear you fall into that category yourself.


Does that mean I hate myself? Because last I checked I was proud of my service. Wait... nope, still proud.

But way to cash in on the tinfoil media conspiracy. Didn't Dusty start a thread about people not knowing what they were talking about trying to tell people about their own jobs.
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 12:47:17 PM EDT

Originally Posted By motown_steve:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:


Earlier this week, the Pentagon called Hussein a "terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP." Berger said only that Hussein had been detained "as a result of his interactions with insurgent activities."


A statement not backed up by anybody or anything. Of course the Pentagon refuses to produce whatever evidence it supposedly has and has not allowed the AP regular access

I'll state publicly ANY country, ANY where, who charges ANY body for a crime without allowing the body of evidence to be examined or presenting charges is a failing and unjust country.

As far as anybody can tell, essentially this guy is in jail for taking pictures of the other side.




He's not being held on charges...

He is being detained, IN A WARZONE, for acting in support of hostile forces (wouldn't be the first)...

The status is closer to POW/enemy-combatant, than it is to suspected criminal...

That status does not require charges or evidence....

That status allows him to be detained until the end of hostilities....


He is being held in his own country, and not being told why. Nor is he or anyone being given a substantial reason to deprive him of his liberty and the right to free press that we supposedly value in this country.


Yeah, and I'm going to cry myself to sleep tonight over that.



He chose to run with terrorists, well now he gets locked up with them. At least he has friends close by.


He chose to cover a war.
There is more than one side to it.
You can take pictures of a drug deal and not be a drug dealer.
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 1:02:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By jkstexas2001:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:


Earlier this week, the Pentagon called Hussein a "terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP." Berger said only that Hussein had been detained "as a result of his interactions with insurgent activities."


A statement not backed up by anybody or anything. Of course the Pentagon refuses to produce whatever evidence it supposedly has and has not allowed the AP regular access

I'll state publicly ANY country, ANY where, who charges ANY body for a crime without allowing the body of evidence to be examined or presenting charges is a failing and unjust country.

As far as anybody can tell, essentially this guy is in jail for taking pictures of the other side.




He's not being held on charges...

He is being detained, IN A WARZONE, for acting in support of hostile forces (wouldn't be the first)...

The status is closer to POW/enemy-combatant, than it is to suspected criminal...

That status does not require charges or evidence....

That status allows him to be detained until the end of hostilities....


He is being held in his own country, and not being told why. Nor is he or anyone being given a substantial reason to deprive him of his liberty and the right to free press that we supposedly value in this country.


I personally would have no qualms with a bullet being put in his head. I'd volunteer for the honor of doing it myself, and then watch a movie that night and get a good nights sleep.



+1

I hope they let the Iraqis hang the fucker.

Link Posted: 11/21/2007 1:04:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By GBME:

Originally Posted By jkstexas2001:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:


Earlier this week, the Pentagon called Hussein a "terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP." Berger said only that Hussein had been detained "as a result of his interactions with insurgent activities."


A statement not backed up by anybody or anything. Of course the Pentagon refuses to produce whatever evidence it supposedly has and has not allowed the AP regular access

I'll state publicly ANY country, ANY where, who charges ANY body for a crime without allowing the body of evidence to be examined or presenting charges is a failing and unjust country.

As far as anybody can tell, essentially this guy is in jail for taking pictures of the other side.




He's not being held on charges...

He is being detained, IN A WARZONE, for acting in support of hostile forces (wouldn't be the first)...

The status is closer to POW/enemy-combatant, than it is to suspected criminal...

That status does not require charges or evidence....

That status allows him to be detained until the end of hostilities....


He is being held in his own country, and not being told why. Nor is he or anyone being given a substantial reason to deprive him of his liberty and the right to free press that we supposedly value in this country.


I personally would have no qualms with a bullet being put in his head. I'd volunteer for the honor of doing it myself, and then watch a movie that night and get a good nights sleep.



+1

I hope they let the Iraqis hang the fucker.



For someone who has risked his life to liberate a people from oppression to wish it back upon them is truly bizarre.
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 1:12:38 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Fly-Navy:

Originally Posted By prk:

Originally Posted By Fly-Navy:
Terrorists infiltrating the media... who work with the military side-by-side...

Honestly, that's fvcking brilliant if Al Qaeda pulled it off.


Why presume that "infiltration" is even needed? IMHO, you imagine a far greater degree of integrity on the media's behalf than I've seen evidence of.




Hey brother, I'm in the military... my distrust and distaste of the media is as strong as anyone else's.


Well, then you're ahead of most of us on this. It would suit me just fine if they weren't even allowed in hostile zones and a lot less with those serving, though I guess in practice that easier said than done from a practical standpoint. Thanks for your service, by the way.
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 1:15:12 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

Originally Posted By motown_steve:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:


Earlier this week, the Pentagon called Hussein a "terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP." Berger said only that Hussein had been detained "as a result of his interactions with insurgent activities."


A statement not backed up by anybody or anything. Of course the Pentagon refuses to produce whatever evidence it supposedly has and has not allowed the AP regular access

I'll state publicly ANY country, ANY where, who charges ANY body for a crime without allowing the body of evidence to be examined or presenting charges is a failing and unjust country.

As far as anybody can tell, essentially this guy is in jail for taking pictures of the other side.




He's not being held on charges...

He is being detained, IN A WARZONE, for acting in support of hostile forces (wouldn't be the first)...

The status is closer to POW/enemy-combatant, than it is to suspected criminal...

That status does not require charges or evidence....

That status allows him to be detained until the end of hostilities....


He is being held in his own country, and not being told why. Nor is he or anyone being given a substantial reason to deprive him of his liberty and the right to free press that we supposedly value in this country.


Yeah, and I'm going to cry myself to sleep tonight over that.



He chose to run with terrorists, well now he gets locked up with them. At least he has friends close by.


He chose to cover a war.
There is more than one side to it.
You can take pictures of a drug deal and not be a drug dealer.


You are severely morally confused. Do you consider a group of people who kill women and children using suicide bombers a valid "side" to this thing? What is your major malfunction?
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 1:15:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By prk:

Originally Posted By Fly-Navy:

Originally Posted By prk:

Originally Posted By Fly-Navy:
Terrorists infiltrating the media... who work with the military side-by-side...

Honestly, that's fvcking brilliant if Al Qaeda pulled it off.


Why presume that "infiltration" is even needed? IMHO, you imagine a far greater degree of integrity on the media's behalf than I've seen evidence of.




Hey brother, I'm in the military... my distrust and distaste of the media is as strong as anyone else's.


Well, then you're ahead of most of us on this. It would suit me just fine if they weren't even allowed in hostile zones and a lot less with those serving, though I guess in practice that easier said than done from a practical standpoint. Thanks for your service, by the way.


So... we shouldn't allow Iraqi journalists to cover the war?
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 1:15:42 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

He chose to cover a war.
There is more than one side to it.
You can take pictures of a drug deal and not be a drug dealer.


Poor analogy. Taking pictures of a drug deal is far from the claims of what he was involved in. Your comparison would be more accurate if it was "You can take pictures of drugs which you're carrying and not be a.. uh.. nevermind"
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 1:16:14 PM EDT
I think we should hang him.

Of course, I think all members of the press should hang. Being a member of the press is the same as being an insurgent in my book.
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 1:16:20 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:


Earlier this week, the Pentagon called Hussein a "terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP." Berger said only that Hussein had been detained "as a result of his interactions with insurgent activities."


A statement not backed up by anybody or anything. Of course the Pentagon refuses to produce whatever evidence it supposedly has and has not allowed the AP regular access

I'll state publicly ANY country, ANY where, who charges ANY body for a crime without allowing the body of evidence to be examined or presenting charges is a failing and unjust country.

As far as anybody can tell, essentially this guy is in jail for taking pictures of the other side.




He's not being held on charges...

He is being detained, IN A WARZONE, for acting in support of hostile forces (wouldn't be the first)...

The status is closer to POW/enemy-combatant, than it is to suspected criminal...

That status does not require charges or evidence....

That status allows him to be detained until the end of hostilities....


He is being held in his own country, and not being told why. Nor is he or anyone being given a substantial reason to deprive him of his liberty and the right to free press that we supposedly value in this country.


The man is an unlawful (out of uniform) enemy combatant, who was captured under arms (IED materials) against US forces...

At one time, he could have been shot right then and there, no 'rights' or similar...

Now, we hold him until the end of hostilities....

In your sick & twisted world he's just a reporter...

In my world, he's a goddamn enemy spy, and should be treated accordingly...
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 1:18:00 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

Originally Posted By prk:

Originally Posted By Fly-Navy:

Originally Posted By prk:

Originally Posted By Fly-Navy:
Terrorists infiltrating the media... who work with the military side-by-side...

Honestly, that's fvcking brilliant if Al Qaeda pulled it off.


Why presume that "infiltration" is even needed? IMHO, you imagine a far greater degree of integrity on the media's behalf than I've seen evidence of.




Hey brother, I'm in the military... my distrust and distaste of the media is as strong as anyone else's.


Well, then you're ahead of most of us on this. It would suit me just fine if they weren't even allowed in hostile zones and a lot less with those serving, though I guess in practice that easier said than done from a practical standpoint. Thanks for your service, by the way.


So... we shouldn't allow Iraqi journalists to cover the war?


We shouldn't allow journalists to ENGAGE IN the war, FOR THE OTHER SIDE, while using their press-card as cover...

That's spying in this or any other century....

Too bad we can't shoot spies anymore (minor breach of the LOAC)....
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 1:19:22 PM EDT
This guy has come into the spotlight more than once I believe. He's the guy who was taking pictures of insurgents shooting at US troops. He had a picture of an insurgent sniping at US troops, action photos and everything. He didn't do anything to alert the people the sniper was shooting at, he just stood by and snapped away at his camera....
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 1:19:58 PM EDT

Originally Posted By jkstexas2001:

You are severely morally confused. Do you consider a group of people who kill women and children using suicide bombers a valid "side" to this thing? What is your major malfunction?


Who said anything about valid, I just said it was a side.
And there is more to our opposition in Iraq than the Salfist zealots and stupid thugs killing innocents. This is why getting information from multiple perspectives is important.
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 1:20:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/21/2007 1:23:10 PM EDT by Dave_A]

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:


Not a chance in hell....

Posession of IED components = Enemy Combatant = you're lucky no one shot your ass, welcome to your cell...

The man was using press credentials to support the enemy... He was captured... And he is being treated much better than is required for such cases (spies do not have much protection under the law of war)...


IED components, which is what? Copper? Powder? Nails? Explosive charges with "Die Yankee bastard" written on the side?

If they have a case against this guy then why the hell won't they present it? If they had indisputable evidence why are they holding it back and making themselves look bad?

Charge him or release him. Shit unholy - we're starting an Iraqi government with absolutely no respect for legitimate judicial process and declaring "victory."


Charge him or release him?

This isn't a fucking law enforcement matter!!!!

This is WAR.

And in WAR when you capture THE ENEMY, you hold him until hostilities terminate, OR you charge him with any crimes against LOAC that he may have committed....

*COULD* this guy be charged with crimes? Yes - spying.

Will he be? Maybe, maybe not... Considering that the penalty for spying is death, and that the judge doing the sentancing (ours or the Iraqis) probably knows at least on IED victim... I think he'd rather be held as an EC/POW.... Because if he goes to trial, he will hang - literally...
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 1:26:03 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/21/2007 1:31:12 PM EDT by Dave_A]

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

Originally Posted By jkstexas2001:

You are severely morally confused. Do you consider a group of people who kill women and children using suicide bombers a valid "side" to this thing? What is your major malfunction?


Who said anything about valid, I just said it was a side.
And there is more to our opposition in Iraq than the Salfist zealots and stupid thugs killing innocents. This is why getting information from multiple perspectives is important.


Yeah, there are the Iranian-backed thugs killing innocents too...

And that's about it...

The 'Iraqi Patriots' are no longer 'the opposition', they've by-and-large had a change of heart, and are now fighting against the aforementioned thugs (to the level of manning their own CPs, conducting their own patrols, and even engaging the enemy in combat), under banners such as 'The Awakening', and so on... Which is why enemy attacks are down over 50%, tips on terrorist movements & weapons caches keep flowing in, and the enemy is getting rolled up all over the place.... There's no doubt that a number of these folks WERE insurgents back in 2003 - fortunately for us they've got a better idea of who the 'foreign invaders' are now....

But of course, since you believe that a fucking spy is a 'honest journalist', you undoubtably believe that most of the enemy combatants in Iraq are 'local freedom fighters' rising up against 'American imperialism'...

And you're just as wrong in both cases...
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 1:30:18 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/21/2007 1:31:13 PM EDT by 95thFoot]

Originally Posted By packinheavy:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

snip

A cadre of respected journalists......



I thought that was kind of like the Easter Bunny or better yet, the Passenger Pigeon. Because they did exist once, but good luck finding one now. Definitely not with the AP.

By the way, since you are a journalist yourself, this wouldn't be anything like the thin blue line they accuse the cops of? Would it
?


Best.
Post.
Ever.
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 1:35:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/21/2007 1:37:25 PM EDT by JonasWright]

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:


Not a chance in hell....

Posession of IED components = Enemy Combatant = you're lucky no one shot your ass, welcome to your cell...

The man was using press credentials to support the enemy... He was captured... And he is being treated much better than is required for such cases (spies do not have much protection under the law of war)...


IED components, which is what? Copper? Powder? Nails? Explosive charges with "Die Yankee bastard" written on the side?

If they have a case against this guy then why the hell won't they present it? If they had indisputable evidence why are they holding it back and making themselves look bad?

Charge him or release him. Shit unholy - we're starting an Iraqi government with absolutely no respect for legitimate judicial process and declaring "victory."


Charge him or release him?

This isn't a fucking law enforcement matter!!!!

This is WAR.

And in WAR when you capture THE ENEMY, you hold him until hostilities terminate, OR you charge him with any crimes against LOAC that he may have committed....

*COULD* this guy be charged with crimes? Yes - spying.

Will he be? Maybe, maybe not... Considering that the penalty for spying is death, and that the judge doing the sentancing (ours or the Iraqis) probably knows at least on IED victim... I think he'd rather be held as an EC/POW.... Because if he goes to trial, he will hang - literally...


There is no meaningful law, anywhere, ever, that says people have to support our side. Get it? We are not fucking holy. We are not anointed.

There is no proof that he is "the enemy," or if there is "it's secret and can't be shown."
It's fine, really. I realize most people here don't read or care about history. Most people think we can turn our military into a huge police organization abroad and then bring them home with no consequences. Most people don't care because he was a journalist "over there." Well, history is full of this, I really have no expectation that my children will be born into a country recognizable as free. And when the protesters are dragged away (to great applause) and media criticism is silenced (to great applause) people will celebrate a new age. Until the protesters are us, and the media is ours.

Conservatives were the last people to be skeptical of the government. And now we have a bunch of so called "conservatives" cheerleading the indefinite incarceration of a journalist based on nothing but the governments word which, in this case, has never, ever, not once, been substantiated by evidence.

We are now in that great sunset that the Founders feared and Reagan warned us about. A total and overwhelming dewey-eyed love of government. And we will one day tell our children what it was once like in America, where men were free.
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 1:44:41 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:


Not a chance in hell....

Posession of IED components = Enemy Combatant = you're lucky no one shot your ass, welcome to your cell...

The man was using press credentials to support the enemy... He was captured... And he is being treated much better than is required for such cases (spies do not have much protection under the law of war)...


IED components, which is what? Copper? Powder? Nails? Explosive charges with "Die Yankee bastard" written on the side?

If they have a case against this guy then why the hell won't they present it? If they had indisputable evidence why are they holding it back and making themselves look bad?

Charge him or release him. Shit unholy - we're starting an Iraqi government with absolutely no respect for legitimate judicial process and declaring "victory."


Charge him or release him?

This isn't a fucking law enforcement matter!!!!

This is WAR.

And in WAR when you capture THE ENEMY, you hold him until hostilities terminate, OR you charge him with any crimes against LOAC that he may have committed....

*COULD* this guy be charged with crimes? Yes - spying.

Will he be? Maybe, maybe not... Considering that the penalty for spying is death, and that the judge doing the sentancing (ours or the Iraqis) probably knows at least on IED victim... I think he'd rather be held as an EC/POW.... Because if he goes to trial, he will hang - literally...


There is no meaningful law, anywhere, ever, that says people have to support our side. Get it? We are not fucking holy. We are not anointed.

There is no proof that he is "the enemy," or if there is "it's secret and can't be shown."
It's fine, really. I realize most people here don't read or care about history. Most people think we can turn our military into a huge police organization abroad and then bring them home with no consequences. Most people don't care because he was a journalist "over there." Well, history is full of this, I really have no expectation that my children will be born into a country recognizable as free. And when the protesters are dragged away (to great applause) and media criticism is silenced (to great applause) people will celebrate a new age. Until the protesters are us, and the media is ours.

Conservatives were the last people to be skeptical of the government. And now we have a bunch of so called "conservatives" cheerleading the indefinite incarceration of a journalist based on nothing but the governments word which, in this case, has never, ever, not once, been substantiated by evidence.

We are now in that great sunset that the Founders feared and Reagan warned us about. A total and overwhelming dewey-eyed love of government. And we will one day tell our children what it was once like in America, where men were free.

How do you not understand this? He is the enemy, military intel has confirmed this. There is evidence, but guess what? You're not authorized to see it. You don't have the clearance. So shut your god damn mouth and let the military deal with it.
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 1:48:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Enigma102083:

So shut your god damn mouth and let the government deal with it.
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 1:55:11 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

A statement not backed up by anybody or anything. Of course the Pentagon refuses to produce whatever evidence it supposedly has and has not allowed the AP regular access

AP really has no rights in the matter. And yes, we did notice that you did a little dance, qualifying "access" with the ever-so-vague "regular".
About all that says is that AP didn't get carte blanche. Works for me.


I'll state publicly ANY country, ANY where, who charges ANY body for a crime without allowing the body of evidence to be examined or presenting charges is a failing and unjust country.
The body of evidence HAS evidently been reviewed repeatedly and found to support his continued detention. Your complaint is that they didn't let AP or the public look at it. OK. [shrug]


As far as anybody can tell, essentially this guy is in jail for taking pictures of the other side.
So the trial will take place in the courtroom and not in the press? OMFG!!
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 1:59:26 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:


Not a chance in hell....

Posession of IED components = Enemy Combatant = you're lucky no one shot your ass, welcome to your cell...

The man was using press credentials to support the enemy... He was captured... And he is being treated much better than is required for such cases (spies do not have much protection under the law of war)...


IED components, which is what? Copper? Powder? Nails? Explosive charges with "Die Yankee bastard" written on the side?

If they have a case against this guy then why the hell won't they present it? If they had indisputable evidence why are they holding it back and making themselves look bad?

Charge him or release him. Shit unholy - we're starting an Iraqi government with absolutely no respect for legitimate judicial process and declaring "victory."


Charge him or release him?

This isn't a fucking law enforcement matter!!!!

This is WAR.

And in WAR when you capture THE ENEMY, you hold him until hostilities terminate, OR you charge him with any crimes against LOAC that he may have committed....

*COULD* this guy be charged with crimes? Yes - spying.

Will he be? Maybe, maybe not... Considering that the penalty for spying is death, and that the judge doing the sentancing (ours or the Iraqis) probably knows at least on IED victim... I think he'd rather be held as an EC/POW.... Because if he goes to trial, he will hang - literally...


There is no meaningful law, anywhere, ever, that says people have to support our side. Get it? We are not fucking holy. We are not anointed.

There is no proof that he is "the enemy," or if there is "it's secret and can't be shown."
It's fine, really. I realize most people here don't read or care about history. Most people think we can turn our military into a huge police organization abroad and then bring them home with no consequences. Most people don't care because he was a journalist "over there." Well, history is full of this, I really have no expectation that my children will be born into a country recognizable as free. And when the protesters are dragged away (to great applause) and media criticism is silenced (to great applause) people will celebrate a new age. Until the protesters are us, and the media is ours.

Conservatives were the last people to be skeptical of the government. And now we have a bunch of so called "conservatives" cheerleading the indefinite incarceration of a journalist based on nothing but the governments word which, in this case, has never, ever, not once, been substantiated by evidence.

We are now in that great sunset that the Founders feared and Reagan warned us about. A total and overwhelming dewey-eyed love of government. And we will one day tell our children what it was once like in America, where men were free.


Jonas:

He was caught UNDER ARMS AGAINST OUR FORCES IN A WAR ZONE

He is NOT A JOURNALIST

HE IS A SPY

Why is this so hard for you to understand?

We are talking about an enemy spy captured on the battlefield.

Not a civillian criminal who should be 'charged or released'....

SPIES HAVE NO RIGHTS BEYOND LOAC/GENEVA...

Link Posted: 11/21/2007 2:00:35 PM EDT
Ok, for the active posters in this thread:

Show of hands (Er posts)

SPY

or

NOT A SPY

...

Somehow I think Jonas would be the only one posting 'NOT'....
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 2:03:23 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
Ok, for the active posters in this thread:

Show of hands (Er posts)

SPY

or

NOT A SPY

...

Somehow I think Jonas would be the only one posting 'NOT'....


You need to add Piece of Shit as a choice. That's what I would consider him.
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 2:03:28 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/21/2007 2:05:39 PM EDT by FMJshooter]

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

Originally Posted By GBME:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:


Earlier this week, the Pentagon called Hussein a "terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP." Berger said only that Hussein had been detained "as a result of his interactions with insurgent activities."


A statement not backed up by anybody or anything. Of course the Pentagon refuses to produce whatever evidence it supposedly has and has not allowed the AP regular access

I'll state publicly ANY country, ANY where, who charges ANY body for a crime without allowing the body of evidence to be examined or presenting charges is a failing and unjust country.

As far as anybody can tell, essentially this guy is in jail for taking pictures of the other side.





Did you miss this part?


The military has said in the past that Hussein was detained for possessing materials used to make roadside bombs, insurgent propaganda, and a surveillance photo of a coalition installation.




Might that be because we was a reporter covering the insurgents? I'm doing a story on meth production right now, and have info on my computer about how its done.

According to this Daffy Duck logic we can now infer that "OH NOEZ JW IS MAKING TEH METH!" And again, if they have evidence why won't they present it? Is or is not Iraq a sovereign nation capable of holding its own trials?

A cadre of respected journalists who have worked with this man have said trying to link him with the terrorist is utter and total shit.



So because a Cadre of "respected" journalists who worked with him a few times say hes innocent you buy it hook line and sinker. You say you served before? Then you of all people should know how it works. Regardless of what you think the .Mil could give a shit about you and your buddy's. We don't have to give you shit. Every time we kill someone over there do you want them to Email you evidence so you can give the Military permission to carry on?

And I'm calling you out who did you serve with Mr.Expert at my job.
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 2:06:45 PM EDT

Originally Posted By FMJshooter:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

Originally Posted By GBME:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:


Earlier this week, the Pentagon called Hussein a "terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP." Berger said only that Hussein had been detained "as a result of his interactions with insurgent activities."


A statement not backed up by anybody or anything. Of course the Pentagon refuses to produce whatever evidence it supposedly has and has not allowed the AP regular access

I'll state publicly ANY country, ANY where, who charges ANY body for a crime without allowing the body of evidence to be examined or presenting charges is a failing and unjust country.

As far as anybody can tell, essentially this guy is in jail for taking pictures of the other side.





Did you miss this part?


The military has said in the past that Hussein was detained for possessing materials used to make roadside bombs, insurgent propaganda, and a surveillance photo of a coalition installation.




Might that be because we was a reporter covering the insurgents? I'm doing a story on meth production right now, and have info on my computer about how its done.

According to this Daffy Duck logic we can now infer that "OH NOEZ JW IS MAKING TEH METH!" And again, if they have evidence why won't they present it? Is or is not Iraq a sovereign nation capable of holding its own trials?

A cadre of respected journalists who have worked with this man have said trying to link him with the terrorist is utter and total shit.



So because a Cadre of "respected" journalists who worked with him a few times say hes innocent you buy it hook line and sinker. You say you served before? Then you of all people should know how it works. Regardless of what you think the .Mil could give a shit about you and you buddy's we don't have to give you shit. Every time we kill someone over there do you want them to Email you evidence so you can give the Military permission to carry on?

And I'm calling you out who did you serve with Mr.Expert at my job.


Jonas never claimed to have served, IIRC...

Fly-navy was the only one I saw in this thread (which makes sense, why use 'fly-navy' as a handle unless you're a Naval Aviator)...
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 2:08:45 PM EDT
He was caught with IED making materiels. It ain't rocket scientry.
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 2:13:00 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By FMJshooter:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:

Originally Posted By GBME:

Originally Posted By JonasWright:


Earlier this week, the Pentagon called Hussein a "terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP." Berger said only that Hussein had been detained "as a result of his interactions with insurgent activities."


A statement not backed up by anybody or anything. Of course the Pentagon refuses to produce whatever evidence it supposedly has and has not allowed the AP regular access

I'll state publicly ANY country, ANY where, who charges ANY body for a crime without allowing the body of evidence to be examined or presenting charges is a failing and unjust country.

As far as anybody can tell, essentially this guy is in jail for taking pictures of the other side.





Did you miss this part?


The military has said in the past that Hussein was detained for possessing materials used to make roadside bombs, insurgent propaganda, and a surveillance photo of a coalition installation.




Might that be because we was a reporter covering the insurgents? I'm doing a story on meth production right now, and have info on my computer about how its done.

According to this Daffy Duck logic we can now infer that "OH NOEZ JW IS MAKING TEH METH!" And again, if they have evidence why won't they present it? Is or is not Iraq a sovereign nation capable of holding its own trials?

A cadre of respected journalists who have worked with this man have said trying to link him with the terrorist is utter and total shit.



So because a Cadre of "respected" journalists who worked with him a few times say hes innocent you buy it hook line and sinker. You say you served before? Then you of all people should know how it works. Regardless of what you think the .Mil could give a shit about you and you buddy's we don't have to give you shit. Every time we kill someone over there do you want them to Email you evidence so you can give the Military permission to carry on?

And I'm calling you out who did you serve with Mr.Expert at my job.


Jonas never claimed to have served, IIRC...

Fly-navy was the only one I saw in this thread (which makes sense, why use 'fly-navy' as a handle unless you're a Naval Aviator)...


First page about half way down.
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 2:32:59 PM EDT

Originally Posted By GBME:

Hussein, 36, is just one of a number of Iraqi journalists who have been held by the U.S. military without being charged. Reuters journalists have also been detained by the U.S. military for months and later released without charges.

Link


Wasn't the same thing that's being said about him said about the Reuters journalists? This whole "detain people without trial" thing is getting a bit ridiculous.
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 2:38:00 PM EDT
JonasWright sticking up for the bad guys, as usual...
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 2:47:32 PM EDT
he should be shot as a spie.
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 3:08:31 PM EDT
I'd like to borrow him for awhile.
Link Posted: 11/21/2007 3:29:09 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JonasWright:


Earlier this week, the Pentagon called Hussein a "terrorist media operative who infiltrated the AP." Berger said only that Hussein had been detained "as a result of his interactions with insurgent activities."


A statement not backed up by anybody or anything. Of course the Pentagon refuses to produce whatever evidence it supposedly has and has not allowed the AP regular access

I'll state publicly ANY country, ANY where, who charges ANY body for a crime without allowing the body of evidence to be examined or presenting charges is a failing and unjust country.

As far as anybody can tell, essentially this guy is in jail for taking pictures of the other side.



You don't know, nor have you seen, the evidence.

You can sit here in the good old US of A and bitch and whine until your tongue falls out but until you know e-x-a-c-t-l-y what has occurred with Mr. Hussein, you're speaking out of the side of your mouth. Or some other bodily orifice.

The scumbag had bomb making materials and propaganda. Sitting in your yellow easy chair with your phallic-shaped TV remote in your hand, you might think that isn't a big deal. Last year this time, my son's recon team was hit by one of those IEDs. Four good Marines were killed and others wounded. Hussein was not involved, but who cares, right? Just as long as you can sit back in safety, type away on your keyboard and bitch about how unjust we Americans are. How unjust were those insurgents -- you know, the scumbags who were Mr. Hussein's buddies?

If you don't like what it happening with a military tribunal in another country, if you feel that we're unjust, then leave and move there. Let's see how the Muslims treat you after you do something they don't like. They'd LOVE a whimpering chump like you. And how do you think Hussein would be treated if it was a Muslim court? His head would probably be separated from his body.

Please leave. Pack your altruistic bags and work to change the world there. Or shut your trap until you know the facts.

After five years of war, I'm getting sick of hearing sniveling simpering wimps such as yourself complain about what we're doing OVERSEAS while others are in harm's way protecting your right to show what a chump you really are.

Link Posted: 11/21/2007 3:34:47 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JonasWright:
There is no meaningful law, anywhere, ever, that says people have to support our side. Get it? We are not fucking holy. We are not anointed.

There is no proof that he is "the enemy," or if there is "it's secret and can't be shown."
It's fine, really. I realize most people here don't read or care about history. Most people think we can turn our military into a huge police organization abroad and then bring them home with no consequences. Most people don't care because he was a journalist "over there." Well, history is full of this, I really have no expectation that my children will be born into a country recognizable as free. And when the protesters are dragged away (to great applause) and media criticism is silenced (to great applause) people will celebrate a new age. Until the protesters are us, and the media is ours.

Conservatives were the last people to be skeptical of the government. And now we have a bunch of so called "conservatives" cheerleading the indefinite incarceration of a journalist based on nothing but the governments word which, in this case, has never, ever, not once, been substantiated by evidence.

We are now in that great sunset that the Founders feared and Reagan warned us about. A total and overwhelming dewey-eyed love of government. And we will one day tell our children what it was once like in America, where men were free.



Blah blah blah blah blah.

List facts. Give some concrete examples. Get some meds
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Top Top