This is huge news in Europe and the middle east & less big news here (what a suprise).

Photo's of US troops abusing, sexually and torture with electricity of Iraqi prisoners.

This is an absolute total disgrace. As if the image of the US wasn't bad enough - now the rest of the world is going to think we are inhumane barbarians.

The Iraq war has turned into a complete and utter mess. Although I have always been a Bush supporter - my view is now that this idiot needs to be replaced. Kerry is crap - but Bush is a bloody moron.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/04/29/1083224523783.html

Absolutely it is. It's disgusting.

Particularily bad was the photo of the one prisoner being forced to give the other prisoner some head.

And the best part is their defense -- that they hadn't received any training on how to handle prisoners. WTF??? Training??? How about the training their parents gave them for 18 years or more called common sense and decency.

I say, turn the offenders over to the Iraquis for trial and punishment. Guarantee it will end this crap forever.

On Edit: One more thing -- these guards are claiming the CIA and FBI encouraged them to treat the prisoners in such a fashion and even told them to keep up the good work. Heads need to roll on this one and not just the guards.

Dop

Great. This is the perfect oppurtunity for the anti-American media to show the world how awful ALL U.S. soldiers are, not just six.

It might only be 6 - but they obviously felt ok about doing it. If it was 1 then you could call them a bad apple - 6 on the other hand says it was condoned. Here's guessing that the Military has some big problems if they allow this to happen.

This is about the worst PR the US could get.

If Bush was the CEO of a company - he would have been fired by now with a severance package for this mess. Talk about complete incompetance.

Digusting. Appalling. Humiliating for the U.S.

This is the 6 that were caught? Do you think this is the only instance?

THese soldiers do not see Iraqi's as humans. This is conditioned through their training. WE are seeing a symptom of a much greater problem.

Originally posted by Pepper
This is the 6 that were caught? Do you think this is the only instance?

THese soldiers do not see Iraqi's as humans. This is conditioned through their training. WE are seeing a symptom of a much greater problem.

I agree

Originally posted by Pepper
This is the 6 that were caught? Do you think this is the only instance?

THese soldiers do not see Iraqi's as humans. This is conditioned through their training. WE are seeing a symptom of a much greater problem.


comepletely agree.

I know this is already posted...but here is a better in-depth coverage link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4855930/

Now if I am correct, I believe Bush’s reason (after Iraq not have WMD’s) is to “liberate” the Iraqis. The funny thing is, we have killed over 10,000 civilians (www.iraqbodycount.net) and we are torturing them?

If you look at the facts, we are becoming just like another Saddam in Iraq. We kill the civilians, and then torture them.

Also Iraq is in ruins, and the people are without power, food and basic life necessities (just like when Saddam was in office). The majority of Iraqi’s want us out of Iraq for we are doing a horrible job, (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm..._ea/iraq_poll_2)

…unbelievable, we are becoming the man we hate so much....

This proves to me and most Americans that this war is a joke and is out of control and Bush has made a huge mistake in going into Iraq almost alone.

Practice What You Preach Bush! Saving Civilians From Torture, To Torture Them Again Is Wrong!

Originally posted by DrewM
If Bush was the CEO of a company - he would have been fired by now with a severance package for this mess. Talk about complete incompetance.

You're absolutely correct, although I don't necessarily agree that such a CEO should be fired. The higher up you are the less able you are to monitor the day to day activities of all of your "employees." If Bush is guilty of anything, and frankly I think he might be, it's of relying far too much on inexperienced and/or undertrained soldiers and reservists to do the jobs that should be left up to specialists or more experienced soliders.

Kerry is crap - but Bush is a bloody moron.

Depressing. I haven't lived in the States long, mind if I ask you when the last time Americans generally loved their own president was? It's something you wouldn't know if you don't actually live in the country... Also, when do you think Americans will generally love their president again?

I really dont think presiden'ts are meant to be loved. they make all these really important decisions, and someone's gonna hate them them for it.

the soldiers who did this will go to prison for a long time. Bush wasnt there torturing the men. for those who already hated the mission and bush this is just going to ush them into the looney side of "dissent". Soon there will be lines of people at the airports spitting on the returning troops as they get off the planes. the US troops are monsters, and its OK to discgrace monsters. The line of thinking that you cant condemn a whole group of people by the actions of a few will not apply in this case. its a sad day for everyone. If anything was ever like vietnam it is the way our own pewople feel about our troops and their mission. not the fighting on hte battlefiueld, but the fighting at home. thanks a lot ted kennedy.

thanks a lot ted kennedy.

Another "liberal" plot Trav? :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Dio Seijuro
Depressing. I haven't lived in the States long, mind if I ask you when the last time Americans generally loved their own president was? It's something you wouldn't know if you don't actually live in the country... Also, when do you think Americans will generally love their president again?

I'd have to say that John F. Kennedy was the last president that the public "loved".

As far as when it might happen again is anybody's guess. This country has become very divided along party/ideological lines and it seems to be getting worse. I think it's partly the fault of the parties, and partly the fault of the media.

Originally posted by Vilepagan
Another "liberal" plot Trav? :rolleyes:

pagan pagan pagan, wake up my friend. when osama and fat head al sadr use kennedy words line for line against our operations somethings not right

Originally posted by Travh20
the soldiers who did this will go to prison for a long time. Bush wasnt there torturing the men. for those who already hated the mission and bush this is just going to ush them into the looney side of "dissent". Soon there will be lines of people at the airports spitting on the returning troops as they get off the planes. the US troops are monsters, and its OK to discgrace monsters. The line of thinking that you cant condemn a whole group of people by the actions of a few will not apply in this case. its a sad day for everyone. If anything was ever like vietnam it is the way our own pewople feel about our troops and their mission. not the fighting on hte battlefiueld, but the fighting at home. thanks a lot ted kennedy.

Yes, they will go to prison for a long time…but still what’s your point? I’m sure this is occurring elsewhere in Iraq as well. Spitting on the troops? I think not. I respect the troops, but all I’m trying to convey is I’m sure these aren’t the only troops who are doing this. Which leads me to believe, we are acting no better then Saddam and his regime. I respect the troops, and Trav the republicans are so funny. They think if you are Anti-War you don’t respect the troops. And that is the funniest thing of all, because it is just a plain lie.

well, if you call suspecting the entire military of being no better then saddams regime respect, I think our men could do without it.

The fact this it did occur, and I’m sure it still is occurring in other areas, leads me to believe we are not making Iraq any better then when Saddam was in office. Their lands are in ruins, 10,000 plus of the civilians are gone, their schools, office buildings gone, and the majority of Iraqi’s want us out. Fighting, and killing is everywhere. We are then torturing the civilians, and I’m sure more then in just this incident. We are doing a HORRIBLE job occupying Iraq.

Well since the liberal media does not report the successes in Iraq it is no wonder people think we are doing a horrible job. Hospitals, schools, utilities are all functioning at prewar levels or above thanks to the reconstruction effort of the coalition. But that is not as news worthy as the body count.

Originally posted by The Republican
Well since the liberal media does not report the successes in Iraq it is no wonder people think we are doing a horrible job. Hospitals, schools, utilities are all functioning at prewar levels or above thanks to the reconstruction effort of the coalition. But that is not as news worthy as the body count.

If we are doing such a good job, why did we have the largest death toll, out of any month in this war, just last month? If we are doing a good job, why do the majority of Iraqi's want America out of Iraq? If we are doing such a good job, then why did we just have prisoners tortured, in the past few weeks? All of this leads me, and the majority of the world to believe that America is, indeed handling Iraq poorly.

Also, hospitals, schools, utilities are not functioning at prewar levels, they are suffering.

Originally posted by Liberal 4 Life
If we are doing such a good job, why did we have the largest death toll, out of any month in this war, just last month? If we are doing a good job, why do the majority of Iraqi's want America out of Iraq? If we are doing such a good job, then why did we just have prisoners tortured, in the past few weeks? All of this leads me, and the majority of the world to believe that America is, indeed handling Iraq poorly.

Also, hospitals, schools, utilities are not functioning at prewar levels, they are suffering.

You need to pay attention to the news. Iraqis do not want America out. They want the occupation to end and for the Iraqis to take control of their government which is to happen July 1. The majority of Iraqis want the Americans to stay to provide stability until a time the IRaqis can do it themselves.

And good rebuttal to what I said about schools hospitals and the Iraqi infrastructure. Had you watched both Fox News and MSNBC last week you would have seen reports on both networks supporting my claim.

Originally posted by The Republican
You need to pay attention to the news. Iraqis do not want America out. They want the occupation to end and for the Iraqis to take control of their government which is to happen July 1. The majority of Iraqis want the Americans to stay to provide stability until a time the IRaqis can do it themselves.

And good rebuttal to what I said about schools hospitals and the Iraqi infrastructure. Had you watched both Fox News and MSNBC last week you would have seen reports on both networks supporting my claim.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=535&ncid=535&e=3&u=/ap/20040429/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_poll_2

We are doing a good job, I take it...

not to long ago i predicted that there would be an iraqi Tet offensive about this time, leading up to the transfer of power, and here it is, dont act so suprised. anyone with a brain knew that in the months leading up to the transfer there would be desperate attacks to derail the hand over. sure enough the leftists acted just as expected and cried on que for the terrorists.

Originally posted by Travh20
not to long ago i predicted that there would be an iraqi Tet offensive about this time, leading up to the transfer of power, and here it is, dont act so suprised. anyone with a brain knew that in the months leading up to the transfer there would be desperate attacks to derail the hand over. sure enough the leftists acted just as expected and cried on que for the terrorists.

Crying

CNN reporting that mercenaries are not subject to civilian law, Iraqui law or the UCMJ (doh) so none of them can be prosecuted for any part in the prison abuses. Further, a pentagon general is recommending the punishment for the military offenders as being a letter of reprimand. No charges, no trials.

This figures -- they need to get this swept under the rug pronto and it looks like they are doing just that.

Dop

dop, these people will do hard time at levanworth. they will be made an example of. no matter what you think the military does not tolerate this type of behavior. you and your "pentagon general" as a source. thats like saying college "student"

Originally posted by Travh20
pagan pagan pagan, wake up my friend. when osama and fat head al sadr use kennedy words line for line against our operations somethings not right

Trav, I don't think you can blame Ted Kennedy for the fact that his words are being used by someone else. We have the right to speak freely in this country and that means that there will always be dissenting voices.

What, in your opinion is not right about this?

Not according to General Ricardo S. Sanchez, the top gen in Iraq.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61989-2004May3.html

Seems though the officers involved in the ongoing prisoner abuse investigations will receive a reprimand and the enlistees will do the prison time.

Same thing happened in Viet Nam. This isn't anything new.

Dop

On Edit: It's official -- NYT just reported that 7 of the accused have received a reprimand for the prison abuse. Now move along, there's nothing to see here.

pagan, the war is happening now, men are dying while kennedy flaps his bloated lips on the senate attacking the commander in chief. he is partisan beyond what would be considered healthy dissent, he borders more on sedetion. like I said, al qeada could not buy a better PR firm then the demcratic party. there is no need for al qeada propaganda in america when you got byrd and kennedy doing it for them. calling the president a coward and liar, attacking the effort being made by our troops, what kennedy has done has not helped the war effort , tahts for sure.

Trav, anyone has he rioght to say anything they wnat about the president. it's called freedom of speech, and it applies to what you disagree with, not just what you agree with. criticism of the governemnt is really important, especially when they are doing really huge things like going to war. if the president can't govern properly while people are criticizing him, he should not have been elcetd, becasue there will always be people criticizing the government.

why cant you see that there is a proper time for that and a time to shut the F up? I dont give a crap when poepe call the prez a moron and idiot, but when they attack the war in a purely political way it makes me sick. dont lecture me on freedom so speech. its easy to use the rights you were giving, but to use them agaisnt the people who give them to you is a slap in the face

Trav, I criticize the fact that we are at war, not the people who are fighting it.

I have no problem with the U.S. attacking Afghanistan after 9-11, but the Bush league constantly refers to Iraq as the "front line in the war on terror". Bullshit. When he was campaigning he was against "nation building", but now he's for it. For Bush the war in Iraq has turned into a political liability, and that's fine with me. The kicker for me was that farcical landing on the aircraft carrier and parading around in the flight suit. If I were a Navy pilot I'd be disgusted with his antics.

Trav, war is politics. nobody ever attacked the actual soldiers, past the handful caught abusing prisoners recently. bush didn't give me freedom of speech, the constituion does. there';s absoltuely no reason why people shouldn't express their political views, especially if they are involved in governemnt. we elct people like Ted Kennedy to be vocal about politics and make things happen within the governemtn. if you want a country where free speech isn't universal, move somewhere else.

how come you cant see that bush and the military are one? ever heard the term commander in chief? when you attack bush, you are attacking the military. you act as if the military are a bunch of idiots who dont know right from wrong.

no, they are people trained to follow orders. it is their job to listen to commanders. I don't fault them for it, becuse it is out of their control. Bush controls the miliary, along with genrals, and whoever else plans what they are going to do. Bush and the military are not one in the same.

Trav, Bush is a white male. So if I attack him, am I attacking all white males?

Originally posted by Travh20
how come you cant see that bush and the military are one? ever heard the term commander in chief?When you attack bush, you are attacking the military.

No Trav, Bush and the military are NOT the same. As a matter of law, Bush is NOT in the military, no matter how many flight suits he parades around in. The Constitution guarantees that the military is commanded by a civilian.

you act as if the military are a bunch of idiots who dont know right from wrong.

No, just Bush.

well, obviously you people dont know much about the chain of command

Good point Vile ... and that's exactly why the top gun act on the carrier in full uniform was a bad idea.

U.S. presidents try real hard not to wear a military uniform so as to not look like the country is a military dictatorship. Of course some national leaders have worn the uniform -- a couple come to mind -- Mao and Fidel. LMAO.

"Mission demolished"

Dop

I think Bush is doing the best he can for our country given the circumstances.
What I like about Bush is that he has a strength about him and he goes in and does the job.
He essentially has to win votes and still knowing how many people oppose him. He's doing what needs to be done to ensure our survival and our freedom. It all comes back to us and the safety of America. Everyone is giving him a hard time about IRAQ but really he has to do a really shitty job. Clean up and Help innocent people who live in a country that was influenced by a man who has no value for human Life. We are going to encounter problems, As we do in everything in life but we can't stand back and watch IRAQ appoint another dictator like saddam. Honestly, Can we afford another 9/11? Do we want another 9/11? No so essentially we need to show our strength, Our convictions and stand up for ourselves and those who are weaker.
We are dealing with a country that has uncivilized ways and will kill 15 of there own to kill one American.
We have to take charge and we have to step in. Heaven forbid the day IRAQ becomes a super power. We have the common sense and we have the heart to match and we need to united together and protect those who need help and also re-enforce that we are strong & proud nation. Who will fight for not only ourselves but our neighboring countries.
Our Soldiers believe in what they are fighting for, if they didn't they would not be there. The best we can do is support them and give them our appreciation. Right or wrong they are in there fighting for us, maintaining and controlling a situation in IRAQ that has been left unattended too for far to long. It's easy to have an opinion and pass judgment when we are comfortable in our lounge chairs watching it on TV. Really, what are we doing to insure that America is protected? That 9/11 won't happen again? Nothing.
The people who are and who are betting there lives on what they believe in deserve more than our criticism and our disrespect. Sucide bombers are everywhere in IRAQ. Are boys need to have there wits about them and show some kind of confidence and strength, even though you know they are scared and homesick. So many people believe their's a better way and their could be. If their is then they should put in into action and do something. "The spark of one can ignite the fire in the heart of many"
Everyone is all talk and no action and the ones who take action should be respected for getting out there and fighting for what they believe in.

Just sharing my thoughts.. I do have them occassionally LOL:hitout:

the "mission" was to topple saddam, we did that. End of major military oeprations means no more tank divisions maneuvering through the desert. in that same speech bush also said that there would still be fighiting and dying. I dont remember him ever saying the war was over and no one would die anymore. but of course the speech isnt whats important to you, its that he was in a flight suit. some of the things you come up with to trash this guy are ridiculous. He flew in on a navy jet. when you fly in a jet there are certain things you have to wear under the SOP, there is a uniform that incorperates all th equipment needed to fly in a military jet, its called a flight suit. Would you rather him wear a 3 piece suit? he didnt make the speech in the flight suit. this whole flight suit thing has been blown way out of proportion. the fact that you hang your hat on it shows that after accusations of lies and conspiracy theorys, you got nothing.

I'm willing to bet that if Rove had his way, there is no way in hell he would have let Karen Hughes talk GWB into that top gun stunt which was only one of the problems that day. The other being they disclaimed responsibility for the 'mission accomplished' banner, was caught in their lies and had to restate their position and finally tell the truth that they indeed placed it there.

My question -- doesn't this constant lying and being caught embarrass these people?

I would think, by now, this administration would realize it is much easier to tell the truth and quit trying to bullshit the american public. Some of us can actually think on our feet and see right through the bullcrap.

Dop

On Edit: The Boston newspapers are now reporting the 4 civilians involved in the prisoner abuse will not be prosecuted. No charges will be brought against them.

Wanna know why? They know what went down, have the names and the videos to prove it. They especially could bring out what happened in the womens and childrens wings of the prison which BTW is the next leg of this story to go public soon. They also know about what really happened that day the 22 prisoners were killed and 51 wounded in the prison from mortar shelling and not one single scratch to any of the guards (You gotta love that one) .

IOW they could take down this entire administration.

Will the american public and the Iraquis give these civilians a pass?

I suspect so -- after all, there are people to kick off the island and there are nascar races to watch. You know, the important stuff.

what would you do without karl rove?

take down the entire adminstration? boy that would make you day wouldnt it dop? you know you cant win in an election so you have wet dreams about kerry just being appointed. your a joke

Originally posted by Travh20
how come you cant see that bush and the military are one? ever heard the term commander in chief? when you attack bush, you are attacking the military. you act as if the military are a bunch of idiots who dont know right from wrong.

Come on now - this is rubbish. Bush happens to be commander in chief because he is the president and that's how it works, but he is not the military - he is the civilian leadership of the miltary. You can attack Bush, or any president, and it not be an attack on the Military.

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing
I'm willing to bet that if Rove had his way, there is no way in hell he would have let Karen Hughes talk GWB into that top gun stunt which was only one of the problems that day. The other being they disclaimed responsibility for the 'mission accomplished' banner, was caught in their lies and had to restate their position and finally tell the truth that they indeed placed it there.

My question -- doesn't this constant lying and being caught embarrass these people?

I would think, by now, this administration would realize it is much easier to tell the truth and quit trying to bullshit the american public. Some of us can actually think on our feet and see right through the bullcrap.

Dop


What is wrong with a former National Guard pilot flying out to a carrier? Please tell me...as far as I am concerned there is nothing wrong with it and nothing you say or do will change my mind.

The Mission Accomplished banner was to reflect that major combat opperations were over in Iraq...which at the time the banner was placed was true. So please tell me how that is a lie?

Since this administration does not lie and does not get cought in lies why should it be embarrassing. I think the bigger question is how much egg do the Dems need to keep throwing on their face before they get it that the American people do not like their partisan politics? I wonder what the Dems are going to do, and how they are going to reinvent themselves when Bush gets reelected and the GOP remains in control of the House and Senate?

They did lie about the banner when they claimed it was not ordered to be put up by the White House. They later took back that statement and said "yes, the white house put up the banner"

Now, how is that not lying?

Dop

The carrier thing was a big PR stunt - that I bet any money they wish they could take back.

Beyond the fact that there was absolutely no need for him to fly out to it in a navy jet (on the logic that it was too far to get to by marine 1 helicopter - which was crap). They had to turn the carrier around so the TV camera's didn't pick up the california coastline closeby.

The aim was a photo-op to be used re-election time, but instead it will work against them.

I must admit - I thought it was pretty cool at the time, but that was back when I supported and had faith in Bush. Now is different - I think he has screwed things up so bad - he has to go & the carrier stunt now looks like a pathetic joke.

OK, again, there is such a thing as a chain of command, and guess who is at the top of the chain of coomand? in times of war the pesident and the miltary are one. Why do you think there used to be a thing called the waters edge? the democrats have gone completly 100% partisan and recklesly throw around accusations and insults that are being used by our enemies to bolster the moral of thier troops. It is sad and pathetic. if our enemies saw a seamless wall of solidarity they may not be as inclined to fight on, but everytime kennedy or byrd flap their gums and attack our president it shows them that maybe they can win this thing if they get the democrats enought to gripe about.

Originally posted by The Republican
What is wrong with a former National Guard pilot flying out to a carrier? Please tell me...as far as I am concerned there is nothing wrong with it and nothing you say or do will change my mind.


What is wrong with it? Plenty.

1. The administration lied, and said he had to fly on a jet because it was too far out to be reached by helicopter.

2. As drew pointed out they had to turn the ship around to avoid seeing the city's skyline during Bush's photo-op. The return of the ship to port was delayed so Bush could pull his stunt.

3. It costs an estimated $3 million dollars a day to operate an Aircraft Carrier Battle Group, remember we're not talking about just delaying one ship. A typical Carrier Battle Group consists of a Carrier, 2 Guided Missile Cruisers, a Guided Missile Destroyer, a Destroyer, a Frigate, 2 Attack Submarines, and a supply/replenishment ship. How much taxpayer money was spent on what can only be viewed as a campaign stunt?

4. It's dangerous for even a trained pilot to land on an aircraft carrier. Why did the president needlessly endanger himself during wartime?

5. The Commander-in-Chief is a civilian for a reason and it's just wrong for the President to appear in military garb.

I have no problem with him flying out to the carrier to greet the troops and give them a "well done" speech, but he should have taken Marine 1, not fly in on a jet like some cowboy.

Trav - the President is not part of the military - period.

He is the civilian leader of the military. By your logic - is the President a member of the FBI, INS, CIA....etc - no he isn't.

The logic that if one attacks the President you are attacking the military is laughable. The President is an elected official - the Military are not elected - they are the Military.

And another thing - we are not at 'war' - no war has ever been declared by congress. We have a problem with terrorists, that no doubt will get worse because of the past year.

man you guys are a bunch of downers. If I only listened to you I would think we were going down now. not later, but now. Look, I understand you dont like the president and his flying onto a carrier. but he is not the first to do it, nor is he the first to don military "garb". you both need to relax. and I am still trying to figure out what you mean by "turn the carrier around" so as not to see the shoreline.

Originally posted by Travh20
man you guys are a bunch of downers. If I only listened to you I would think we were going down now. not later, but now. Look, I understand you dont like the president and his flying onto a carrier. but he is not the first to do it, nor is he the first to don military "garb". you both need to relax. and I am still trying to figure out what you mean by "turn the carrier around" so as not to see the shoreline.

The Whitehouse originally said that the carrier was too far out to sea to be reached by helicopter, thus necessitating Bush's jet landing. In order for the shoreline not to show up during his photo-op they turned the ship around.

BTW, what other president ever staged a carrier landing?

well I dont like the idea of wasting a bunch of money fo rit either, but why would you have to turn the ship around, coulnd the camera man just walk to the other side? sounds knit picky to me. anyway heres a picture for you, I know it will shot down but what the hell.

http://www.nationalreview.com/images/pic_clinton_truthsquad5-7.jpg

I've got no problem with the President wearing a military garb for a press shot. Wearing camoflage doesn't make you part of the military. I;ve got no problem with a president visiting a carrier.

The carrier - they deliberately turned it around so when Bush was on the deck coming into land - from the press pit on the deck, the photo's did not show the coastline and give the appearance they were well out to sea when they were only 30 miles from shore.

All politicians do this kind of stuff - it's normal, but there were a few blatant lies and manipulations built into this one. A good politician should at least appear to be sincere.

Washington Post article
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0507-07.htm

Trav, did Clinton fly in on a jet, or did he take a helicopter?

Should the President needlessly endanger himself?

By any reasonable persons standard - the carrier stunt was that - a cheap stunt designed only to benefit Bush and cost the taxpayers millions. Bloody disgraceful really.

I'm sure you will find a way to defend it Trav.

I dont care. I am not saying it was right, i am saying it isnt a big a deal as you all say it was. the only reason you are making such a big deal about it is becasue of who it was. I dont like publicity stunts, especially exspensive ones. I do find it funny that as soon as I posted that clinto picture you changed your tune dramatically though

Originally posted by Travh20
I dont care. I am not saying it was right, i am saying it isnt a big a deal as you all say it was. the only reason you are making such a big deal about it is becasue of who it was. I dont like publicity stunts, especially exspensive ones. I do find it funny that as soon as I posted that clinto picture you changed your tune dramatically though

In what way did I change my tune dramatically?

not you pagan, drew

Originally posted by Travh20
I dont care. I am not saying it was right, i am saying it isnt a big a deal as you all say it was. the only reason you are making such a big deal about it is becasue of who it was. I dont like publicity stunts, especially exspensive ones. I do find it funny that as soon as I posted that clinto picture you changed your tune dramatically though

I'm not aware of any tune changing. The message is consistent.

I too don't think it was big deal - we are just discussing if it was right or wrong - it doesn't matter who it was that did it.

Glad to see you now agree that it was a cheap pulicity stunt - not worthy of ANY president.