[Krusty]

Well after a couple years of stalling by the federal government, more Abu Ghraib pictures and videos are emerging from an Australian source. Most are similar (though a bit more bloody and graphic) than the originals and apparently there are literally thousands more still to come out.

I think this is probably a good time to revisit what has unfolded over the last couple of years since the first crop of photos came out. Back then, the apologists line was the "few bad apples" theory. The divulgence of occurrences at Guantnamo Bay, "extraordinary rendition" of prisoners to foreign holding areas, top level administration officials now openly arguing for the President's legal right to torture, the overwhelming vote by the Senate that all interrogations should conform to the US Army Field Manual's standards (though the executive branch still contends it is not legally bound by this vote), and the revelation that more extreme tactics were explicitly authorized by the administration months prior to the first round of photos all seem to clearly point toward a top-level, intentional policy of torturing perceived enemies without regard to whether or not any actual evidence can be drummed up against the particular individuals being tortured. Sorta ... "beat them first, figure out whether they are actually guilty of something later (or never, doesn't really matter)"

Anyway, I'm just curious if anybody on these boards is still clinging to the "few bad apples" theory in light of all this. Anyone still think this is just a small handful of people led by Charles Graner or are they just a small sampling of the ones who were dumb enough to film what they were doing and let it get in to the wrong hands ? Here's a link to a ram file that will start a RealPlayer stream of the Australian TV broadcast of the story (14 min) in case anyone wants to view it.

[analogika]

good god.

[PacHead]

These are old pictures, with some of the same people who've already been charged. A few naked terrorists, who cares ?

[Krusty]

Originally Posted by PacHead

These are old pictures, with some of the same people who've already been charged. A few naked terrorists, who cares ?

Correct. The pictures are from the same old batch from long ago. They're not the point of this thread. The point of this thread is how you (or anyone else) views the abuses with the things that have come to light in the last 2 years. Still think we're talking about "bad apples" at the lower levels here or does it seem pretty clear now that what happened at Abu-Ghraib was the result of changes in policy that happened much higher up the food chain before those abuses ever occurred? I'm saying its the latter ... many argued that it was the former 2 years ago but (seemingly) few take that position anymore. What are your thoughts on THAT topic?

[PacHead]

Originally Posted by Krusty

What are your thoughts on THAT topic?

My thoughts on that topic are very clear. I don't view harsh interrogation methods as torture.

[Krusty]

Originally Posted by PacHead

My thoughts on that topic are very clear. I don't view harsh interrogation methods as torture.

Yeah, I know ... but you're still missing (avoiding ?) the point. Substitute "harsh interrogation methods" for "torture" if you like. Do you think the "harsh interrogation methods" were carried out by a few bad apples acting alone ... or do you think the "harsh interrogation methods" were sanctioned from above. Many people denied until the ends of the earth that the "harsh interrogation methods" were anything more than a handful of soldiers taking matters into their own hands. Does it not now seem readily apparent that "harsh interrogation methods" are a new policy directive consciously implemented by this administration ?

[RAILhead]

Earth to Krusty: "harsh interrogation methods" have been "policy" since WWII.

GET.OVER.IT.

[Macrobat]

My thoughts are that the government investigated, arrested, tried and imprisoned those responsible for what is clearly NOT government policy. The fact that this escapes you is a mystery to me.

[Spliffdaddy]

I support torturing prisoners of war.

What's in those pictures isn't torture, though.

Appears to be more like discomfort.

Looks like most of them are still alive - and their limbs are still attached to their bodies.

[Too Artificial]

And isn't it something that the MSM has no problem showing these pictures, but will not show the "offensive" Mohammed cartoons out of "respect" to Muslims. Guess our soldiers don't deserve the same "respect". Cowards.

[Krusty]

Originally Posted by RAILhead

Earth to Krusty: "harsh interrogation methods" have been "policy" since WWII.

GET.OVER.IT.

Th harsher interrogation methods have not been "policy" (though they may have been actual practice) since WWII -- they were specifically approved and ramped up by Rumsfeld, and were specifically legally defended to the President by Gonzales in late '02 and early '03. This is open knowledge and it is well documented that our policy has in fact changed substantially since 2002 ... nobody denies that (except you, apparently) at this point. Congress and the administration have already acknowledged it, the only thing they're debating is whether or not it the "enhanced methods" constitute "torture" and whether or not the administration can approve them at their discretion without Congressional review. Colin Powell directly responded to change as presented by Gonzales by saying:

It will reverse over a century of US policy and practice in supporting the Geneva conventions and undermine the protections of the law for our troops, both in this specific conflict and in general

He describes the changes as a radical departure from a long-standing tradition. You are just making claims pulled out of thin air based on your feeling (apparently), that nothing has changed since WW II. The changes to policy are well documented, material fact and I have a hard time believing you're actually arguing against that. Care to support your claim somehow ??

[Kevin]

And the url is just the clincher.

[Dakar]

Originally Posted by Too Artificial

And isn't it something that the MSM has no problem showing these pictures, but will not show the "offensive" Mohammed cartoons out of "respect" to Muslims. Guess our soldiers don't deserve the same "respect". Cowards.

When our soldiers start rioting in the streets over this, I think you'll see a change of a policy. Until that day when they rail against the very free speech they defend, newspapers will feel free to publish items like these.

[Kevin]

It's called an agenda.

[Rolling Bones]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

I support torturing prisoners of war.

What's in those pictures isn't torture, though.

Appears to be more like discomfort.

Looks like most of them are still alive - and their limbs are still attached to their bodies.

You didn't see the picture of the dead guy.

Not that I really care.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Rolling Bones

You didn't see the picture of the dead guy.

Not that I really care.

You can't spin something that obvious.

Go back and see Spliff's post.

Looks like most of them are still alive

Put your eyes back in bub.

[Rolling Bones]

Originally Posted by Kevin

You can't spin something that obvious.

Go back and see Spliff's post.



Put your eyes back in bub.

There was another picture of that guy that they said appeared dead.

It was in one of the papers I read the other day.

Spin what spin?

Like I said I don't care what they do over there.

As long as I can go for my walk to Timmy's for my coffee and fart on the way there, I'm alright. On my way now.

You put your eyeballs in backwards bub.

Or were you making a post for the sake of revenge from another thread. There are more important posts to reply to here.

[RAILhead]

Krusty, my point is that NOTHING is different NOW as far as what's been going on since WWII. Some of you act like GWB suddenly had the idea to approve torturing people for info when the fact of the matter is, everyone with an ounce of gray matter knows we've been doing the SAME THING WE'RE DOING NOW for YEARS. Every administration. Every Presidency.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by RAILhead

Krusty, my point is that NOTHING is different NOW as far as what's been going on since WWII. Some of you act like GWB suddenly had the idea to approve torturing people for info when the fact of the matter is, everyone with an ounce of gray matter knows we've been doing the SAME THING WE'RE DOING NOW for YEARS. Every administration. Every Presidency.

Your founding fathers must be spinning in their graves, as must be your god.


Many refused to believe that their allies - friends - would be capable of implementing such a horror as policy, simply because we believed in at least some last shreds of human decency and ethical values behind the facade of Freedom and Liberty projected by the United States.

I am aghast, not the least at the reaction from some people here who see this as nothing more than normal course of action.


And you wonder why people hate you.


/cue Spliffdaddy "envy" post

[von Wrangell]

Originally Posted by analogika

Your founding fathers must be spinning in their graves, as must be your god.


Many refused to believe that their allies - friends - would be capable of implementing such a horror as policy, simply because we believed in at least some last shreds of human decency and ethical values behind the facade of Freedom and Liberty projected by the United States.

I am aghast, not the least at the reaction from some people here who see this as nothing more than normal course of action.


And you wonder why people hate you.

[kvm_mkdb]

Originally Posted by analogika

Your founding fathers must be spinning in their graves, as must be your god.


Many refused to believe that their allies - friends - would be capable of implementing such a horror as policy, simply because we believed in at least some last shreds of human decency and ethical values behind the facade of Freedom and Liberty projected by the United States.

I am aghast, not the least at the reaction from some people here who see this as nothing more than normal course of action.


And you wonder why people hate you.


/cue Spliffdaddy "envy" post

Post of the Year

[Spliffdaddy]

I'm still of the opinion that the prisoners are damned lucky to be alive.

Given the choice, I'm sure a majority of them would prefer panties on their head to being shot/blown up/crushed under the tracks of a tank/swallowed by a huge fireball/etc.

You should be thanking the US for not killing them.

[Tomchu]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

I support torturing prisoners of war.

Would you support it equally as much if it was your family, prisoners of a war, being tortured?

Yeah, thought so.

Say ... when are you going off to the Middle East to shoot you some sand n*****s?

[Krusty]

Originally Posted by RAILhead

Krusty, my point is that NOTHING is different NOW as far as what's been going on since WWII. Some of you act like GWB suddenly had the idea to approve torturing people for info when the fact of the matter is, everyone with an ounce of gray matter knows we've been doing the SAME THING WE'RE DOING NOW for YEARS. Every administration. Every Presidency.

I understand what you're saying Railhead ... and, y'know, I think you're probably right ... that our practice has likely always entailed some degree of secret "torture". The point I'm making is that the overt policy has been drastically altered to "normalize" torture as executive privilege. In other words, the legal foundation laid by this Administration as expressed by Gonzales and the rest of their legal counsel is essentially that no rules or limits can be put upon them by Congress and they can literally do anything they deem necessary. If other administrations were torturing people (and they may well have as you noted) ... they dam sure better have been hiding and doing it in secret or potentially face legal consequences if they were found out. The position of the current administration literally allows the President to override [i]any[/] restrictions that Congress tries to put on them and ignore any prosecution or legal repercussions if they are caught doing something that Congress and/or the American people deem illegal. This has ALREADY played out in the last couple of months. The Senate voted 90 - 9 (yes, if you are a Republican, this means the Republican Senator that you voted for is probably amongst those 90) to establish a code of conduct for interrogations. The administration has asserted that this vote is NOT binding on them whatsoever as the President's executive privilege overrides Congress on the matter and this IS a HUGE change from our prior history. Keep in mind, this is a primarily Republican congress that is voting overwhelmingly to set limits on Presidential power and the President is basically thumbing his nose at all of them. When your own party thinks you've gone too far (not just the opposition party) ... you've probably gone too far.

Moving the power to define the "rules" of interrogation from Congressional vote to Executive discretion is essentially Monarchy rather than representative gov't. It's no different than having Congress establishing a law against theft but then saying "but its OK for the President to steal if he sees fit". Big change in a bad direction, IMHO.

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally Posted by Tomchu

Would you support it equally as much if it was your family, prisoners of a war, being tortured?

Yeah, thought so.

Say ... when are you going off to the Middle East to shoot you some sand n*****s?

I'm not sure any country would treat US prisoners of war as well as we treat our prisoners of war. At least it's never happened yet.

So, no, I don't feel bad if the US mistreats prisoners they could have killed.

[Tomchu]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

I'm not sure any country would treat US prisoners of war as well as we treat our prisoners of war.

What scares me is that you can say that with a straight face.

In this very thread.

[Kevin]

Double Post

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by analogika

And you wonder why people hate you.

If people hate, it's of their own accord. If you hate, that says more about you, than the people you hate.

I would also ad, many of us really care less about the zealous anti-American people. Nothing we can do will stop them from hating.

We'll just mark that up as a loss.

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

I'm not sure any country would treat US prisoners of war as well as we treat our prisoners of war. At least it's never happened yet.

Yes, we are the big bad America! Yet we still treat our prisoners better. Yet we are still the evil driving force in the world.

Originally Posted by Tomchu

What scares me is that you can say that with a straight face.

In this very thread.

Would you like us to post pics of what other countries do to their prisoners?

Didn't think so.

I am not justifying anything anyone did.

But for those anti-American zealots, you don't need a reason. You are going to hiss and honk regardless.

And when it's pointed out to that America treats it's prisoners better than most, you'll just then justify your self induced hatred with "OH BUT AMERICA IS SUPPOSED TO BE BETTER!11"

Why? We are all human. Your beef is with humanity. No America.

I suggest some of you grow the hell up.

[Krusty]

Originally Posted by Kevin

And when it's pointed out to that America treats it's prisoners better than most, you'll just then justify your self induced hatred with "OH BUT AMERICA IS SUPPOSED TO BE BETTER!11"

The "America is supposed to be better" position that you've paraphrased and attributed to "anti-American zealots" is, in fact, the position taken by an overwhelming 90% of our Senate including the overwhelming majority of Republicans. Your portrayal of the sides of the argument seem pretty accurate ... but your implication that the "America is supposed to be better" crowd is comprised of a small group of "America haters" is completely inaccurate. That position is the by far the mainstream position of Democratic and Republican lawmakers alike. It is a strikingly small minority of Senators, the Bush Administration, and over zealous forum posters who hold the apologist view that treating our prisoners "better than most" or "better than they do" is good enough.

Morals and values that are contingent or sway in the breeze based on what others (and especially our enemies) do are not really morals and values at all and smacks of the "moral relativism" that the "Left" or "Hollywood" is so often accused of. I urge you to read the text of the McCain Amendment, the speech he gave upon submitting it to the Senate, and even the guidance of Jesus Christ if you are a Christian. Whether it be a year from now, a decade from now, or when you meet your maker -- one day it will dawn on you and the other apologists that you've spent the last couple of years taking a stance on this issue that is not only morally bankrupt but that is also impractical from the standpoint of information gathering.

Originally Posted by Kevin

Why? We are all human. Your beef is with humanity. No America.

What logic here could not equally be applied to the people who flew planes in to the twin towers ?? Perhaps your beef is with humanity, not terrorists. They are just being human after all.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Krusty

The "America is supposed to be better" position that you've paraphrased and attributed to "anti-American zealots" is, in fact, the position taken by an overwhelming 90% of our Senate including the overwhelming majority of Republicans.

Actually I have heard it mostly used when the Dems are attacking.

Your portrayal of the sides of the argument seem pretty accurate ... but your implication that the "America is supposed to be better" crowd is comprised of a small group of "America haters" is completely inaccurate. That position is the by far the mainstream position of Democratic and Republican lawmakers alike. It is a strikingly small minority of Senators, the Bush Administration, and over zealous forum posters who hold the apologist view that treating our prisoners "better than most" or "better than they do" is good enough.

No, I think the point is, America does treat it's prisoners better. And America still gets treated like it's the worst. That is my point. And it's true.

Morals and values that are contingent or sway in the breeze based on what others (and especially our enemies) do are not really morals and values at all and smacks of the "moral relativism" that the "Left" or "Hollywood" is so often accused of. I urge you to read the text of the McCain Amendment, the speech he gave upon submitting it to the Senate, and even the guidance of Jesus Christ if you are a Christian. Whether it be a year from now, a decade from now, or when you meet your maker -- one day it will dawn on you and the other apologists that you've spent the last couple of years taking a stance on this issue that is not only morally bankrupt but that is also impractical from the standpoint of information gathering.

Ah, I love it when non-Christians quote scriptures. You'd have probably quoted that scripture to Jesus when he was kicking the merchant's ass out of the temple too. He didn't HATE the merchants. But he took care of them didn't he? Wasn't with words either. Not trying to justify anything America has done. Just pointing out your scripture pasting is invalid.

What logic here could not equally be applied to the people who flew planes in to the twin towers ?? Perhaps your beef is with humanity, not terrorists. They are just being human after all.

Oh you are very correct. My beef isn't with these terrorists, but the one that deceived them.

[PacHead]

Originally Posted by Rolling Bones

You didn't see the picture of the dead guy.

Not that I really care.

A picture of a dead guy doesn't prove much. Who knows how he ended up dead. It might have something to do with a certain war, people do in fact die from various causes.