Remember Abu Graib?

CBL4 · 26th October 2004, 10:51 AM

This is a pointless post because anyone who actual cares about civil liberties is already anti-Bush but here is an editorial from the Washington Post:

Quote:

IN THE PAST few weeks the presidential candidates have debated almost every aspect of the war on terrorism save one: the handling of detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan. That is a remarkable omission, if only because the shocking photographs of abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, and reports of hundreds of other cases of torture and homicide in Iraq and Afghanistan, have done grave damage to the United States' ability to combat extremism in the Muslim world. There is, too, something important to debate: whether the United States will return to adhering to the Geneva Conventions and other international rules governing the treatment of foreign prisoners, or whether the war on terrorism justifies the violation of international law in certain cases. President Bush clearly intends to preserve the current, exceptional policies he adopted after Sept. 11, 2001, despite the abuses to which they led. Sen. John F. Kerry has criticized the abuses but hasn't made clear whether he would change the policies.

Mr. Bush is obviously eager to avoid the subject of prisoner detentions. Maybe that's because his public stance on what happened at Abu Ghraib, and what caused it, is entirely at odds with the facts brought out by official investigations. When he last spoke of the matter, months ago, the president maintained that the abuse was the responsibility of a few low-ranking soldiers working the night shift. He has not acknowledged that scores of soldiers have now been implicated for crimes including homicide, or that a Pentagon-appointed panel has found responsibility at senior levels of the Pentagon, the Justice Department and the White House. Nor has he held anyone in his administration accountable. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, who made policy decisions about interrogations that led directly to the abuse of prisoners in Afghanistan and Iraq, said he's not aware that any abuses occurred during questionings -- even though an official report by his own department confirmed that very point.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34176-2004Oct14.html

CBL

Crossbow · 26th October 2004, 02:32 PM

Yes, I watched all four debates and I hoped that Abu Graib would have been mentioned at least once, but alas it was not.

Ugh!

zakur · 26th October 2004, 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Crossbow
Yes, I watched all four debates and I hoped that Abu Graib would have been mentioned at least once, but alas it was not.

Ugh!

And Kerry had a great chance in debate #1 when Bush said something to the effect of keeping his girls on a leash. Kerry said "I have learned not to do that." Instead he should have said something like:

As the Commander in Chief presiding over the abuses at Abu Ghraib, photographic evidence of which shows leashed Iraqi prisoners being humiliated by U.S. soldiers, you should no better than to talk of leashing human beings. What are you, a f*cking moron?

Ladewig · 26th October 2004, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by zakur
And Kerry had a great chance in debate #1 when Bush said something to the effect of keeping his girls on a leash. Kerry said "I have learned not to do that." Instead he should have said something like:

As the Commander in Chief presiding over the abuses at Abu Ghraib, photographic evidence of which shows leashed Iraqi prisoners being humiliated by U.S. soldiers, you should no better than to talk of leashing human beings. What are you, a f*cking moron?

I would have paid money to witness that: the insult heard 'round the world.

a_unique_person · 27th October 2004, 06:10 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Crossbow
Yes, I watched all four debates and I hoped that Abu Graib would have been mentioned at least once, but alas it was not.

Ugh!

I think Kerry has learned his lesson from his Vietnam days. Don't rock the boat when it comes to criticising our men in uniform. If you criticise any, you are considered a monster who criticises them all.

Chaos · 27th October 2004, 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by zakur
And Kerry had a great chance in debate #1 when Bush said something to the effect of keeping his girls on a leash. Kerry said "I have learned not to do that." Instead he should have said something like:

As the Commander in Chief presiding over the abuses at Abu Ghraib, photographic evidence of which shows leashed Iraqi prisoners being humiliated by U.S. soldiers, you should no better than to talk of leashing human beings. What are you, a f*cking moron?

Oh my, of course you know he could never have done that, donÂ´t you?

What respectable person (or what person who pretends to be respectable, like a politician) would say "f*cking" on TV?

AlH · 27th October 2004, 10:40 AM

How about a conspiracy theory. With a highly contested race the media - and the parties probably - have a higher income due to increased spending and interest in the event. So by keeping the race neck and neck as long as possible and not asking any hard questions, the media can increase viewership/readership, sell more ad space, reduce cost on scripted shows (i.e. REAL reality television) etc., etc. Introducing facts that end the closeness of the race are ignored or left until the "season finale" on election eve just like any other Hollywood series. Outsiders like Michael Moore are not *in* on the plan so are out trying to deflect the vote one way or the other.

How much has been spent on this election, including all the books like Woodward's, Clarke's, Coulter's and Moore's, that probably would not have been if, say, Bush (or Kerry) was alway 30 points behind in the polls?

I am not saying this is happening, just throwing it out there, although there are probably conspiracy advocates who have already believe this going on - at the prodding of the reptoid overlords who put Bush in power - all along even though it would require the co-operation of both parties for it to work.

HarryKeogh · 27th October 2004, 11:13 AM

and remember the female soldier holding the leash around the prisoner's neck with the thumbs up sign?

well, she had a baby this week! congrats to the new mom...hopefully baby will inherit none of your morals.

26th October 2004, 10:51 AM	#1
CBL4 Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 2,349	Remember Abu Graib? This is a pointless post because anyone who actual cares about civil liberties is already anti-Bush but here is an editorial from the Washington Post: Quote: IN THE PAST few weeks the presidential candidates have debated almost every aspect of the war on terrorism save one: the handling of detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan. That is a remarkable omission, if only because the shocking photographs of abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, and reports of hundreds of other cases of torture and homicide in Iraq and Afghanistan, have done grave damage to the United States' ability to combat extremism in the Muslim world. There is, too, something important to debate: whether the United States will return to adhering to the Geneva Conventions and other international rules governing the treatment of foreign prisoners, or whether the war on terrorism justifies the violation of international law in certain cases. President Bush clearly intends to preserve the current, exceptional policies he adopted after Sept. 11, 2001, despite the abuses to which they led. Sen. John F. Kerry has criticized the abuses but hasn't made clear whether he would change the policies. Mr. Bush is obviously eager to avoid the subject of prisoner detentions. Maybe that's because his public stance on what happened at Abu Ghraib, and what caused it, is entirely at odds with the facts brought out by official investigations. When he last spoke of the matter, months ago, the president maintained that the abuse was the responsibility of a few low-ranking soldiers working the night shift. He has not acknowledged that scores of soldiers have now been implicated for crimes including homicide, or that a Pentagon-appointed panel has found responsibility at senior levels of the Pentagon, the Justice Department and the White House. Nor has he held anyone in his administration accountable. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, who made policy decisions about interrogations that led directly to the abuse of prisoners in Afghanistan and Iraq, said he's not aware that any abuses occurred during questionings -- even though an official report by his own department confirmed that very point. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34176-2004Oct14.html CBL
CBL4 Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 2,349

26th October 2004, 02:32 PM	#2
Crossbow Seeking Honesty and Sanity Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 6,294	Yes, I watched all four debates and I hoped that Abu Graib would have been mentioned at least once, but alas it was not. Ugh!
	__________________ A man's best friend is his dogma.

26th October 2004, 05:34 PM	#3
zakur Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Dayton, OH Posts: 3,265	Quote: Originally posted by Crossbow Yes, I watched all four debates and I hoped that Abu Graib would have been mentioned at least once, but alas it was not. Ugh! And Kerry had a great chance in debate #1 when Bush said something to the effect of keeping his girls on a leash. Kerry said "I have learned not to do that." Instead he should have said something like: As the Commander in Chief presiding over the abuses at Abu Ghraib, photographic evidence of which shows leashed Iraqi prisoners being humiliated by U.S. soldiers, you should no better than to talk of leashing human beings. What are you, a f*cking moron?
	__________________ "I do not believe in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." -Thomas Carlyle "That's the problem these days: nobody thinks of the tumors." -steinhenge

26th October 2004, 06:03 PM	#4
Ladewig Hipster alien Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: not measurable Posts: 16,827	Quote: Originally posted by zakur And Kerry had a great chance in debate #1 when Bush said something to the effect of keeping his girls on a leash. Kerry said "I have learned not to do that." Instead he should have said something like: As the Commander in Chief presiding over the abuses at Abu Ghraib, photographic evidence of which shows leashed Iraqi prisoners being humiliated by U.S. soldiers, you should no better than to talk of leashing human beings. What are you, a f*cking moron? I would have paid money to witness that: the insult heard 'round the world.
	__________________ Is the JREF message board training wheels for people who hope to one day troll other message boards? It is not that hard to get us to believe you. We are not the major leagues or even the minor leagues. We are Pee-Wee baseball. If you love striking out 10-year-olds, then you'll love trolling our board.

27th October 2004, 06:10 AM	#5
a_unique_person Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Mt Disappointment Posts: 33,341	Quote: Originally posted by Crossbow Yes, I watched all four debates and I hoped that Abu Graib would have been mentioned at least once, but alas it was not. Ugh! I think Kerry has learned his lesson from his Vietnam days. Don't rock the boat when it comes to criticising our men in uniform. If you criticise any, you are considered a monster who criticises them all.
	__________________ *Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.* Everything is possible, but not everything is probable. For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes

27th October 2004, 07:19 AM	#6
Chaos TAM Chocolate Dispenser Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: The Heart of Old Europe Posts: 9,782	Quote: Originally posted by zakur And Kerry had a great chance in debate #1 when Bush said something to the effect of keeping his girls on a leash. Kerry said "I have learned not to do that." Instead he should have said something like: As the Commander in Chief presiding over the abuses at Abu Ghraib, photographic evidence of which shows leashed Iraqi prisoners being humiliated by U.S. soldiers, you should no better than to talk of leashing human beings. What are you, a fcking moron? Oh my, of course you know he could never have done that, donÂ´t you? What respectable person (or what person who pretends to be respectable, like a politician) would say "fcking" on TV?
	__________________ Grand Master, Knights of the Question Mark Illusion: too good to be true - Reality: too true to be good Authors build castles in the sky, readers live in them and publishers collect the rent. - Maxim Gorki Folks enjoy a witch-hunt as long as they are on the blunt end of the pitchfork. - Suezoled You can't use logic to talk a man out of a position that he didn't use logic to get himself into - passed down by Nyarlathotep Kids these days are better than their parents since they constitute the newest edition, the beta version of our societies - Cleopatra YouÂ´ll have to accept the fact that some people are just plain nuts. - Paul C. Anagnostopolous

27th October 2004, 10:40 AM	#7
AlH Muse Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 526	How about a conspiracy theory. With a highly contested race the media - and the parties probably - have a higher income due to increased spending and interest in the event. So by keeping the race neck and neck as long as possible and not asking any hard questions, the media can increase viewership/readership, sell more ad space, reduce cost on scripted shows (i.e. REAL reality television) etc., etc. Introducing facts that end the closeness of the race are ignored or left until the "season finale" on election eve just like any other Hollywood series. Outsiders like Michael Moore are not in on the plan so are out trying to deflect the vote one way or the other. How much has been spent on this election, including all the books like Woodward's, Clarke's, Coulter's and Moore's, that probably would not have been if, say, Bush (or Kerry) was alway 30 points behind in the polls? I am not saying this is happening, just throwing it out there, although there are probably conspiracy advocates who have already believe this going on - at the prodding of the reptoid overlords who put Bush in power - all along even though it would require the co-operation of both parties for it to work.
AlH Muse Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 526

27th October 2004, 11:13 AM	#8
HarryKeogh Catholic School Survivor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: New York, NY Posts: 11,342	and remember the female soldier holding the leash around the prisoner's neck with the thumbs up sign? well, she had a baby this week! congrats to the new mom...hopefully baby will inherit none of your morals.