Abu Ghraib, Act II

[kuzadd]

wrt the torture abuses and Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo:

the obama administration, like it's predecessor the Bush adminstration, wished to hide the attrocious abuses on the grounds that the release of the photos would create problems in the Arab world.

Therefore both administrations were and are acknowledging that the actions undertaken by the US do indeed contribute to troubles in the ME.

They boldly acknowledge it!

Mr Obama now believes the release of the photos would make the job of US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan more difficult, White House officials said.

Which is something far too many wish to deny.

But, one of the real issue to my mind is one of control in a public relations sense of the word.

The US administrations need their gullible followers to believe, like zealots, that they are the righteous. The torture photos make that type of belief difficult for all but the most hate hardened minds.

Secondly, to release the prisoners from Guantanamo, whom it is safe to say,most , like at Abu Ghraib have only committed the crime of being Arab, would be another public relations nightmare.

Because the ones, the very few that have been released speak of the horrendous abuses at the hands of their american captives.

This is really all the US administration cares about! Be it Obama, or Bush before him.

Not the arabs, not peace in the ME, what they care about is that their believers keep on believing and they can hold up their alleged moral righteousness, of which they really have none, as long as they can keep these abuses, murders and rapes from the public eye, as much as possible, for as long as possible.

So to maintain the illusion, they take the actions they feel they have to.

Not the right ones, not the moral ones, the necessary to the illusion ones.

[Sir Bandelot]

When dealing with the humorless...yes! They tend to find it annoying.

Don't flatter yourself... you are not that important.

I just find you boring, and irrelevant.

[Sir Bandelot]

I knew it would piss you off...enjoy. Kiss a Tamil Tiger for me, would you?

Oh, you forgot your little joke face... though I'm quite sure you were just dieing to use it.

Guess I had an impact on you

[Sir Bandelot]

Therefore both administrations were and are acknowledging that the actions undertaken by the US do indeed contribute to troubles in the ME.

Yup, just take a look at the story going around about Nancy Pelosi. They all know about it, and when outed they try to point the finger the other way.

Thats why I hold no "loyalty" to a party, just because they call themselves such and such. Whether it be left or right, in this case that is for mindless flag waving fools.

Actually the loyal followers of GOP should be very pleased with the Obama administration, except that they can't get over the brand name.

[DogOnPorch]

Don't flatter yourself... you are not that important.

I just find you boring, and irrelevant.

Ow...that hurt.

[WIP]

The comment was facetious due to kuzadd's drama-queen nature.

Okay, but what is your stand on the "Dick Cheney philosophy," since he's out of his secret, undisclosed location and in front of TV cameras everyday, claiming that torture is good, and Obama is threatening national security by condemning practices he authorized that violate military and civilian law enforcement codes of conduct?

[WIP]

Obama has already shown himself for what he is, a continuation of current US doctrine. His policy of "reaching out" to the republican party, really just means it's the same old same old.

This is the new politics, where bald faced liars tell jokes and wear a grin. It should not be surprising at all for those who are not subject to mass media hysterics that typically occur during election time. The rest are now waking up to the sobering reality, with a hangover

I heard Seymour Hersch say back in March, that Obama would face opposition from within the CIA if he gave a go-ahead for war crimes prosecutions, and that there are likely many Cheney loyalists embedded within the CIA, State Dept., Defense Dept., that could disrupt the system and leak embarrassing information (Nancy Pelosi, for example...maybe!)

One thing is certain, government departments exert a powerful inertial force that thwarts reformers and would-be reformers who try to move to fast in a different direction. I don't think Obama was ever quite the activist that the Progressive Left was expecting, and now that he's been made aware of where the bodies are buried, he's learning the limits of what he can and cannot accomplish. Looking at the big picture, I don't think any U.S. president can make great changes to foreign policy without tackling the Military-Industrial complex that has been the greatest beneficiary of an aggressive foreign policy over the last half century. But, I'm sure Obama realizes that he can't pay for goals like starting a national health insurance, without taking down the enormously expensive war-making industry.

[Sir Bandelot]

Ow...that hurt.

LoL

Ok, sorry

[DogOnPorch]

Okay, but what is your stand on the "Dick Cheney philosophy," since he's out of his secret, undisclosed location and in front of TV cameras everyday, claiming that torture is good, and Obama is threatening national security by condemning practices he authorized that violate military and civilian law enforcement codes of conduct?

I take the 'Dave Letterman' approach re: Cheney and torture.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3TWlm5gf3hg

...and...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEtnaDi6DHw

...creepy music from his underground torture dungeon...

[kuzadd]

I was just thinking of the irony here.

The people who are okeydokey with torture as committed by the US, were aghast at the alleged torture committed by Iraq. Or so they claimed. But one always needs that propaganda to get the dupes on board, the crazy train.

And the American torture is so well documented. Like they couldn't help but smile for the cameras with such glee. Identifying themselves so perfectly.

I guess it is safe to say, to them, the right or wrong of torture depends on who is doing it, and who it is being done to?

Not that the users of excuses really were concerned with Iraquis, they weren't, they were just so hot for war with Iraq, they could and did use any excuse to justify the attack.

You know like GWB spouting about Saddam, or Rumsfeld, but then they are ok'ing torture at every turn, hell they even used Saddams jails to do so.

Pot meet Kettle. Kettle meet Pot.

[bush_cheney2004]

I was just thinking of the irony here.

The people who are okeydokey with torture as committed by the US, were aghast at the alleged torture committed by Iraq. Or so they claimed. But one always needs that propaganda to get the dupes on board, the crazy train.

What people? I certainly wasn't "aghast", knowing full well what happens to prisoners on either "side". I specifically remember a female chopper pilot who crash landed with two broken arms during Gulf War I; she was captured and "tortured" (sexual assault), but dreaded even more any attempt to use her ordeal as propaganda.

And the American torture is so well documented. Like they couldn't help but smile for the cameras with such glee. Identifying themselves so perfectly.

You should see that which is not documented!

I guess it is safe to say, to them, the right or wrong of torture depends on who is doing it, and who it is being done to?

Yep...no brainer on that.

Not that the users of excuses really were concerned with Iraquis, they weren't, they were just so hot for war with Iraq, they could and did use any excuse to justify the attack.

Correct....a job worth doing is worth doing well.

You know like GWB spouting about Saddam, or Rumsfeld, but then they are ok'ing torture at every turn, hell they even used Saddams jails to do so.

An Earth friendly re-purposing of resources.

Pot meet Kettle. Kettle meet Pot.

How do you do!

[dub]

Did I say he was lying?

why did you post the following?

QUOTE

Seymore Hersh...the most gullible investigative reporter I've ever encountered.

---Arthur Schlesinger, Jr

what is anyone supposed to gain from you posting that inflammatory comment towards hirsh?

[kuzadd]

why did you post the following?

QUOTE

Seymore Hersh...the most gullible investigative reporter I've ever encountered.

---Arthur Schlesinger, Jr

what is anyone supposed to gain from you posting that inflammatory comment towards hirsh?

that is exactly why that comment was made, it is a smear, commonly used by persons who cannot rationally discount the information so they attack the provider.

What was to be gained? It was a hijack and switch the topic.

[DogOnPorch]

why did you post the following?

QUOTE

Seymore Hersh...the most gullible investigative reporter I've ever encountered.

---Arthur Schlesinger, Jr

what is anyone supposed to gain from you posting that inflammatory comment towards hirsh?

Why did you start a thread with a news article yet no personal comment? I'm only returning the favor.

that is exactly why that comment was made, it is a smear, commonly used by persons who cannot rationally discount the information so they attack the provider.

What was to be gained? It was a hijack and switch the topic.

dud does sound a bit like B_Cat...

.

[dub]

Why did you start a thread with a news article yet no personal comment? I'm only returning the favor.

dud does sound a bit like B_Cat...

.

now you're trying to equate me posting a self-explanatory news article to your inflammatory quote in regards to hirsh. you're babbling and avoiding to accept the fact that your post was useless.

you're a dishonest person.

[DogOnPorch]

now you're trying to equate me posting a self-explanatory news article to your inflammatory quote in regards to hirsh. you're babbling and avoiding to accept the fact that your post was useless.

Don't worry. I'm sure the Zionist Entity will cause some sort of 'genocide' here or there...then you can get back to your favorite subject.

dub: I'm you're a dishonest person supporter of terrorism.

No kiddin'...

[dub]

Don't worry. I'm sure the Zionist Entity will cause some sort of 'genocide' here or there...then you can get back to your favorite subject.

No kiddin'...

more babbling and uselessness.

i will take kuzadd's recommendation and ignore you until you're able to come up with something relevant to the topic and not something useless, like every one of your posts in this thread.

[Oleg Bach]

more babbling and uselessness.

i will take kuzadd's recommendation and ignore you until you're able to come up with something relevant to the topic and not something useless, like every one of your posts in this thread.

You can tell if the writer is young by the softness of the insult - when us older guys insult - we either avoid it and follow protocol or come in for the kill with vigor - either insult to the death - or try to get along kids...and don't make me come down there....why do I always feel like dad?

[bush_cheney2004]

You can tell if the writer is young by the softness of the insult - when us older guys insult - we either avoid it and follow protocol or come in for the kill with vigor - either insult to the death - or try to get along kids...and don't make me come down there....why do I always feel like dad?

I agree 100%...if you're going to go to the trouble of busting their balls / ovaries, do it well.

Edited May 20, 2009 by bush_cheney2004

[Oleg Bach]

I agree 100%...if you're going to go to the trouble of busting their balls / ovaries, do it well.

It's like a street fight - You have two choices - avoidance at all cost - run if you must...OR fight to totally destroy - personally I am not into total destruction if it can be avoided - at my age street fight or other wise -You don't have the endurance - just the experience - so you either and I say this symbolically - kill instantly with stealth - or you leave and disappear - prolonged battles with crazed youth is not wise...they have staying power...we don't - brittle as I be - I am good for one shot...and as the cowboys used to say - better make it good..

[dub]

It's like a street fight - You have two choices - avoidance at all cost - run if you must...OR fight to totally destroy - personally I am not into total destruction if it can be avoided - at my age street fight or other wise -You don't have the endurance - just the experience - so you either and I say this symbolically - kill instantly with stealth - or you leave and disappear - prolonged battles with crazed youth is not wise...they have staying power...we don't - brittle as I be - I am good for one shot...and as the cowboys used to say - better make it good..

c'mon clint. i would destroy him, but i'm too nice of a guy. plus, it's obvious that nature already beat me to it.

[kuzadd]

c'mon clint. i would destroy him, but i'm too nice of a guy. plus, it's obvious that nature already beat me to it.

while I am sure bc and oleg barach mean well.

I am a beleiver in picking your fights, what and who are worth fighting for.

Wasting time with posters who engage in nothing but insulting ad hominem attacks and name calling ,over and over, by posters who have nothing of substance to add to a discussion, aren't worth one second of time.

Which btw, if one notices BC and Oleg are much more of the discussing types then others.

Edited May 20, 2009 by kuzadd

[ironstone]

aaaaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

Don't you mean "the debate over prisoner mistreatment is still roiling in the faculty lounges of America's social science departments and left wing media outlets"?

hahahahahahahaha.

Nobody else gives a shit about these terrorist assholes.

I think you're wrong Jerry,there are apparently a lot of people that do care deeply for the plight of terrorists.I think many on the radical-left(or is it simply the "left"?) are deeply sympathetic with many terrorists and their use of violence as a means to an end.No doubt,the mere thought of a terrorist being detained under anything-but-Holiday Inn conditions surely brings tears to the eyes of sympathizers.I can't help wonder why those who scream bloody murder if terrorist prisoners are mistreated are the same one's who are apparently unmoved by something much more brutal,like a man being beheaded alive.....slowly.Where was the outrage from the left?!

[WIP]

I think you're wrong Jerry,there are apparently a lot of people that do care deeply for the plight of terrorists.I think many on the radical-left(or is it simply the "left"?) are deeply sympathetic with many terrorists and their use of violence as a means to an end.No doubt,the mere thought of a terrorist being detained under anything-but-Holiday Inn conditions surely brings tears to the eyes of sympathizers.I can't help wonder why those who scream bloody murder if terrorist prisoners are mistreated are the same one's who are apparently unmoved by something much more brutal,like a man being beheaded alive.....slowly.Where was the outrage from the left?!

Or could it be that civil libertarians care about principles like rule of law and judicial fairness? All these years, we've had to listen to fundies blather on about how God gives them moral standards and us atheists are moral relativists, and now the reality is that the religious right have turned out to be the moral relativists, since they are willing to break all of their own rules to punish the enemy.

[dub]

haha?

this is okay?

Abu Ghraib abuse photos 'show rape'

Photographs of alleged prisoner abuse which Barack Obama is attempting to censor include images of apparent rape and sexual abuse, it has emerged.

At least one picture shows an American soldier apparently raping a female prisoner while another is said to show a male translator raping a male detainee.

Further photographs are said to depict sexual assaults on prisoners with objects including a truncheon, wire and a phosphorescent tube.

Another apparently shows a female prisoner having her clothing forcibly removed to expose her breasts.

Detail of the content emerged from Major General Antonio Taguba, the former army officer who conducted an inquiry into the Abu Ghraib jail in Iraq.

Allegations of rape and abuse were included in his 2004 report but the fact there were photographs was never revealed. He has now confirmed their existence in an interview with the Daily Telegraph.

how much longer will some of you try to justify these behaviours?