Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Scotty McClellan: Quran abuses have been taken OUT OF CONTEXT

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 03:22 PM
Original message
Scotty McClellan: Quran abuses have been taken OUT OF CONTEXT
Edited on Sat Jun-04-05 03:26 PM by Bluebear
Evidetly you had to be there to understand how urine climbed through the air vents to 'splash' on the detainees. Meanwhile Bush is clearing more brush in Crawford.

===

CRAWFORD, Texas - A Pentagon report detailing incidents in which U.S. guards at Guantanamo Bay prison desecrated the Quran is creating another public relations challenge for President Bush.

Two weeks ago, the White House was thrown on the defensive by a now-retracted Newsweek report alleging that U.S. interrogators at the detention center for alleged terrorists in Cuba had flushed a Quran down a toilet....

On Saturday, a day after the Pentagon described a series of cases of U.S. personnel mishandling the Quran, the White House downplayed the issue.

"It is unfortunate that some have chosen to take out of context a few isolated incidents by a few individuals," presidential spokesman Scott McClellan said in a statement.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050604/ts_nm/security_guantanamo_bush_dc_1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ewagner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 03:25 PM
Response to Original message
1. So exactly
in what context are we supposed to take these incidents?

Scotty McMoonface?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anarchy1999 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 03:25 PM
Response to Original message
2. Note to Scotty: Resign like your predecessor, Ari F. It will be a wise
career move, other option, stick with it and go down with Bush Inc., you little darling sychophant!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 03:26 PM
Response to Original message
3. OMFG. Umm, Scotty, exactly in what context would these acts be considered
okay?!?!

jeebus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JerseygirlCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 07:08 PM
Response to Reply #3
20. That's what I was wondering, too! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anarchy1999 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
4. "out of context.... a few individuals...." how many times have we already
heard this before. The rest of the world is getting tired of "our" few bad apples rotting the rest of the barrel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
5. "Hey! We did the same to the Bible & the Constitution! Quitcherbeefin!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MGKrebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 03:28 PM
Response to Original message
6. Well, he's telling the truth for once.
They were taken out of the context that they weren't supposed to come out at all!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
burythehatchet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 03:30 PM
Response to Original message
7. first of all the word is now "mishandling"
here one example of mishandling as heard on Fux news: Apparently a guard left an interrogation in order to go urinate. He happened to urinate right next to a vent, and his urine got sucked in through the vent and splashed on the Qu-ran.

We have the worst fucking luck.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Those vents must have hurricane force air conditioning
Of course they do, we want our detainees comfortable in humid Cuba. The air pressure is sufficient to transport piss across a room.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eleny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #9
19. That's how stupid they think their "base" is
Their base will believe anything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Straight Shooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. "the urine got sucked in through the vent"? Pul-eeez
Edited on Sat Jun-04-05 04:29 PM by Straight Shooter
That has got to be the most stupid, asinine, ridiculous, childish, pathetic excuse I have ever heard.

We thought bush was being stupid with his "disassembling" remarks, but I think Scotty needs to wear the dunce cap for a while.

edit: typo. I admit my mistakes :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. every see the "Rosemary Woods" twist?
(About as plausable)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BringEmOn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 08:24 PM
Response to Reply #14
32. Well, there's been a lot of urine suckin' goin' on in the WH, lately.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wallwriter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 03:31 PM
Response to Original message
8. Really. Taken *in* context, urine on the Quran is
not a problem at all.:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Igel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 06:55 PM
Response to Reply #8
17. That's what one of the Muslim inmates apparently thought.
Maybe the guard was just trying to emulate a Muslim.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 03:52 PM
Response to Original message
10. That is just about the stupidest thing Scotty has said so far..but there
is still time for him to outdo himself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. He is not the sharpest knife in the drawer is he?
One would think that the equally dim W would want someone a little more quick on his feet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 04:16 PM
Response to Original message
12. The context of these incidents
Edited on Sat Jun-04-05 04:22 PM by Jack Rabbit
The context of these incidents is the way the Bush regime has chosen to wage a war on terror.

First of all, the very term war on terror suggests a war designed not to be won. We are not fighting a war against specific terrorists; there can be no rational measure of success. This is a war against a tactic. Instead of resolving to arrest murderers, which would be a practical goal, the regime has promised to wipe out murder, which is not. This allows war to perpetuate, and with any real and imagined emergency powers the chief executive may have to wage war. It is more likely a pretext for tyranny.

Second, the term is dishonest. Invading Iraq had nothing to do with fighting either the tactics of terror or specific terrorists. Saddam had neither a working relationship with terrorists nor any weapons of terror to give or sell. It was colonial piracy, pure and simple. The invasion of Iraq only became a part of the war on terror afterward, when some Islamists chose terror as a tactic to resist the foreign occupation and the colonial rape of their country. The Downing Street document shows that Bush and members of his regime were not concerned about facts, that they were probably aware that facts contradicted their case against Iraq, but that they were determined to make facts and intelligence fit the pre-determined policy of regime change. In other words, they lied and dissembled (that means didn't tell the truth).

Third, we have the Gonzales memos (here in pdf format). These show that from the outset violations of the Geneva Conventions and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment were to be the order of the day. Mr. Gonzales' memoranda is less a legal justification of what the regime is doing by maintaining a network of gulags and of what goes on inside them than an outline of dissembling written in legalese. All one has to do to make it legal is to say the President ordered it, and he is above the law, especially in time of war; this is nonsense. If one assert the right of detainees as prisoners of war, then all one has to do is assert that they are not prisoners of war but something else and that all that is required to call them something else is the President's say so; this is also nonsense and the Third Geneva Convention explicitly says that a battlefield detainee is to be regarded as a prisoner of war until a court of law (not an executive) determines otherwise. Finally, the Gonzales memos define torture in such a way as to say that nothing is torture unless the torturer says its torture; this is clearly nonsense.

So, the context is that a bunch of dissembling, sadistic tyrants bent on world domination are telling us that the situation is not as bad as what some would have us believe, and we are just to take their word for it. We don't need an independent world body looking into the matter, they say, because their word is good enough.

Yeah, right. Just like it was when they said Saddam had a vast biochemical arsenal that should be obvious to anyone who looks and that independent weapons inspectors weren't needed and couldn't prove anything because they were blind anyway. Those were willful lies. Are we supposed to believe them now?

Bush and his neoconservative aide are liars. They are war criminals. They are torturers. It is long past time to start treating them accordingly. If the United States is incapable or unwilling to bring these thugs to justice, then we must urge the United Nations to convene a war crimes tribunal, issue indictments and begin apprehending suspected war criminals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kelvin Mace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 04:20 PM
Response to Original message
13. How do you piss out of context?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #13
30. ROFL! Very succinct .....
oh how I wish the WH press corps would pose that exact question!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 05:33 PM
Response to Original message
15. Bump
:bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabasco Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 07:01 PM
Response to Original message
18. Their distortion and obfuscation tells the world one thing.
Our guards pissed on the prisoners and their Korans.

This is a further disgrace to the US that we do not admit our crimes but cover them up with fairy tales. How fkkking stupid do they think we are? As stupid as Bush voters apparently.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JerseygirlCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 07:10 PM
Response to Original message
21. How come when it was one incident that Newsweek -m
supposedly had wrong that caused riots and death it was a terrible big deal. Now it's many incidents and it's "a few isolated incidents" and taken all out of context?

How the hell does he pull that off?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 07:21 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. That makes sense
One would suppose that Mr. McClellan would say that if he were telling the truth. Crime investigators know that it is always easier to tell the truth because if questioned repeatedly one only need remember what happened rather then the lie that one made up on a prior occasion.

So, what does this inconsistency suggest?

Maybe McClellan should resort to an old master from a bygone era of White House dissembling, Ron Ziegler, the Nixon White House's press spokesman:

This is the operative statement. The others are inoperative.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JerseygirlCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. LOL. I'd forgotten that one. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 11:55 PM
Response to Reply #22
33. Blast from the past! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Protagoras Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 07:39 PM
Response to Original message
24. What is the proper Context for Splashing Urine Scotty?
nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yella_dawg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 07:46 PM
Response to Original message
25. Hey Scotty!
What exactly was the context? I wanna know so that when I wipe my ass with you tie, you'll understand that no insult was meant.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Darth_Ole Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. C.J. Cregg is my press secretary...
Scott McClellan is a joke...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kliljedahl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 08:06 PM
Response to Original message
27. had flushed a Quran down a toilet....?
From everything I've heard they don't have toilets, only buckets & latrines. Buckets & latrines don't flush,therefore nothing happened.

End of story, move along folks.


Keith’s Barbeque Central
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ogradda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 08:10 PM
Response to Original message
28. Well then just explain that.
How about"We peed on your Bible in a NICE way'? Or the ever popular "We wrote dirty words in your Holy Book as a sign of respect"? Just be honest, I'm sure they'll understand.:eyes: :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr.Green93 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 08:14 PM
Response to Original message
29. We Tortured their Holy Book
the fact can not be denied. This is an affront to Islam and all Muslims.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bpilgrim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-04-05 08:22 PM
Response to Original message
31. 'some people say' the same thing about Mr. Galloway and his TRUTH 2 POWER
SMACKDOWN the other day...

'some people say' that he's an EVIL DO'ER at worst, lover at best

'some people say' that we shouldn't listen to what he has to say

'some people say' that we should avoid the American/Israel hater at all coast

DU, as usual, says different

Thank GORE he 'invented' the INTERNETs :evilgrin:

peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-05 07:04 AM
Response to Original message
34. For the morning shift
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-05 07:05 AM
Response to Original message
35. Sure, Scotty.
And Jeff Gannon was delivering Girl Scout cookies. Right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-05-05 09:20 AM
Response to Original message
36. "When Jeffy splashes urine on me, I kinda LIKE it!" Scot Mc Clellan
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Mar 13th 2025, 06:31 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC