Bush: Iraqi prisoner abuse on Arab TV
Find a Conversation
| Wed, 05-05-2004 - 10:17am |
Bush to address Iraqi prisoner abuse on Arab TV.
President Bush will give interviews to two Arab television networks Wednesday about reports of U.S. military personnel abusing Iraqi prisoners, the White House said.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the 10-minute interviews with Al-Hurra, a U.S.-sponsored network, and Al Arabiya will take place about 10 a.m. ET (1400 GMT) in the Map Room at the White House.
"This is an opportunity for the president to speak directly to the people of Arab nations and let them know that the images that we all have seen are shameful and unacceptable," McClellan told reporters during a Bush campaign tour.
Referring to photographs that have surfaced showing Iraqi prisoners being abused McClellan said, "The images do not represent what America stands for, nor do they represent the high standards of conduct that the military is committed to uphold. The U.S. believes in treating all people with dignity and respect."
Asked why Bush would not meet with the Arab network Al-Jazeera, McClellan would only say the other two networks "reach a wide range of people in the Middle East."
McClellan said the actions of the accused soldiers at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq "do not represent what 99 percent of the men and women in the military stand for." (Full story)
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said Tuesday that he would take "all measures necessary" to ensure that abuse of detainees in Iraq "does not happen again."
Rumsfeld defended the Defense Department's handling of the matter in the face of congressional criticism, noting that a criminal investigation by the Army was under way and publicly disclosed three months before what he called "deeply disturbing" photographs were broadcast last week.
"This is a serious problem, and it's something the department is addressing," he said at a Pentagon news briefing. "The system works. The system works."
Rumsfeld said the criminal investigation was one of six launched since January.
More..............
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/05/05/iraq.abuse.main/index.html


Pages
Yes it is the same man, Micheal Moore. I don't know what part of his book, you would say was half truth. Yes he ridiculed Bush, but then who hasn't? The part that I read regarding Bush's involvement in the vote rigging to enable him to become president, was not a half truth. The part that mentions Bush's involvement with the neo-conservative's, was not an half truth. Look up on the internet, and see what the neo-conservative's plans were. They wanted world domination, and was willing to abandon all international rules (including the Geneva Convention)to get it! The hallmark of the neo-conservatives thinking has been their belief that the U.S. should project both political and military dominance in the post-Cold War world.
Maybe Micheal Moore did make money out of his own political statements, but his best seller made a lot of people aware that thier President, was a dangerous idiot.
Well I have known people who read it and thought the opposite and it opened their eyes more towards the other way. Now they truely believe Michael Moore is the IDIOT!
2) I quoted Pat Buchanan because I thought he might be someone, as a conservative, that you would respect...I guess not
3) I am making no claim to "being right" as much as I am asking that all of us try to get as broad an understanding of this terrible tragedy in which we find ourselves as we can -
4)I don't have "my" articles, I have the national news, a variety of newsmagazines, the voices of several political commentators and many statements made by our President and his administration - and if, as you imply, we can't trust any news briefs or independent websites, boy, are we in trouble...or do you assume, as you say, that "your articles" are right and everything that presents a different view than the one you hold is wrong?
5) I accused you of nothing except the issue of "hate"which I addressed in point one and for which I have already apologized
6) I was not being "right", I was asking that all of us try to understand what the Iraqi Ordinary Citizen is feeling...it appears that you are convinced that you are right if you say "I have my reasons, etc. and I don't have to listen to anyone else" - and lest I be accused of anything else, just let me say that as soon as you talk about "our" reasoning and what "we" believe, that seems devisive - almost any issue has more than two sides...and the last time I looked, this was still a democracy and holding an opinion different than someone elses was still one of our most cherished freedoms...one of the many reasons I love this country!
Please view this so that you will think twice before you make statements like this.
Why are you screaming... I didn't say the video you saw was not gruesome. I was not comparing it with anything else. You are. To me, and most of world admit it was horrendous. Even Bush and Rumsfeld agree it was outrageous at least in public..
---And don't be ridiculous about Iraqi officials asking for help. Saddam Hussain was the brutal dictator before we went in. HE was the official in charge before we went in. Do you really think that HE would have written to us asking us to fight for his oppressed people? Well, we didn't go in just to fight for his oppressed people (that was a benefit from us going in).
Then why didn't we go to other troubled countries. Why only Iraq..Maybe becasue of oil? But you know this.. My response is not new about bush pretending to help Iraqi's from Saddam. And don't ask me where is oil. They may or may not have the oil yet but that's what they went for. They intended getting hold of the oil when everything boiled over after war. A newly formed democracy is unstable, becasue people are fighting for power, that's when US would make a move/deal with one to give support in exchange of oil. I know that's how business is done in most of the foreign countries, me being from one.
----We went in to fight for AMERICA, and our safety.
When will you get it that war in Iraq is not going to make you safe against terrorism. If anything will, it will be our security agecies alertness and intelligence.
----If you want to know how the Iraqis really feel ASK an Iraqi here in the United States who is free to speak his mind.
An Iraqi living here would not have experienced the effects of war in their frontyard. Isn't it a ridiculous suggestion??? How can you justify Deaths of thousands of civilians when previously only people going against Saddam were tortured? Consider this ... Some reads American news everyday. Everday he reads news about violence in inner cities. Kids dying of random shots. people dying of random shots, gang violence, drugs, illegal porn film shooting etc etc and decide America needs to be free from this corruption, lets attack and liberate US. Would you welcome the army of some other country to help you and kill your people by thousands? No then it will be considered terrorism. right???
Minnie, I know you will still have a come back.. you are still going to say that Bush did right. If the billions spend in war was spent on CIA, FBI or any other agency required to secure US from Inside and if people in those responsible position remained alert.. We would be safe. Also if more money was spent in support of projects that invent alternative source of energy, we wouldn't have to fight for oil for sustaining our economy.
don't believe for a minute that those militants/terrorists
think what they did to young Berg was just, we're free
to disagree, which is more than many in Iraq used to have.
Let's hope NO ONE has died for a lost cause, and possibly
they will have such freedom one day. In the meantime, don't
let them get your dander up. You sound so angry. Put it
to good use. Just FYI, I'm not a Bush fan, and frankly, I'm
extremely disappointed that in such a wonderful country full
of great gals like you and me, we can't come up with better
people for our highest office. over...
I agree that "atonement" may be different within the Islamic countries.
Blessed Be!
Laure-co-cl on migraines & headaches
Hi Laure
"e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998
"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others
"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998
"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002
"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002
"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002
"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003
"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998
"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002
"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002
"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002
"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002
"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002
"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998
"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002
"Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002
"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration’s policy towards Iraq, I don’t think there can be any question about Saddam’s conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002
There are many Iraqis who used to live under the rule of Saddam Hussain who are now living here. I have spoken to a few. You should too. They have relatives who are still in Iraq. The news media never interview these people because they support what we did.
Are you comparing the crime in America to the oppression that the Iraq people endured for more than 30 years? He would take hundreds of people at a time and bury them alive in mass graves. He would gas hundreds of men, women, and children in the streets. There is really no comparison. I think our country goes overboard now sometimes when it comes to crime, and I don't think that it is to the point that we need to be liberated from it. Not so with the oppressed people of Iraq. They didn't know from one day to the next if they or a family member would be tortured or killed. The could not say what they thought. If Saddam became paranoid about someone who HADN'T done anything against him they would be executed just in case. He boasted about this so that the people would live in fear. All Iraqis, even his most trusted inner circle lived in fear. That is how he kept his power.
I think universally people here want to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. We just have different ideas about how.
Pages