Hi jp! Hi!

Remember the last time you got banned? I did that. I caused you to be banned. Heh heh heh.

The Yahoo jews changed "Smith directing his dog to lick peanut butter off the genitals of a male soldier and the breasts of a female soldier." into "directing his dog to lick peanut butter off other soldiers' bodies."

Save those articles the moment you read them.

The Yahoo jews changed "Smith directing his dog to lick peanut butter off the genitals of a male soldier and the breasts of a female soldier." into "directing his dog to lick peanut butter off other soldiers' bodies."

Save those articles the moment you read them.

I'll be darned-- you're exactly right. Here was the text when I copied it from the article last week:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060322/ap_on_re_us/abu_ghraib_dog_handler

Smith was found guilty of maltreating three prisoners, conspiring with another dog handler in a contest to make detainees soil themselves, dereliction of duty, assault and an indecent act. The assault charge was dismissed.

The indecency conviction was for Smith directing his dog to lick peanut butter off the genitals of a male soldier and the breasts of a female soldier.

Now here is the same text today:

Smith was sentenced on five charges, including maltreatment of prisoners, conspiring with another dog handler in a contest to try to frighten detainees at the Iraqi prison into soiling themselves, and directing his dog to lick peanut butter off other soldiers' bodies.

Same link!

What does this tell you about the reliability of the socalled indepentdent free press and news agencies and what they are provably doing to downplay embarassing things on behalf of the government?

What does this tell you about the reliability of the socalled indepentdent free press and news agencies and what they are provably doing to downplay embarassing things on behalf of the government?

It tells me that originally it was too graphic so they toned it down.

Thanks for giving another example of jewish dishonesty, mr.Hate, and of you defending it.

Jews falsify texts; when they are caught, they say they were "toning it down".

Thanks for giving another example of jewish dishonesty, mr.Hate, and of you defending it.

Jews falsify texts]

How do you know it was the jew, and how do you know they were somehow protecting the government? I mean why did they word it that way to begin with? In fact why even mention it at all?

That you think this, is very sad.

 

How do you know it was the jew, and how do you know they were somehow protecting the government? I mean why did they word it that way to begin with? In fact why even mention it at all?
....

that jews were involved in the reporting or editing of the story is probably a likelihood considering their dominance in the print industry.

that it was toned down to protect the government-- well, that's a possible inference. or, toned down to protect a newspaper which supports agovernment, or toned down to protect the warmonger-zionist alliance. take your pick of possible inferences, but none of them are really against my initial point about the story.