Bush calls alleged rape-murder 'despicable' (1 Viewer)

[KidRocks]

AHA!

It looks like President Bush is putting in his two-cents. Many here on this forum were severly criticized by some on the right, they were accused of hating the troops, America and all that jazz as usual. They said we should reserve judgement and not rush to join the chorus of jeers from the usual liberal mob.

Hmmm, looks like President Bush has joined that chorus. Ok, now people, all together, in unison...








http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-07-07-bush-iraq_x.htm

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Bush, calling the alleged rape of an Iraqi girl and the murder of her and her family by a U.S. soldier "a despicable crime, if true," said Thursday that Iraqis will learn about the openness of American justice.

Steven D. Green, a former Army private with the 101st Airborne Division, pleaded not guilty to charges Thursday. Green and other soldiers were accused of targeting the girl after seeing her near the Iraqi town of Mahmoudiya earlier this year...

 

[::Major_Baker::]

what's the point of this thread? he said dispicable if true.
I would expect any normal person to agree.

 

[KidRocks]

what's the point of this thread? he said dispicable if true.
I would expect any normal person to agree.

Yeah right, we all qualified our feelings too but that didn't stop the extremists from pounding on us 'troop/America haters for expressing our thoughts. They said we presumed the troops were guilty, well it looks to me that Bush is presuming the troops as guilty and dispicable!

 

[::Major_Baker::]

Yeah right, we all qualified our feelings too but that didn't stop the extremists from pounding on us 'troop/America haters for expressing our thoughts. They said we presumed the troops were guilty, well it looks to me that Bush is presuming the troops as guilty and dispicable!

he called the crime dispicable, if true--not the soldiers.

 

[KidRocks]

he called the crime dispicable, if true--not the soldiers.

Oh, I see, how very politically-correct of him.

What a fu....g cop-out!

 

[Goobieman]

Yeah right, we all qualified our feelings too but that didn't stop the extremists from pounding on us 'troop/America haters for expressing our thoughts. They said we presumed the troops were guilty, well it looks to me that Bush is presuming the troops as guilty and dispicable!

English obviously isnt your native language.

Bush's statement:

"a despicable crime, if true",

He CLEARLY said that the crime was despicable.

And, by CLEARLY stating "If true", he in no way assumes the soldiers involved are guilty.

Are you THAT desperate to bash Bush?

 

[KidRocks]

English obviously isnt your native language.

Bush's statement:

"a despicable crime, if true",

He CLEARLY said that the crime was despicable.

And, by CLEARLY stating "If true", he in no way assumes the soldiers involved are guilty.

Are you THAT desperate to bash Bush?

Looks like you are having a hard time comprehending English too. I stated earlier that we also qualified our statements with "if true" but that didn't satisfy the extremists and dittoheads here, they pounced on us and in so many words told us to STFU. Bush (with his statement) in no way assumed the soldier was innocent either!

President Bush projected his feelings ahead of time just in case the soldier was found guilty and that my friend you cannot deny.

"These are very serious charges and what the Iraqis must understand is that we will deal with these in a very transparent, upfront way," Bush said during an interview broadcast on CNN's "Larry King Live."

Why, you ask did President Bush want to prepare the people for a possible guilty verdict? Was it directed at and to prepare the Iraqi people? Did he possibly want to diffuse another embarrassing mess? Of course he did and yes, Rove probably told him that the soldier will most likly be tried and found guilty!

President Bush did not possibly taint the procedings using words such as "a despicable crime" in an alleged rape-murder for nothing you know, no way Jose! Bush was preparing the Iraqi people and appealing for calm by telling them that the American soldier will be held accountable and prosecuted to the full extent for his alleged "despicable crime".

Wake up will ya?

 

[Albanian Rebel]

Bush doesnt give a **** about this at all

 

[Goobieman]

Looks like you are having a hard time comprehending English too. I stated earlier that we also qualified our statements with "if true" but that didn't satisfy the extremists and dittoheads here, they pounced on us and in so many words told us to STFU. Bush (with his statement) in no way assumed the soldier was innocent either!

None of this speaks to what you said:

it looks to me that Bush is presuming the troops as guilty and dispicable!

Bush did NOT say the troops were despicable, he said the act was.
Bush's statement does NOT presume them guilty.

Back to Bizzarowurld with you.

 

[KidRocks]

None of this speaks to what you said:

it looks to me that Bush is presuming the troops as guilty and dispicable!

Bush did NOT say the troops were despicable, he said the act was.
Bush's statement does NOT presume them guilty.

Back to Bizzarowurld with you.

Oh, so you can differentiate between the troops and the act?

So, let me see if I'm following you, the act (if true) was despicable but the troops are not(also if the act true)? So if the troops are found guilty and convicted it's okay because the act, and only the act was dispicable, not the troops, right?

Because that my friend is what you are arguing and saying is true right now, that only the act is dispicable, not the troops that may have allegedly comitted the "act"!

Do you see how silly you sound?

 

[KidRocks]

I wonder how this is going to play out with the prime suspect being tried under civilian courts and the rest of the gang tried under military courts.







http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/07/09/soldiers.charged/index.html

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Four U.S. soldiers in Iraq are charged with participation in the "rape and murder of a young Iraqi woman and three members of her family," the U.S. military said Sunday.

The soldiers are "accused of rape and murder," the military said in a news release.

A fifth soldier is accused of dereliction of duty for failing to report the offenses.

All five are charged with conspiring with former Pfc. Steven D. Green to commit the crimes, the military said..

 

[KidRocks]

Upon reading this this horrible account of the story, and at the moment, I can only hope that the troops that committed this "dipicable act", (if true"), are hung by the balls so that they may feel some of the pain and terror they purposely inflicted on that young lady and her family.

And equally guilty, in my humble opinion, is President Bush for needlessly attacking Iraq and putting our troops in harms way. Iraq is a terrible and God-awful place for our troops to be right now and I am afraid that this situation is just the tip of the iceburg.

We didn't need this but President Bush choose to invade against worldwide opposition, it was his chioce and his choice alone, he is the Commander in Chief and only he could of issued the order to attack, only he!

Shame on you President Bush!











http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/news/14962449.htm

Report: Rape victim was afraid of U.S. soldiers

The young woman at the heart of an alleged atrocity by members of the U.S. military knew she had attracted the attention of the soldiers who manned the checkpoint near her home, neighbors say. And she didn't like it.

Neither did her family, and they made a plan to protect her, their neighbors told reporters over the weekend.

But it wasn't enough.

Abeer Qasim Hamza is the young woman identified in news reports as the alleged target of Steven D. Green, the former Army private who was charged Monday with her rape and the killing of her and three other family members in March.

A U.S. military official has described the attack on the family's home south of Baghdad as "totally premeditated," telling The Associated Press that the soldiers apparently "studied" the family for about a week before carrying out the raid...

 

[RightinNYC]

Looks like you are having a hard time comprehending English too. I stated earlier that we also qualified our statements with "if true" but that didn't satisfy the extremists and dittoheads here, they pounced on us and in so many words told us to STFU.

How about you show evidence of that?

 

[Joby]

This is an idiotic thread that has no pointr other than some liberal, and a rather mediocre one, trying to bash bush on something and is so stubborn he can't even argue after about a post and a half of debate.

anyway, the title looked interesting and I was kind of let down

 

[KidRocks]

How about you show evidence of that?

Gee, I'd love to, got a minute? I'll be right back!

 

[drobforever]

This is an idiotic thread that has no pointr other than some liberal, and a rather mediocre one, trying to bash bush on something and is so stubborn he can't even argue after about a post and a half of debate.

I guess Michael Savage must be a mediocre liberal cause he did the exact same thing.

 

[Joby]

I guess Michael Savage must be a mediocre liberal cause he did the exact same thing.

No, he's a mediocre talk show host

 

[Goobieman]

Oh, so you can differentiate between the troops and the act?

Yes. You can't?
I guess that's a flaw you need to work on.

In any event, he CLEARLY said the act, not those that committed them, were despicible - and your argument to the contrary hasn't a leg to stand on.

 

[drobforever]

No, he's a mediocre talk show host

Yes and according to you a liberal one. :lol:

 

[KidRocks]

Yes. You can't?
I guess that's a flaw you need to work on.

In any event, he CLEARLY said the act, not those that committed them, were despicible - and your argument to the contrary hasn't a leg to stand on.

But... the act was comitted by the soldier, how in the world can you seperate the two. A rapist is a rapist, a murderor is a murderor. A rape is comitted by a rapist, a murder is comitted by a murderor. The two go hand in hand and both are "dispicable"!

What you are saying is that the "act" comitted by the soldier is dipicable but that the soldier himself is not necessarily so, that in fact the soldier is still honorable, trustworthy and basically still a 'good' guy.

Following that logic then Hitler was overall a good man and it was just his "acts" that were dipicable. According to you that is. Is that true?

 

[Goobieman]

But... the act was comitted by the soldier, how in the world can you seperate the two. A rapist is a rapist, a murderor is a murderor. A rape is comitted by a rapist, a murder is comitted by a murderor. The two go hand in hand and both are "dispicable"!

There's the old adage:
Love the sinner, hate the sin.

Fact of the matter is, Bush said the act was despicable, and, for some reason, you're desperately trying to equate that to him saying the soldier is despicable. In this, you have nothing to stand on -- the text of his statement is clear -- and any argument you make in this regard can be easily countered by a 1st grader.

What you are saying is that the "act" comitted by the soldier is dipicable but that the soldier himself is not necessarily so, that in fact the soldier is still honorable, trustworthy and basically still a 'good' guy.

This is called a strawman, and is a sign of not knowing how to create a sound argument or that the author is very desperate. Show where anyone, including myself, said that the soldier is still honorable, trustworthy and basically still a 'good' guy.

Never mind that until he is proven guilty, the assumption (for normal people) is that he is innocent -- and so, if he were an honorable, trustworthy and basically a 'good' guy before this accusation, then he still is after the accusation.

Following that logic then Hitler was overall a good man and it was just his "acts" that were dipicable. According to you that is. Is that true?

Your "logic" here is flawed, as demonstrated above.

 

[cherokee]

I swear some people here pick nat chit out of pepper.

If any solider commits a crime and is found guilty they will be punished!
And that don’t NOT exclude the Death Penalty.
Period end of story.

Unlike the sobs who like to set off bombs every f**king day in Iraq and kill innocent civilians. Where is all the hype about those sob’s? Hmm?

 

[KidRocks]

There's the old adage:
Love the sinner, hate the sin.

Fact of the matter is, Bush said the act was despicable, and, for some reason, you're desperately trying to equate that to him saying the soldier is despicable. In this, you have nothing to stand on -- the text of his statement is clear -- and any argument you make in this regard can be easily countered by a 1st grader.


This is called a strawman, and is a sign of not knowing how to create a sound argument or that the author is very desperate. Show where anyone, including myself, said that the soldier is still honorable, trustworthy and basically still a 'good' guy.

Never mind that until he is proven guilty, the assumption (for normal people) is that he is innocent -- and so, if he were an honorable, trustworthy and basically a 'good' guy before this accusation, then he still is after the accusation.

Your "logic" here is flawed, as demonstrated above.

Nonsense, President Bush was obviously being "politically-correct" and cute by addressing the "act" and not the "actor". Are you being politically-correct? Of course you are. Talk about addages!

LOL...and I love it!

 

[Goobieman]

Nonsense,

Show me, specifically, how each of my points are "nonsense".

 

[drobforever]

Show me, specifically, how each of my points are "nonsense".

I don't think your points are nonsense, but you're definitely avoiding the issue here. e.g. If your son is alleged to be gay and you tell him that "being gay is a despicable crime, if true," do you think your son will think that you're just talking about the act and have no negative opinion about him?