On 02-24-09, DAN CEPPA said to TIM RICHARDSON:


DC>They were detained in wide sweeps without supporting evidence.


TR> A person or persons swept up in an area full of hostiles, usually with
TR> a weapon or weapons in their possession, or a cache of weapons near at
TR> hand, gets taken into custody.


DC>Many of those arrested were unarmed.


So what! Many gang members on the streets of LA are `unarmed' at the time of
their arrest. How long does it take to toss a `niner' in a dumpster or over an
adobe wall when the cops are coming!


DC>As to near at hand, it's a recent combat zone.


Really? When did you figure that out! Things happen in combat. Many times, the
ones who look the most innocent are the ones who are most dangerous.



TR> Thats hogwash. Bush's `mistreatment' of them had nothing to do with


DC>Wrong.  Recruitment went through the roof when the Abu Ghraib scandle hit
DC>the news.


When did `you' become an expert on al Qaeda recruitment figures? You don't
know any more about al Qaeda recruitment than anyone else. That `through the
roof' of yours is nothing but more `get GW' BS.


TR> it. Not only that...the mis-treatment was punished when it was brought
TR> to light. I believe even a general was disciplined. On an EM level,


DC>The problem did not start at the lowest level.  It came from edicts from
DC>the WH.


Show me the exact WH memo that orders personnel at Abu Ghraib to `make 'em
wear panties on their heads and crawl around naked barking like dogs'. When
was it issued? Who issued it? Through who's hands did it pass up the chain of
command?


TR> When what we do to terrorists equals cutting someone's head off with a
TR> sword, get back to me. And don't go off on all that high-horse crapola


DC>The degree of pain/death is irrelevant.  That the US deals in torture of
DC>any strain is morally reprehensible.


Oh get off that high horse! Your attitude and demeanor in other echoes puts
the lie to any expressions of `high moral standards and principles' coming
from you! I've been reading your `stuff' out here in Fido for many years, pal,
and that doesn't fit you, period!


DC>I never claimed that.  My statement was the W's policies were Al Qaeda's
DC>Madison Ad campaign.


Your `statement' is hogwash. Lets say W didn't win the election. Letss say the
democrat election stealers had succeeded in cheating AlGore's way into the
White House.


Do you think 9\11 would never have taken place?


TR> Thats crap. Who do you think the individuals were that flew the planes
TR> into the World Trade Center, Santa's elves?


DC>Of which 15 of the 19 were Saudi.


Nice try. They were al Qaeda.


DC>Not a single one was an Iraqi.


That was never claimed. Try again.


DC>Nor was there ever a connection between Sadam and Al Qaeda.


So you say.


DC>bin Laden is still on the loose.


Don't worry.......now that the democrats are in almost complete control of the
country......bin Laden will probably be so scared he'll turn himself in.





---
*Durango b301 #PE*