The Hoodie Dude Got Sprung

[bwray]

For the next year plus, I was "Tommie the Red" as Law School. They thought any suggestion of retreat, vs. blasting away indicated extreme-left leanings -- soft on rioters.

That's great. At least you know there is some sort of balance operating out there when you are attacked from the left on one occasion and from the right on another. What's most relevant to me w.r.t. this discussion is that BOTH groups attacked you, i.e. neither was able to resist demonization when they felt they were in a comfortable majority (like my fraternity pals at the Cotton Bowl). Refraining from that sort of behavior is a matter of personal ethics; you can find good folks and bad on both sides of almost any issue.

 

[hollowdweller]

Most places I go I'm in a minority on the left, but on the Democratic Underground I'm on the right.

Update on this story: Apparently there's some question as to whether this is really the guy in the picture.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11822340/

 

[Thomas Linton]

Most places I go I'm in a minority on the left, but on the Democratic Underground I'm on the right.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11822340/

'Course you are, you violent person, with your big, dangerous GUNS and all. The NBS late-night buffoon makes jokes about your kind all the time -- gun-totin' hollowdwellers, or something to that effect.

 

[hollowdweller]

'Course you are, you violent person, with your big, dangerous GUNS and all. The NBS late-night buffoon makes jokes about your kind all the time -- gun-totin' hollowdwellers, or something to that effect.

Even more than guns my feeling that illegal immigrants and the people that hire them should be prosecuted.

 

[Thomas Linton]

Even more than guns my feeling that illegal immigrants and the people that hire them should be prosecuted.

There goes singing, "We are the world."

But you're WAY too easy on those who hire these poor souls. In addition too existing penalties, anyone caught "exploiting" illegals (We can discuss the meaning of "exploiting.") should be exiled.

 

[hollowdweller]

There goes singing, "We are the world."

But you're WAY too easy on those who hire these poor souls. In addition too existing penalties, anyone caught "exploiting" illegals (We can discuss the meaning of "exploiting.") should be exiled.

NOW you're talking. Send them to making Nike's in Thailand

 

[Leatherface]

Tortured???


PFFFTTTT!!!!!!


I have paid women good money to do much worse than that to me, and THANKED them when it was over..

 

[munk]

In addition too existing penalties, anyone caught "exploiting" illegals (We can discuss the meaning of "exploiting.") should be exiled.>>>>> Thomas Linton

Like to where? San Francisco?




munk

 

[jurassicnarc44]

Tortured???


PFFFTTTT!!!!!!


I have paid women good money to do much worse than that to me, and THANKED them when it was over..

I am actually cracking up! I haven't laughed this hard in ages! (he says with tears streaming down his face) Was it good for you?!!! Ha Ha Ha........

 

[namaarie]

Concerning torture in the media:

I, for one, am just fine keeping torture in the agenda for a while.

I was raised on the notion that America was the Good Guys. We were the ones to whom enemies could defect or surrender without fear, and we represented the golden standard to which other nations could aspire, in terms of justice and liberty. That's how it ought to be.

Then this stuff happens. What's more, it looks likely that it happened with encouragement from the top. In one action, we have dramatically tarnished our credibility and gone from the golden standard to a possible evil empire, in the eyes of the world. Who will believe a power who claims to be a force of good and justice, when they see Mr. Hoodie? Who will see even justified military action as being driven by anything by dark ulterior motives?

This issue has not yet been solved. The anti-torture bill passed, but with a "signing statement" from Bush stating that the government could disregard it as needed. In effect, nothing happened. Even though higher-ups knew about and encouraged Abu Ghraib, no higher-ups have been blamed. Justice has not been served.

How can it be unpatriotic to question such actions, to demand that America returns to its principles of equality and justice, to the right of human dignity? Misconduct of this type cannot be tolerated, and should absolutely be called out for what it is. I, for one, do not want to see this issue disappear until it has been made right. I feel that anything less would be to besmirch the principles for which generations of Americans have fought and died, and in which I so strongly believe.

Chris

 

[bwray]

Concerning torture in the media:

How can it be unpatriotic to question such actions, to demand that America returns to its principles of equality and justice, to the right of human dignity? Misconduct of this type cannot be tolerated, and should absolutely be called out for what it is. I, for one, do not want to see this issue disappear until it has been made right. I feel that anything less would be to besmirch the principles for which generations of Americans have fought and died, and in which I so strongly believe.

Chris

I have to go along on this one. The military value of information gained through torture is dubious, but the propaganda value for our enemies is beyond question. We need friends in the international community, not still more enemies. During WWII the Japanese made enemies everywhere they went due to their brutality; that did not help their cause. So there are both pragmatic and humanitatian reasons for opposing torure. Do we want to look like Nazis Germany? I don't think so.

 

[hollowdweller]

I have to go along on this one. The military value of information gained through torture is dubious, but the propaganda value for our enemies is beyond question. We need friends in the international community, not still more enemies. During WWII the Japanese made enemies everywhere they went due to their brutality; that did not help their cause. So there are both pragmatic and humanitatian reasons for opposing torure. Do we want to look like Nazis Germany? I don't think so.

I guess that is more or less what I have been trying to say but you said it better:thumbup:

I wouldn't really object to some of the tactics used if say we knew the person had vital information that would save lives and we thought we could get it this way. However it seems like this sort of interrogation is more routine than the exception anymore.

Part of this struggle we are in now is almost more of a struggle of ideas as it is a physical struggle.

I kind of feel like if we were not falling to the level of our opponents more in executing it, that the brutality and intolerance of the bad guys would be hilighted more, not even in our media, but in THEIR media.

Also when we support brutal and repressive governments or methods because it suits our short term military or economic interests, it undermines our former credibility as the champion of democracy and human rights.

" if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Keep watch on yourself, lest you too be tempted. " The Bible

 

[brokenhallelujah]

I was kinda hoping that someone would get the thread pointed this way... It's about holding the moral high ground. And holding ourselves to a higher standard than we hold anyone else.

I hear so often, "Saddam would have done worse." How is that, in any way, a defense of America? Since when is our conscience answerable to that kind of standard?

Sorry, I didn't feel like I could pipe up on this one yet -- still kinda new here. Thank you guys for speaking out first.

 

[Thomas Linton]

The U.S. has done many good things and paid a high price in blood and treasure to vindicate good over evil. We also had a government policy to support slavery, exterminate Indians, put the residents of large area of the Phillippines in concentration camps, slaughter enemy civilians by the 100,000's by terror bombings, and put 100,000's of our own citizens in concentration camps. These are not secrets. Whatever good image we have must balance positives with some pretty serious negatives.

The Arab street hates our guts because we support Israel. Nothing else need be noted in the ledger against us except by way of rationalization. They were willing to kill us for that alone and did so.


Many experts agree that "torture" will not produce reliable information.

Many experts agree torture has, in fact, produced information that was accurate. In sad chapters in human history, the German Government under Hitler and Soviet government made a science out of effective use of torture and got excellent results.

Popular U.S. media show use of torture with approval (e.g., N.Y.P.D. Blue).

I would hope that my country would not seek to emulate Nazis and Soviets.


What is "torture"? The word is thrown around to label everything from being separated from loved ones and deprived of sex to electrocution, mutilation and "partial drowning." Is sleep deprivation torture?

The Government says they are not using "torture" at Guantanimo Bay. Some of you say the government is using torture to gain information. What is the source of your information?

What "higher ups" approved or encouraged the humiliating and intimidating treatment at Abu Ghraib. What is the source of your information?

(It is not enough that a higher power tells you that the government is evil - or the source of all good. That's not evidence. It's faith, which has it's place.)

Discuss calmly.

 

[bwray]

What is "torture"? The word is thrown around to label everything from being separated from loved ones and deprived of sex to electrocution, mutilation and "partial drowning." Is sleep deprivation torture?

The Government says they are not using "torture" at Guantanimo Bay. Some of you say the government is using torture to gain information. What is the source of your information?

What "higher ups" approved or encouraged the humiliating and intimidating treatment at Abu Ghraib. What is the source of your information?

(It is not enough that a higher power tells you that the government is evil - or the source of all good. That's not evidence. It's faith, which has it's place.)

Discuss calmly.

Thomas, I think you provide too many questions and too few answers. It's also difficult for me to glean what your own position really is. Can you enlighten us?

 

[Thomas Linton]

Thomas, I think you provide too many questions and too few answers. It's also difficult for me to glean what your own position really is. Can you enlighten us?

Like the folks at the History Dept. and the Law School, some would be more comfortable putting me in a nice, neat category that exists in their head.
Sorry. (Well, not really.)

"Too many" questions? Questions often lead to more illumination than statements of fact. Life often has more questions than answers. Some questions never get answered, if one could but see that reality.

My position on what you (and others) mean by "torture"? My position is that I'd like to know what you mean by "torture" so I can understand the argument that you are making.

My position on whether we are using "torture" at Gitmo? Tell me what "torture" means to you and how we know it's going on and I may be convinced that I have come to know something more about how my government behaves than I knew before. I am willing to look at evidence, not speculation and spin. I've had a bellyfull of propaganda and try not to be "fooled again."

My position on whether "higher ups" approved humiliation and intimidation at AG? Same as re "torture" at Gitmo. Who are "higher ups" and how do we know what they approved? I have read domr official reports. It makes a difference to me whether this was a case of negligence or intentional wrongdoing. (And yes, I know about scapegoating. I saw what the media did to Truman over China. If it can be done to a President, a Pfc is easy meat.)

What other "position" do you want to hear about? Am I a nominee for the Supreme Court?

 

[brokenhallelujah]

Personally, I don't think that our military forces abroad should be allowed to deal with POWs or non-combatants in any manner that would not be acceptable right here at home. Sure, I know that civilian law-enforcement frequently steps over the line of what is legally -- or morally -- right, but they are at least theoretically supposed to be answerable for it. I think that we should treat disarmed foreign nationals by the same rules we treat our own citizens.

Yes. I said it. The same. Here's why:

I think if we really believe that humans should be treated a certain way, we should apply it to everyone that our country deals with from position of superior power. I think that is more ethically consistant. And I think it would communicate to the rest of the world that we were a people of morals, ethics, standards... That the way we treated the rest of the world was more important to our national identity than the way we were treated. That we believed enough in our way of life to fight for it, to live and die by it, to try and be tried by the sense of justice that we claim to endorse.

I am not saying that our military should not be allowed to fight, or kill, or subdue by any means necessary, if they are required to do so. And I don't think this discussion would benefit from an examination of U.S. international policy at this point. I just contest that once a particular group has been subdued, we should act toward them with the same ideals we apply to our own people.

That means ANY measure of torture.. Yes, even if that person might reveal information under torture that would save the lives of hundreds. I would prefer to see my country triumph -- or fail -- while adhering to the principles it claims to possess.

When we compromise on issues that we, as citizens of this country, claim to hold as inviolate, I don't think it matters where these compromises take place: Abu Gharib or Cincinatti Ohio. I think the good people in this country experience outrage when confronted with these images for very good reasons.

I know it's a bit of a drastic posistion, but we was talkin' torture, and I had my dos centavos.

 

[bwray]

When we compromise on issues that we, as citizens of this country, claim to hold as inviolate, I don't think it matters where these compromises take place: Abu Gharib or Cincinatti Ohio. I think the good people in this country experience outrage when confronted with these images for very good reasons.

I know it's a bit of a drastic posistion, but we was talkin' torture, and I had my dos centavos.

Doesn't sound drastic to me. I cringe at the legal wrangling that surrounds issues of what we can or cannot do to certain groups of people on the basis of technicalities associated with the circumstances of their apprehension.:thumbup:

 

[Thomas Linton]

See. We can discuss this stuff.

Personally, I don't think that our military forces abroad should be allowed to deal with POWs or non-combatants in any manner that would not be acceptable right here at home. Sure, I know that civilian law-enforcement frequently steps over the line of what is legally -- or morally -- right, but they are at least theoretically supposed to be answerable for it. I think that we should treat disarmed foreign nationals by the same rules we treat our own citizens.

What do you mean "manner . . . acceptable right here at home"? We kept German POW's by the 100,000's right here in the U.S. during WW II. (Producing real contrasts with how Black G.I.'s were treated at the same places and times.)

Do you, for example, mean treating them like criminal defendants under U.S. criminal law? Full "due process"?

Do you mean we ought to treat them in a manner the public in the U.S. would find acceptable? Bright light on military/spook conduct?

That means [avoiding] ANY measure of torture.. Yes, even if that person might reveal information under torture that would save the lives of hundreds. I would prefer to see my country triumph -- or fail -- while adhering to the principles it claims to possess.

What do you mean by "torture"? Is sleep-deprivation torture. Is depriving a POW of access to the Holy Koran torture?

What if it could save the lives of 1000's? 10,000's? 100,000's? 1,000,000's? 10,000,000's? Every single person in this world that you like, respect, value or love? Just trying to understand your position.

When we compromise on issues that we, as citizens of this country, claim to hold as inviolate, I don't think it matters where these compromises take place: Abu Gharib or Cincinatti Ohio.

I understand the logic.

What's "inviolate"? Life?

Do you apply your position to speed limits? Tobacco" Alcohol"

POSITION: Life itself is clearly not "inviolate," and human conduct is a series of compromises. Otherwise, no one's son goes to war, cops have no weapons, and the speed limit is 5 mph - in rubber cars - on rubber highways.

Example: an insane 14-year-old has a gun and is executing hostages. He just shot a blond five-year-old. You can shoot him (BAD! Capital punishment - of an insane minor, for God's sake. He can't even formulate evil intent 'cause he's insane.) to save lives (GOOD). If you do other than shoot to kill (bad), he may kill you (bad) and go on shooting the hostages (bad). A pregnant madonna is next. Do you compromise - weigh cost vs. benefit and make a choice involving life itself -- not pain, not humiliation, not social taboos - life?

Questions.

 

[munk]

pays yer money and takes yer chances

OK, if that wasn't clear; you make choices and keep moving. A lot of this isn't 'fixable' or with a solution from the Right or Left, it is something to be bourne until you are old and can pass it off to the next generation and pray they can do you one better.
We survive it, we buy more time.

munk