Announcement

Collapse

Welcome to Moorcock's Miscellany

Dear reader,

Many people have given their valuable time to create a website for the pleasure of posing questions to Michael Moorcock, meeting people from around the world, and mining the site for information. Please follow one of the links above to learn more about the site.

Thank you,
Reinart der Fuchs
See more
See less

Torture in Abu Ghraib Prison

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Yup, zakt. Berg's parents claimed he was in US custody for something like 20 days before he was captured by those who killed him. Now the US govt. is saying that isn't so. I get the feeling the truth is a million miles away from here...
    "Wounds are all I'm made of. Did I hear you say that this is victory?"
    --Michael Moorcock, Veteran of the Psychic Wars

    Comment


    • #32
      Here's some interesting stuff related to this story (warning: much of what follows is rough, seriously gruesome shit). I have touched on some of this in the Q&A Current Event threads, but this is more recent stuff along the same lines as what I had mentioned from the early 80s...

      -----------------------------

      Torture and abuse: A pattern and practice of the U.S. military
      Bob Fitrakis, May 4, 2004

      http://www.freepress.org/columns/display/3/2004/882

      The official word from the Bush administration is that the torture and sexual abuse of Iraqi prisoners by U.S. troops in Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison is not "systematic," according to General Richard Myers, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. This type of torture of indigenous and Third World people, however, is well-documented as a pattern and practice of the U.S. military and the CIA.

      In January 1997, the Baltimore Sun exposed a 1983 CIA torture manual that was used to instruct five Latin American nations' security forces. The infamous disclaimer in the torture manual read: "While we do not stress the use of coercive techniques, we want to make you aware of them and the proper way to use them." A 1996 U.S. government investigation into the U.S. Army School of the Americas in Ft. Benning, Georgia resulted in the release of no less than seven training manuals used at the school "which taught murder, torture, and extortion" as a means of repressing so-called "subversives," according to a Congressional report. (www.fas.org/irp/congress/1997_rpt/soaexec.htm) In addition to the seven training manuals, add the 1983 Honduran Interrogation Manual and the 1984 Contra Manual as evidence of the U.S. military industrial complex's long-standing practice of torture.

      Recall the comments of former CIA Station Chief and National Security Council Coordinator John Stockwell about the CIA Contra Manual and actions promoted by the U.S. military in Nicaragua: "They go into villages. They haul out families. With the children forced to watch, they castrate the father. They peel the skin off his face. They put a grenade in his mouth, and pull the pin. With the children forced to watch, they gang-rape the mother, and slash her breasts off. And sometimes, for variety they make the parents watch while they do these things to the children." (www.serendipity.li/cia/stock1.html)

      In his lecture, "The Secret Wars of the CIA," Stockwell outlined in detail the use of sexual humiliation from his own investigation. "She told about being tortured one day: She's on this table, naked in a room full of six men and they're doing these incredibly painful, degrading things to her body. There's an interruption. The American is called to the telephone, and he's in the next room, and the others take a smoke break. She's lying on this table, and he's saying: 'Oh, hi Honey. Yes, I can wrap it up here in another hour or so, and meet you and the kids at the Ambassador's on the way home.'"

      {more via the above cited URL}

      -----------------------------

      Torture's Teachers
      By A.J. Langguth, THE NEW YORK TIMES, MONDAY, JUNE 11, 1979

      http://www.chss.montclair.edu/englis...gguthleaf.html

      He said that the C.I.A. sent an operative to teach interrogation methods to SAVAK, the Shah's secret police, that the training included instructions in torture, and the techniques were copied from the Nazis.

      Reading through the clippings, I could think of several reasons why the accusations had not been featured prominently. Mr. Leaf could not, or did not, supply the name of the instructor, his victims would be hard to locate; and the testimony from opponents of the Shah would be suspect.

      But there is still another reason that I take to be the truest one: We - and I mean we as Americans - don't believe it. We can read the accusations, even examine the evidence and find it irrefutable. But, in our hearts, we cannot believe that Americans have gone abroad to spread the use of torture.

      ...

      Thanks to Mr. Hevia, I was finally hearing Mr. Mitrione's true voice:

      "When you receive a subject, the first thing to do is to determine his physical state, his degree of resistance, through a medical examination. A premature death means a failure by the technician.

      "Another important thing to know is exactly how far you can go given the political situation and the personality of the prisoner. It is very important to know beforehand whether we have the luxury of letting the subject die"

      "Before all else, you must be efficient. You must cause only the damage that is strictly necessary, not a bit more. We must control our tempers in any case. You have to act with the efficiency and cleanliness of a surgeon and with the perfection of an artist"

      {more via the above cited URL}

      -----------------------------

      Various comments by poster "Outraged" at:
      http://billmon.org/archives/001474.html#comments

      We created Saddam, we financed Saddam, we armed Saddam, we gave him Chemical weapons and intelligence to encourage and assist Saddam to Kill more Iranians, after he gassed his own people Rumsfeld visited Saddam and we gave him more money and more weapons...

      Why are there mass Shia graves in southern Iraq ? because he slaughtered the Shia uprising while we sat back and WATCHED !

      We killed 500,000+ Iraqi's (mostly children) through bombing and sanctions over 11 years before we Invaded to give them Freedom.

      Then we murder them, humiliate them, diminate them torture and assainate them...

      And WE tell ourselves WE are the GOOD Guys ?!

      ...

      Thier style of dress, posture, weaponry and demeanour taken as a whole does not fit with any previous footage I've seen
      of the Iraqi's Resistance or Al Qaeda paramilitaries...

      ...

      Any experienced Interrogator will tell you that Torture and Abuse are counter-productive in obtaining useful information for analysis and subseuent dissemination as intelligence reports.

      I'm been concerned that there is more to some of these activities than 'just' preparatory to and interrogation.

      Have you read Taguba's full report, Male rape, female rape, photos of paraded naked male and female prisoners, beating of a naked 13 year old girl, sodomy with broomsticks, numbers of obviously bearen to death detainees, etc, etc.

      I think an element of these activities is selective humiliation, and an expression of domination not so much to obtain information from all that they did this too, but to terrorise them and attaempt to destroy targeted individuals self-worth via such activities. Perhaps as leverage on others or relatives...

      I've also heard whispers there was a component of targeted Psyops involved as well.

      ...

      Hmmm, re Nick Berg,

      He definitely was an unescorted freelance civilian contractor with no association with CPA, Coalition Forces or In Country Companies.

      Apparently made his own way into the country overland via Jordan.

      He was arrested bu Iraqi Police for "suspicious activities" after CPA (FBI) officials interviewed him three seperate occassions he was released but advised to "Leave the Country". CPA directing all queries to Iraqi police wo redirect all queries to the CPA.

      Source: CPA Iraq morning brief.

      Comment: The plot thickens...as a communications specialist the events would indicate he was possibly a covert Intelligence/Interception Operative...but who's ?

      Since he was requested to 'Depart Iraq' he did'nt have a relationship with any Coalition nation...

      He was wearing a detention jumpsuit, and was skillfully bound hand and foot with proper/quality rope ?

      The 'Terrorists' 'dress, bearing & demeanour' suggest formally trained military or paramilitary...

      The 'terrorists' were all armed with Close combat/security arms...difficult to identify, however, probably H & K MP5s SMGs (an extremely unusual weapon of use for Iraqi insurgents or Terrorist groups)...What was odd was no miscellaneous weaponry on display, no AKs, no RPG launchers and no 'macho' posturing with thier weapons, curiously all familiarly carried on slings...they also stood at 'parade rest' or 'easy' in a line formation...no 'macho', indisiplined, emotive aggressive physical posturing...all had a consistent conformist attire (pseudo-uniform ?)...all appeared well-built and apparently of moderate to high physical fitness.

      Who were the 'terrorists' ?

      1. US OGA's, ie. private contractors (hired killers, mercs) ? or
      2. In-country paramilitary, ie. ICDC, Iraqi police, recently raised Iraqi Inteeligence service ?
      or
      3. Ex-Saddam military/paramilitary (if so why so disciplined and uniformly attired and armed ?) ?
      or
      4. Supposed Al Qaeda terrorists ?

      Given the above he was probably brutally murdered by group 1 or 2 ?

      Comment: an uninvited Covert Israeli Mossad agent identified and effectively executed completely independantly by group 2 ? or obscenely cynically murdered by group 2? or a combination of the two groups ?

      ...

      G3 and H & K MP5 are very different weapons, one a readily available assault rifle (G3) the other an expensive rare sub machine gun usually used by western elite special forces...

      -----------------------------

      {And finally this...}

      US faces prisoner abuse complaint in Afghanistan
      By Mike Collett-White, 12 May 2004 14:38:30 GMT

      http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/ISL66411.htm

      KABUL, May 12 (Reuters) - The U.S. military, facing a backlash across the Arab world for its treatment of Iraqi prisoners, announced on Wednesday it had launched an investigation into a complaint of detainee abuse in Afghanistan.

      Former Afghan police colonel Sayed Nabi Siddiqui told the New York Times he was subjected to beating, kicking, sleep deprivation, taunts and sexual abuse during about 40 days in U.S. custody in Afghanistan last year.

      {more via the above cited URL}

      -----------------------------

      Have a good day anyway!

      Comment


      • #33
        PWV:

        Maybe I was out of line with the troll comment - but why do some very basic things have to be explained to someone of Bill's apparent intelligence? In my view he is not making sincere replies - he is in some cases dissembling with an agenda of confusing clearly understood ideas.

        I won't apologize, I am merely explaining my position.

        I also won't deny that despite some similarity in our respective backgrounds, Bill and I are miles apart politically. Politically, we are practically mortal enemies. And I take my politics very seriously. I am not amused. I am not being entertained.

        I am appalled at the things that are done in my name and for which I am supposed to feign gratitude.

        And to answer another poster in Q&A: no, I am not surprised. I have been aware of these disturbing undercurrents in U.S. politics since the 80s. The fact that I am not surprised by the horror provides me no comfort.

        Comment


        • #34
          Thanks for replying, krunky. I see what you mean.

          Originally posted by krunky
          why do some very basic things have to be explained to someone of Bill's apparent intelligence?
          I don't know. It sucks. And as Bill said, Bush's numbers seem to be increasing with all this. I cannot explain it.

          I would think we would all be, "Alright. That's it! Too far is too far! Get the fuck out of the White House! You've had your last chance! Let's try something new!" But instead, half the country is all, "Stay the course. You're doing great, George. Stay the course. Our God can beat up their God."

          Sometimes, it ISN'T the thought that counts.

          At what point did this war turn from restoring and protecting people's civil rights to taking them away?
          "Wounds are all I'm made of. Did I hear you say that this is victory?"
          --Michael Moorcock, Veteran of the Psychic Wars

          Comment


          • #35
            PWV:

            Don't despair quite yet...

            --------------------------------

            Bush approval rating hits lowest point

            http://www.usatoday.com/news/politic...ush-poll_x.htm

            But according to Newport, other parts of the poll provide some encouragement for Kerry's campaign:

            *Kerry improved his standing with registered voters, a larger group than likely voters. He leads Bush 50%-44% among them.

            *Kerry has a 14-point lead over Bush on who would better handle the economy, up from 8 points last week.

            *Bush's margin on handling Iraq shrank from 15 points to 3.

            Newport said the five presidents re-elected since 1950 never fell behind their opponents among registered voters after January of an election year. "Clearly, Kerry has made some gains among the general population of registered voters," he says. "At the same time, Bush has been able to maintain rough parity among likely voters because his voters are more activated."

            --------------------------------

            Findings from a New National Poll show support for Impeachment, Growing Opposition to War on Terrorism

            http://www.commondreams.org/news2004/0511-08.htm

            BERKELEY - May 11 - Reporting from an ongoing survey of public knowledge and opinion, Berkeley based NGO Retro Poll released startling results suggesting that 39% of Americans favor impeachment of President Bush. The poll, taken between April 19 and May 5 asked whether people believe that misleading Congress and the Public on weapons of mass destruction to take the country to war is grounds to impeach the President (39% said yes, 40% said no). On whether the U.S. should have invaded Iraq the poll results are consistent with findings of Gallup and other major polls (48% said yes).

            Other surprising findings were that almost half of respondents (46%) favor an independent investigation of the U.S. role in the overthrow of Haiti's democratically elected president, Juan Bertrand Aristide, and 57% favor a national moratorium on the death penalty because of the procedural problems that have put many innocent people on death row (112 released so far). Four out of five Americans also repudiate the use of torture.

            As in earlier Retro Polls most support for the war in Iraq and the War on Terrorism was found among people who still think that Saddam Hussein worked with Al Qaeda (though no evidence has been published) and among the 32% of people who believe the War on Terrorism is preventing terrorism. However, 24% of Americans believe that the War on Terrorism is actually creating terrorists. In addition, 56 % of people who gave an opinion say the War on Terrorism is removing important democratic rights in the US and large percentages (50-80%) oppose various intrusive provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act.

            The poll reached 513 random Americans and has a "margin of error" of +/- 3.5% Full results are available at www.retropoll.org.

            {this was a press release so I quoted it almost in full}

            --------------------------------

            And here's the secret weapon waiting in the wings (maybe):

            --------------------------------



            What John Kerry Needs: The Estrogen Factor
            By Lakshmi Chaudhry, AlterNet, May 11, 2004

            http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=18666

            Sherry is just a regular gal. Like most Americans, the married 30-something would rather watch "Survivor" on CBS than a bunch of talking heads discuss Washington politics over on CNN. And yet, she has a photo of John Edwards and his wife stuck on her refrigerator. Oh, except she's carefully grafted her own face onto Elizabeth Edwards' body.

            Let's just say Sherry really, really likes John Edwards. And she's not alone.

            John Edwards was the rare candidate who actually got more of his support from women than men in many of the Democratic primaries. He also got more of his money, in both dollar amounts and percentage, from contributors identified as homemakers or housewives. In fact, it's the women of North Carolina who put Edwards in the Senate ? he owed his upset victory over incumbent Republican Senator Lauch Faircloth in 1998 to a whopping 16-point gender gap.

            --------------------------------

            So fine - it's a race for the lesser evil. It can still be won by the lesser evil.

            Comment


            • #36
              "Maybe I was out of line with the troll comment - but why do some very basic things have to be explained to someone of Bill's apparent intelligence? In my view he is not making sincere replies - he is in some cases dissembling with an agenda of confusing clearly understood ideas."

              C'mon. We feel the same way here, on differing sides of the equation. This stuff doesn't need to be explained. Some of you (not all) are so self-righteous that you cannot even contemplate that there are other perspectives, even if those perspectives in theory agree with you. I think some of you here are just as "you are with us or are against us" as Bush is, and since I have true allegiance to neither, I feel justified in pointing that out. My agenda isn't pro-Bush (how many times do I have to say that???), my agenda is to not be as bad as those I profess to want out. This isn't bickering, this is stnding up for what you believe in. Do you truly want everyone to just march to your drummer? Can you say "Caesar"?

              Face it: I am considered a "troll" becuase I am not walking in lockstep. I have said on several occasions that I agree with almost everything that you all have said. Why does everyone want to forget that? Becuase I am not calling for Rumsfeld's head? All I am saying is this shit isn't "either/or". No one , least of all me, is arguing that that girl is the mastermind here. But there are probably 10 or more levels of command between that girl and Rumsfeld, and I guarantee you at least 5 of them are not even in the same hemisphere as that prison. How do you jump from her to the Secretary of Defense??? Don't any of you work in a hierarchical enterprise??? If he knew - forget about orders - if he even knew, he should resign. But you have to have something more than your simple distaste for the man. There's the simple truth that need not be explained.

              "I also won't deny that despite some similarity in our respective backgrounds, Bill and I are miles apart politically. Politically, we are practically mortal enemies. And I take my politics very seriously. I am not amused. I am not being entertained."

              And I don't take them seriously? I am amused? This is fun? Is there not one other person on this entire website that can't see that just becuase you THINK you are morally right doesn't allow carte blanche for your ideas? How fascist is that?? I know, understand, and typically embrace the argument that no action is better than bad action, but I also believe that this is not a game; we need to be smart. Isn't there anyone even willing to consider that the knee-jerk reaction isnt' necessarily the right one? Maybe it is, but maybe it isn't?

              Isn't anyone tired of the "Corporal gets picture taken with prisoner in humiliating position, therefore Bush is an ass, therefore Rumsfeld must go?" logic (or lack thereof)? Can any of you guarantee that if Bush goes and we leave Iraq that any less people are going to die? What about those that purportedly helped the U.S. forces? You think they will last until sundown? So it's okay to sacrifice them?

              Hey, if you want me to go I will, I don't want to be where I am not wanted, and while there are people here that I like (to the extent you can with words and avatars) but my goal is to be respected and accepted. And if I am neither, so be it. But if you are truly going to cast yourselves as having an open mind on these things, and truly being smarter than the rest of the 225 million people that don't agree with you, you have to consider them. You don't have to agree, you don't have to be comfortable with the ideas, but you have to consider them. Otherwise you are doing yourself and the rest of the American people a disservice.

              Comment


              • #37
                Bill says:
                Can any of you guarantee that if Bush goes and we leave Iraq that any less people are going to die?
                Nope, but nothing is certain in this life. Except, increasingly, for the established fact that Bush is (to use a quaint Americanism) a horse's ass. This guy, from over here, was always patently untrustworthy, and I for one was lulled into approval of the invasion of Iraq by Blair's arguments on the danger posed by Saddam, and his following W's lead. Also by a distrust of religious maniacs of any persuasion. More fool me.

                Bill also says:
                But if you are truly going to cast yourselves as having an open mind on these things, and truly being smarter than the rest of the 225 million people that don't agree with you, you have to consider them. You don't have to agree, you don't have to be comfortable with the ideas, but you have to consider them. Otherwise you are doing yourself and the rest of the American people a disservice.
                Howard Devoto (1979) or thereabouts: "My mind it ain't so open that anything can crawl right in". Rock is simplistic sometimes, but it's snappy. Extend that openness to the rest of the few billlion people in the world, Bill. There is increasing recognition that this is a shit situation, that Bush has no real control over his strategy in Iraq, that in fact he has no strategy other than to sit tight and hope for the best.

                The sad thing is, having dug himself into this mess - he's right! The US and UK need to stay there, and they need to work out a withdrawal strategy. The only thing is, it needs to be someone other than Bush, and sadly (in some ways, there was such hope in his dawning) other than Blair that works out the means of withdrawing, leaving some kind of vaguely decent regime in their wake. They've made life fucking difficult for themselves, though.
                \"Killing me won\'t bring back your apples!\"

                Comment


                • #38
                  This thread has so petered out that one can hardly follow it any more. Why don't you just exchange phone numbers and do all the personal injury and offended school boy stuff there? Bill, what you're doing in your obsession to protect the Bush government is to salami-fy the whole discussion which is a moral issue - not one of thousands ifs and buts. Actually it was a traditional Communist rhetoric tactic to dissect a matter into thousands of relevant and even more irrelevant aspects until all thrust was chewed out of the issue and no result achieved. And Krunky, you keep feeding him with bits to pounce on and display his witty defence intellect. It is beginning to be boring though.
                  For, there is no doubt that it is wrong what happened and there is no doubt that the responsible have to walk the plank. It is not about what would any other government or which politician have done etc.

                  See ya some time!


                  However, Zakt, you're right, B&B have made things fucking difficult for themselves!
                  That means they're fucking incompetent. Out with them!

                  Bill, if I ever run a huge company I'll offer you a job in the complaint dept to deal with all the calls and letters. Next, I will start producing something expensive that doesn't work.
                  Ooops, now I have let myself be carried away. Excuse (where was the delete button just now?)
                  Google ergo sum

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Now I've cooled down a little ...
                    Originally posted by PsychicWarVeteran
                    THOUGHT TO PONDER: Islamic extremists have always claimed westerners are the devil. Have we not, with these atrocious acts (regardless of who ordered them), proven them right in their own minds? Have we not just added to their zeal by verifying their contention that we are the evil infidels?
                    Yes, what I am saying all along since the barbarian treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo began. All the "Freedom" the West talks of is proved a farce by such acts (that are, by the way, against our Christian beliefs and all our Western constitutions, written or habitual).
                    Google ergo sum

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Now I'm a communist? "School boy offenses"? Others have taken the shot at me, as if I am Rush Limbaugh or George Bush. I can't respond? (Although I must say, I would love to see what some of you would do to either of them were they to post here).

                      "For, there is no doubt that it is wrong what happened and there is no doubt that the responsible have to walk the plank. It is not about what would any other government or which politician have done etc."

                      Asuming you mean the prison atrocities, no argument. Ive said before, I cannot fathom how those people can look themselves in the mirror after that. How can they smile? What is not so clear cut - and what isn't a moral issue, but a political one, at least at this point - is how some of us here are willing to take that as a paradigm for everything they don't like about the admnisitration, the economy, world affairs, the environment, so on.

                      I will say this: I am learning some outstanding lessons about human nature here. How we are so ready to villify those that disagree, how we are so confident (or maybe just the opposite??) in our own positions that we will not hesitate to excuse possible alternatives away with dime-store psychology. How we talk about rights, and peace, and whatnot, but only if everyone agrees with us 100%. And the funny thing is, I do agree with most of what people say here (except on economic issues). In terms of civil liberties we're almost in full agreement.

                      I'm going to ask again: what is so uncomfortable about these issues that some of you can't even discuss civilly the idea that there is more than one way to look at these events as a whole? Some of you are actually ANGRY at me becuase I pointed out that Arab attacks of this kind against westerners pre-date the Bush Presidency, as if I am morally bankrupt for not joining your bandwagon. I will say for the 1000th time, I am not doing this to support George Bush. I am not voting for George Bush. If I didn't frequent so many of the other, non-political spaces, I would put it in my signature. But I know for a fact that there are people that are on your bandwagon with both feet that took the same "anti-administration" pose against Reagan, GHW Bush, AND Clinton, and now GW Bush. It's like its a habit. Sure, all these discussions have different root causes, but I have absolutely no doubt (in fact some of us here have already implied it) we will be having the same type of conversation - probably on a different subject matter - in 2006 should Kerry win.

                      I am also seeing that with this kind of inflexibility it is no longer a secret why Bill Clinton felt he had to position himself so moderately to achieve the Presidency, and why Al Gore lost so much of Clinton's good will (becuase he did not maintain that positioning). I am starting to think that Kerry doesn't have a shot once people get alone with their thoughts and beliefs inside those booths.

                      Sorry if you are bored; America needs more of this frankly, since most of us would've ditched this a long time ago to watch "Friends" in rerun.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Did I say "salami-fy"? No, you're mummy-fying this thread.

                        Asuming you mean the prison atrocities, no argument.
                        YES, this is what this thread is about, so why go on churning out what is already commonplace?
                        ...Some of you are actually ANGRY at me becuase I pointed out that Arab attacks of this kind against westerners pre-date the Bush Presidency, as if I am morally bankrupt for not joining your bandwagon. I will say for the 1000th time,....
                        Why need point this out in this thread? We already know that , hmmm, muslim fanatics attacked westerners before the Bush presidency. ... and without justifying them we also know there are thousands of reasons why they do such things. Mainly because Arabs, Africans, Asians and Red Indians were screwed over and over again by Whites (=Westerners) for profit.
                        It doesn't matter what some Arabs did, it only matters what your or my government does in which I as a citizen place trust (even if I voted for the other guy) not only to protect me, but to act responsibly in my name. And I wouldn't want my name to be soiled in such a way.
                        Google ergo sum

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Can I be provocative and agree with Bill for once?

                          One of the reasons I stopped believing in the organised left in this country was when I and a Hindi friend attended an (I think) Revolutionary Communist meeting at the time the Satanic Verses came out. Somewhat naievely, I anticipated that the party people at the meeting might actually take a stand against the religious zealots who were after Rushdie's head. Wouldn't you know it, though, they (white middle class boys all) were demanding that the book be BURNED, and that Rushdie apologise profusely for his temerity in attacking the holy word.

                          The same leftist agenda defends Muslim clerics who actively and openly propogate religious violence within the community here.

                          These people, and the people in control of the Iraqui prisons, all want to constrain the freedoms of others using violence. I am sick of the whole mess, and am sick that the only way to resolve it is to use force, albeit in a policing role. What our nice western governments have to do is to make sure that they institute appropriate controls over their policing forces to ensure that the role doesn't go any further. That they didn't do so before led to the situation in the prisons, and in Iraq in general. They should pay the price electorally, and I hope they will. I just hope that the prospects for some form of liberal democracy in Iraq (albeit that is a western construct) do not pay the same price.
                          \"Killing me won\'t bring back your apples!\"

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            If that's what Bill said, then I would immediately agree with you , Zakt. Much like those blokes who're over-eager to prove their pc feminist stance. They would ultimately put their jewels under the knife to prove they're not chauvinists...!
                            Google ergo sum

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              See what I mean, L'Etranger? Now you're doing it...

                              I take no pleasure in pointing this out, but Bill will absolutely try to find some way to reduce what is obviously a huge problem down to some size where it is merely a history-laden misjudgment or some thing - and this to support status quo political ideas that are so obviously wrong that even the right is starting to abandon ship because of this nonsense. I call that dissembling: because all he really wants to do is fatigue the discussion; show in a thousand ways how what we are doing isn't *THAT* bad. By arguing the same sorts of points again and again, by belaboring the obvious, he beats down resistence and even the desire to contemplate an important political subject. And no, I don't think he is adding lively but controversial comments to a difficult subject. I think he is trying to shut down our shared antipathy for these abhorrent acts. To whitewash it a little. Frankly, to just wear us out on it.

                              And than: bang - there it is. The anti-Kerry stuff. So fine, for the hundredth time, we know that things are so fucked up that we are voting for the lesser evil. No more no less. Now shut the fuck up!

                              And by which I mean: say something else please. I am not trying to shut you up for real.

                              In some ways I think of this as less of a debate than a kind of commiserating between people of a general like-mindedness. In that sense I don't really welcome a voice that tries to justify the people, from top to bottom, who are responsible for this mess.

                              Oh, this is the same as it ever was? Great! I'm sick of it. I want change now anyway. Sometimes I will vote for changes that make no difference in the long run. As long as I keep taking the most wrong-headed people out of positions of power I can live with that. Politically, I don't always get what I want - that doesn't mean that the political ideas I support are wrong or that I should stop wanting to make them a reality.

                              Zakt said:
                              "The sad thing is, having dug himself into this mess - he's right! The US and UK need to stay there, and they need to work out a withdrawal strategy."

                              Here's my anaology in reply:
                              Someone comes to my house and kills my pets and rapes my SO. Then that person feels badly about what they did, wants to help clean up the mess and so forth. You know, I'd just call the cops and get that fucked up whack-job out of my house. I'll bury the bodies of the animals I have cherished, I'll go to counseling to help my SO get over her bout with abuse and violence. I don't need the sick fuck perpetrator of the acts that caused me harm to help me with anything. No thanks.

                              Just how arrogant is it to think that we can fix the problems we caused in Iraq? First, by supporting Saddam; and secondarily by helping remove him from power. Aren't we finished now. Shouldn't we just get the fuck out?

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by krunky
                                See what I mean, L'Etranger? Now you're doing it...

                                I take no pleasure in pointing this out, but Bill will absolutely try to find some way to reduce what is obviously a huge problem down to some size where it is merely a history-laden misjudgment or some thing - and this to support status quo political ideas that are so obviously wrong that even the right is starting to abandon ship because of this nonsense. I call that dissembling: because all he really wants to do is fatigue the discussion; show in a thousand ways how what we are doing isn't *THAT* bad. By arguing the same sorts of points again and again, by belaboring the obvious, he beats down resistence and even the desire to contemplate an important political subject. And no, I don't think he is adding lively but controversial comments to a difficult subject. I think he is trying to shut down our shared antipathy for these abhorrent acts. To whitewash it a little. Frankly, to just wear us out on it.
                                You see, it is always a bit of an effort every time I post here as I'm not a native speaker, so every contribution more than a joke is time consuming - which makes it especially fatiguing going over the same things again and again - even if some points might be valid. Yes - FATIGUING is the right word where I used mummyfication - and "dissembling" when I wrote of "salami-ficating". Thanks.
                                I wonder however if all this is a strategy, or stems from unadmitted shame ... a reaction against the burdon of a pretty bad conscience. I think younger Germans would know what I'm talking of. A frantic, unconscious attempt to reassert that not all is bad. Which it isn't of course (okay, Bill?)
                                But I don't assume there's a deliberate attempt to whitewash things, just a horror that's hard to cope with ("Our guys did this?NO PLEASE NOT!")
                                Google ergo sum

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X