|
|
Post your thoughts about HBO Documentary Films' GHOSTS OF ABU GHRAIB.
|
Posts:
1
Registered:
3/11/08
|
|
(38 of 38)
Mar 11, 2008 4:13 PM
|
|
the honorable Civilian Sam Provance is a glory hound his Entire Statement to Congress was hearsay He has no first person experience! The backward demented soldiers that took those pictures and abused those prisoners were a sign of how hard it is to staff the US Army with quality Soldiers. I am a 12 year veteran a 14S MOS for those who doubt my sincerity I was in Iraq 03-04 with 11 IED and way to many SAF (Small Arms Fire). The people behind those AK47 were some of the people released when Abu was returned to IRAQ control mainly because of the publicity. I personally know from first person experience with Islamic extremist we are not in any way out of the woods living a good life in the US. If we stop I promise form FIRST HAND EXPERINCE you will be dealing with IED driving to Wal Mart. The victims here are the sweaty tired Soldiers that try as they may the day remains long. Can you imagine having a task that is daunting and necessary yet have no real goal or end to look forward to? Abu has been a Political windfall for those apposed to the war. I return soon, all I ask is that when you jump onto to band wagon you remember that because of the stance of the country you are a citizen of the US has been safe and you still drive, shop and live with little to no fear. for all of my comrades your welcome please continue to support us and do not allow special interest or people claiming to be HEROS (Provance) to dictate what you believe I am not asking every American to take up arms and deal with the pain that war. All I ask is support those who will
|
|
|
Posts:
123
Registered:
8/31/06
|
|
(37 of 38)
Jun 29, 2007 1:11 PM
|
Thank you for an intelligent, well written, insightful post.
> I believe that the events after 9/11 (not just at Abu
> G) shows how the ban on torture actually erodes,
> starting at the top of the U.S. administration. As I
> see it, there is a lot of support for this. Mark
> Donner ( "Torture and Truth. America, Abu Ghraib, and
> the War on Terror") and Karen Greenberg & Joshua
> Dratel ("The Torture Papers. The Road to Abu
> Ghraib")have done an excellent work in their
> investigation of this.
>
> It seems that the decisions to allow torture or
> "enhanced interrogation techniques" to "high value
> detainees" came rather early on the war on terror.
> John Walker Lind (the American Taliban)was captured
> in October 2001) was interrogated in a similar
> fashion. The intelligence officer that was in charge
> of the interrogations of Lindh, was told by an Navy
> Admiral at this time that "the secretary of defense's
> counsel has authorized him to take to take the gloves
> off and ask whatever he wanted" (Donner, p. 36.).
>
> According to Donner, this erosion started officially
> in February 2002 when President Bush decided to
> withhold protection of the Geneva Convention both
> from Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters from Afghanistan.
> This decision rested on the analyze that Alberto
> Gonzales made. He claimed that this was a new kind of
> war that "renders obsolete Geneva's strict
> limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and
> renders quaint some of its provision" (Donner, p.
> 42).
>
> I don't believe that Abu G was the work of a "few bad
> apples". As I see it, Donner and the others have
> showed that this started at the top, and forced or
> encouraged people (in different ways, sometimes by
> turning a blind eye) to use extreme and immoral
> methods.
>
> What is extremely interesting about this phenomena is
> how this has affected our opinion on torture, and how
> torture is being depicted in popular media. I just
> read an extremely interesting article in the latest
> issue of the New Yorker (Feb. 19 & 26, 2007, pp.
> 66-82) called "Whatever it takes. The politics of the
> man behind "24". This is a really good piece.
> Basically it is about the man who created "24" and
> how that show uses torture as a part of the story
> line. According to the article, depictions of torture
> have become much more common on American television
> since 9/11. Before 9/11, fewer than 4 acts of torture
> per year appeared on TV per year. Today it's more
> than a 100 acts of torture per year. The show who is
> most famous for this is "24".
>
> This development have, according to the article, gone
> so far that a number of experts on interrogation from
> West Point and the FBI actually contacted the team
> behind "24" to try to make them change how they
> depicted interrogations. These experts felt that it
> gave people the wrong opinion about the subject, and
> that soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan was actually
> starting to imitate the TV-show. Something they felt
> was extremely contra productive. Which is rather
> interesting...the administration changes policy on
> this issue, and media picks up this change, turns it
> into pop-culture...and that affects our attitudes and
> behavior regarding torture once again. It getting
> hard to see what came first, the hen or the egg.
>
> I would like to end this with a question. If torture
> and "enhanced interrogation techniques" are so
> effective, why don't we allow it to be used
> domestically, in law enforcement. After all, which is
> the most severe problem for most of us? I believe
> that most of us are more concerned of being a victim
> of "traditional crimes" such as rape or murder than
> being the victim of a terrorist attack. So why didn't
> we use the waterboard on O.J. Simpson? Or why don't
> we use the waterboard on white-collar crime? After
> all, white-collar crime might look harmless, but it
> is after all a serious threat to the market economy
> (since it erodes the fundamental norms that governs
> it), probably just as seriously as terrorism, if not
> worse. Why didn't we use the waterboard on the Enron
> guys? After all, they are "high value detainees" and
> might have a lot of useful information.
>
> Finally, what is really disturbing about the
> documentary is the fact that taking pictures is a
> crime that will be punished and that murdering a
> prisoner is not. That really scares me.
|
|
|
Posts:
123
Registered:
8/31/06
|
|
(36 of 38)
Jun 28, 2007 12:19 PM
|
Hey, Mr. MIT, please allow me to point out a blinding glimpse of the obvious...if we lived in a civilized world, there would be no documentary, no 9-11, no discussion. I lost afamily member in 9-11, who died saving many others because he was going about his normal day in a civilized world, so don't give me your flower-power, hippy-trippy, "all the world is a beautiful, civilized place filled with those who only want to be good" nonsense.
Have you forgotten the reason why we even know of the existence of this prison? CIVILIZED???? The world has some sense of civility because of our military, in a great way. The kids most harshly dealt with simply didn't come up ideas and cultural knowledge on their own, but were abandoned for scapegoats when someone used photos for their own monetary gain, instead of going to their superiors as would have been proper.
Did I say "MR"? Sorry if I am wrong. When you see Tinkerbell again, tell her I said "Hi". I am sure we never have to worry about you being on the line fighting for your country, unless they'd let you in under a Cat. 4.
|
|
|
Posts:
2
Registered:
4/26/07
|
|
(35 of 38)
Jun 10, 2007 11:50 PM
|
well your retort on spelling andgrammer have affected me so...listen,you can say all you want against my views and all but ask yourself this,if your father or brother or son was taken prisoner and subjected to that kind of abuse,what would you think,if you say to yourself i would get even with them then you are no better,we live in a civilized world with rights and freedoms to ALL.do i think they should have gotten more time in a jail,yes,those people are an embarressment,cut and dry!and thats it.most of the prisoners in there were innocent were talking about an act thats against OUR rights, just because i dont use spell check and look things up on the internet and cut and paste to make myself seem educated doesnt mean that im trailer park,lol,you dont even have a clue what i do for a living!but i do like that your whole response had to do with me,im flattered...i just dont know what your point is,thanks anyway internet hero!
ps i didnt use spellchek again,lol
|
|
|
Posts:
123
Registered:
8/31/06
|
|
(34 of 38)
Apr 27, 2007 8:46 AM
|
"IT ONLY TAKES COMMON SENSE TO KNOW WHAT IS RIGHT AND WRONG"!!! Indeed??!! So, your family and societal values have nothing to do with your sensibilities? There you have it! We are all suffering from a lack of common sense. We have abusive parents, alternative schools filled with kids, and prisons and jails filled to capacity, because we lack common sense. Are you kidding me? We are animals and our entire religious and social structure is designed to civilize us. We are civilized by design, not by instinct. We must be taught right from wrong. The military represents a cross-section of the general population. Why then, would common sense be the prevailing factor in their behavior? These kids have grown up in a society that does not clearly define right from wrong.
It appears from reading your post that you have had some level of education, based on content alone. You know what is right and wrong and yet your post reads as if written by a third grader based on punctuation, sentence structure and spelling. Somewhere in your upbringing, you were probably taught these elements of writing, but you "learned" the value you display. (Which is to say these things have little importance to you). Common sense or at least common knowledge should have prevailed, but your passion on this issue still took center stage. By standards you should be seen as an embarassment to education and probably to your parents. Even if you have not learned how to spell from your education, you obviously have computer access and a means by which to find the knowledge you lack. Most programs have a spell check feature. Correct?
Now apply the same to these kids. I am sure their parents taught them right from wrong. They did not learn through common sense. They found themselves in an arena of great passion, influenced by their military "parents" and did as they were instructed. They are also taught to follow orders. Someone was providing the information on the nuances of the Islamic/Iraqi culture, the interrogation techniques and the orders. Those in power should be charged and the rest should be exonerated. Funny, if we applied some of those techniques, I am sure the high level names would be coughed up soon enough. No, I do not condone torture, but higher level personnel are skating away clean while those following the orders are made scapegoats. Common sense should tell us that it is not right to have these personnel serve our country, follow orders, then be imprisioned for doing so.
> you mean to tell me that those personnel that were
> guards at Abu Gharaib had no idea what so ever what
> was going on in that prison?!!! they are not combat
> soldiers,they are military police and to that fact
> should and do know how to guard and detain prisoners
> in the proper way,it only takes common sense to know
> what is right and wrong. one woman even smiles at a
> sopposed dead body and gives a thumbs up and now says
> she always smiles in front of a camera,well she wasnt
> smiling when i seen her on the doc. in fact i think
> she should have gotten a stiffer penalty then what
> she did get, one military policeman even says he
> didnt know the rules of engagement when he got to
> iraq? you mean to tell me he was a babe in the
> woods,he, being of that trade in the military should
> know damn well what they are in case he has to
> investigate one. and then tells of how he wants to
> man a MG and then to go to the prison was a moral
> buster for him,well what the hell did he think he
> signed up for in the military,he was a n MP,not a
> combat soldier! then one former MP tells how she
> didnt know anything cause she just got out of basic
> training, dont give me that load of garbage. all of
> you people have to live with what youve done and know
> that your not fooling everyone,maybe you had some
> liberties when it came to the P.O.W's but you know
> what is right, i for one dont believe you were so
> left in the dark, that your superiors knew all that
> was going on.You people are an embarressment to the
> profession of arms across the civilized world,
> congradulations
|
|
|
Posts:
2
Registered:
4/26/07
|
|
(33 of 38)
Apr 26, 2007 10:36 PM
|
|
you mean to tell me that those personnel that were guards at Abu Gharaib had no idea what so ever what was going on in that prison?!!! they are not combat soldiers,they are military police and to that fact should and do know how to guard and detain prisoners in the proper way,it only takes common sense to know what is right and wrong. one woman even smiles at a sopposed dead body and gives a thumbs up and now says she always smiles in front of a camera,well she wasnt smiling when i seen her on the doc. in fact i think she should have gotten a stiffer penalty then what she did get, one military policeman even says he didnt know the rules of engagement when he got to iraq? you mean to tell me he was a babe in the woods,he, being of that trade in the military should know damn well what they are in case he has to investigate one. and then tells of how he wants to man a MG and then to go to the prison was a moral buster for him,well what the hell did he think he signed up for in the military,he was a n MP,not a combat soldier! then one former MP tells how she didnt know anything cause she just got out of basic training, dont give me that load of garbage. all of you people have to live with what youve done and know that your not fooling everyone,maybe you had some liberties when it came to the P.O.W's but you know what is right, i for one dont believe you were so left in the dark, that your superiors knew all that was going on.You people are an embarressment to the profession of arms across the civilized world, congradulations
|
|
|
Posts:
123
Registered:
8/31/06
|
|
(32 of 38)
Apr 17, 2007 8:18 AM
|
TO ..PEACE4U...YOU AND OTHERS HAVE MENTIONED THAT WE ARE A SYMBOL OF HUMAN RIGHTS, WE MUST SET AN EXAMPLE, WE DO NOT BELIEVE IN CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY, WE VALUE HUMAN LIVES AND EVEN THAT WE ARE A CHRISTIAN NATION.
THINK OF THIS...THOSE YOUNG MEN AND WOMEN SERVING IN OUR ARMED FORCES HAVE GROWN UP IN A NATION WHERE THE ABOVE VALUES ARE NOT NECESSARILY TRUE. THEY HAVE GROWN UP SEEING THE LIBERALS FIGHT FOR LEGAL INFANTICIDE OR PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTIONS. DOES ANY THING GET FARTHER FROM THE VALUE HUMAN LIFE AND TORTURE OF THE INNOCENT THEN THIS PROCEDURE? THEN WE GIVE THE YOUNG PEOPLE NO WAY TO RECONCILLE GOOD/BAD BECAUSE IF A SCARED 16 YR OLD HAS A BABY, IT IS NOT BREATHING AND LEAVES IT , WE TELL HER SHE IS GOING TO PRISON FOR THIS TERRIBLE ACT.....HOWEVER, HAD SHE VISITED THE CLINIC AND ALLOWED THE DOCTOR TO DELIVER THE BABY BREACH, THEN SHOVED A PAIR OF SURGICAL SCISSORS INTO THE BABY'S HEAD, THEN A CANNULA TO SUCK OUT THE BRAIN STEM...THAT WOULD BE A GOOD THING AND SHE WOULD BE IN NO TROUBLE AT ALL. YOU CAN KILL A BABY, AS LONG AS YOU PAY FOR IT. HOW ARE THESE KIDS TO LEARN VALUE OF HUMAN LIFE OR WHAT IS CLEARLY RIGHT OR WRONG??
THE SAME KIDS THAT GREW UP IN THIS ENVIRONMENT ARE FIGHTING NOW.
DO WE NOT THINK THE TORTURE THEY INFLICTED IS PRETTY DAMNED MILD CONSIDERING WE HAVE BROUGHT THEM UP IN A NATION THAT KILLS BABIES ON DEMAND AND IN SUCH A HORRIBLE MANNER? ABORTION OF THIS TYPE IS JUST ONE EXAMPLE, BUT CERTAINLY A GLARING ONE. ITS NOT MUCH OF A LEAP BEFORE SOMEONE FIGHTS FOR THE RIGHT TO HAVE ELDERLY PARENTS EUTHANIZED, OR DOWN SYNDROME KIDS.
WHAT ABOUT THE SEXUAL, DEGRADING POSTIONS???? BIG DEAL. THEY CAN WATCH VIRTUALLY ANY TYPE OF DEGRADING SEX ON CABLE EVERY DAY OF THE WEEK. IN AMERICA, SIMILAR SEXUAL ACTS BRING MONEY, MUCH MONEY TO THE ECONOMY AND IS COMPLETELY ACCEPTABLE AND THERE WOULD CERTAINLY BE A FEDERAL CASE IF ANYONE TRIED TO PROHIBIT THIS "EXPRESSION".
NEWS STORY RECENTLY...THERE IS AN INEXPENSIVE TREATMENT FOR CANCER THAT IS VERY EFFECTIVE..EASY AS TAKING A PILL...HOWEVER, THE RESEARCHERS HAVE DECIDED NOT TO RELEASE THIS BECAUSE IT WOULD KEEP THEM FROM GETTING MORE GRANTS. A MURDERER IS RELEASED FROM PRISON AFTER A SHORT STAY, A FINANCIAL CRIME GETS TWICE AS LONG A SENTENCE...
ALL OF THESE THINGS ARE TEACHING AMERICAN KIDS THAT HUMAN LIFE, DIGNITY AND RESPECT, REALLY ISNT ALL THAT VALUABLE AND CERTAINLY NOT AS VALUABLE AS MONEY.
THEN WE SEND THESE SAME KIDS TO FIGHT. SO LET'S PUT THEM IN PRISON NOW FOR BEHAVING AS THEY HAVE BEEN TAUGHT. LETS PUNISH THEM FOR NOT HAVING A CLEAR CONCEPT OF RIGHT AND WRONG. IF THE LAND OF THE FREE WAS A LITTLE MORE CLEAR ON THE ISSUES OF RIGHT AND WRONG...WE WOULDNT NEED SO DAMNED MANY PRISONS OURSELVES.
SO, YES, PEACE4U, WE ALL NEED TO ASK YOUR QUESTION..GOOD OR BAD????
|
|
|
Posts:
123
Registered:
8/31/06
|
|
(31 of 38)
Apr 11, 2007 7:47 AM
|
DOES YOUR LOVE EXTEND TO ALL THOSE WHO WERE KILLED BY SADAM, TO THE KURDS, TO THE JEWS IN GERMANY.....BY YOUR REASONING, WE SHOULD HAVE LEFT HITLER TO KILL ANY ONE HE SO DESIRED. HE WAS NOT ATTACKING US. WE HAD THE UNMITIGATED GALL TO GO INTO HIS COUNTRY AND TURN POOR GERMANY'S WORLD UPSIDE DOWN AND MAKE TROUBLE FOR THOSE CITIZENS. IT WAS HIS COUNTRY, HE COULD GAS ALL THE KIDS HE WANTED TO, RIGHT? THE JEWS SHOULD HAVE FOUGHT THEIR OWN BATTLE, RIGHT? IT WAS NOT OUR CONCERN. THE GERMANS DID NOT FIGHT US BECAUSE THEY WERE TROUBLE MAKERS..THEY WERE JUST STANDING FOR THEIR LEADER.....HITLER....AND THEIR RIGHT TO KILL AN ENTIRE POPULATION. SADAM HAD EVERY RIGHT TO USE GASSES ON THOSE KURDS..IT WAS HIS COUNTRY. AMERICANS ARE JUST HORRIBLE......GROW UP, LITTLE GIRL, AND LEARN WHAT LOVE REALLY MEANS. I DO NOT LIKE YOUR BOUNDARIES FOR LOVE, AS IT DOESN'T SEEM TO EXTEND TO THOSE WHO NEED IT THE MOST.
I am American, I love EVERYONE, not just Americans.
> It makes me sad when I read some of the comments. I
> I think Americans need to remember one important
> fact, IRAQ, NEVER attacked us, they never did one
> blessed thing to us. We are confused, and blaming
> them for the war, why? They are NOT Afghanistan,
> they do not represent Osama, they did not cause
> September 11th they had nothing to do with that!!!!!
> We went there because of WMDs, we never found
> und WMDs, we were wrong. We say our one purpose in
> Iraq, is to help them rebuild after WE got rid of
> their leader. Why did we transfer out hate onto
> those Iraq civilians? They are not fighting us
> because they are trouble makers, we are the trouble
> makers, we went there, and decided to turn their
> world upside down.
>
>
>>
> --
> Edited by itisjoy at 02/28/2007 10:18 AM
|
|
|
Posts:
1
Registered:
3/28/07
|
|
(30 of 38)
Mar 28, 2007 1:18 PM
|
I believe that the events after 9/11 (not just at Abu G) shows how the ban on torture actually erodes, starting at the top of the U.S. administration. As I see it, there is a lot of support for this. Mark Donner ( "Torture and Truth. America, Abu Ghraib, and the War on Terror") and Karen Greenberg & Joshua Dratel ("The Torture Papers. The Road to Abu Ghraib")have done an excellent work in their investigation of this.
It seems that the decisions to allow torture or "enhanced interrogation techniques" to "high value detainees" came rather early on the war on terror. John Walker Lind (the American Taliban)was captured in October 2001) was interrogated in a similar fashion. The intelligence officer that was in charge of the interrogations of Lindh, was told by an Navy Admiral at this time that "the secretary of defense's counsel has authorized him to take to take the gloves off and ask whatever he wanted" (Donner, p. 36.).
According to Donner, this erosion started officially in February 2002 when President Bush decided to withhold protection of the Geneva Convention both from Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters from Afghanistan. This decision rested on the analyze that Alberto Gonzales made. He claimed that this was a new kind of war that "renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provision" (Donner, p. 42).
I don't believe that Abu G was the work of a "few bad apples". As I see it, Donner and the others have showed that this started at the top, and forced or encouraged people (in different ways, sometimes by turning a blind eye) to use extreme and immoral methods.
What is extremely interesting about this phenomena is how this has affected our opinion on torture, and how torture is being depicted in popular media. I just read an extremely interesting article in the latest issue of the New Yorker (Feb. 19 & 26, 2007, pp. 66-82) called "Whatever it takes. The politics of the man behind "24". This is a really good piece. Basically it is about the man who created "24" and how that show uses torture as a part of the story line. According to the article, depictions of torture have become much more common on American television since 9/11. Before 9/11, fewer than 4 acts of torture per year appeared on TV per year. Today it's more than a 100 acts of torture per year. The show who is most famous for this is "24".
This development have, according to the article, gone so far that a number of experts on interrogation from West Point and the FBI actually contacted the team behind "24" to try to make them change how they depicted interrogations. These experts felt that it gave people the wrong opinion about the subject, and that soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan was actually starting to imitate the TV-show. Something they felt was extremely contra productive. Which is rather interesting...the administration changes policy on this issue, and media picks up this change, turns it into pop-culture...and that affects our attitudes and behavior regarding torture once again. It getting hard to see what came first, the hen or the egg.
I would like to end this with a question. If torture and "enhanced interrogation techniques" are so effective, why don't we allow it to be used domestically, in law enforcement. After all, which is the most severe problem for most of us? I believe that most of us are more concerned of being a victim of "traditional crimes" such as rape or murder than being the victim of a terrorist attack. So why didn't we use the waterboard on O.J. Simpson? Or why don't we use the waterboard on white-collar crime? After all, white-collar crime might look harmless, but it is after all a serious threat to the market economy (since it erodes the fundamental norms that governs it), probably just as seriously as terrorism, if not worse. Why didn't we use the waterboard on the Enron guys? After all, they are "high value detainees" and might have a lot of useful information.
Finally, what is really disturbing about the documentary is the fact that taking pictures is a crime that will be punished and that murdering a prisoner is not. That really scares me.
|
|
|
Posts:
1
Registered:
3/27/07
|
|
(29 of 38)
Mar 27, 2007 1:55 AM
|
This documentary terrified me. I sat in disbelief, as I listened to each soldier, one by one, with calculated distance, admit their part in the torture that occured at the prison. Each soldier spoke about Abu Ghraib as if the prison itself was its own entitiy, as if the prison "made" the good soldiers evil and made them do these things. The one soldier equated her part in the torture akin to going to the dentist-it was something she didnt like to do, but did it anyway. It further surprised me when I could hear the regret that the photos were realeased. To me it sounded as if they were not upset about the things that they did there, but at the fact that they got caught. I could be wrong, but this is just the sense that I got from each soldiers' reaction when discussing the press release of the tapes.
It is also interesting to note that Rumsfeld clearly played a part, a direct and significant part, in allowing the laws of war, and the prohibition against torture to be purposely manipulated, and walk away like the "Teflon Don." It was clear that these soldiers that ultimately became the scapegoats were told to committ these atrocities. There were certain interrogation techniques present that they would not have known unless trained or told to do so, thus concretely suggesting that there was a chain of command that ordered the tortures. It is even more apalling that the prisoners were random, and that their entire families were taken in with them. The US is the primary supporter for human rights, and believes in prosecuting those whom do not uphold those rights. The US should also thus be held accountable.
|
|
|
Posts:
1
Registered:
3/25/07
|
|
(28 of 38)
Mar 25, 2007 11:52 PM
|
Although you have probably already made an assumption about me, simply by reading my name, I wish you'd keep an open mind.
One of my favorite quotes, from Benjamin Franklin, which I think is particularly pertinent, is as follows:
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."
I found "Ghosts of Abu Ghraib" to be appalling. I stayed on top of the details of the scandal right from the beginning. I couldn't believe that AMERICANS were doing these horrible things to the people that the Bush Administration claimed we were coming to "liberate". To this I respond, what is the difference between tyranny and freedom in a war zone? How can we distinguish ourselves as liberators, and as the proverbial "good guys" if we resort to inhumane treatment and torture?
So, we're in this unlimited war, where rules don't really apply. Oh, wait, rules apply, but we're using our own interpretations... ah... clarification. What is severe? What is torture? Let's define... you see, when the UN Convention Against Torture (http://www.ohchr.org/english/law/cat.htm#part1) can be defined as ambiguous and vague, and the current administration rules to define torture in narrow terms such as "causing death, loss or loss of function of an organ", it opens the door for many other types of "disciplinary", or "facilitating" action. I mean, why not break someone's jaw or arm? It isn't killing them. It isn't causing them to lose an organ... it must be morally acceptable for our military to use during questioning! SUPER!
Well, I don't know about you, but I think that if someone broke my arm during an interrogation, I'd be tempted to call it torture. But wait, that's completely okay for those techniques to not be used on me! I forgot! I'm a white, American female. I don't look like a terrorist, or any other scary person, so I'm good. It is completely justifiable to use these techniques to extrapolate information from someone whose only crime is resembling someone who may or may not be a terrorist. He looks like the enemy… He's got brown skin, a beard, and speaks a funny language! He's a terrorist!! Give me a break. It sounds awfully Monty Python to me... I mean, remember that witch burning scene? If she weighs the same as a duck... let's be logical here.
Also, a little cultural sensitivity wouldn’t kill us… I mean, using the same prison used by Saddam Hussein to execute over 35,000? Yeah, I mean, even the guards were saying that it felt like the place was haunted by its history… their description of Abu Ghraib was almost spot on with my experience at the Buchenwald Concentration camp in Germany. How completely insensitive would it be for us to take over the Dachau site, or the Auschwitz site and use it as a prison? Let’s think about these things.
I have to say that my curiosity has been piqued about the Miller connection. I want to know how great a role he really played in the application of the stronger interrogation techniques (i.e. torture) in Iraq. I’m reluctant to rely solely on the documentary for this assumption. However, the coincidence is striking. I was also shocked that Graner was given a commendation after the incidence of his torturing prisoners was reported. This, you have to admit, makes it seem like a greater problem… not simply ending at Graner. Someone liked what he did. They just didn’t like that there was photographic evidence floating around. At least, that’s what it seemed. The fact that the army asked for the pictures to be destroyed or deposited in Amnesty boxes was appalling. The fact that no one was tried for murder was appalling. I mean, it seems like the fact that a human being lost his life was less important than the photographic evidence.
I felt that the soldiers in the documentary showed little remorse for their actions. In fact, they mostly tried to justify what they had participated in. Oh, it was the environment, oh, it was the fact that you saw these horrifying things every day… oh, it was the fact that no one seemed to get in trouble for abusing the prisoners, oh, it was the fact that after the prisoners had been abused by their captors, they rioted, and THAT justified beating the life out of them, putting them in shameful positions, and abusing them. I mean, they rioted! Why would they do that? Hmmm…
The film made me angry. The film depressed me. The film was horrifying. I don’t want to be associated with that kind of behavior. I don’t want our armed forces to be held accountable for those kinds of policies! Torturing people doesn’t put us in a better position! It endangers our troops! It makes the world a more dangerous and insecure place! It works towards justifying all the horrible things that people have been capable, are capable, and will be capable of doing to other people. I mean, if we’re the greatest nation on the face of the earth, and we succumb to torturing people, that leaves a lot of leeway for the rest of the countries out there… aren’t we supposed to be a shining light, a beacon of hope, and there was something in there about being against oppression, right? Oh… that was only in America, where the rich white people live… no oppression here! Everywhere else, eh, it’s going to happen.
I know that when I’m traveling internationally, I do not want to be picked up off the street and held, interrogated, and tortured simply for being identifiable as an American. If we continue to allow our government to believe that they can get away with this torture policy, we not only put our troops at risk, but ourselves. What if that was your father who died, denied medical treatment, after he was beaten during an interrogation? What would that make YOU want to do? Revenge? Never… certainly not pick up an AK-47 and try to get back at the people who did this, right? No. If MY dad died like that, I’d call my lawyer, grab a latte, chat on my cell phone for a bit, and wait for justice. I mean, we’re civilized. Who mourns with an AK-47 or a car bomb?
Also, to Froggman, who claims that we bleeding heart liberals (dirty rotten scoundrels that we are) are causing America to LOSE in Iraq… I’m pretty sure that there is more to life, and more to Iraq, than simply winning or losing. You know, I could be wrong, but I guess we’ll never know (we just know what happened when the war hawks had it their way). And you know, I’m pretty sure that me being able to voice my opinion, along with others, who have that freedom in this country, is not causing us to LOSE. I think we lost when we allowed our sense of morality to be corrupted and allowed our administration to pour deceit into our ears about how torture isn’t torture, and the U.S. doesn’t torture. Here’s the $24,000 dollar question: What is torture? Well, gee, the dictionary says it is “to inflict extreme pain or physical punishment on people”. The International Red Cross has a detailed definition on their website as follows:
http://www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/htmlall/69mjxc?opendocument
Check it out, and then ask yourself “are we torturing people?” Then ask yourself if you’re okay with that answer.
Finally, we claim to be a Christian nation. So, let’s ask ourselves, what would Jesus do? Don’t think he’d be a big fan of the current torture policy. It’s just a hunch.
|
|
|
Posts:
5
Registered:
2/23/07
|
|
(27 of 38)
Mar 25, 2007 3:11 PM
|
minkyboodle78;
I saw the stupid movie and I can go into explicit details about Iraq, as long as it doesnt violate troop security.
If you think Im full of B.S. then bring it on!
I will make you look like the Liberal Socialist that you are.
Why are liberals always doubting every little thing that comes their way. You like every other liberal probably thinks that the U.S. didnt land on the moon.
This is why people like YOU helping/helped us loose the war!
Which reminds me:
Thank YOU Liberals and Lefties for pulling the carpet out from the U.S. Service Men and Women with the 08 deadline.
Nice work. YOU made us winners at LOOSING. If you had this much influence and desire to be quitters durring WWII we would all be speaking German today.
Also YOUR buddies, the insurgents are now using little children for their VBIED attacks. What do you think of that?
By the way, Mr. I can tell who is in the Military and who isnt:
Do you What or where BIAP is? Do you know where Hiafa street is and why that is significant? Do you know the colors of the Mahdi Army? Do you know what is route Irish and where it is and what takes place there? Do you know the main weapons of the insurgents and their tactics? Do you know how to head space a Ma Duece? I do! Since you say I am not in the Military.
I have been in the service since 1990.
Why is quitting, loosing, blaming others, pacifistism and calling everyone a liar the way of the liberal and lefty.
Im actually happy this movie came out, because the director did a good job of isolating and polarizing the people with this mind set. That will make the divide much more easily reconizable for the enevitable day when the two sides really get to square off with each other. Just remember: Socialists, Lefties and Libs are the minority. You might think that You are the majority in your big cities, but your not. The left will loose in 08
--
Edited by froggman at 03/25/2007 12:18 PM
--
Edited by froggman at 03/25/2007 12:21 PM
|
|
|
Posts:
5
Registered:
2/23/07
|
|
(26 of 38)
Mar 25, 2007 2:18 PM
|
|
minkyboodle78 you are a queen, just not the queen of England!
|
|
|
Posts:
1
Registered:
3/20/07
|
|
(25 of 38)
Mar 20, 2007 6:58 PM
|
We have to remind ourselves that as a world of people, we have evolved to higher plains of consciousness. We all must believe and confirm that we must keep moving forward.
Please ask yourselves this. Good or Bad..
I truly believe as Americans, we all support our soldiers. They are our sons and daughters, as I believe they believe we are infidels. We are all long past the mentality of, "A life for a life." There is no right or wrong in this war. As the most powerful nation, we as human beings, must set an example. Hitler was bad, Sudamn-Bad. Learn from our mistakes. We either are going to be, "good, honest Americans, or corrupt money grubbing Americans as our government now portrays us." We quit somewhere cherishing human life and our government, sold us a bill of goods and we bought it. In the name of Freedom, Terrorism-we as Americans, we bought the worst con in the world. Government greed- which is big businesses need for money.
911, God rest the souls of those who died or injured, became our Pearl Harbor. The government knew it was about to happen, but needed the support of every American. We have proof, that the government knew 911 was going to happen, we have proof that Pearl Harbor was going to happen. Terrorism-We bought it, hook, line and sinker. I ask you all, this war is about money, oil and control. Money for who, not the Americans. Can we honestly say, that we need the oil? No-It has been proven, in other countries, wind power, water power, used French fries oil. Cow dung, are all various ways of producing fuel we need. But big business will not allow this to happen. BIG BUSINESS CONTROLS OUR COUNTRY. We don't want war, a billion dollars spent every eight days on this war is insane. This money could feed 3 starving nations. Cure cancer and aids. BUT THERE IS NO MONEY IN DOING GOOD. I ask every American to open our eyes and realize what we-right now-represent to the world? We are a great nation, who are controlled by the worst of evils. We-can start believing as a nation, in each other and correct our government. We are strong and most part-good people. If we put it out in the universe that we are peaceful, caring nation and are willing to change it up, it will happen. We must start from the inside and work to the outside. We do not believe in crimes against humanity. Nor do we believe that we will allow crimes against our people as a nation. But we are somehow allowing it to happen. As the soldiers who followed orders at Abu Ghraib, some have had to serve prison sentences, BUT WHERE ARE THEIR LEADERS? WHY WERE OUR MILITARY LEADERS NOT HELD ACCOUNTABLE? Why did our American soldiers fall prey to our own government? Our military government leaders made these decisions, yet, were not made to stand in court of the peoples law? You see, it all comes down to, it doesn't matter who's side, who is right or wrong. Who's God or Allah belongs in the hearts of human beings. We all should be working toward the same thing. Human rights. Iraq- we are trying to democratize. They don't want to be a democracy. They want their country without Saddam the dictator, (that our C.I.A. trained.) Democracy isn't their way of living. I believe they would like to see every child have enough food to eat. That education replace poverty. Sickness - no longer belonging to the poor. Everyone to have a bright thought for children’s future in this world. Than the stock market price per barrel of oil? I must ask? Why does President Bush’s father own stock in the very oil companies that the Amuir of Egypt has? This all has been proven, yet as Americans, we don’t want to look at it, that we would mean we are being hoodwinked by our own government. Why that would be a terrible terror.
I ask that as Americans, we valve human lives. Looking back will not change the face of evil. Looking back will only serve to teach us where we might go forward and be better. So many people have suffered and died for a cause none of us are sure of anymore. The only gain is going into the pockets of our government, oil industries, people who make money on war items, bombs, guns. Our government is our terrorism. I ask that we all work from the inside out. Where there is hope, there is a solution.
Watching this documentary is a step in the right direction.
|
|
|
Posts:
4
Registered:
3/12/05
|
|
(24 of 38)
Mar 19, 2007 6:00 PM
|
|
froggman is an iraq vet just like I'm the queen of England. Your posts read like talking points from AM radio and its obvious you never watched the film.
|
|
|
|
|
