Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (417824)	3/21/2011 12:01:56 PM
From: FJB	Respond to of 794349

The media will turn this into the crime of the century. This story will trump the Libyan operation in coverage I bet.

To: LindyBill who wrote (417824)	3/21/2011 2:27:53 PM
From: skinowski	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794349

An elderly man once gave me a present - some medals and various insignia which he took off some dead Nazi soldiers and officers whom he personally killed. The guy didn't give it any excessive amount of thought, and had no doubts about the issue. And why should he? If he wouldn't be victorious in those encounters, he'd be the one who would be dead. War is war.

To: LindyBill who wrote (417824)	3/22/2011 5:33:34 PM
From: FJB	Respond to of 794349

I was wrong. They did not go crazy on this story. --------------------------------------------------------------- BREAKING: Obama’s Abu Ghraib: The Stuff Hits the Fan posted at 1:00 pm on March 21, 2011 by Howard Portnoy When the Abu Ghraib scandal broke in 2003, the mainstream media and liberal blogosphere couldn’t find enough column inches to express adequately their shock and revulsion. The New York Times alone published 56 stories on the hideous revelation that members of the U.S. Army Reserve had tortured prisoners of war and posed for “trophy pictures”—inexcusable acts that the Times placed squarely at the feet of then-president George W. Bush. Nor could left-leaning sources conceal their delight when President-elect Barack Obama boldly proclaimed: [U]nder my administration the United States does not torture. We will abide by the Geneva Conventions. We will uphold our highest ideals. What a difference a president makes. Until you flash forward to today’s bombshell, dropped by the British newspaper The Guardian, noting that members of a self-styled U.S. Army “kill team” posed for photos not with tortured prisoners but with corpses. Of civilians. Whom they had killed. The photos, Guardian reporter Jon Boone writes, were published in German news weekly Der Spiegel, noting that: [s]enior officials at NATO’s International Security Assistance Force in Kabul have compared the pictures … to the images of U.S. soldiers abusing prisoners in Abu Ghraib in Iraq which sparked waves of anti-U.S. protests around the world. Investigators at Der Spiegel unearthed approximately 4,000 photos and videos taken by the soldiers. The accompanying article in the magazine provides shocking details about the depraved, sadistic behavior of the men. In one alleged incident from last May, a mullah captured by the team is forced to kneel down in a ditch, where he is summarily executed. According to the article, the team later claimed to their superiors that the mullah had threatened them with a grenade and that they were acting in self-defense. This account still fails to explain why Gibbs reportedly severed one of the dead man’s fingers and removed one of his teeth, presumably as gruesome “souvenirs.” The U.S. military has endeavored to keep the images out of the public eye, fearing it could touch off a new round of anti-American, anti-military sentiment in Afghanistan at a time when antipathy toward the U.S. is already running high. A spokesman for the military is quoted as having apologized for the images, which in his words depict “actions repugnant to the U.S. as human beings and contrary to the standards and values of the United States.” So far, the White House has released no statement regarding the images or accounts. Neither, surprisingly, has the New York Times. hotair.com