| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq-Jordan |
| They were begging for their lives |
| 2004-06-02 |
| From the letters section of the Weekly Standard, what really happened to the American contractors: Jonathan V. Last asked why Americans were able to take the pictures of mutilated contractors in Falluja "in stride." I didn’t; I am still deeply offended by what happened to our people. However, I do have a possible answer. Our media sanitizes such news about Americans. For example, I read an account of the incident on the website of the major newspaper in Johannesburg, South Africa. It reported that at least some of the American contractors were still alive when, begging for their lives, they were doused in gasoline and burned to death. This was not reported by any media outlet in the United States. If Americans are not given the whole story, how can we be expected to do anything except take the news "in stride." --Jim Nowicki |
| Posted by:Zhang Fei |
| #9 Jennifer, I have asked several times and on several blogs -- When has Bush or his administration lied? Perhaps you can answer. And please... no 'opinion polls' or 'they said so on the News!' or quote from some talking head or one of the steford anchors or other BS. Plain facts. Where in any of his statements or speeches did he lie? |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2004-06-03 12:48:31 AM |
| #8 Terrific comment, Jennifer. Peace in our time. It can still be achieved. |
| Posted by: Rafael 2004-06-03 12:30:40 AM |
| #7 At least under Saddam there was peace. And Mussolini made the trains run on time and Hitler turned the German economy around. We should just ignore their other little faux pas, shouldn't we Jennifer? Yes, Iraqis had peace - the peace of the mass grave. |
| Posted by: sc88 2004-06-03 12:02:35 AM |
| #6 "The Democrats had to vote in favor of the war because there was an election. Most Democrats were not really really in favor of the war." Jennifer obviously is not the sharpest nail in the barrel, but she stumbled into a truth. Most Democrats were against the war but voted for it because of politics. Does that surprise anyone? The depth of their thinking went like this - "Bush is for the war so I'm against it, but the people are for it so I will vote for it so they will think I'm for it." |
| Posted by: Jake 2004-06-02 9:54:58 PM |
| #5 Jennifer, President Bush didn't exaggerate the threat at all and it was based on the best intelligence that everyone in the world had. The fact that we haven't found Saddam's WMDs doesn't mean they weren't there. And the burden wasn't on Bush to find the WMDs but on Saddam and his breach of 17 UN resolutions to PROVE that he had destroyed the WMDs he was already caught having by UNSCOM. The Dimocrats up for reelection were perfectly free to vote against the war in the fall of 2002 and some of them did and many of them lost their reelection bids, because the American people are behind their President. But the fact of the matter remains that the Dims screamed about voting on it, no matter when, and so President Bush made his case and let them vote. And Leftist shills like you just have to suck it up and live with it. |
| Posted by: Jen 2004-06-02 9:40:32 PM |
| #4 I have a clue. I read the papers too. True we did talk about invading Iraq for about a year before, and true Congress did authorize the war. But you know why. Someone exagerrated the threat of terroism and Saddam. The Democrats had to vote in favor of the war because there was an election. Most Democrats were not really really in favor of the war. The rest of the world was against us and there were no weapons of mass destruction. |
| Posted by: Jennifer 2004-06-02 9:14:07 PM |
| #3 bad choice "Jennifer" -I'll keep the comments to the fact that you haven't a clue |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-06-02 9:02:55 PM |
| #2 Jennifer, don't give all of we "Jens" a bad name with your Leftist/Liberal whining! We thought PLENTY about going to war in Iraq. It was in the air for discussion among the American citizenry for 18 months (the so-called "rush to war") and it was voted on by Congress shortly before a Congressional election. Iraq was a hotbed when SADDAM took over (if not long before. Check your Bible for details about Babylon.) Iraq is where we need to be and where we're making our stand against Islamist terrorism. You clearly don't read any Iraqi blogs--the majority of Iraqis are glad we came and got rid of Saddam and are looking forward to a better, democratic future for their country. Meanwhile, back here at home, we haven't had any big attacks here because the terrorists are busy trying to stir up the al-Sadr uprising. Unless or until sKerry wins (knock on wood and crossing myself that he does not), you Lefty appeasement-junkies and apologists for terrorists should shut the hell up! |
| Posted by: Jen 2004-06-02 8:57:10 PM |
| #1 Our invasion of Iraq made them angry at all Americans. We need to think more about what the consequences are when we decide to take over a nation. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the American contractors derserved it or anything, but we turned Iraq into a terror hotbed. At least under Saddam there was peace. |
| Posted by: Jennifer 2004-06-02 8:50:06 PM |