NationStates Jolt Archive

Makes you feel all warm inside doesn't it? And still somehow people manage to not like Americans. Why is that?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1390256,00.html

lol america

Ah, the partisan hackery that is 'The Guardian' (and yes, I have authority to attack news sources for bias - I'm a sudent reporter myself)

Thats bullshit.

Ah, the partisan hackery that is 'The Guardian' (and yes, I have authority to attack news sources for bias - I'm a sudent reporter myself)

Then maybe you can back up your statement.

Thats bullshit.
What is?

How about you occupy yourself with my wonderful Colombia?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4228013.stm

Ah, the partisan hackery that is 'The Guardian' (and yes, I have authority to attack news sources for bias - I'm a sudent reporter myself)

I rank this alongside "stories" from American tabloids like: "I Had Elvis' Two-Headed Baby," and "Why Are Space Aliens Living In My Commode?"

I rank this alongside "stories" from American tabloids like: "I Had Elvis' Two-Headed Baby," and "Why Are Space Aliens Living In My Commode?"
AIDS: China's Secret Weapon?

I rank this alongside "stories" from American tabloids like: "I Had Elvis' Two-Headed Baby," and "Why Are Space Aliens Living In My Commode?"

Why, exactly? Because it protrays the US in a poor light? Because it doesn't mesh with your view of the world? Because you don't believe it? Or because you have actual evidence that disproves the story?

The Guardian. What a credible source. About as credible as those tabloids found at the checkout counters in American supermarkets. :headbang:

Why, exactly? Because it protrays the US in a poor light? Because it doesn't mesh with your view of the world? Because you don't believe it? Or because you have actual evidence that disproves the story?
I was about to ask the same.

The Guardian. What a credible source. About as credible as those tabloids found at the checkout counters in American supermarkets. :headbang:
http://www.iwpr.net/index.pl?archive/bcr3/bcr3_200501_538_1_eng.txt
Better?

AIDS: China's Secret Weapon?

ROFL!! That too! :D

I rank this alongside "stories" from American tabloids like: "I Had Elvis' Two-Headed Baby," and "Why Are Space Aliens Living In My Commode?"
Don't forget Skapedroe's "articles"!

Why, exactly? Because it protrays the US in a poor light? Because it doesn't mesh with your view of the world? Because you don't believe it? Or because you have actual evidence that disproves the story?

Because if it weren't so funny it would be tragic. Because only those who truly choose to hate America ( MY Country! ) would give credence to such a fabrication. Because it's total, unmitigated, unvarnished, tarnished, impacted, discombobulated bull shit. :D

Because if it weren't so funny it would be tragic. Because only those who truly choose to hate America ( MY Country! ) would give credence to such a fabrication. Because it's total, unmitigated, unvarnished, tarnished, impacted, discombobulated bull shit. :D
Yes of course. We all know the US realy is the shining beacon of all that is good and would never do such a thing. :rolleyes:

Because if it weren't so funny it would be tragic. Because only those who truly choose to hate America ( MY Country! ) would give credence to such a fabrication. Because it's total, unmitigated, unvarnished, tarnished, impacted, discombobulated bull shit. :D

Why? Your personal belief in the ideals and actions of your country are not really evidence in its favour, whatever you might want to think.

There's also the fact that a quck google search reveals that the only references to it all solely rely upon The Guardian article. Which of course brings this article into serious question.

Any challenges to my rebuttal of the article?

"Why Are Space Aliens Living In My Commode?"

I think that's a question that deserves an answer! :eek:

Any challenges to my rebuttal of the article?
http://www.sueddeutsche.de/,poll2/deutschland/artikel/19/45973/print.html

http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,336762,00.html

http://www.zdf.de/ZDFde/inhalt/25/0,1872,2256793,00.html

There's also the fact that a quck google search reveals that the only references to it all solely rely upon The Guardian article. Which of course brings this article into serious question.

If it were true. Typing his name into Google returns 9330 hits. Adding 'Guardian to the search string returns 1590. That's 1/6th of the total hits.

Just on the first page I find several other sources.

Ok, other sources, and now I'm reviewing them.

I think that's a question that deserves an answer! :eek:

Perhaps so, but they're no longer there, having taken up residence in the bowels of certain unnamed NS General Forum posters. :D

Perhaps so, but they're no longer there, having taken up residence in the bowels of certain unnamed NS General Forum posters. :D

These thinks happen. Some Metamucil usually helps. *nod*

A bit of reading doesn't have me convinced of any wrongdoing. All I see is that a guy was arrested on an illegal pass in the Balkans by local border-guard-types under suspiscious conditions. Americans were called up by the locals on the suspiscion that the guy was a terrorist. The American's picked him up, flew him to Kabul to figure out what was going on, held him for a time, found out he was innocent and sent him back. That seems to be the worst that happened. Plus there is an awful lot of common source use here, the Suddeutsche Zeitung and the Guardian article.

Plus, there are some discrepencies amongst the stories.

only those who truly choose to hate America ( MY Country! ) would give credence to such a fabrication. Because it's total, unmitigated, unvarnished, tarnished, impacted, discombobulated bull shit. :DThe USA kisnapping people...what are the Chances of that being true...about 99.9%
I dont hate America, yet I say his story is very likely.
You dont agree? too bad.

The USA kisnapping people...what are the Chances of that being truh 99.9%
I dont hate America, yet I say his story is very likely.
You dont agree? too bad.
If you have evidence to back up that statistic...bring it.

The American's picked him up, flew him to Kabul to figure out what was going on, held him for a time, found out he was innocent and sent him back.

and taking someone to afghanistan against their will without some sort of extradition hearing is not kidnapping how exactly?

and taking someone to afghanistan against their will without some sort of extradition hearing is not kidnapping how exactly?

It isn't kidnapping because.... um.... he....uh.... he....was....um....he was jaywalking. Yeah! That's the ticket! He was jaywalking! ANd...uh....criminals have no rights in the Balkans. http://www.clicksmilies.com/s0105/grinser/grinning-smiley-044.gif

and taking someone to afghanistan against their will without some sort of extradition hearing is not kidnapping how exactly?
It appears from the articles that the local government gave him to the Americans. Not the Americans coming and seizing him. After all, he was arrested by men with Kalashnikov's of unknown identitiy.

It isn't kidnapping because.... um.... he....uh.... he....was....um....he was jaywalking. Yeah! That's the ticket! He was jaywalking! ANd...uh....criminals have no rights in the Balkans. http://www.clicksmilies.com/s0105/grinser/grinning-smiley-044.gif
He wasn't jaywalking. He was traveling in the mountains, at night without proper authorization to be in a country. The locals arrested him, handed him off to the Americans as the locals suspected him of terrorism and the American's flew him to Afghanistan as per the local government.

He wasn't jaywalking. He was traveling in the mountains, at night without proper authorization to be in a country. The locals arrested him, handed him off to the Americans as the locals suspected him of terrorism and the American's flew him to Afghanistan as per the local government.

Ah. Since the local government didn't insist on protecting the man's rights, the U.S. government was under no obligation to do so either. *nod* Makes sense.

Ah. Since the local government didn't insist on protecting the man's rights, the U.S. government was under no obligation to do so either. *nod* Makes sense.
What rights were disrespected? He was arrested on suspiscion, handed off to the US as they are considered to be of greater expertise in the issue. There obviously was suspiscion, if there wasn't, he wouldn't have been arrested.

What rights were disrespected? He was arrested on suspiscion, handed off to the US as they are considered to be of greater expertise in the issue. There obviously was suspiscion, if there wasn't, he wouldn't have been arrested.

Good point. However, as it may shock several people here, why was he flown to Afghanistan?

It appears from the articles that the local government gave him to the Americans. Not the Americans coming and seizing him. After all, he was arrested by men with Kalashnikov's of unknown identitiy.
If someone came to your home, and then seized you, and then gave you to me, I if I did not immediately release you, would also become a kidnapper. Kidnapping is not merely the seizure of a person, but also includes detaining them.
Unless formal extradition proceedures were utilised, I dont see how what was described wasnt kidnapping, even if it can be proven that the folk with the Kalashnikov were acting with local government authorisation.

Good point. However, as it may shock several people here, why was he flown to Afghanistan?
It's where the experts in dealing with terrorist networks are.

If someone came to your home, and then seized you, and then gave you to me, I if I did not immediately release you, would also become a kidnapper. Kidnapping is not merely the seizure of a person, but also includes detaining them.
Unless formal extradition proceedures were utilised, I dont see how what was described wasnt kidnapping, even if it can be proven that the folk with the Kalashnikov were acting with local government authorisation.
It would seem that formal extradition procedures are only for if a person is being requested by another state. Not if another state is trying to hand off another person.

And there isn't any evidence anyways as to anything in this story, besides this guy's testimony.

Did anyone read the article? The mans basis for the evil Americans being behind this is that he thought his interrogator had an "American Accent." Personally, I can't see America kidnapping someone and taking them to Afghanistan to get photographed naked when they could just do it in Macedonia. I submit this German was confused, and actually abducted by Canadian special forces. The accents are similar, they both have a military prescense in Afghanistan, and oh wait "he deduced he was in Afghanistan?" Based on GRAFFITI. Only someone blinded by anti American hate and ideology can seriously take an article like this seriously, and then post several articles to back up their claim which all reference the original Guardian article and are leftist newspapers with demonstratable anti American bias. The United States has just brought free elections to 50 million people in the past 4 years. What has German or the British left done to help the most progressive foreign policy initiative in history? Post tabloid articles. Welcome to the trashbin of history.

I have one thing to say about kidnapping and its trade.

CHECHNYA!

He wasn't jaywalking. He was traveling in the mountains, at night without proper authorization to be in a country. The locals arrested him, handed him off to the Americans as the locals suspected him of terrorism and the American's flew him to Afghanistan as per the local government.

don't know weather the story is true, but he was in fact taken off a bus in Macedonia "he was taken off a bus from Germany at the Macedonian border on New Year's Eve 2003." He was wandering a moutainside in Albania because that was where he was consequently dropped...

and according to him he was: "held incommunicado for weeks without charge, then beaten, stripped, shackled and blindfolded and flown to a jail in Afghanistan, run by Afghans but controlled by Americans"

If true, that is kidnapping, and illegal

don't know weather the story is true, but he was in fact taken off a bus in Macedonia "he was taken off a bus from Germany at the Macedonian border on New Year's Eve 2003." He was wandering a moutainside in Albania because that was where he was consequently dropped...

and according to him he was: "held incommunicado for weeks without charge, then beaten, stripped, shackled and blindfolded and flown to a jail in Afghanistan, run by Afghans but controlled by Americans"

If true, that is kidnapping, and illegal
Well, the wandering around in the dark part was wrong on my part, but as far as I can tell the rest of it was right.

It's where the experts in dealing with terrorist networks are.

True but would it hurt if one or two flew to where he was being held?

True but would it hurt if one or two flew to where he was being held?
Mainly because it is inefficient. For several reasons

-Each anti-terror expert specializes in a certain field, and more than just a few are involved in every case.
-A single anti-terror expert can be involved in so many cases at a time.
-Direct resources to terror networks can be more readily found in Afghanistan, if say, field work needs to be done.

Personally I'm ashamed for all of you. you are arguing about an isolated incident? As far as I can tell one side of this argument is going to those who are willing to believe the worst about the US due most likely to either pre-concieved notions that you picked up from family or friends, or else some incident where a US soldiar or citizen didn't show you the respect you deserve. Get over it. If the Real UN did it's job there would be no need for the US to police the world, and as much as I hate to admit it, a police force is necessary and the US is currently the only nation that has the athority to do so.
As for those of you taking the US's side although I admire the fact that you are willing to stick up for a much-slandered nation you shoudn't have bothered answering after the forth piece of obvious evidence was rejected. "Debate not with a fool lest a wise man come along and be unable to tell which the fool is." You made your point and they refused to listen to reason. drop it.

It would seem that formal extradition procedures are only for if a person is being requested by another state. Not if another state is trying to hand off another person.

And there isn't any evidence anyways as to anything in this story, besides this guy's testimony.
Regardless of whether or not extradition proceedures must be followed, the US has ratified certain treaties which make the treatment described illegal. Illegally holding someone against their will and transporting them about the place, is kidnapping according to my understanding of the word.

Regardless of whether or not extradition proceedures must be followed, the US has ratified certain treaties which make the treatment described illegal. Illegally holding someone against their will and transporting them about the place, is kidnapping according to my understanding of the word.

Then if we follow that logic my friend, we are holding millions of people in our jails against their will. Extradition happens against a person's will so I guess that violates treaties too don't you think?

Then if we follow that logic my friend, we are holding millions of people in our jails against their will. Extradition happens against a person's will so I guess that violates treaties too don't you think?
I seriously doubt that the number of people being illegally held by the US is in the millions. If you have proof otherwise, please provide it.
Extradition in accordance with all relevent law is not a violation of any treaty that I am aware of. Unless you know of a treaty ratified by the US that states nations or the US particularly, cannot in accordance with relevent law extradict people who dont wish to be extradicted, I see no way in which doing so would violate any treaty ratified by the US.

Why, exactly? Because it protrays the US in a poor light? Because it doesn't mesh with your view of the world? Because you don't believe it? Or because you have actual evidence that disproves the story?
I get the feeling that he isn't you average innocent car salesman.

the US is currently the only nation that has the athority to do so.
They have the authoritah? Since when?

Only someone blinded by anti American hate and ideology can seriously take an article like this seriously,
Only an American who's blind, deaf and dumb can just shrug it off and think the US deserves a cookie.

What rights were disrespected? He was arrested on suspiscion, handed off to the US as they are considered to be of greater expertise in the issue.
No doubt the US wrote the book on torture and intimidation.
There obviously was suspiscion, if there wasn't, he wouldn't have been arrested.
Kidnapped is the right word.

No doubt the US wrote the book on torture and intimidation.

Those authors would be Iraq, USSR, Nazi Germany, Italy, Yugoslavia, China, Japan, Vietnam. You need to study history more dude.

Kidnapped is the right word.

Doubtful!

They have the authoritah? Since when?

In reality, that is what I like to know.

Those authors would be Iraq, USSR, Nazi Germany, Italy, Yugoslavia, China, Japan, Vietnam. You need to study history more dude.
Yes of course. People as good as Americans don't even know the meaning of the word. It's always the others.



Doubtful!
Cause Americans would never ever do such a thing. They are the beacon of virtue and goodness. :rolleyes:

Yes of course. People as good as Americans don't even know the meaning of the word. It's always the others.

So I tell you nations that have been torturing and intimidating people on a wider scale and much more sophisticated than the US and you brush it off? Thanks for showing how little you care for the facts.

Cause Americans would never ever do such a thing. They are the beacon of virtue and goodness. :rolleyes:

I've read the articles Von Witzleben! To me it isn't kidnapping. I know what kidnapping is and this isn't it.

So I tell you nations that have been torturing and intimidating people on a wider scale and much more sophisticated than the US and you brush it off? Thanks for showing how little you care for the facts.
Oh. I don't brush it off. But you sounded like you brushed of any chance that the US is doing the same. Albeit more secretive.



I've read the articles Von Witzleben! To me it isn't kidnapping. I know what kidnapping is and this isn't it.
No of course. It was perfectly legal. Cause we all know the US authoritah is universal and we all must agree to whatever they do.

Personally I'm ashamed for all of you. you are arguing about an isolated incident? As far as I can tell one side of this argument is going to those who are willing to believe the worst about the US due most likely to either pre-concieved notions that you picked up from family or friends, or else some incident where a US soldiar or citizen didn't show you the respect you deserve. Get over it. If the Real UN did it's job there would be no need for the US to police the world, and as much as I hate to admit it, a police force is necessary and the US is currently the only nation that has the athority to do so.
As for those of you taking the US's side although I admire the fact that you are willing to stick up for a much-slandered nation you shoudn't have bothered answering after the forth piece of obvious evidence was rejected. "Debate not with a fool lest a wise man come along and be unable to tell which the fool is." You made your point and they refused to listen to reason. drop it.

OK Manatheron,
First, if we want to argue we can, we do not live in a police state yet
Second, I have had no issue with any US citizen or armed forces personnel
third, Who said the UN had to sort out this kind of issue? Maybe if all countries paid the money they owed it it would.
fourthly, the evidence of those unwilling to belive the story was no more than saying the authors and people quoted in the story were all lying.

I am not saying it is true, just it is possible that it is true and if so bad.

I rank this alongside "stories" from American tabloids like: "I Had Elvis' Two-Headed Baby," and "Why Are Space Aliens Living In My Commode?"


LMAO......

yeah I agree.....its horse shit. But you know America will be hated anyway-regardless of the good or evil it does. Hate the government, not the people.....cause most of us are really cool.

LMAO......

yeah I agree.....its horse shit. But you know America will be hated anyway-regardless of the good or evil it does. Hate the government, not the people.....cause most of us are really cool.


Heyy Peachy, how could anyone hate you :fluffle:

Heyy Peachy, how could anyone hate you :fluffle:


awww......i hope no one does cause i tend to get my feelings hurt easily. *cries*

awww......i hope no one does cause i tend to get my feelings hurt easily. *cries*

*puts arm around Peachy* Need a tissue? :fluffle:

*puts arm around Peachy* Need a tissue? :fluffle:


*sniff*

thank you!

*sniff*

thank you!

It's a pleasure Peachy. ;)

Ok, lets start with the original source.

The Guardian - My home town paper (it was originally The Manchester Guardian), left of centre and opposes the "War on Terror". However, despite some peoples ideas as to what kind of newspaper it is, it is a well respected broadsheet newspaper (it is NOT a tabloid, i don't know how you could ever call it that).

Also, the german sources are of a high quality too, so the story, interview etc etc are certainly not made up. As for the other source given, i'm not sure.

As for the likely hood of the story:

Governments don't often go following up crazed theories by some immigrant who accuses the US and other countries of kidnapp. If they did they would be innundated with 'cases'. So somebody must see one of two things in the case, the bringing to light of a horrific and blatently illegal case of kinapping and false arrest, or the making of easy money.

If the evidence (the folicals from the hair etc) do prove where he was then it could very well provide some basis to his story.

As for the States or any other country involved admitting to it, i've got more chance of winning the lottery...which i don't play so...

The accusations of the U.S. having a series of jails that are 'hidden', in my opinion, would be highly likely, somewhere where they could take all the middle to high profile prisoners to be held pending 'interview' whilst not being subject to international law or media nosing around.

But the way he was treated of the time he was there changed dramatically. I mean, after being humiliated by 'personal' searches etc, to having a 'new bed and carpet' before he left, it sounds like he could have been a case of mistaken identity...

To be honest, until the tests are complete, i doubt his story, but as for the possibility of it happening, i think its more than likely it happening.

I don't 'hate' the states, but i don't doubt that it wouldn't do things like this (along with its allies, or more importantly in this case, with countries wanting to be its ally) just to get the people they want.

Makes you feel all warm inside doesn't it? And still somehow people manage to not like Americans. Why is that?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1390256,00.html

um, while I hate the war and my government sucks, what possible motive would they have for kidnapping german car salesmen?

um, while I hate the war and my government sucks, what possible motive would they have for kidnapping german car salesmen?

Ahh that would be the war on terror.
Or just to scare the s**t out of the rest of the world.

Remember the people held in Guantanamo, still no charges on the majority.
Justice needs to be seen to be done as well as to be done.

um, while I hate the war and my government sucks, what possible motive would they have for kidnapping german car salesmen?
To quote not the nine o'clock news (sorry to none UK residents):
'He looked at me in a funny way.'
'Being in possesion of an offensive wife.'
What reason do they need these days?

um, while I hate the war and my government sucks, what possible motive would they have for kidnapping german car salesmen?


Maybe they wanted to get a good deal on a Volkswagen?

Maybe they wanted to get a good deal on a Volkswagen?

LOL

um, while I hate the war and my government sucks, what possible motive would they have for kidnapping german car salesmen?

Read where he comes from, what he was doing etc etc...i would see it as suspicious...

Single male muslim travelling to south east europe on a last minute ticket to "get away from his family"....

Ahh that would be the war on terror.
Or just to scare the s**t out of the rest of the world.

Remember the people held in Guantanamo, still no charges on the majority.
Justice needs to be seen to be done as well as to be done.

well, there's a difference between arresting a dissenter and not charging him, and arresting a used car salesman for the hell of it. did he <i>do</i> anything, or are we just swooping down on innocents like...some random innocnet-swooping thing...

Read where he comes from, what he was doing etc etc...i would see it as suspicious...

Single male muslim travelling to south east europe on a last minute ticket to "get away from his family"....

I mean, all single male muslims are obviously terrorists! :gundge: :sniper:

...why do we have so many violent smilies?

Sounds like the Macedonian police kidnapped him.

Of course, he's not going to be able to prove any of it. I could tell a similar story right now, and it could be just as colorful and entertaining, especially to someone who thinks the US is doing the wrong thing.

And I bet I could make it convincing enough for the German government to take seriously. That wouldn't be hard at all.

That, from a nation that doesn't have a problem with killing protesters using water cannon.

Of course, he's not going to be able to prove any of it.

Wait until the tests come back, it will prove where he has been at least. Won't prove the story, although it will be a lot more credible, assuming they come back with a positive result for him of course.

I mean, all single male muslims are obviously terrorists! :gundge: :sniper:

...why do we have so many violent smilies?


Well, you never know! ;)


All i am saying is that its perfectly possible, and that judgement should only be passed when the test results come back.

Sounds like the Macedonian police kidnapped him.

Of course, he's not going to be able to prove any of it. I could tell a similar story right now, and it could be just as colorful and entertaining, especially to someone who thinks the US is doing the wrong thing.

And I bet I could make it convincing enough for the German government to take seriously. That wouldn't be hard at all.

That, from a nation that doesn't have a problem with killing protesters using water cannon.

Was that the Macedonian's or German's water cannon?

Anyway, as Kellarly said, let's see if anyone can find further proof, or disproof.

Just saying it's a lie doesn't make it so, no matter how much we would want it to.

Was that the Macedonian's or German's water cannon?

Anyway, as Kellarly said, let's see if anyone can find further proof, or disproof.

Just saying it's a lie doesn't make it so, no matter how much we would want it to.

It was the German water cannon.

That said, during the race riots in L.A. the police just shot protesters instead. It doesn't make either action right.

<1st post snip>

<2nd post snip>Indeed it is a well respected paper, it was the joint most trusted newspaper in the UK... but then is was joint with the Daily Mail c_c;;
[url]http://www.yougov.co.uk/yougov_website/asp_besPollArchives/pdf/OMI050101003_2.pdf[url] <--pdf format

Since when has Germany been classed as Southern Europe? o_O

Indeed it is a well respected paper, it was the joint most trusted newspaper in the UK... but then is was joint with the Daily Mail c_c;;
[url]http://www.yougov.co.uk/yougov_website/asp_besPollArchives/pdf/OMI050101003_2.pdf[url] <--pdf format

Since when has Germany been classed as Southern Europe? o_O

He was on his way to Macedonia, thats what i meant by south eastern europe...


Sweet crap, if the Daily Mail is well respected we are all screwed...

But then again the Daily mail has a higher circulation, so the fact that the Guardian was equally trusted is... er... something...

Anyways, the BBC was the most trusted news organisation, with 5 times as many votes as the Sky, which was second place. :D

But then again the Daily mail has a higher circulation, so the fact that the Guardian was equally trusted is... er... something...

Anyways, the BBC was the most trusted news organisation, with 5 times as many votes as the Sky, which was second place. :D

The Guardian is a good news paper anyways...although its attempt at trying to change voters minds in the US was farcical. But still, the reaction proved a point i suppose...

Hmmmmmmm, i personally trust Channel 4 News the most out of the 3 but BBC is always ok...and not as biased as people think...

My two cents:

I live in Canada, and there have been a few cases of Canadian citizens travelling to/through the US, being detained without charge or reason, other than their heritage. One such person was deported to Saudi Arabia (despite the fact he was a Canadian, with a Canadian passport and citizenship, they said it was a false passport.) He was tortured there for months before he was finally released and returned to Canada.

My government is hardly blameless. Evidence is growing that not only did the Canadian government know about it, but they gave US authorities the go-ahead. Afterwards, even after the situation was brought to public light, the government did nothing to expedite the man's release. Eventually, it was public pressure that brought about his release.

This said, the story may or may not be true, but there is precedence. Also, I support the war on terrorism, more specifically, the war in Iraq, however I do find some of the methods being used questionable.

And last, but not least, you cannot put the blame solely on Bush, as it is unlikely he knows everything that his subordinates do.

I think I'll start by taking the tack that some others here have adopted.

This is an "alleged" kidnapping. He "alleges" that it was done by the US.

Until he can show irrefutable documents that show orders that he was kidnapped, that he was interrogated, that he was tortured, and until we get a full confession in public by all (and I mean, all) parties involved, from the Macedonian police who arrested him to the Afghans who saw him to the Americans who played a part in this, all the way up to President Bush, this remains a non-fact and is only "alleged" and carries absolutely NO weight whatsoever.

As such, it's not worth talking about anymore.

Sounds like the Macedonian police kidnapped him.

Of course, he's not going to be able to prove any of it. I could tell a similar story right now, and it could be just as colorful and entertaining, especially to someone who thinks the US is doing the wrong thing.

And I bet I could make it convincing enough for the German government to take seriously. That wouldn't be hard at all.

That, from a nation that doesn't have a problem with killing protesters using water cannon.
Yes, and I'm sure you can break down in tears and vomit on que and come up with such elaborate details of the prison you were never taken to, etc, etc.. it's funny how so many Americans are so willing to just dismiss this as bullshit and lies and never even considering for a second it's possible that it could happen. Whether or not it really did is besides the point, that's just willing ignorance right there, and is one of the reasons I'm ashamed of this country. So many people with one tract minds unable to accept anything that goes against their beliefs and so willing to attack such instead, on both the liberal and conservative side.
I think I'll start by taking the tack that some others here have adopted.

This is an "alleged" kidnapping. He "alleges" that it was done by the US.

Until he can show irrefutable documents that show orders that he was kidnapped, that he was interrogated, that he was tortured, and until we get a full confession in public by all (and I mean, all) parties involved, from the Macedonian police who arrested him to the Afghans who saw him to the Americans who played a part in this, all the way up to President Bush, this remains a non-fact and is only "alleged" and carries absolutely NO weight whatsoever.

As such, it's not worth talking about anymore.
Yes, because we all know the parties involved are going to admit their guilt. :rolleyes: You can't even expect a single guilty murderer to admit to comitting a crime and you expect government officials from multiple governments to confess? Willing ignorance, gotta hate it.

I think I'll start by taking the tack that some others here have adopted.

This is an "alleged" kidnapping. He "alleges" that it was done by the US.

Until he can show irrefutable documents that show orders that he was kidnapped, that he was interrogated, that he was tortured, and until we get a full confession in public by all (and I mean, all) parties involved, from the Macedonian police who arrested him to the Afghans who saw him to the Americans who played a part in this, all the way up to President Bush, this remains a non-fact and is only "alleged" and carries absolutely NO weight whatsoever.

As such, it's not worth talking about anymore.


Like that will ever happen..."beyond all reasonable doubt" i think the phrase goes...but the truth will probably never arise, but its the possibility that you have to worry about.

I'm alleging that this is the woman who tortured David Hicks at Guantanamo.
http://i17.ebayimg.com/01/i/03/56/3a/8b_3.JPG

Now, prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that this isn't the woman.

I'm alleging that this is the woman who tortured David Hicks at Guantanamo.
http://i17.ebayimg.com/01/i/03/56/3a/8b_3.JPG

Now, prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that this isn't the woman.
:rolleyes: Your posts get more and more absurd. Gee, she's not a real person and can't move on her own accord. Moron.

I'm alleging that this is the woman who tortured David Hicks at Guantanamo.
http://i17.ebayimg.com/01/i/03/56/3a/8b_3.JPG

Now, prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that this isn't the woman.

Er, lets see now, she is made of plastic...please don't take me for a fool. you know exactly what i meant, you are just being pedantic. i think you are missing the point completely, however my time has just run out so i can't continue this discussion... i'm sure Omnibenevolent Discord will take it up for me though...

Interesting.

There WAS a report on tv about this on German TV yesterday. As it seems, there IS reason to believe that the story is actually true. The state attorneys are currently looking at it. A investigation might be in order.

Of course, this won´t affect America´s fascist policies in any fashion.

If he was held "incommunicado" how come they gave him his passport back? Surely if this was "kidnapping" the common sense thing would have been to destroy his passport. This sounds like someome with dodgy contacts who ended up on the wrong end of a shitkicking to me.

I feel sorry for the bloke, but I imagine someone "he knows" is more to blame than anyone else. Because let's face it: military operations run by the US and common sense do not walk hand in hand...

Interesting.

There WAS a report on tv about this on German TV yesterday. As it seems, there IS reason to believe that the story is actually true. The state attorneys are currently looking at it. A investigation might be in order.

Of course, this won´t affect America´s fascist policies in any fashion.

I see. I'm sure that the Macedonian police would be glad to come down and testify to their involvement, as would the Afghans who ran the prison, and the Americans who were all involved.

And I'm sure they'ld be glad to hand over the paperwork as well.

Until then, it's an assertion, not a fact. An accusation, not a truth, no matter how hard you want to believe it.

Er, lets see now, she is made of plastic...please don't take me for a fool. you know exactly what i meant, you are just being pedantic. i think you are missing the point completely, however my time has just run out so i can't continue this discussion... i'm sure Omnibenevolent Discord will take it up for me though...
I would, but these kinds of people are hopeless anyways, they're great fun to mock though...
I see. I'm sure that the Macedonian police would be glad to come down and testify to their involvement, as would the Afghans who ran the prison, and the Americans who were all involved.

And I'm sure they'ld be glad to hand over the paperwork as well.

Until then, it's an assertion, not a fact. An accusation, not a truth, no matter how hard you want to believe it.
See? Absolutely hopeless.. If it were that easy, police investigators and trials wouldn't be necessary because people would just willingly confess to everything they've done wrong...

...Until then, it's an assertion, not a fact. An accusation, not a truth, no matter how hard you want to believe it.
That's the best description of US Law and US history rolled into one that I've ever seen.

*takes hat off and bows*

I'm using the same argument that people gave to the idea that there were NO WMD in Iraq.

People said, "Well, we won't believe there's WMD in Iraq until you show us the scientists who were working on it, the piles of the WMD, the weapons the WMD was going to be put in (for that 45 minute reaction time), and all the documents for the WMD programs, and the buildings and bunkers the WMD is hidden in. Until then, we're not going to believe there's WMD."

It's purely logical - not political. AND THEY WERE FUCKING RIGHT.

I apply the same logic to this man's story - certainly no more credible than Chalabi saying that Saddam had WMD. Oh yes, he was in Iraq! He saw everything! Yes!

Ok, now show us the evidence. No evidence? Well guess what, there's probably no WMD.

And until this man comes up with some major evidence, he's just as full of shit as the WMD story.

Why, exactly? Because it protrays the US in a poor light? Because it doesn't mesh with your view of the world? Because you don't believe it? Or because you have actual evidence that disproves the story?

I'm sure he has as much evidence to disprove the many - ridiculous - claims the Guardian makes in that story as the Guardian has to prove its claims.

The Guardian reads like one of those conspiracy theory websites that can't keep its facts straight between writers.

I see. I'm sure that the Macedonian police would be glad to come down and testify to their involvement, as would the Afghans who ran the prison, and the Americans who were all involved.

And I'm sure they'ld be glad to hand over the paperwork as well.

Until then, it's an assertion, not a fact. An accusation, not a truth, no matter how hard you want to believe it.

You´re not reading me.

I have no doubt that a investigation will be pointless. Though I´d appreciate the fact if my gov would retaliate in a similar fashion and makes sure that some US citizen "disappear" and "never show up again". Now that would be a classic, right?

You agree?

Anyway, I could very well imagine the US actually doing such things. The behavior of the current administration in the last four years made me very suspicious and there is enough reason to believe they actually might do such things.

Is there proof? Of course not. Is there reason to believe they might actually do it? Hell yes.

The current admin has shown it´s total disregard for inetrnational conventions and human rights. It runs it´s own concentration camp on foreign soil and Bush assigned a state attorney who approves with TORTURE. We have evidence that Rumsfeld approved certain "interrogation methods" (see: torture) and they make use of "mercenaries" to carry them out to keep the gov´s personell out of the firing line.

Wether you like it or not, the US is going the way of the Third Reich, though a bit more subtle. Which makes it worse.

I can´t really believe who such good people like the Americans can sit by and watch their gov do such shit.

Suffice to say, I´m about to loose all the faith in the Americans. I knew them as good and honorable, generous people. I more and more start to believe that I was terribly mistaken.

And until this man comes up with some major evidence, he's just as full of shit as the WMD story.
Remember that thread about the German IT woman who the government were trying to force to take a job as a prostitute? Well maybe this guy is just launching an elaborate plan to make sure he gets his state benefits? Maybe if he doesn't hang on to this tale he won't get his government handout? Perhaps he's been working in a restaurant in Afghanistan serving porkburgers and beer?

It could all be true... unless the government prove otherwise.

GIVE THE GUY HIS FECKIN' BENEFITS!

I'm using the same argument that people gave to the idea that there were NO WMD in Iraq.

People said, "Well, we won't believe there's WMD in Iraq until you show us the scientists who were working on it, the piles of the WMD, the weapons the WMD was going to be put in (for that 45 minute reaction time), and all the documents for the WMD programs, and the buildings and bunkers the WMD is hidden in. Until then, we're not going to believe there's WMD."

It's purely logical - not political. AND THEY WERE FUCKING RIGHT.

I apply the same logic to this man's story - certainly no more credible than Chalabi saying that Saddam had WMD. Oh yes, he was in Iraq! He saw everything! Yes!

Ok, now show us the evidence. No evidence? Well guess what, there's probably no WMD.

And until this man comes up with some major evidence, he's just as full of shit as the WMD story.
Yes, because a government making claims in order to sell a war to its citizens is just so totally the same as one very distraught man who disappeared from his family for a lengthy period of time, was found wandering the mountain side in a place he wasn't suppose to be, and has no real motivation to make up such a story...

Wether you like it or not, the US is going the way of the Third Reich, though a bit more subtle. Which makes it worse.

I can´t really believe who such good people like the Americans can sit by and watch their gov do such shit.

Suffice to say, I´m about to loose all the faith in the Americans. I knew them as good and honorable, generous people. I more and more start to believe that I was terribly mistaken.

Oh, yes, I believe it's possible. But I don't believe that they would have just let him pop up like that. Either they would have killed him, kept him, or let him go publicly like they did Hicks. Since hardly anyone knew he was captured, they could have shot him into a ditch in Afghanistan and no one would have ever, ever known.

You shouldn't lose faith in Americans. We were the last shining hope of this world - especially during WW II. You should lose faith in humanity, because we're not the only ones doing this sort of thing.

Remember Dorothy, even the French kill unarmed nonviolent protesters by blowing up their boat in international waters.

It's easier to sell the public on a war today, because the military is so advanced, it wins quickly. Even against an insurgency, it does an order of magnitude better than it did in Vietnam (two orders of magnitude, if you're going by casualty rates). The terrorists are now resorting to kidnapping dolls.

Meanwhile, at home, few Americans are impacted. In the future, there will be no American pilots - the planes will be robotic. And they are experimenting NOW in Iraq with a robotic infantryman. So in the future, Americans will have ZERO humans at risk in an occupation.

Makes it easy for the folks at home to say, "Hell yes, let's invade x______x and kick their asses!"

Scary, no? It's the future face of American tyranny.

If we do become that advanced, the invasion of France would be just around the corner - just to show we could do it.

I'm sure he has as much evidence to disprove the many - ridiculous - claims the Guardian makes in that story as the Guardian has to prove its claims.

The Guardian reads like one of those conspiracy theory websites that can't keep its facts straight between writers.

Since the previous poster never provided evidence and other sources are backing up the Guardian's story, perhaps you would like to show this evidence you mention that the many claims are ridiculous.

Yes, because a government making claims in order to sell a war to its citizens is just so totally the same as one very distraught man who disappeared from his family for a lengthy period of time, was found wandering the mountain side in a place he wasn't suppose to be, and has no real motivation to make up such a story...

How do you know what his motivation is? Is it written in a script?

Believe me, I've been missing for some short periods in my life (I knew where I was, though). When I got back, I had to do some explaining.

So, where have you been? That was always the question.

He's a lot more inventive than I was. But I don't see anything in his story as printed that couldn't be pulled off the Internet and put together.

We don't know what his motivation is. Just like we don't really know what Bush's motivation was.

So I give him (and everyone else from now on) the same logic.

It's an unbiased logic.

Oh, yes, I believe it's possible. But I don't believe that they would have just let him pop up like that. Either they would have killed him, kept him, or let him go publicly like they did Hicks. Since hardly anyone knew he was captured, they could have shot him into a ditch in Afghanistan and no one would have ever, ever known.

That would have made the most sense. IF his story is true, then maybe the 'Boss' was abhorred at the actions leading up to this and couldn't stomach killing him too.

You shouldn't lose faith in Americans. We were the last shining hope of this world - especially during WW II.

First of all, the americans only saved Britain. The true credit lies with the Russians who took Berlin and liberated most of the eastern concentration camps. Not to downplay the american contribution, but if it hadn't have been for bad weather, Britain would have fallen before american soldiers arrived to bolster their defenses. Yes, the fate of Britain was decided by their notoriously bad weather. They'd better not ever complain :P

The americans DID aid in the final assaults and liberations, however, the war would have still been won without them, albeit at a greater cost to all parties involved.

You should lose faith in humanity, because we're not the only ones doing this sort of thing.
You're absolutely right there. As I've said before, I support the US, but I find some of their methods questionable. However, wars were never won by pacifists, and sometimes your ownly choices are between two evils. Bush's priorities lie in protecting America and american interests, NOT protecting foreigners. (That may be a consideration, but not anywhere near as important.)

The man's story may or may not be true. There are many questions to be asked, such as, does he have a motivation to lie? Was it really american involvement, or just someone speaking english whom he assumed to be american? You are absolutely right people, that until it is proven, it remains an allegation. Hence the reason why it's being investigated. I applaud the german authorities for being willing to investigate

Investigate away, I say!

<sounds of crickets chirping>
<tumbleweeds roll down the street>

I think I'll start by taking the tack that some others here have adopted.

This is an "alleged" kidnapping. He "alleges" that it was done by the US.

Until he can show irrefutable documents that show orders that he was kidnapped, that he was interrogated, that he was tortured, and until we get a full confession in public by all (and I mean, all) parties involved, from the Macedonian police who arrested him to the Afghans who saw him to the Americans who played a part in this, all the way up to President Bush, this remains a non-fact and is only "alleged" and carries absolutely NO weight whatsoever.

As such, it's not worth talking about anymore.
Great way to reason away the US justice system amoung others. After all allegations of crimes are only allegations, and until someone can show irrefutable documents that show the crime occured, and until the alledged criminals give a full confession in public, the allegations carry no weight whatsoever and are non-facts. As such they are not worth talking about, much less investigating and having a trial over them....mmm, somehow I'm not percieving your reasoning as being productive, sensible or even rational.

I'm using the same argument that people gave to the idea that there were NO WMD in Iraq.
No, that might be the same argument that some people gave, but it is not the argument that all people gave.

People said, "Well, we won't believe there's WMD in Iraq until you show us the scientists who were working on it, the piles of the WMD, the weapons the WMD was going to be put in (for that 45 minute reaction time), and all the documents for the WMD programs, and the buildings and bunkers the WMD is hidden in. Until then, we're not going to believe there's WMD."
And this proves that such people's reasoning is sound, how exactly?

It's purely logical - not political. AND THEY WERE FUCKING RIGHT.
Were they? Can you provide some logical basis for this assertion?

I apply the same logic to this man's story -
Right, but until you can provide some reason why anyone ought to credit such 'logic' as being useful, why should your choice have any particular influence over anyone other than yourself?

certainly no more credible than Chalabi saying that Saddam had WMD. Oh yes, he was in Iraq! He saw everything! Yes!
Actually someone stating something there is not strong evidence against, is indeed more credible than someone stating something that there is strong evidence against.

Ok, now show us the evidence. No evidence? Well guess what, there's probably no WMD.
And until this man comes up with some major evidence, he's just as full of shit as the WMD story.
No, actually the man is either telling the truth entirely, partially, or not at all, irrespective of what evidence does or doesnt come to light.

Makes you feel all warm inside doesn't it? And still somehow people manage to not like Americans. Why is that?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1390256,00.html
dont bite the hand that feeds you.

like this is any different from the political prisoners, genocides and drug rings of other countries. get over it, and quit picking on the big guy.

http://www.iwpr.net/index.pl?archive/bcr3/bcr3_200501_538_1_eng.txt
Better?

No. Worse.

dont bite the hand that feeds you.
:rolleyes:

Interesting.

There WAS a report on tv about this on German TV yesterday. As it seems, there IS reason to believe that the story is actually true. The state attorneys are currently looking at it. A investigation might be in order.
Yes. Frontal 21.

Since when has Germany been classed as Southern Europe? o_O
Not Germany. But Macedonia.

Germany doesn't own Macedonia.
The Macedonian police, if they did this, are not going to cooperate (they will deny everything at the very least). If they did not do this, they will deny it.

That will be a denial in any case then.

Germany won't be able to interview the Afghan prison camp officials, as I'm pretty sure they aren't interviewable.

But if you could interview them, if the story is true they will deny it, and if the story is false they will deny it.

That will be a denial in any case.

The US won't be able to answer any questions because I bet he can't say who the Americans were - and even if he heard a name, it would not have been a real name.

So it won't be much of an investigation.

Not to downplay the american contribution, but if it hadn't have been for bad weather, Britain would have fallen before american soldiers arrived to bolster their defenses. Yes, the fate of Britain was decided by their notoriously bad weather. They'd better not ever complain :P

You obviously don't think the incapability of the Luftwaffe, the protection by the Royal Navy and RAF, the inablility of the German navy etc etc had anything to do with it and it was the british rain that stopped it...You need to go read some history books my friend...

You obviously don't think the incapability of the Luftwaffe, the protection by the Royal Navy and RAF, the inablility of the German navy etc etc had anything to do with it and it was the british rain that stopped it...You need to go read some history books my friend...

No one on the Left is ever going to give anyone's armed forces, British or American, any credit for doing anything.

They would rather celebrate the rain, rather than the heroism and skill of actual soldiers and airmen.

No one on the Left is ever going to give anyone's armed forces, British or American, any credit for doing anything.

They would rather celebrate the rain, rather than the heroism and skill of actual soldiers and airmen.
:rolleyes: Just like no one on the right could ever admit that a peaceful resolution could ever be achieved in any situation and war is the only viable solution :rolleyes:

:rolleyes: Just like no one on the right could ever admit that a peaceful resolution could ever be achieved in any situation and war is the only viable solution :rolleyes:

Well, the recent question in the thread was about Germany and the UK in WW II.

We all know how well peaceful resolution worked for Chamberlain.

Hitler was NEVER negotiating in good faith. It was a complete farce, and Chamberlain and his supporters fell for it like the fools they were.

No one on the Left is ever going to give anyone's armed forces, British or American, any credit for doing anything.

They would rather celebrate the rain, rather than the heroism and skill of actual soldiers and airmen.

I'm on the "Left" as you call it. Stop making stupid accusations! :mad: Its just he hasn't got a clue about history!

Well, the recent question in the thread was about Germany and the UK in WW II.

We all know how well peaceful resolution worked for Chamberlain.

Hitler was NEVER negotiating in good faith. It was a complete farce, and Chamberlain and his supporters fell for it like the fools they were.

Ahem, this was due to many trying to avoid a war that had wiped out a generation merely 20 years before...yes it was in hindsight a hopeless ploy, but at the time it was seen as the best thing to do...

Ahem, this was due to many trying to avoid a war that had wiped out a generation merely 20 years before...yes it was in hindsight a hopeless ploy, but at the time it was seen as the best thing to do...

Most of the "wiping out" had more to do with a grave misunderstanding of the improvement of technology on the nature of war.

This misunderstanding, rather than being realized and dealt with (either by immediately trying to negotiate an armistice when the effects of machineguns and modern artillery were realized, or by trying to innovate more quickly), was merely ignored for several years by the respective governments.

Millions died as a result.

It's interesting to note that even now, some governments still have no idea of the effects of some technological innovations - and still think that a successful military has more to do with dash, bravery, and a spiffy uniform.

One of the things I think everyone overlooks today is that the ratio of military casualties to civilian casualties has swung the wrong way. WW II was the last war where military casualties were on a par with civilian casualties.

I believe a lot of this has to do with the technological pressure that the US places on its enemies. The US has become extremely efficient at defeating conventional military forces.

The first adaptation to this insurmountable technological advantage was the VietCong tactic of "hugging", where the insurgents would fight so close to the US troops that they were unable to use the heavier weapons of the time to win. This, combined with locating the insurgency in civilian populations, meant that a lot of civilians got killed. You then get a win through PR rather than through decisive military action.

According to Dunnigan (military analyst), the ratio as of 1991 was around 1 military casualty for 40 civilian casualties (across all conflicts, not just US conflicts). The adaptation of insurgency and hugging was at its peak.

Now, the US has more precise weapons and has effective body armor for its troops. The US is therefore encouraged to use the heavier weapons more often, and the hugging tactic is increasingly fatal to insurgents, who lose their own men at a faster rate than in the Vietnam War.

Currently, we're losing men at 1/5th the rate we lost men in Vietnam. That's an incredible performance increase, and can only serve to embolden US involvement in further counterinsurgency wars. The insurgents, on the other hand, are at the point where they can't do what the VC did - assemble in any great numbers to make attacks - because it's a one-way ticket to fatality while inflicting very low casualty rates on the Americans.

The improvised explosive device is the new tactic - it doesn't expose an insurgent to being attacked in return. But, as the US troops get better armor over time, a counterinsurgency war becomes that much more lethal to civilians who just happen to live there.

The ratio, therefore, becomes worse, despite the apparent efforts of the US to use more precise methods.

The problem with the equation is that the US loses only PR points - I would project that as the US follows this technological path, the number of US casualties in each conflict is going to go down. The number of civilians killed is going to go up, because the insurgents have no realistic tactic other than hostage taking and random bombing. For every American killed, I'm betting the number of civilians killed (by insurgents, mostly, but also by the Americans, who may be firing on insurgents in proximity to civilians) will double to 100.

It may be likely over time that the insurgents may expose themselves to really bad PR. It's one thing to claim that the US drops bombs in the wrong place - but it's not happening at anywhere near the rate it did in the Vietnam War. Insurgents, on the other hand, have indiscriminate killing as their ONLY viable tactic.

War is a bad thing. One would think that if people saw the effects of their policies, they might stop.

One might also consider the alternative to resisting the US invasion. The US managed to destroy 80 percent of the Iraqi Army's vehicles in a two week period during the initial invasion. The regular Iraqi Army was essentially destroyed. With a relative minimum of civilian casualties.

Had the nation and its populace actually accepted surrender, and not engaged in a worthless insurgency, I'm sure that the majority of the Iraqi civilians (not insurgents) who have been killed would be alive today.

Is peace an alternative? Yes, the US may be characterized as invading for all the wrong or non-existent reasons. But if you're invaded, can you, with good conscience, advocate the slaughter of your own population at your own hands by indiscriminate means in order to put up a relatively futile resistance?

It might have been a better tactic to hold elections, vote in a new government, and ask the Americans to leave. International pressure at that point would have been far more effective at getting the US to leave - and you would have lost far fewer Iraqis.

Even your insurgents would still be alive, to foment rebellion the moment the US left.

:rolleyes: Just like no one on the right could ever admit that a peaceful resolution could ever be achieved in any situation and war is the only viable solution :rolleyes:

We were beyond peace at this time. After the atrocities of Hitler were revealed, nothing short of unconditional surrender would suffice. After Pearl Harbor, nothing short of unconditional surrender would suffice.

Also, the reason why the USSR took Berlin was because of politics. The allied forces let the Russians take it. The Western Forces could aslo have taken it considering the Germans in the west were surrendering to them but fighting to the death against the Soviets.

Also for peace, if you wanted peace then Europe shouldn't have went with appeasement when they saw Hitler breaking the Treat of Versailles!

Ahem, this was due to many trying to avoid a war that had wiped out a generation merely 20 years before...yes it was in hindsight a hopeless ploy, but at the time it was seen as the best thing to do...

And Europe suffered 6 years of warfare to do this "best thing to do" crap!

Well, the recent question in the thread was about Germany and the UK in WW II.

We all know how well peaceful resolution worked for Chamberlain.

Hitler was NEVER negotiating in good faith. It was a complete farce, and Chamberlain and his supporters fell for it like the fools they were.
We were beyond peace at this time. After the atrocities of Hitler were revealed, nothing short of unconditional surrender would suffice. After Pearl Harbor, nothing short of unconditional surrender would suffice.

Also, the reason why the USSR took Berlin was because of politics. The allied forces let the Russians take it. The Western Forces could aslo have taken it considering the Germans in the west were surrendering to them but fighting to the death against the Soviets.

Also for peace, if you wanted peace then Europe shouldn't have went with appeasement when they saw Hitler breaking the Treat of Versailles!
Haha, I must commend you both for missing my point entirely.