I said from my first post that the people who did this are up a creek. It's a crime---it will be handled by UMCJ (and more harshly than for a civilian BTW).
Minus the whipped-up frenzy---what's to sort out?
Take a peak at my last link. The investigation is broadening to include the practices of the Military Intelligence apparatus in Iraq. There is some evidence that torture and inhumane treatment has been systematic, that the MI has carried forward the techniques from Guantanamo, broadly tolerated as part of "The War on Terror", into Iraq, where suddenly people seem to be remembering that torture didn't use to be part of the American tool kit.
I guess you seized on the porn stuff as somehow rendering the whole affair the stuff of liberal hysteria, something that will quickly dispatched by dealing with "a few bad eggs".
Implying (oh hell, outright claiming) that when the news is carried on a Viacom outlet it is dismissible (because of, well, I'm not sure what, liberal bias and irrational hatred of the president, I guess), isn't really an effective rhetorical technique, in that it makes you sound like a crazy shut-in with "theories".
Implying (oh hell, outright claiming) that when the news is carried on a Viacom outlet it is dismissible (because of, well, I'm not sure what, liberal bias and irrational hatred of the president, I guess), isn't really an effective rhetorical technique, in that it makes you sound like a crazy shut-in with "theories".
I wouldn't be suprised if MI is using breaking out the rubber hose on the hard cases----it wouldn't suprise me one bit. But this nonsense that the Iraqi prisons are one big rerun of Deliverance isn't rational.
Try going a month without TV of any kind and tell me who is hooked (and on what).
(or maybe I've read to one-to-many marketing books)
I read both websites, not papers. What I said was hyperbole - intentional exaggeration to make a point.
I don't care how factual they are, how credible the actual sources are, those two papers are mostly lowbrow tabloid junk, and that I'll wait, thank you, for other more credible sites/papers/channels to report such things before believing it.
But then I am always skeptical, in some percentage, as it should be.
I wouldn't be suprised if MI is using breaking out the rubber hose on the hard cases----it wouldn't suprise me one bit. But this nonsense that the Iraqi prisons are one big rerun of Deliverance isn't rational.
Straw man. Not being claimed. The claim is that abuse of prisoners is more than a few isolated incidents, but rather a strategy of information gathering techniques implemented by MI.
As you seem to allow for by "not being suprised if MI is using breaking out the rubber hose on the hard cases". Which begs the question, what does it take to surprise you, since that would be a clear violation of the Geneva convention and an appalling betrayal of the promise of American justice.
Quote:
Try going a month without TV of any kind and tell me who is hooked (and on what).
(or maybe I've read to one-to-many marketing books) [/B]
Do you really think most Americans care about this? I don't think that most Americans care at all what happens to a bunch of Arabs nor do they care what the Arab world thinks. We are in a "the hell with them kill them if they don't like it" state of mind in this country right now. World opinion matters little to the American voter and "W" knows it
Also:
My comment that the female rape images were "clearly fake" was based on the fact that you pointed out where they came from.
As you seem to allow for by "not being suprised if MI is using breaking out the rubber hose on the hard cases". Which begs the question, what does it take to surprise you
....piles of naked prisoners?
.....a 105-pound female soldier in a prison (handling prisoners--What?!)?
this is much different that point to porn and implying that the troops are, en mas, raping Iraqi prisoners---which, I think, all too many on this thread were willing to accept.
And also, you guys are ruining the only three hours a week I get to spend playing Halo---a crime, in and of itself.
Albasrah.com's lies are spreading. I've seen several forums now go needlessly off-track, with people becoming thoroughly enraged over the PORN pics, mistakenly believed as real.
There is now no way to put out the fire of these Albasrah.com lies now, once the idiot on the street hears about it from word-of-mouth via 1000 people's distorted tellings.
It will be as distorted and propagated as the Susan Block "Rape of Iraq" column whose metaphorical "rape" was misunderstood by the all-too-literal, too-credulous Arab/Muslim/Middle Eastern/South Asian/Islamists/whatever else you want to call them.
Thankfully each forum eventually has someone debunk that site. I certainly can't chase them all down.
What a waste of outrage, when so many real things are going on. Waste of focus. Waste of effort. And only makes people even more jaded and leery and skeptical of real cases.
Do you really think most Americans care about this? I don't think that most Americans care at all what happens to a bunch of Arabs nor do they care what the Arab world thinks. We are in a "the hell with them kill them if they don't like it" state of mind in this country right now. World opinion matters little to the American voter and "W" knows it
You tell me. (Pardon the rhetorical questions).
Year: 2000
Voting Age Population (VAP): 205,815,000
Total Vote: 105,399,313
% VAP Voted: 51.2
Did "Most Americans" (eligible to vote), in fact vote? (Yes)
Gore: 50,996,116 (48 %)
Bush: 50,456,169 (48 %)
Other: 3,874,040 (4 %)
Did "most Americans" vote FOR Gore? (Yes)
(or put the other way)
Did "most Americans" NOT vote for Bush? (Yes)
Can we assume that most Democrats do "care about this" (Iraqi abuse)? (Yes)
Can we assume that most Democrats do care "what happens to a bunch of Arabs"? (Yes)
Can we assume that most Democrats do care what the Arab world thinks? (Yes)
Can we assume that at least some Republicans also care (just to be fair to them)? (Yes)
Can we assume that most Democrats are not in a "the hell with them kill them if they don't like it" state of mind in this country right now"? (Yes)
Can we assume that to most Democrats, "world opinion" does matter? (Yes)
Can we assume that the Naderites also mostly have similar opinions as the above Democrats? (Yes)
Even in the most biased, fantasy-based, cynical view of Republicans, in which 100% of all Republicans are indifferent to even hostile to the above issues, we are still left with a majority of Americans that do at least theoretically care about those issues, if only based on their voting choice.
I'm sorry many didn't vote or couldn't. But I'd say that a majority of the votes (despite not being what actually elects our President) at least suggests that most voters have a Democratic viewpoint and we can further assume that that viewpoint does not condone such abuse, nor is it indifferent to world/Arab/Muslim affairs.
It is a sickness of the mind to paint all of America as flag waving Bush clones. It simply isn't true. Bad habit to get into. That's collective punishment. That leads to extremist "All Americans are evil because of what Bush does" mindsets.
I just think it's overly cynical to say things like "World opinion matters little to the American voter and 'W' knows it". There is outrage on every channel. Every blog. Every news site.
I just think it's overly cynical to say things like "World opinion matters little to the American voter and 'W' knows it". There is outrage on every channel. Every blog. Every news site.
Call me cynical, but for every "shocked and outraged" opinion, there is an equal and opposite "kill those fzcking sand-niggers" type of reaction. After all, a majority of Americans still know that Saddam and Iraq did 9-11, and Iraq is the centerpiece of Bush's "war on terror".
Call me cynical, but for every "shocked and outraged" opinion, there is an equal and opposite "kill those fzcking sand-niggers" type of reaction. After all, a majority of Americans still know that Saddam and Iraq did 9-11, and Iraq is the centerpiece of Bush's "war on terror".
Fox News told them, so it must be true.
Fox News tells you that "a majority of Americans still know that Saddam and Iraq did 9-11, and Iraq is the centerpiece of Bush's 'war on terror'" and it's true?
Why is Fox News so reliable ( ) for polling if they are so unreliable for reporting?
One the one hand, Fox News "lies" to Americans, yet, on the otherhand, when they do a poll that reflects negatively on Americans, they are suddenly a useful resource?
Everything Fox News does is to be viewed a leery eye and taken with a grain of salt the size of Crawford, including/especially their polls.
Picking and choosing from Fox News resources to prove a point, especially if you think or know the data is likely flawed, skewed, incorrect or biased is just dishonest.
I wouldn't be suprised if MI is using breaking out the rubber hose on the hard cases----it wouldn't suprise me one bit. But this nonsense that the Iraqi prisons are one big rerun of Deliverance isn't rational.
Try going a month without TV of any kind and tell me who is hooked (and on what).
(or maybe I've read to one-to-many marketing books)
I DON'T have TV. I am much happier (eh, whatever) for it.
I think that since we have been "delivering" this shit on Iraqi's for so long (seems to be over a year or even back all the way to Afganistan) this HAS to have been passed on into the general Iraqi population and insurgents of these abuses...hell, if it has been...ok, I'll say it...the attack and mutilations of those contractors was justified...I learned from experience that if you keep poking a wasps nest enough...you get your ass stung and stung a lot.
Military Intelligence...two words that shouldn't be said together in one sentence.
[B]Fox News tells you that "a majority of Americans still know that Saddam and Iraq did 9-11, and Iraq is the centerpiece of Bush's 'war on terror'" and it's true?
Why is Fox News so reliable ( ) for polling if they are so unreliable for reporting?
Maybe Fox has conducted polls? Can you point me to one? I didn't quote a Fox poll. The ones I recall were CNN, and others...*not* Fox. Quit misquoting me please!
Quote:
One the one hand, Fox News "lies" to Americans, yet, on the otherhand, when they do a poll that reflects negatively on Americans, they are suddenly a useful resource?
Again...I wasn't quoting any Fox poll. But America's support for the war was largely as a result of (especially) Fox perpetual linking of 9-11 with Iraq, as well as a boatload of other garbage ...for example Saddam Hussein's drones loaded with bio weapons which could reach America and had everyone and their cousins scared sh¡tless, stripping the hardware store shelves of duct-tape and plastic sheeting.
Quote:
Everything Fox News does is to be viewed a leery eye and taken with a grain of salt the size of Crawford, including/especially their polls.
Yes, there I agree! But Cheney has other ideas! He commented on Fox the other day, saying that they were "the most reliable" media source!!!!! (yikes)
Quote:
Picking and choosing from Fox News resources to prove a point, even if you know the data is likely flawed, skewed, incorrect or biased is just dishonest.
Your point is moot. I wasnt quoting any Fox poll. Try again.
And....when I said: "but Fox told us, so it must be true"....that was sarcasm...and pretty obvious I would have thought.
And from Artman:
Quote:
.the attack and mutilations of those contractors...
Contractors...thats a generality. It could mean anyone who is in Iraq doing a job of work. In this case, these guys were supposedly mercenaries (read thugs), paid for by private enterprise, doing the work of soldiers, but without having to keep to the military codes of conduct and professional discipline expected from troops in the US Army. The mercenaries are the 2nd largest military contingent in Iraq, outnumbering the British forces there.
""There is no -- no -- evidence of systematic abuse in this system at all. We've paid a lot of attention, of course, in Guantanamo, as well," Myers said, referring to the U.S. detention facility in Cuba for suspects captured in connection with the war on terror. "We review all the interrogation methods.
"Torture is not one of the methods that we're allowed to use and that we use. I mean, it's just not permitted by international law, and we don't use it."
Maybe Fox has conducted polls? Can you point me to one? I didn't quote a Fox poll. The ones I recall were CNN, and others...*not* Fox. Quit misquoting me please!
You obviously got the notion that "a majority of Americans still know that Saddam and Iraq did 9-11, and Iraq is the centerpiece of Bush's 'war on terror'" from somewhere, and since you are mocking that notion, I was left to assume that the source was also being mocked. Since everyone's favorite whipping boy is Fox News (with good reason, btw, I detest it), it's hardly a stretch to think you were referring to something like this Fox News poll:
I apologize for assuming my way through your vagueness. I stand corrected.
Quote:
Originally posted by sammi jo
Again...I wasn't quoting any Fox poll. But America's support for the war was largely as a result of (especially) Fox perpetual linking of 9-11 with Iraq, as well as a boatload of other garbage ...for example Saddam Hussein's drones loaded with bio weapons which could reach America and had everyone and their cousins scared sh¡tless, stripping the hardware store shelves of duct-tape and plastic sheeting.
Largely??? Fox?? Fox News Channel reaches around 3 million or so viewers prime time. (CNN a bit less than 2 million).
Talk to me about ABC (8m), NBC (8m) and CBS (7m) first, (approx. for the big 3 network news shows) where Americans do "largely" get their TV news from. The hottest shows going rarely get above 20 million viewers. You act like all 217.8 million people age 18 and over all watch Fox News Channel.
Something like 20% of Americans don't even get cable or have satellite. Fuzzy figures, but still, kinda hard for Fox News to be so influential that way. Fox News is not the U.S.A.
Quote:
Originally posted by sammi jo
Your point is moot. I wasnt quoting any Fox poll. Try again.
And....when I said: "but Fox told us, so it must be true"....that was sarcasm...and pretty obvious I would have thought.
Why do you assume I didn't think you were being sarcastic? I knew you were. Hence my argument. But it is moot, agreed, since you weren't citing any particular poll. But I did know it was sarcasm, otherwise it wouldn't have been remarkable.
""There is no -- no -- evidence of systematic abuse in this system at all. We've paid a lot of attention, of course, in Guantanamo, as well," Myers said, referring to the U.S. detention facility in Cuba for suspects captured in connection with the war on terror. "We review all the interrogation methods.
"Torture is not one of the methods that we're allowed to use and that we use. I mean, it's just not permitted by international law, and we don't use it."
STOP LYING GODAMMITT!
You know how they lie: Say several individual things that are true and leave out the reality.
Torture is not one of the methods that we're allowed to use. (True)
Torture not permitted by international law. (True)
We don't use torture. (True)
Unsaid: The local thugs we hire do the torture that we are not allowed to do.
Depends on the meaning of "we", and "do" and "use", right? Everyone is coy these days. (Rumsfeld is the king of coy).
I hope this is a Catholic Church sexual abuse type of scandal if it rips open the system (including U.S. domestic prison systems) and causes reform.
There are growing doubts about the authenticity of the abuse photos. The vehicles and guns are not the kind currently used/issued by the Brits in the Iraqi campaign. The flag seen on an Iraqi's shirt is an "old flag" which hasn't been used for awhile, yet the prisoner's shirt is clean.
The Mirror is admitting that some of the discrepancies are strange but are currently sticking by their story. Regardless of the authenticity of the photos, the damage that they've done in the Arabic world are long-lasting. YOU try telling an incensed Arab that the photos were faked; once you believe in something it's hard to stop believing it.
In demonstration of that fact, I submit to you the rest of this thread>>>
What is quite interesting is the sexual undercurrent and the efford to humiliate in a lot of the tortures reported. This is no honest-to-god rough 'em up torture to get people to talk, but here is a deep ingrained hatred showing. Those torture techniques serve no direct purpose (like sleep deprivation) but reinforce a position of dominance. There are a lot of incidents related to castration (threatening to machine-gun genitals, wiring a penis) and sexual humiliation by "reducing" a hetero to a gay (staged fellatio).
Anyone claiming this is merely a bunch of soldiers losing touch with reality is only fooling himself. To stage such elaborate forms of sexual torture shows a very sadist streak. Things like this have always happened in war, but mostly when one party was fighting because of racial prejudices (Yugoslavia, NS Germany) or to exterminate the other side.
To me, this is even more shocking than seing the Geneve convention trampled on. This has turned into a crusade all right where the winners have long stopped to see themselves as liberators (you don't do such things if you have positive feelings).
There is a connection to the concentration camp of Guantano bay. When the miliary leader goes on record denying captured enemys basic rights, the lower ranks will likely see this as a ticket to do the same.
The "kid" is Brigadier General Janice Karpinski, the commander of the 800th Military Police Brigade which oversees all the U.S. detention centers in Iraq.
Johnq: I think you are incorrect on this point, and/or your source was incorrect. After further reading... I found this in the NYT today:
Quote:
The news came as Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, the commander of the prison, said on ABC's ``Good Morning America'' that she did not know about the prisoner abuse.
``They were despicable acts,'' Karpinski said Monday. ``Had I known anything about it, I certainly would have reacted very quickly.''
I hardly think she would deny knowing about it if her picture was among those seen all last week. Maybe it's a female soldier (not a kid), but it isn't who you thought it was... just figured I'd bring in more clarification.
There is some evidence that torture and inhumane treatment has been systematic, that the MI has carried forward the techniques from Guantanamo, broadly tolerated as part of "The War on Terror"...
And there's the rub. Broadly tolerated by whom?
"The War on Terror", a phrase coined by Bush in order to be able to cover a multitude of sins.
BTW I am just wondering what Bush's chances are of getting re-elected, and if there should be a presence of neutral observers from say the United Nations?
Comments
Originally posted by dmz
I said from my first post that the people who did this are up a creek. It's a crime---it will be handled by UMCJ (and more harshly than for a civilian BTW).
Minus the whipped-up frenzy---what's to sort out?
Take a peak at my last link. The investigation is broadening to include the practices of the Military Intelligence apparatus in Iraq. There is some evidence that torture and inhumane treatment has been systematic, that the MI has carried forward the techniques from Guantanamo, broadly tolerated as part of "The War on Terror", into Iraq, where suddenly people seem to be remembering that torture didn't use to be part of the American tool kit.
I guess you seized on the porn stuff as somehow rendering the whole affair the stuff of liberal hysteria, something that will quickly dispatched by dealing with "a few bad eggs".
Implying (oh hell, outright claiming) that when the news is carried on a Viacom outlet it is dismissible (because of, well, I'm not sure what, liberal bias and irrational hatred of the president, I guess), isn't really an effective rhetorical technique, in that it makes you sound like a crazy shut-in with "theories".
Originally posted by addabox
Implying (oh hell, outright claiming) that when the news is carried on a Viacom outlet it is dismissible (because of, well, I'm not sure what, liberal bias and irrational hatred of the president, I guess), isn't really an effective rhetorical technique, in that it makes you sound like a crazy shut-in with "theories".
I wouldn't be suprised if MI is using breaking out the rubber hose on the hard cases----it wouldn't suprise me one bit. But this nonsense that the Iraqi prisons are one big rerun of Deliverance isn't rational.
Try going a month without TV of any kind and tell me who is hooked (and on what).
(or maybe I've read to one-to-many marketing books)
Originally posted by The Installer
You obviously did not see either paper.
- T. I.
I read both websites, not papers. What I said was hyperbole - intentional exaggeration to make a point.
I don't care how factual they are, how credible the actual sources are, those two papers are mostly lowbrow tabloid junk, and that I'll wait, thank you, for other more credible sites/papers/channels to report such things before believing it.
But then I am always skeptical, in some percentage, as it should be.
Originally posted by dmz
I wouldn't be suprised if MI is using breaking out the rubber hose on the hard cases----it wouldn't suprise me one bit. But this nonsense that the Iraqi prisons are one big rerun of Deliverance isn't rational.
Straw man. Not being claimed. The claim is that abuse of prisoners is more than a few isolated incidents, but rather a strategy of information gathering techniques implemented by MI.
As you seem to allow for by "not being suprised if MI is using breaking out the rubber hose on the hard cases". Which begs the question, what does it take to surprise you, since that would be a clear violation of the Geneva convention and an appalling betrayal of the promise of American justice.
Try going a month without TV of any kind and tell me who is hooked (and on what).
(or maybe I've read to one-to-many marketing books) [/B]
Not quite sure what.... never mind.
Do you really think most Americans care about this? I don't think that most Americans care at all what happens to a bunch of Arabs nor do they care what the Arab world thinks. We are in a "the hell with them kill them if they don't like it" state of mind in this country right now. World opinion matters little to the American voter and "W" knows it
Also:
My comment that the female rape images were "clearly fake" was based on the fact that you pointed out where they came from.
Originally posted by addabox
As you seem to allow for by "not being suprised if MI is using breaking out the rubber hose on the hard cases". Which begs the question, what does it take to surprise you
....piles of naked prisoners?
.....a 105-pound female soldier in a prison (handling prisoners--What?!)?
this is much different that point to porn and implying that the troops are, en mas, raping Iraqi prisoners---which, I think, all too many on this thread were willing to accept.
And also, you guys are ruining the only three hours a week I get to spend playing Halo---a crime, in and of itself.
*grabs sniper rifle and leaves thread*
There is now no way to put out the fire of these Albasrah.com lies now, once the idiot on the street hears about it from word-of-mouth via 1000 people's distorted tellings.
It will be as distorted and propagated as the Susan Block "Rape of Iraq" column whose metaphorical "rape" was misunderstood by the all-too-literal, too-credulous Arab/Muslim/Middle Eastern/South Asian/Islamists/whatever else you want to call them.
Thankfully each forum eventually has someone debunk that site. I certainly can't chase them all down.
What a waste of outrage, when so many real things are going on. Waste of focus. Waste of effort. And only makes people even more jaded and leery and skeptical of real cases.
Originally posted by addabox
...where suddenly people seem to be remembering that torture didn't use to be part of the American tool kit.
Neither did preemptive war.
Originally posted by Beige_G3
johnq:
Do you really think most Americans care about this? I don't think that most Americans care at all what happens to a bunch of Arabs nor do they care what the Arab world thinks. We are in a "the hell with them kill them if they don't like it" state of mind in this country right now. World opinion matters little to the American voter and "W" knows it
You tell me. (Pardon the rhetorical questions).
Year: 2000
Voting Age Population (VAP): 205,815,000
Total Vote: 105,399,313
% VAP Voted: 51.2
Did "Most Americans" (eligible to vote), in fact vote? (Yes)
Gore: 50,996,116 (48 %)
Bush: 50,456,169 (48 %)
Other: 3,874,040 (4 %)
Did "most Americans" vote FOR Gore? (Yes)
(or put the other way)
Did "most Americans" NOT vote for Bush? (Yes)
Can we assume that most Democrats do "care about this" (Iraqi abuse)? (Yes)
Can we assume that most Democrats do care "what happens to a bunch of Arabs"? (Yes)
Can we assume that most Democrats do care what the Arab world thinks? (Yes)
Can we assume that at least some Republicans also care (just to be fair to them)? (Yes)
Can we assume that most Democrats are not in a "the hell with them kill them if they don't like it" state of mind in this country right now"? (Yes)
Can we assume that to most Democrats, "world opinion" does matter? (Yes)
Can we assume that the Naderites also mostly have similar opinions as the above Democrats? (Yes)
Even in the most biased, fantasy-based, cynical view of Republicans, in which 100% of all Republicans are indifferent to even hostile to the above issues, we are still left with a majority of Americans that do at least theoretically care about those issues, if only based on their voting choice.
I'm sorry many didn't vote or couldn't. But I'd say that a majority of the votes (despite not being what actually elects our President) at least suggests that most voters have a Democratic viewpoint and we can further assume that that viewpoint does not condone such abuse, nor is it indifferent to world/Arab/Muslim affairs.
It is a sickness of the mind to paint all of America as flag waving Bush clones. It simply isn't true. Bad habit to get into. That's collective punishment. That leads to extremist "All Americans are evil because of what Bush does" mindsets.
I just think it's overly cynical to say things like "World opinion matters little to the American voter and 'W' knows it". There is outrage on every channel. Every blog. Every news site.
I just think it's overly cynical to say things like "World opinion matters little to the American voter and 'W' knows it". There is outrage on every channel. Every blog. Every news site.
Call me cynical, but for every "shocked and outraged" opinion, there is an equal and opposite "kill those fzcking sand-niggers" type of reaction. After all, a majority of Americans still know that Saddam and Iraq did 9-11, and Iraq is the centerpiece of Bush's "war on terror".
Fox News told them, so it must be true.
Originally posted by sammi jo
Call me cynical, but for every "shocked and outraged" opinion, there is an equal and opposite "kill those fzcking sand-niggers" type of reaction. After all, a majority of Americans still know that Saddam and Iraq did 9-11, and Iraq is the centerpiece of Bush's "war on terror".
Fox News told them, so it must be true.
Fox News tells you that "a majority of Americans still know that Saddam and Iraq did 9-11, and Iraq is the centerpiece of Bush's 'war on terror'" and it's true?
Why is Fox News so reliable (
One the one hand, Fox News "lies" to Americans, yet, on the otherhand, when they do a poll that reflects negatively on Americans, they are suddenly a useful resource?
Everything Fox News does is to be viewed a leery eye and taken with a grain of salt the size of Crawford, including/especially their polls.
Picking and choosing from Fox News resources to prove a point, especially if you think or know the data is likely flawed, skewed, incorrect or biased is just dishonest.
Originally posted by dmz
I wouldn't be suprised if MI is using breaking out the rubber hose on the hard cases----it wouldn't suprise me one bit. But this nonsense that the Iraqi prisons are one big rerun of Deliverance isn't rational.
Try going a month without TV of any kind and tell me who is hooked (and on what).
(or maybe I've read to one-to-many marketing books)
I DON'T have TV. I am much happier (eh, whatever) for it.
I think that since we have been "delivering" this shit on Iraqi's for so long (seems to be over a year or even back all the way to Afganistan) this HAS to have been passed on into the general Iraqi population and insurgents of these abuses...hell, if it has been...ok, I'll say it...the attack and mutilations of those contractors was justified...I learned from experience that if you keep poking a wasps nest enough...you get your ass stung and stung a lot.
Military Intelligence...two words that shouldn't be said together in one sentence.
Originally posted by johnq
[B]Fox News tells you that "a majority of Americans still know that Saddam and Iraq did 9-11, and Iraq is the centerpiece of Bush's 'war on terror'" and it's true?
Why is Fox News so reliable (
Maybe Fox has conducted polls? Can you point me to one? I didn't quote a Fox poll. The ones I recall were CNN, and others...*not* Fox. Quit misquoting me please!
One the one hand, Fox News "lies" to Americans, yet, on the otherhand, when they do a poll that reflects negatively on Americans, they are suddenly a useful resource?
Again...I wasn't quoting any Fox poll. But America's support for the war was largely as a result of (especially) Fox perpetual linking of 9-11 with Iraq, as well as a boatload of other garbage ...for example Saddam Hussein's drones loaded with bio weapons which could reach America and had everyone and their cousins scared sh¡tless, stripping the hardware store shelves of duct-tape and plastic sheeting.
Everything Fox News does is to be viewed a leery eye and taken with a grain of salt the size of Crawford, including/especially their polls.
Yes, there I agree! But Cheney has other ideas! He commented on Fox the other day, saying that they were "the most reliable" media source!!!!! (yikes)
Picking and choosing from Fox News resources to prove a point, even if you know the data is likely flawed, skewed, incorrect or biased is just dishonest.
Your point is moot. I wasnt quoting any Fox poll. Try again.
And....when I said: "but Fox told us, so it must be true"....that was sarcasm...and pretty obvious I would have thought.
And from Artman:
.the attack and mutilations of those contractors...
Contractors...thats a generality. It could mean anyone who is in Iraq doing a job of work. In this case, these guys were supposedly mercenaries (read thugs), paid for by private enterprise, doing the work of soldiers, but without having to keep to the military codes of conduct and professional discipline expected from troops in the US Army. The mercenaries are the 2nd largest military contingent in Iraq, outnumbering the British forces there.
""There is no -- no -- evidence of systematic abuse in this system at all. We've paid a lot of attention, of course, in Guantanamo, as well," Myers said, referring to the U.S. detention facility in Cuba for suspects captured in connection with the war on terror. "We review all the interrogation methods.
"Torture is not one of the methods that we're allowed to use and that we use. I mean, it's just not permitted by international law, and we don't use it."
STOP LYING GODAMMITT!
Originally posted by sammi jo
Maybe Fox has conducted polls? Can you point me to one? I didn't quote a Fox poll. The ones I recall were CNN, and others...*not* Fox. Quit misquoting me please!
You obviously got the notion that "a majority of Americans still know that Saddam and Iraq did 9-11, and Iraq is the centerpiece of Bush's 'war on terror'" from somewhere, and since you are mocking that notion, I was left to assume that the source was also being mocked. Since everyone's favorite whipping boy is Fox News (with good reason, btw, I detest it), it's hardly a stretch to think you were referring to something like this Fox News poll:
Poll: Steady Support for Action Against Iraq
...or similar.
I apologize for assuming my way through your vagueness. I stand corrected.
Originally posted by sammi jo
Again...I wasn't quoting any Fox poll. But America's support for the war was largely as a result of (especially) Fox perpetual linking of 9-11 with Iraq, as well as a boatload of other garbage ...for example Saddam Hussein's drones loaded with bio weapons which could reach America and had everyone and their cousins scared sh¡tless, stripping the hardware store shelves of duct-tape and plastic sheeting.
Largely??? Fox?? Fox News Channel reaches around 3 million or so viewers prime time. (CNN a bit less than 2 million).
Talk to me about ABC (8m), NBC (8m) and CBS (7m) first, (approx. for the big 3 network news shows) where Americans do "largely" get their TV news from. The hottest shows going rarely get above 20 million viewers. You act like all 217.8 million people age 18 and over all watch Fox News Channel.
Something like 20% of Americans don't even get cable or have satellite. Fuzzy figures, but still, kinda hard for Fox News to be so influential that way. Fox News is not the U.S.A.
Originally posted by sammi jo
Your point is moot. I wasnt quoting any Fox poll. Try again.
And....when I said: "but Fox told us, so it must be true"....that was sarcasm...and pretty obvious I would have thought.
Why do you assume I didn't think you were being sarcastic? I knew you were. Hence my argument. But it is moot, agreed, since you weren't citing any particular poll. But I did know it was sarcasm, otherwise it wouldn't have been remarkable.
Originally posted by Artman @_@
And the SPIN has begun!
""There is no -- no -- evidence of systematic abuse in this system at all. We've paid a lot of attention, of course, in Guantanamo, as well," Myers said, referring to the U.S. detention facility in Cuba for suspects captured in connection with the war on terror. "We review all the interrogation methods.
"Torture is not one of the methods that we're allowed to use and that we use. I mean, it's just not permitted by international law, and we don't use it."
STOP LYING GODAMMITT!
You know how they lie: Say several individual things that are true and leave out the reality.
Torture is not one of the methods that we're allowed to use. (True)
Torture not permitted by international law. (True)
We don't use torture. (True)
Unsaid: The local thugs we hire do the torture that we are not allowed to do.
Depends on the meaning of "we", and "do" and "use", right? Everyone is coy these days. (Rumsfeld is the king of coy).
I hope this is a Catholic Church sexual abuse type of scandal if it rips open the system (including U.S. domestic prison systems) and causes reform.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/...tos/index.html
There are growing doubts about the authenticity of the abuse photos. The vehicles and guns are not the kind currently used/issued by the Brits in the Iraqi campaign. The flag seen on an Iraqi's shirt is an "old flag" which hasn't been used for awhile, yet the prisoner's shirt is clean.
The Mirror is admitting that some of the discrepancies are strange but are currently sticking by their story. Regardless of the authenticity of the photos, the damage that they've done in the Arabic world are long-lasting. YOU try telling an incensed Arab that the photos were faked; once you believe in something it's hard to stop believing it.
In demonstration of that fact, I submit to you the rest of this thread>>>
Anyone claiming this is merely a bunch of soldiers losing touch with reality is only fooling himself. To stage such elaborate forms of sexual torture shows a very sadist streak. Things like this have always happened in war, but mostly when one party was fighting because of racial prejudices (Yugoslavia, NS Germany) or to exterminate the other side.
To me, this is even more shocking than seing the Geneve convention trampled on. This has turned into a crusade all right where the winners have long stopped to see themselves as liberators (you don't do such things if you have positive feelings).
There is a connection to the concentration camp of Guantano bay. When the miliary leader goes on record denying captured enemys basic rights, the lower ranks will likely see this as a ticket to do the same.
Originally posted by johnq
Hello? Can we please read the sources?
The "kid" is Brigadier General Janice Karpinski, the commander of the 800th Military Police Brigade which oversees all the U.S. detention centers in Iraq.
Johnq: I think you are incorrect on this point, and/or your source was incorrect. After further reading... I found this in the NYT today:
The news came as Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, the commander of the prison, said on ABC's ``Good Morning America'' that she did not know about the prisoner abuse.
``They were despicable acts,'' Karpinski said Monday. ``Had I known anything about it, I certainly would have reacted very quickly.''
I hardly think she would deny knowing about it if her picture was among those seen all last week. Maybe it's a female soldier (not a kid), but it isn't who you thought it was... just figured I'd bring in more clarification.
Originally posted by addabox
There is some evidence that torture and inhumane treatment has been systematic, that the MI has carried forward the techniques from Guantanamo, broadly tolerated as part of "The War on Terror"...
And there's the rub. Broadly tolerated by whom?
"The War on Terror", a phrase coined by Bush in order to be able to cover a multitude of sins.
BTW I am just wondering what Bush's chances are of getting re-elected, and if there should be a presence of neutral observers from say the United Nations?
- T. I.