Lifestyle > Train of Thought
The Detention and Subsequent Abuse of Female Iraqis
Woodrow:
--- Quote from: Ant on January 25, 2005, 11:57:35 AM ---1) Regardless of the fact that I've pointed out previously that you took Byrd out of context, you still continue to do so. Byrd never called black people niggers. He was criticizing the hypocrisy of white supremacists, in a rather vulgar way, by reminding white supremacists that there are "white niggers too." You continually say Byrd called Black people 'niggers' which is entirely untrue he said there are "white niggers" or in other words, just like their are lazy, incompentent black people, the same is true of the white race.
--- End quote ---
I don't know much about the KKK, but I'd think it would take more than an "honest mistake" to rise to the rank of grand dragon. I don't care what context he used it in, the fact is, and he used a racial epitat with derogatory intent. If he uses this word on national television, well knowing the commotion it will cause, what do you think the chances are he uses it in private? I'd say pretty good.
--- Quote from: Ant on January 25, 2005, 11:57:35 AM ---But you continually take this story out of context despite the fact ive corrected you more than once. It's pathetic and a blatant display of the blinding ignorance your partisanship imparts on you.
--- End quote ---
Sorry I find the word Ni**er offensive. Seems you don't. But all racists are republicans right?
--- Quote from: Ant on January 25, 2005, 11:57:35 AM ---2) Who is responsible foe the abu graib scandal and how can we insure it never happens again, and is no longer occuring? You have nothing to say except giving BS political answers.
--- End quote ---
The soldiers that committed the abuse are responsible. Better education and more review up the chain of command can help make sure this never happens again.
Ant:
1). Byrd never called it an honest mistake, and yes he did use the word nigger in a 'derogatory manner', towards white people though. Also, occasionally people shift ideologies during their lifetime. He admitted to being an extreme racist, but your talking about things he did in the 60's im talking about this republicans do in 2004.
2) I've always been talking about majorities. I think we can come to an honest agreement that there are racist democrats, and racists republicans, but the majority of racist americans vote republican. It makes very little sense for racist individuals to vote democrat. Democrats for years supported welfare, they support affirmative action, and democrats have embraced the black population. Your party has people still making racist remakrs in 2004, and you even seemed to condone comments during the Bush inauguration that blantantly made fun of americans that live in poverty (and coincidentally poverty in america is a huge problem for the black and minority communities). To rejoice at the poor "losing the war on poverty" is to say your happy people are going to remain in the ghettos. It shows an utter lack of respect for your fellow man, and a selfish care only for your own personal well-being.
3) If the soldiers are responsible why is it so widespread? Its entirealy irresonsible putting the blame on the american soldier (who are that the bottom of the chain of command), when members of the Bush Administration have been the one's orchestrating a rationale for torture. Bush wants Gonzales for Attorney General, and gonzales in early 2002, began drafting legal justifications for the torture of detainees. And it was Bush who took away the POW status of detainees when he chose to instead call them "enemy combantants" in an effort to strip away the protect the Geneva Accords gives to POWs. Bush made the choice to take away POW status from people at Gautanamo. And Gonzales made the choice to draft a legal rational for condoning torture. Bust made the choice to nominate him to Attorney General. So why don't you stop burying your head and educate yourself on the reality of whats occuring in modern day america.
King Tech Quadafi:
--- Quote from: Woodrow on January 25, 2005, 12:34:10 PM ---[The soldiers that committed the abuse are responsible. Better education and more review up the chain of command can help make sure this never happens again.
--- End quote ---
Interesting comment Englewood.
So do u think its an amazing coincidence, that torture had been systematically used in Guantanomo and Afghanistan before the Iraq war was launched?
Wait a minute, Let me rebuke myself for u englewood.
In Afghanistan, Iraq AND Guantanamo, low level soldiers administered torture without superior/higher up knowledge. In all 3 places at 3 different times, low level soldiers acting ALONE administered torture.
LOL
Woodrow:
It's crazy to me:
People the commited these crimes are being arrested, punished, and changes are being made so it doesn't happen again.
On the other side, Heads are cut off, people kidnapped, and torutre rooms are being found in Iraq, there's little to no opposition. In fact, a large number of muslims and their leaders support the actions.
I don't get it.
Ant:
--- Quote from: O.G. Techniec on January 26, 2005, 11:01:50 AM ---
--- Quote from: Woodrow on January 25, 2005, 12:34:10 PM ---[The soldiers that committed the abuse are responsible. Better education and more review up the chain of command can help make sure this never happens again.
--- End quote ---
Interesting comment Englewood.
So do u think its an amazing coincidence, that torture had been systematically used in Guantanomo and Afghanistan before the Iraq war was launched?
Wait a minute, Let me rebuke myself for u englewood.
In Afghanistan, Iraq AND Guantanamo, low level soldiers administered torture without superior/higher up knowledge. In all 3 places at 3 different times, low level soldiers acting ALONE administered torture.
LOL
--- End quote ---
Its much more than a coincidence that torture and abuse occured in all three of these places. But I'd add to the list a few other facts:
1. To be clear, similiar incidents of torture occured in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanmo.
2. Bush made a clear choice to deny certain individuals POW status.
3. Bush nominated Alberto Gonzales to Attorney General. Gonzales, a long time friend and advisor to Bush, began drafting legal justifications for torture in 2002.
4. The International Red Cross, and Human Rights Watch, both submitted reports to the Government well in advance of the Abu Graib scandal documenting these problems. In fact, HRW posted a report on their website in early spring 2003 that detailed exactly what turned out to be happening. Yet, when the pictures leaked, Bush said "oh this is an isolated incident, i had no knowledge this was going on." How exactly did I know about this when the president and no one in his administration did?
5. HRW released a new report documenting the continued abuse of detainees in Iraq on january 25th.
http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2005/01/26/iraq10053.htm
____
I'll leave you with one last quote from Alberto Gonzales:
Alberto Gonzales has asserted to the Senate committee weighing his nomination to be attorney general that there's a legal rationale for harsh treatment of foreign prisoners by U.S. forces.
In more than 200 pages of written responses to members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, who plan to vote Wednesday on his nomination, Gonzales told senators that laws and treaties prohibit torture by any U.S. agent without exception.
But he said the Convention Against Torture treaty, as ratified by the Senate, doesn't prohibit the use of "cruel, inhuman or degrading" tactics on non-U.S. citizens who are captured abroad, in Iraq or elsewhere.
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/politics/10732627.htm?1c
So please tell me where this line gets drawn? What is the difference between torture and "cruel, inhuman, and degrading" actions? And when you say you don't support torture do you follow Bush Logic in saying: yes, torture is illegal, and wrong, but we are still allowed to treat people in a "cruel, inhuman, and degrading" manner?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version