Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

Palomar · 2005-05-13 12:14:42

...for]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/afghan_us_protests]"...for the world is always the mob..."

*Machiavelli quote. All this, over an alleged desecration.

Of course, Abu Ghraib (spelling?) makes the allegation easier for them to believe, I suppose.

More of a mess. ::shakes head::

--Cindy

BWhite · 2005-05-13 12:36:37

...for]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/afghan_us_protests]"...for the world is always the mob..."
*Machiavelli quote. All this, over an alleged desecration.
Of course, Abu Ghraib (spelling?) makes the allegation easier for them to believe, I suppose.
More of a mess. ::shakes head::
--Cindy

Simple solution.

Allow a full and open inspection of Gitmo. With Islamic clerics participating. What do we have to hide?

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdes … tm]Reuters link

This is why building credibility is important. America's jury is the Islamic man/woman in the street. Fail to persuade them that we mean well and its irrelevant what US polls say.

The Saudi government has expressed dismay over the allegations which means they think its at least possibly true.

= = =

All this, over an alleged desecration.

Heh! The entire Iraq war was over alleged WMD, right?

Edited By BWhite on 1116009784

BWhite · 2005-05-13 13:01:16

Pakistan's http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_ … tm]foreign minister joins in the fray. He is in the government, not some radical cleric.

Oh yeah, Pakistan has nukes.

Condi Rice had better do more than "its an unsubstantiated rumor" or this could get really nasty, fast.

Palomar · 2005-05-13 14:51:55

Allow a full and open inspection of Gitmo. With Islamic clerics participating. What do we have to hide?
This is why building credibility is important. America's jury is the Islamic man/woman in the street. Fail to persuade them that we mean well and its irrelevant what US polls say.

*True.

I see no light at the end of this tunnel. Am always hoping for a glimmer of it...and seemingly always in vain.

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/news/LauraBu … ]Political cartoons about Laura Bush's recent comedy attempt

--Cindy

P.S.: Trouble is, how do we keep EVERY soldier in line? There will always be rogues in uniform -- troublemakers and bad apples, abusive of their authority/power, etc. How to anticipate, much less stop, a few nasty troublemakers? Even if the U.S. gov't apologizes (IF the allegations are true), it'll do little good; the harm is already done. And I wouldn't doubt a few rogue soldiers joined the military deliberately, just to make trouble (either VERY misguidedly thinking they're "helping" us -or- they're "plants" working in favor of Mid-East extremists. Probably a mix of both).

Gennaro · 2005-05-13 14:52:49

Changed my mind about posting. Again.

BWhite · 2005-05-15 06:46:02

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7856618/]Saudi Arabia is the key. As it was on 12 September 2001.

In a paper published in March, Reuven Paz, an Israeli expert on terrorism, analyzed the lists of jihadi dead. He found 154 Arabs killed over the previous six months in Iraq, 61 percent of them from Saudi Arabia, with Syrians, Iraqis and Kuwaitis together accounting for another 25 percent. He also found that 70 percent of the suicide bombers named by the Web sites were Saudi. In three cases, Paz found two brothers who carried out suicide attacks. Many of the bombers were married, well educated and in their late twenties, according to postings.

Not Iran, and Syria is only a tiny fraction.

But since we need Saudi oil I guess the West will continue to attack all the "usual suspects" just make the citizens feel good that we are doing something.

BWhite · 2005-05-15 06:46:59

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7856618/]Saudi Arabia is the key. As it was on 12 September 2001.

In a paper published in March, Reuven Paz, an Israeli expert on terrorism, analyzed the lists of jihadi dead. He found 154 Arabs killed over the previous six months in Iraq, 61 percent of them from Saudi Arabia, with Syrians, Iraqis and Kuwaitis together accounting for another 25 percent. He also found that 70 percent of the suicide bombers named by the Web sites were Saudi. In three cases, Paz found two brothers who carried out suicide attacks. Many of the bombers were married, well educated and in their late twenties, according to postings.

Not Iran, and Syria is only a tiny fraction.

But since we need Saudi oil I guess the West will continue to attack all the "usual suspects" just make the citizens feel good that we are doing something.

Palomar · 2005-05-15 09:08:46

*Lots of military helicopters flying over my house in the past half hour. My husband came in and asked if I'd heard them. :-\ Um...yeah; they sounded like they were going to come crashing through the roof any second -- guess I heard them!

Anyone else read/hear about the recent scandal at the U.S. Air Force Academy (?). Pressuring people to conform to Christianity. Jewish cadets are feeling the pinch. An atheist cadet said he'd been verbally abused repeatedly.

How can the Air Force protect/defend our freedoms and rights when they bully their own soldiers into conformity and oppress THEIR rights?

Not to mention the sexual abuse/intimidation scandals which have plagued that academy for a while now, regarding female cadets.

--Cindy

reddragon · 2005-05-15 11:44:10

It may be related to the fact that the military is based on command, unquestioning obedience, conformity, etc. These are necessary for it to function properly in wartime, and thus aren't anything that can really be changed. They are, however, values that are not really in line with the general civilian American culture or the basic political philosophy of the country. It is also a system that puts power in the hands of a few. Again this is usually necessary in war, but it leads to abuse of power.

It may also be important to note that the military and war are often associated with Republicans and conservatives, groups that include large numbers of evangelicals and that have often poor records on religious tolerance and freedom.

Just some thoughts. The problem at the Air Force Academy is probably rather complex. At least they're seriously looking into it now that it has come to public attention. Hopefully that will result in improvement.

Grypd · 2005-05-15 15:53:58

I agree with reddragon, a military operates as a team with everyone outside counted as more or less the enemy. People who slow the team weaken the team. And a duty to your country is considered normalcy. It does mean they tend to a consertivism and strong beliefs.

Then again the perfect soldier is also a Sociopath.

Shaun Barrett · 2005-05-16 04:49:15

I just heard this evening that Newsweek has apologized for errors in its story about abuses of the Muslim Holy Book, the Koran, at Guantanamo Bay. See http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=760253]THIS SITE. :-

NEW YORK May 15, 2005 — Newsweek magazine has apologized for errors in a story alleging that interrogators at the U.S. detention center in Guantanamo Bay desecrated the Quran, saying it would re-examine the accusations, which sparked outrage and deadly protests in Afghanistan.
Fifteen people died and scores were injured in violence between protesters and security forces, prompting U.S. promises to investigate the allegations. After Muslim leaders in several countries assailed the U.S. over the allegations, Pentagon officials blamed Newsweek for the flare-up and accused it of "irresponsible" reporting.
"We regret that we got any part of our story wrong, and extend our sympathies to victims of the violence and to the U.S. soldiers caught in its midst," Newsweek Editor Mark Whitaker wrote in a note to readers.

Apparently, a member of a U.S. Government organization is responsible for giving the story to Newsweek:-

Whitaker [Newsweek's Editor] wrote that the magazine's information came from "a knowledgeable U.S. government source" ..

I think most of you know my attitude toward journalists doing their damndest to present the worst possible case against the Coalition forces. During World War II, they would have been jailed for life or executed.
Even if rogue interrogators at Guantanamo Bay had actually used the Koran inappropriately or disrespectfully, the first recourse would have been to ensure the behaviour was stopped immediately .. and quietly .. and the perpetrators dealt with by military authorities.

The fact that Newsweek went to press with this intensely inflammatory story, apparently without much evidence, is symptomatic of widespread irresponsible media activity the world over.
The fact that our armed forces are under sporadic attack by men who don't wear uniforms, in a conflict some of us didn't happen to agree with, doesn't make it all right to undermine their efforts by means of a ceaseless propaganda campaign against them.
And the fact that 15 people died and that the Coalition's reputation has been further maligned as a result of this disgraceful behaviour by an ostensibly reliable publication, draws attention to the fact that this is a serious business. It's not a university political debate with cute theoretical outcomes and a few beers at the bar afterwards. This is about a real-world struggle in the Middle East to spread democracy, to drain a veritable swamp of oppression and religious radicalism and make the world safer for all of us.

So far, the majority of the world's media have effectively joined forces with the religious zealots and murderers, by trumpeting every fault and flaw in the actions of the Coalition leaders and troops. And now, by further inflaming a notoriously sensitive and excitable ethnic group, and inciting them to further anti-American sentiment, have shown their true colours once again.
It's not the only case of this sort of thing, I realize, but it is one of the most spectacularly irresponsible and just plain stupid examples we've seen from the media in quite some time.
It's extremely unfortunate that Newsweek withdrawing their allegations will be so much quicker and easier than undoing the appalling damage they've done through their traitorous 'journalism'. ???

clark · 2005-05-16 05:22:29

In local news, the messenger was shot. :laugh:

Cobra Commander · 2005-05-16 05:40:02

In local news, the messenger was shot.

Ha ha. However Shaun has a valid point. A free press is all well and good and certainly worth protecting but with freedom comes responsibility. Running the "flushed Koran" story without conclusive evidence is the equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded theater.

Quick, shoot him before he gets through the gate.

clark · 2005-05-16 05:51:36

Of course. When reporting on secret military bases, where access os controlled and restricted, only conclusive evidence will do.

I'm sure no one is abused there either. I mean, where is the conclusive evidence?

Nope, nothing to see here, move along.

Of course, Newsweek didn't retract the story or even disavow that particular piece of the report. They merely apologized for anything they *might* have gotten wrong.

But that's just extraneous information either way.

Shaun Barrett · 2005-05-16 06:49:33

With any luck, there'll be more truth to http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/co … .html]THIS REPORT in The Australian newspaper today.
Apparently, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi may have been seriously wounded and treated by a doctor:-

IRAQ'S most wanted terrorist, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, has been seriously wounded, according to a doctor who claims to have treated him last week.
The doctor told an Iraqi reporter in the western city of Ramadi that Zarqawi was bleeding heavily when he was brought into hospital on Wednesday. After treating his wounds, the doctor tried to persuade him to remain, but the Jordanian-born terrorist's minders drove him away.

A pity they stopped the bleeding. ???

Palomar · 2005-05-16 06:56:15

In local news, the messenger was shot.
Ha ha. However Shaun has a valid point. A free press is all well and good and certainly worth protecting but with freedom comes responsibility. Running the "flushed Koran" story without conclusive evidence is the equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded theater.

*No, the messenger wasn't shot: But a lot of innocent bystanders were because of the "messenger."

Ah well, stupid is as stupid says/does.

And now, by further inflaming a notoriously sensitive and excitable ethnic group, and inciting them to further anti-American sentiment, have shown their true colours once again.

Yep. And so much for innocent until proven guilty.

The media is playing judge, jury and executioner -- with deadly consequences including for innocent bystanders and civilians.

--Cindy

Palomar · 2005-05-16 07:11:05

"We regret that we got any part of our story wrong, and extend our sympathies to victims of the violence and to the U.S. soldiers caught in its midst," Newsweek Editor Mark Whitaker wrote in a note to readers.

*Yeah, well -- f*ck you, Mr. Whitaker. That's not good enough.

--Cindy

BWhite · 2005-05-16 08:59:02

”Irresponsible” is the word the Bushies use when somebody accurately reports the things that they do, with devastating consequences for the Bushies.

Question: Why are we held in such low repute in the Arab world that a report issued as a "maybe" causes anti-US riots?

BWhite · 2005-05-16 09:00:53

"We regret that we got any part of our story wrong, and extend our sympathies to victims of the violence and to the U.S. soldiers caught in its midst," Newsweek Editor Mark Whitaker wrote in a note to readers.
*Yeah, well -- f*ck you, Mr. Whitaker. That's not good enough.
--Cindy

Cindy, your reaction demonstrates how magicians do their tricks. Blame Newsweek and we forget all about our FUBAR-ed policy.

:;):

Is Newsweek's "error" worse than the error over Saddam having WMD? If so, why?

BWhite · 2005-05-16 09:02:15

PS - - Newsweek has NOT retracted the story. They now say it lacks corroboration and regret the uproar.

BWhite · 2005-05-16 09:03:58

In local news, the messenger was shot.
Ha ha. However Shaun has a valid point. A free press is all well and good and certainly worth protecting but with freedom comes responsibility. Running the "flushed Koran" story without conclusive evidence is the equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded theater.
Quick, shoot him before he gets through the gate.

Yup. The media who LIED about Saddam's weapons are a perfect example.

:;):

Palomar · 2005-05-16 09:13:03

"We regret that we got any part of our story wrong, and extend our sympathies to victims of the violence and to the U.S. soldiers caught in its midst," Newsweek Editor Mark Whitaker wrote in a note to readers.
*Yeah, well -- f*ck you, Mr. Whitaker. That's not good enough.
--Cindy
Cindy, your reaction demonstrates how magicians do their tricks. Blame Newsweek and we forget all about our FUBAR-ed policy.
:;):
Is Newsweek's "error" worse than the error over Saddam having WMD? If so, why?

*So Newsweek's irresponsible stupidity is "okay" because of the Iraq war?

I think not.

--Cindy

P.S.:

PS - - Newsweek has NOT retracted the story. They now say it lacks corroboration and regret the uproar.

A lot of good that does. Why -not- retract it then? Covering their own asses, yep. "We'll only look like half idiotic/irresponsible that way."

Cobra Commander · 2005-05-16 09:19:49

Question: Why are we held in such low repute in the Arab world that a report issued as a "maybe" causes anti-US riots?

They hate our freedoms!

Seriously, that's an important question and one with a series of complex answers. It has more to do with Arab governments and Arab perceptions than anything we actually do.

Yup. The media who LIED about Saddam's weapons are a perfect example.

Here's the thing. The WMD's were used as one of many justifications for action, even by people who knew the allegations were true. Government says "here's why" and media reports it. Of course government censored itself because it understands that some things can't be said without grave consequences.

Along comes media with a story about a Koran flushed down a crapper. Can't back it up, but they run it. Anyone with any sense knew two things from the outset, it would incite Muslims to all sorts of violent outbursts and it doesn't really have much bearing on our efforts in a practical sense. Round up and torture a million people, then the public has a right to be outraged at what's happening and demand something be done. Some interrogator flushes a book down a toilet? So the hell what? Tell him not to do it again and move on. Don't go to the enemy and say "look what our guys did, they mocked your religion and mixed your holy book with feces. They're such bastards, you guys better express your outrage"

But like all propaganda, it doesn't matter if it's true. The Koran story or the WMD's for that matter. Certain elements want any reason to fight Americans, and they'll grab what they can get. Just as some Americans saw a need for action beyond Afghanistan in a broader strategic sense and accepted whatever arguments facilitated that. Stop throwing bones to your enemies and they'll just dig up their own.

There are times when shutting the hell up about an evil is the lesser evil. Unless you live in that black and white fantasy world I keep hearing our President inhabits.

BWhite · 2005-05-16 09:21:24

Cindy, they have not retracted it because they do not believe it was wrong, it just became too politically hot not to do something to appease Washington. All of Washington has fallen on Newsweek so they issue a non-apology apology. They are very sorry they published the story, but not because it was false.

Koran flushing stories were in the European press in the summer of 2004.

In other words, Newsweek got it right they just cannot PROVE IT!

Solution? Open up Gitmo.

Palomar · 2005-05-16 09:23:55

*Yeah, well -- f*ck you, Mr. Whitaker. That's not good enough.
--Cindy
Cindy, your reaction demonstrates how magicians do their tricks. Blame Newsweek and we forget all about our FUBAR-ed policy.
:;):
Is Newsweek's "error" worse than the error over Saddam having WMD? If so, why?
*So Newsweek's irresponsible stupidity is "okay" because of the Iraq war?
I think not.
--Cindy
P.S.:
PS - - Newsweek has NOT retracted the story. They now say it lacks corroboration and regret the uproar.
A lot of good that does. Why -not- retract it then? Covering their own asses, yep. "We'll only look like half idiotic/irresponsible that way."

*And besides, how can the popular media NOW criticize and condemn Pres Bush (Rice, Rumsfeld & Co.) over the WMDs claim when they've done the exact same thing with this "Quran flushed down the toilet" story?

A mere allegation with questionable proof behind it is a mere allegation with questionable proof behind it.

Pot - kettle - black.

--Cindy

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#201 2005-05-13 12:14:42

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#202 2005-05-13 12:36:37

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#203 2005-05-13 13:01:16

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#204 2005-05-13 14:51:55

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#205 2005-05-13 14:52:49

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#206 2005-05-15 06:46:02

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#207 2005-05-15 06:46:59

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#208 2005-05-15 09:08:46

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#209 2005-05-15 11:44:10

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#210 2005-05-15 15:53:58

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#211 2005-05-16 04:49:15

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#212 2005-05-16 05:22:29

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#213 2005-05-16 05:40:02

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#214 2005-05-16 05:51:36

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#215 2005-05-16 06:49:33

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#216 2005-05-16 06:56:15

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#217 2005-05-16 07:11:05

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#218 2005-05-16 08:59:02

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#219 2005-05-16 09:00:53

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#220 2005-05-16 09:02:15

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#221 2005-05-16 09:03:58

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#222 2005-05-16 09:13:03

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#223 2005-05-16 09:19:49

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#224 2005-05-16 09:21:24

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

#225 2005-05-16 09:23:55

Re: Political Potpourri IV - Continued from previous

Board footer