Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Secret CIA al-Qaida prison in eastern Europe (Page 3)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4   
Author Topic: Secret CIA al-Qaida prison in eastern Europe
Vance
Member
Member # 2612

 - posted      Profile for Vance   Email Vance       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yeah, but even knowing that a few misguided men and women have abrogated our rights with the Patriot Act, set up secret torture facilities overseas, locked suspected terrorists away down in Gitmo without habeus corpus, taken trophy pictures of the sexual harrasment and molestation of prisoners, when most minorities in the U.S. don't feel that their votes are even counted, when white phosphorus has been used by our armed forces against insurgents (and maybe civilians) in Iraq - chemical weapons used against Muslim extremists produces a sickening sensation the word 'irony' fails to encompass, when ....

oh i'm just tired of it.

Welcome to the newest banana republic in the western hemisphere.

Posts: 148 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
javelin
Member
Member # 1284

 - posted      Profile for javelin   Email javelin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Welcome to the newest banana republic in the western hemisphere.
Yes, more over the top rhetoric will ALWAYS help the situation and inspire respectful, results-oriented debate and action.

[Roll Eyes]

It'd be even better if you knew why something was called a "banana republic" and could relate it to the situation. Whoohoo.

[ November 09, 2005, 10:33 AM: Message edited by: javelin ]

Posts: 8614 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Vance
Member
Member # 2612

 - posted      Profile for Vance   Email Vance       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well, true. I guess I was speaking on a more emotional level, and I don't blame you for calling me on it.

Still, it seems like every day we find out about yet another thing our country has done that's morally reprehensible. I mean, the vice president and the director of the CIA crying about not being able to torture people??

The U.S. used to stand for certain things, and I think your average citizen still does, but our leaders don't. It's depressing and it's shameful.

You were right about the rhetoric, but that's how it feels sometimes - like this isn't the country I thought it was.

Posts: 148 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
javelin
Member
Member # 1284

 - posted      Profile for javelin   Email javelin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
The U.S. used to stand for certain things, and I think your average citizen still does, but our leaders don't. It's depressing and it's shameful.
I do, truly, agree with this. I haven't taken a firm stand on the torture thing, but I've been thinking about it a LOT, and reading everything I can find out. At this point, I don't really care what torture gets us (on the positive side) - I don't believe we can afford it.

America must always strive for the ideal. The only time we can, as a nation, be okay with not shooting for that ideal is if it means we cease to exist because we are too caught in the pursuit of our ideals.

Basically, I feel that our country should always put our ideals first, right after our survival.

Posts: 8614 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Vance
Member
Member # 2612

 - posted      Profile for Vance   Email Vance       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Exactly.

This administration has twisted those sentiments, has always couched their dubious behavior on the basis of our survival. They're running us into a "Little Boy Who Cried Wolf" scenario with our allies, and justifying our enemies' concerns.

Posts: 148 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Bear in mind that France is up against the same people that kicked their ass in Northern Africa.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"but the last time I checked most of these Islamist organizations have so much problems with funding, recruitment, in-fighting and organization that they wouldn't even pose a threat to the military of luxembourg. All they can do are a few transit bombings over the course of 4 years and you expect this to be a warrant for forcing our society to become a totalitarian, torturing state?"


Glad you said that. So now I expect to not hear how much of a disaster Iraq is if the terrorists are so damned weak.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
javelin
Member
Member # 1284

 - posted      Profile for javelin   Email javelin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Vance:
Exactly.

This administration has twisted those sentiments, has always couched their dubious behavior on the basis of our survival. They're running us into a "Little Boy Who Cried Wolf" scenario with our allies, and justifying our enemies' concerns.

This is why there is a spectrum, in my response. I don't think anything we are up against threatens us enough that we must abandon our principles in order to survive - and I don't honestly believe that the administration thinks so either. However, I do think the administration has a lower barrier to certain things - and this issue is anything but simple:

1. There is a difference between torture and interrogation. Our definition of that difference is likely not the same as many people in the government, in the military, in the intelligence services, and worldwide. I feel we've crossed the line many times - the administration probably feels they have not.

2. The administration may feel that "low level" torture, if they were even to consider it torture, doesn't voilate our principles. I don't understand that, but I concede it as being possible.

3. There is considerable debate, with little clear cut truth, on whether the reports we've heard that we feel show torture being used are isolated events, performed without real authorization, or are systematic and authorized by the administration, or somewhere in between. "We" are not violating our principles if torture is not condoned, and in fact, if those involved are prosecuted fully. Is this happening? I can't be sure - and any who tells me they are sure has, to this point, been unable to back up their contentions without rampant speculation and rhetoric.

So, anyway, it's a complicated situation. I do think things could be clarified pretty easily by the administration, but the fact is, even if they went overboard pursuing and eliminating this stuff, their critics would still be doing what they are - insinuating and vilifying - capitalizing on any exception (and if the administration was trying to eliminate this stuff, it WOULD be an exception) to attack the United States and it's government with their cynical, paranoid, and frankly, hateful wordview.

[ November 09, 2005, 12:25 PM: Message edited by: javelin ]

Posts: 8614 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I am probably mangling the quote, but here it goes:

"When you are powerful, I will ask for pity, as is in line with YOUR ideals. When I am strong, I will oppress you, because that is in line with MY ideals."

Of course, you can put whomever you want in the place of the speaker...


One of the little historical dodges that many against torture have taken in painting a dark America, is the fact that we HAVE been down this "fold up your morals and put them in your pocket for now" scenarios. And every time, when the war, conflict, crisis, whatever has ended, we have cleaned off the blood, reached back into our pocket, and unfolded our ideals again.
We have acknowledged that "ideals" are for an ideal world, not a reality.

I'm not sure where I am yet on this.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
javelin
Member
Member # 1284

 - posted      Profile for javelin   Email javelin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by flydye45:
One of the little historical dodges that many against torture have taken in painting a dark America, is the fact that we HAVE been down this "fold up your morals and put them in your pocket for now" scenarios. And every time, when the war, conflict, crisis, whatever has ended, we have cleaned off the blood, reached back into our pocket, and unfolded our ideals again.
We have acknowledged that "ideals" are for an ideal world, not a reality.

Oddly enough, I find this completely in line with what I've said [Smile] - I think that, in the past, we HAVE fought for survival, and had to deal with the fact our ideals were in our way. We carefully set them aside, with people crying out in pain to do so, and when the crisis past, we ostentatiously restored them. This is good. Are we in one of those situations today? I don't know for sure, but I doubt it.

[ November 09, 2005, 12:45 PM: Message edited by: javelin ]

Posts: 8614 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Allow me to post a question, which may have been asked before, but never addressed as a single point.

Point 1: The Geneva Convention does not protect terrorists. It's just that simple. If you want to extend the protections as a keynote to humanity, fine. Don't say they are covered.

Point 2: Those we have taken and released have gone on to engage in more violent acts against us.

Point 3: Like torture, interrogation is not consistantly effective either. Linking that to the fact that the Gitmo detainees are "old news", they have now become excess baggage.

If we as a society cannot get reliable, helpful and timely information from insurgents, are you prepared to have America set up a permanent penal colony for those captured, or execute them immediately?

The argument that "well, guys who are going to die no matter what won't surrender and will just fight harder" doesn't wash in this instance. Why? I don't see them pussyfooting with us right now, and that argument is more key to military units. If we kill all the soldiers we capture, 1st Islamic Brigade will fight like banshees and kill all OUR soldiers captured. But the 1st Islamic Brigade isn't also on a recruitment drive as well. The terrorists ARE killing and dismembering our prisoners already and they ARE on a recruitment drive. Who really wants to join up a suicide brigade?

So is killing terrorists a more "moral" option then torture? I prefer it. Take these yahoos and give them to an Iraqi court with a military, civilian and clerical tribunal and have them killed under the laws of Iraq and the Prophet...and broadcast it. They already do that in the Middle East. Get the word out.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
javelin
Member
Member # 1284

 - posted      Profile for javelin   Email javelin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yes, trying and executing terrorists is most definitely a more moral position then torturing them. However, this doesn't mean that I think we should be executing them - it just means that if you want to compare the two, there is my opinion on the comparison [Smile] .
Posts: 8614 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
One last point, I swear. For those agog about the "outing" of a CIA operative who sits at a desk, are you also happy that the government is going to find and indict the leakers in this instance? It follows that leaking a desk jockey's name is less of an offense to security then this release of information. No doubt the insurgents are looking for soldiers to "make an example for America". Sigh.

Hey, it's illegal. The perpetrators of this crime should be happy to be indicted since they are doing it to save society, right? That's the standard we're holding the "torturers" to, brave idealists who should be eviserated by the law no matter the good they do society. And that includes the reporters, who would like to be immune to their little grandstanding without consequences. "Free press" does not trump "criminal investigation on national security".

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If given the choice between the two, which would you select suddenly elevated to public policy arbiter Javelin?
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
javelin
Member
Member # 1284

 - posted      Profile for javelin   Email javelin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
[Smile] Flydye, if I could only choose between the two, I'd execute them - not torture them. And do so fully within our court of law - as it applies to those I am executing, and I'd do the whole proceedings as publically as possible.
Posts: 8614 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
One quick question here....I seem to recall a whole lot of outrage by Sanc, Ricardo et al (our 'neo-con Klaxon' contingent) about the "national security breach" of the "leak" of Valerie Plame's identity.

Is this story also not a "leak?"

Oh wait, this one is a 'good' leak because it hurts this administration while the plame leak was bad because it compromised national security....

Thank god we have so many true conservatives with such rigid priniciples ready to expose all that is evil about this administration!

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Sancselfieme
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
There is a difference Daruma. Once again you are guilty of simplifying an argument to twist its meaning. Not all intelligence leaks are bad. If our government is doing something illegal and horrible, then a leak about it is good, regardless of the politics of the current administration.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Everard
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Daruma-
Who leaked the story is always the question. Was it someone who knew because they have access to classified information? If so, then it should be investigated and if necessary prosecuted. If the story breaks due to the actions of people who do not have access to the information through their status as a member of the government, then it is not a "leak," and not a criminal problem.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Let me check to see if I understand your second proposal. If Groundskeeper Willie suddenly sees behind the bushes in Poland a huge secret base with the screams of the oppressed ringing in his ears, then it is not a criminal problem? I can accept that.

However, until the reporters pony up their sources, we cannot know this. And if we are glad to have military "martyrs" willing to do the hard things for the good of society, then these possible administration hacks should be happy to play "bunkies" with Bubba if this is a case of idealism.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Sanc,

Right now any number of Al Qaida recruiters are finding some lost youth to "revenge their brothers in this torture chambers." And some of these recruits are going to kill soldiers. OUR soldiers. So the work of these reporters and their sources will directly hinder us and lead to the additional deaths of Americans and our allies. And I don't think that they spent a single second worrying about that.

So, no, I don't really see a difference...oh...wait...yep. I see the light! Valerie Plame was sitting at a desk all this time so her added risk was zero. Such is not the case for this leak. If the administration has culpability by having these sites of dubious legality (the fact there is a debate on this strikes at your arguement), then whistle blowers have their share of culpability as well.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Vance
Member
Member # 2612

 - posted      Profile for Vance   Email Vance       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yep, the leakers in both cases broke the law. Absolutely.

The folks who told us about facilities where untried, unconvicted, alleged enemy combatants may have been and almost certainly were systematically tortured to obtain information of the same quality the Spanish Inquisition was able to extract way back when. The law says they should pay the price for having broken the law. It might be hard to find a jury to convict them.

The people who leaked Valerie Plame's name also committed a crime. They did it in a childish attempt to "get back" at her husband for pointing out a discrepancy in what the president was telling the country. He embarrassed Bush. They got his wife outted as a CIA employee which is indeedydo against the law.

Aside from the strictly legal question, there's quite a bit of difference between the situations, now isn't there.

Posts: 148 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Godot
Member
Member # 2099

 - posted      Profile for Godot   Email Godot   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'll let Molly Ivins say it (from here ):
quote:
AUSTIN, Texas -- I can't get over this feeling of unreality, that I am actually sitting here writing about our country having a gulag of secret prisons in which it tortures people. I have loved America all my life, even though I have often disagreed with the government. But this seems to me so preposterous, so monstrous. My mind is a little bent and my heart is a little broken this morning.
Maybe I should try to get a grip -- after all, it's just this one administration that I had more cause than most to realize was full of inadequate people going in. And even at that, it seems to be mostly Vice President Cheney. And after all, we were badly frightened by 9-11, which was a horrible event. "Only" nine senators voted against the prohibition of "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment of persons under custody or control the United States." Nine out of 100. Should we be proud? Should we cry?

"We do not torture," said our pitifully inarticulate president, straining through emphasis and repetition to erase the obvious.

A string of prisons in Eastern Europe in which suspects are held and tortured indefinitely, without trial, without lawyers, without the right to confront their accusers, without knowing the evidence or the charges against them, if any. Forever. It's "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich." Another secret prison in the midst of a military camp on an island run by an infamous dictator. Prisoner without a name, cell without a number.

Who are we? What have we become? The shining city on a hill, the beacon and bastion of refuge and freedom, a country born amidst the most magnificent ideals of freedom and justice, the greatest political heritage ever given to any people anywhere.
...
Why did we bother to beat the Soviet Union if we were just going to become it? Shame. Shame. Shame.


Posts: 444 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
" almost certainly were systematically tortured to obtain information of the same quality the Spanish Inquisition "


Hmm. The Spanish Inquisition tortured to cause a change in religious allegiance and/or to confiscate the property of wealthy Protestants and Jews.

The U.S. may be torturing people who are single handedly devoted to the eradication of a whole slew of "rights" you have grown quite comfortable under and are not denied you, your allies and even your enemies who act in a civilized manner. Yes, we get to define civilized since it is our law.

But other then that there is no difference in what you hyperbolically said.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
And I could mention to Godot that the Gulags were used to house such enemies such as engineers who said a project could not be built, poets who said Stalin might be a bit too strong, Jews who were...um Jews, people seen talking to other people who knew "enemies of the state". Oh yes, and occasionally by luck the odd criminal and real revolutionary.

Our "gulag" (please insert as much sarcasm as you can in this word) houses muslims who hate us and want to kill us. Who have been captured killing us, or planning on killing us, or even building equipment to kill us. You will note a dearth of poets, housewives and children in this list.

For supposedly sophisticates, your sudden transition to black and white thinking is telling.

This is a point for debate, not blatant partisan hyperbole of the worst sort.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Godot
Member
Member # 2099

 - posted      Profile for Godot   Email Godot   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
flydye45, Five points:

(1) From one website...
quote:
Even more broadly, ";Gulag" has come to mean the Soviet repressive system itself, the set of procedures that prisoners once called the "meat-grinder": the arrests, the interrogations, the transport in unheated cattle cars, the forced labor, the destruction of families, the years spent in exile, the early and unnecessary deaths.
Maybe not all is applicable, but it's in the ballpark.

(2) How is it that you have such intimate knowledge of who is in our secret prisons? They are SECRET. We don't know who is in them or why.

(3) Who said I am a "sophisticate"? That's a danged lie! [Wink]

(4) Seriously, I don't know how you managed to discern anything about MY thinking from Molly Ivins' comments. What did I transition from? Did I say anything about whether or not I even agree with Ms. Ivin's? (Although I pretty much always do.) And despite your putting words in my mouth, I do feel this is a pretty B&W issue; this is not what our country stands for.

(5) How is it "partisan" to be against illegal detention and torture? And you consider my post, or Molly Ivin's comments, (I'm not sure which you are referring to) to be hyperbole of the worst sort? You must have just joined the Ornery forums. Welcome!

Personally, you pissed me off! (For about 30 seconds.) Now I've forgotten you.

Posts: 444 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
The people who leaked Valerie Plame's name also committed a crime. They did it in a childish attempt to "get back" at her husband for pointing out a discrepancy in what the president was telling the country. He embarrassed Bush. They got his wife outted as a CIA employee which is indeedydo against the law.
This is the conventional wisdom of the largely anti-Bush/anti-war on terror mainstream media and leftist contingent of the country, thouroughly immersed in the alternate reality you have all constructed for yourselves to convince yourselves that Bush is the greatest evil in the world, and the entire administration are nothing but blood thirsty liars and our only hope for salvation is the Democrat parties return to power.

It's the Joseph Goebbels template applied to perfection...tell a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.

Facts: In order to "out" a CIA agent, that agent needs to be undercover within the past 5 years. Ms. Plame was NOT undercover within that time frame, which means she was never "outted" to begin with.

Please disprove that fact before any of you leftist/Bush-haters flame me for my comparison to the Goebbels propaganda template.

Otherwise, just stick to DemocraticUnderground, DailyKos and Molly Ivins articles where the echo chamber does not have to deal with the dissonance of actual facts deconstructing the favored memes.

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
FiredrakeRAGE
Member
Member # 1224

 - posted      Profile for FiredrakeRAGE   Email FiredrakeRAGE   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Daruma28 said:
quote:
Otherwise, just stick to DemocraticUnderground, DailyKos and Molly Ivins articles where the echo chamber does not have to deal with the dissonance of actual facts deconstructing the favored memes.
I am normally relatively conservative. In the case of the above-referenced Molly Ivins article, however, I agree with her.

My point: torture is bad, and while someone may use amoral tactics in arguing against the Bush Administration, they may still have some good points.

--Firedrake

Posts: 3538 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Bah. A bunch of hyperventilation over what may or may not be going on here.

I find it ironic that the standard, boilerplate leftist view of America is that we are Amerikkka the Horrible. We oppress gays, women, minorities, we are colonial imperialists that ruthlessly murder innocent civilians to gain oil, and that terrorism is a justified response to our horrible foriegn policies....

And now people like Ivins that have constructed entire editorial careers re-hashing the many variations of that overall theme express shock that the CIA has secret prisons to house and interrogate suspected terrorists in foreign countries...including the Soviet Gulag facilities. But wait....why should that be so bad? Remember? Ronald Reagan was a dunce and an idiot for calling them an "Evil Empire" so the Gulag's could NOT have been that bad...right?

Shock?

This is supposed to be par for the course for this horrible country...right?

Personally, I'm past caring if anyone wants to call me a 'torture apologist' fine. I could give a rat's ass if we ARE torturing islamic extremists...the very same folks that salivate at the opportunity to cut YOUR infidel head off while ghoulishly chanting "God is Great" in their next Internet vid clip.

That being said, I STILL don't believe we are out and out truly TORTURING these prisoners. Perhaps some harsh treatment that a lot of squeamish people may have a hard time dealing with - like water boarding, but in comparison to TRUE torture like Saddam's regime ran? Industrial Shredders, rape rooms, cutting off limbs and tounges, ripping out fingernails, gouging out eyes....I don't believe we are truly doing such things. Of course, so many assume the worst because if fits the partisan template.

When we have concrete evidence of such things, than perhaps I'll join in on the condemnation...but for now, there has just been way too much politically motivated hyperbole about American "torture" ever since the Abu Ghraib debacle.

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Personally, you pissed me off! (For about 30 seconds.) Now I've forgotten you.

Best fire up your five working neurons again, because I'm back.

quote:
(1) From one website...

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Even more broadly, ";Gulag" has come to mean the Soviet repressive system itself, the set of procedures that prisoners once called the "meat-grinder": the arrests, the interrogations, the transport in unheated cattle cars, the forced labor, the destruction of families, the years spent in exile, the early and unnecessary deaths.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Maybe not all is applicable, but it's in the ballpark.

If in fact your ballparks are the size of Alaska, yes, it is in the ballpark. Let's see, cattle cars, forced labor, bereft families, exile, unnecessary deaths inflicted by their own govenrment. ...Nope still looking for that ballpark. Now if Molly Ivins had the intellectual sophistication to compare us to the S.S. rooting out the French Resistance, I might grant that. Instead, there is this intellectually dishonest diatribe. Shame shame shame on Molly (Partisan Hack) Ivins.

quote:
(2) How is it that you have such intimate knowledge of who is in our secret prisons? They are SECRET. We don't know who is in them or why.
Then how do you know it's not a love nest for Cheney and Condi, misreported by a rabid press? I'm not making any more presumptions about who or what is going on therein then Ms. Ivins or you. However, Occams Razor favors me in this matter, unless, in your comparison to gulags, you are assuming that Bush has suddenly started gathering Kulaks into these prisons.


quote:
(3) Who said I am a "sophisticate"? That's a danged lie!

Much like my spelling, my mischaracterization of your ability to see complex points has been corrected. Thank you. [Smile] BTW, nice ad hominem


quote:
(4) Seriously, I don't know how you managed to discern anything about MY thinking from Molly Ivins' comments. What did I transition from? Did I say anything about whether or not I even agree with Ms. Ivin's? (Although I pretty much always do.) And despite your putting words in my mouth, I do feel this is a pretty B&W issue; this is not what our country stands for.
Let's try this in fewer words. "How dare you imply I am like anything (even though you are right.)" Is that it? Silly me from infering by your entry that you would put in something that you agree with. Stupid stupid flydye. (hits head repeatedly)

quote:
(5) How is it "partisan" to be against illegal detention and torture? And you consider my post, or Molly Ivin's comments, (I'm not sure which you are referring to) to be hyperbole of the worst sort? You must have just joined the Ornery forums. Welcome!
I am not necesarily "for" torture. In fact I could be "against" torture and still allow the administration to do so under the extraordinary circumstances we find oursleves. But again I lapse into subtlety [Wink] As I stated before, "gulag" is besides being inaccurate, highly inflammatory. Even Ms. Ivins is intellectually honest enough to avoid comparisons to concentration camps, though I'll give her a few months before she finds something else to be agog about.

As far as hyperbolic stupidity, I have to grant you that I can easily think of at least 3 people who have you beat three ways past Sunday. [Big Grin]

[ November 10, 2005, 07:16 PM: Message edited by: flydye45 ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
FiredrakeRAGE
Member
Member # 1224

 - posted      Profile for FiredrakeRAGE   Email FiredrakeRAGE   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
flydye45 and Daruma28 -

Both of you seem to make two major points when advocating allowing torture.

You seem to hold both that:
1) These circumstances are extreme.
2) The people we torture are only getting what is coming to them.

I do not believe that the circumstances that we are currently in - a war on terror, a superpower, the information age, etc. were considered when the Constitution was created. However, I do believe that the Constitution and the case law behind it take the current circumstances into account. The Constitution was written broadly, to allow it to take new circumstances into account – and to apply old rules to these new circumstances. As an American, I believe in due process and the rule of law. These detainees are not recipients of due process, they are not allowed to confront their accusers, and do not have their day in court. I believe that the practice is legally and morally abhorrent.

The people we torture may be getting what is coming to them. The problem is that they are innocent. In the United States, people are innocent until they are proven guilty. While these prisons may not be on United States soil, we should insist that while they are run by agents of the government, they should be run at the standards to which we hold the government.

--Firedrake

Posts: 3538 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If/when we apprehend any American citizen, I agree with you 100% Fire.

AFAICT, these are facilities for captured terrorist suspects. For them, I care not what we do in terms of harsh interrogation techniques INCLUDING water boarding and threateining with dogs. Some find that atrocious. Sorry if it offends people that I just cannot muster a shred of sympathy for islamic extremists we are interrogating like that.

As far as I'm concerned, water boarding is scaring the living crap out of the prisoner without actually physically harming him. That's not TORTURE in the sense that so many critics use the term. The condemnation of TORTURE implies the worst human rights violations known to mankind are the exact same thing as the harsher interrogation techniques we've used.

Now, I did have to get a laugh out of Ted Kennedy going into his diatribe of explicitly detailing water boarding on the floor of the Senate a while back -- I guess he would know from personal experience when he "water boarded" Mary Jo Kopechne......

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
witless chum
Member
Member # 1643

 - posted      Profile for witless chum   Email witless chum   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Personally, I'm past caring if anyone wants to call me a 'torture apologist' fine. I could give a rat's ass if we ARE torturing islamic extremists...the very same folks that salivate at the opportunity to cut YOUR infidel head off while ghoulishly chanting "God is Great" in their next Internet vid clip."

I'd say you're a torture advocate, you don't seem too apologetic.

Even if you're right and, unlike Abu Ghraib, everyone in the prisons deserves to be there and they'd like to cut off my head, that doesn't make torture right and it doesn't make torture smart.

"That being said, I STILL don't believe we are out and out truly TORTURING these prisoners. Perhaps some harsh treatment that a lot of squeamish people may have a hard time dealing with - like water boarding, but in comparison to TRUE torture like Saddam's regime ran? Industrial Shredders, rape rooms, cutting off limbs and tounges, ripping out fingernails, gouging out eyes....I don't believe we are truly doing such things. Of course, so many assume the worst because if fits the partisan template."

I've never been moved by the "someone else is worse" argument.

The practical problem with torturing people is that they tend to tell you what you want to hear.

"When we have concrete evidence of such things, than perhaps I'll join in on the condemnation...but for now, there has just been way too much politically motivated hyperbole about American "torture" ever since the Abu Ghraib debacle."

Maybe so. If someone is motivated by partisanship, they're still right or wrong. I wonder if you engaged in any politically motivated hyperbole last year about how John Kerry was somehow going to compromise national security if he'd won the election.

Dan

Posts: 642 | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I've never been moved by the "someone else is worse" argument.
I'm not making it. I'm only saying that the definition of "torture" can be pretty damn broad...and a lot of people seem to be making the case that the interrogations we are carrying out are exactly the same on the moral equivalence level. Statments like Ted Kennedy when he said the torture chambers were not closed down, just re-opened under US management.

As far as I'm concerned there's a world of difference with techniques like water boarding and using dogs to intimidate, and sleep deprivation, and even sexual taunting as perhaps borderline, but WORLD'S apart from torture practices such as those done by Saddam that most agree are crimes against humanity.

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
FiredrakeRAGE
Member
Member # 1224

 - posted      Profile for FiredrakeRAGE   Email FiredrakeRAGE   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Daruma -

It is not our job to prove that some of those held are not terrorists. It is the job of the government to prove people guilty before imprisoning them.

Now most of these people are probably found in Iraq, fighting against our troops. They are probably bad guys, and it would probably be simple to prove their guilt. However, until we do, they are innocent.

--Firedrake

Posts: 3538 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
A bunch of hyperventilation over what may or may not be going on here.
That's what most concerns me. That we don't know, have no way of knowing, and that those who are doing these things will create new completely unaccountable systems. That will lead to innocent persons getting tortured, and then killed to cover up the fact that someone screwed up and tortured an innocent.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
witless chum
Member
Member # 1643

 - posted      Profile for witless chum   Email witless chum   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"As far as I'm concerned there's a world of difference with techniques like water boarding and using dogs to intimidate, and sleep deprivation, and even sexual taunting as perhaps borderline, but WORLD'S apart from torture practices such as those done by Saddam that most agree are crimes against humanity."

I don't disagree with that. I would disagree if you said 'and that makes them ok.' I wouldn't say that's there's a one-to-one moral equivalence. I would say that it puts us closer to one than we should be, as a free society.

The practical argument against torture would stand whether it's torture light or the "real" thing, in terms of damage to our reputation and in terms of the toturee telling us what we want to hear.

Posts: 642 | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
David Ricardo
Member
Member # 1678

 - posted      Profile for David Ricardo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Daruma said:

quote:
One quick question here....I seem to recall a whole lot of outrage by Sanc, Ricardo et al (our 'neo-con Klaxon' contingent) about the "national security breach" of the "leak" of Valerie Plame's identity.
Flydye, Daruma,

I am outraged that someone violated our national security by leaking classified information in the second case as well.

We should do whatever we must to punish, convict, and force the resignation of whoever that leaker may be.

BTW,

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-interrogate9nov09,0,802978.story

quote:
Another Republican, Sen. Trent Lott of Mississippi, said that senators from his party might have given information to the Post. Lott told reporters that the existence of the prison system was discussed last week at the Republican policy luncheon on Capitol Hill, which was attended by Vice President Dick Cheney and held the day before the Post published its report.
I would wager the Republicans thought they had come up with a clever little scheme. They saw Harry Reid embarrass them last week and thought maybe they could turn the tables a bit. Instead they ended up shooting themselves in the foot.

Frist and Hastert announced they wanted a formal congressional leak investigation — not about Plame scandal, but into the leak about CIA "black sites", the secret prisons in Eastern Europe -- as a way for GOP leaders to prove that they take the leak of classified information seriously.

It was also a way to put Dems on the spot: "Aha, you want leaks? You guys are worried about leaks? Fine, let's investigate this leak. Aha!"

Almost immediately after the flydye and Daruma Republican apologists starting screaming from their rooftops, it became immediately clear that the Republicans themselves were the source of the CIA "black sites" in Eastern Europe leak.

Yes, the same Republicans who are whining the most about the leak as a political tactic...are the same ones who leaked the existence of those aforementioned CIA black sites.

So, if Vice President Cheney is the leaker, will Daruma and flydye join me in demanding his resignation?

Or is their indignation over national security leaks simply partisan stupidity?

The actual answer is: Neither. They were just regurgitating the Republican talking points because they didn't know any better.

[ November 10, 2005, 11:23 PM: Message edited by: David Ricardo ]

Posts: 1429 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Or perhaps Flyedye and Daruma are simply being true to their principles.

Believe it or not, David Ricardo, not all politics is centered on affiliation and personality. Some people actually have principles and ideals, and apply them regardless of persons.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
David Ricardo
Member
Member # 1678

 - posted      Profile for David Ricardo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Let's just point out the obvious.

Flydye and Daruma are politicizing the issue of leaks of classified informatino that damage national security and are trying muddy the issue by diverting the debate towards the leak of CIA black sites in Eastern Europe.

Meanwhile, we know that the Republicans themselves were the ones to leak that classified information to the Washington Post.

They are saying that the first leak is not bad ("Democrats blah blah are politicizing blah blah blah the issue blah blah blah. Plame was not a real covert agent blah blah blah.").

Yet, they bring up false outrage over the second leak of CIA black sites in Eastern Europe and try to bring that up as a "real leak."

So they are not being consistent at all. They do not view all leaks of classified information as damaging to national security because they have continually tried to poo-poo the outing of a CIA covert agent who fought on the frontlines in the shadows against our nation's enemies for dozens of years.

So, yes, flydye and Daruma are being partisan hacks here, and I am calling them on it.

[ November 10, 2005, 11:52 PM: Message edited by: David Ricardo ]

Posts: 1429 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I haven't followed the Plame story. Was she actually fighting on the front lines in the shadows against our nations enemies when she got outed? I thought she was safely in DC. Is there an objective link somewhere that explains how this threatened national security, without asking me to contribute to Moveon.org or Al Qaeda or some other anti-Bush PAC at the end of the article?
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1