The media's curious attitude towards pictures

Quote from Gringinho:

I would like to think that the rest of the world see the actions undertaken in Abu Ghraib as torture as well. I actually think the Geneva convention forbids it - but that's something very many know very little about it seems.
More...

cartoon_geneva_large.gif


Of course it's torture, plain and simple, and illegal under the Geneva Convention that the current US regime couldn't care less about. One of the worst things that can happen to you right now is being any Arab in US occupied territory, the US perpetrated abuse, war crimes and torture we've witnessed in Iraq and elsewhere are simply endemic to all wars, any other ideas are simply naive, hence I can only feel sorry for those on the wrong side of the fence. Besides, since when have the NeoCons ever cared about stuff like not utilizing torture - either they do it themselves or they outsource it to nasty regimes where its even more normal -, or upkeeping civil liberties, democracy and freedom etc, lol. Just think about the abomination that is Guantanamo. Somebody once said show me a countries prisons, and I'll tell you what kind of a country that is. Right!

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=33314

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=33261

britt.gif
 
Wow TigerO, those little cartoons you cut and paste are so interesting and completely unbiased.

Do you even trade? Or spend all your time surfing the net?
 
Volume, how can one be unbiased when you've got the most cowardly, corrupt, deceitful and lying scum bag in US history running this place, Bush, who poses the biggest threat to freedom, civil liberties, democracy, peace and stability to the world in ages, and who is on the verge of blowing up the world?:confused:

But, no worries, me old trading is doing ok seeing as how I'm no scalper and have plenty of time, when the inclination hits, which is not all the time, to engage in extracurricular activities.:D

Regards,
 
Quote from Gringinho:

I would like to think that the rest of the world see the actions undertaken in Abu Ghraib as torture as well. I actually think the Geneva convention forbids it - but that's something very many know very little about it seems.



There's where you fell into the trap of trying to manipulate my statement into something specifically against US soldiers committing acts of torture. As you can clearly read it says "any soldier" and not "US soldiers".

I claim no moral authority for others than myself. Normal reaction to some lowlife torturing anybody - human or animal - is that they get a fitting punishment - even morally so. That is embedded into US penal code - with death sentences too.
So what was it you were saying - you're not a supremacist ? Or doesn't your normal morals apply when it comes to US soldiers - only with US criminals ?

You see - that's why the International Criminal Court was established. People easily get manipulated by governments when they lack the proper education in self-scrutiny, history and world affairs as well as a common set of moral values. It happened in Rwanda when government elements imported thousands of machetes in the time running up to the slaughter when radio broadcasts and newspapers were chock full of things like "Don't let the Tutsi scum escape."

US media was full of propaganda leading up to the Iraq war - and they're still churning that propaganda flowing into your ears - now with a opposition presidential candidate as well. The question is what reality you can deduct from the information, reflect over the real situation - and then apply reality-aware conclusions into your voice and actions.

To me some of the language from Mark Kimmit and others are totally appalling when uttered - but I understand he sometimes tries to strike some humor with his remarks. He applies his language to "the enemy" - the Iraqis, and I don't think they deserved being targeted as enemies in the first place.

Having principles and morality means you apply them equally - and not based on racist or supremacist beliefs - singeling out the wrong actions of "your own kind" as ok - but condemning the equal actions of others. That was e.g the case when Iraqis flaunted US POWs in TV broadcasts, while the US had shown worse treatment themselves. US media and military commanders cried "Geneva convention!" when seing that on arabic newscasts - yet see where we are now.

You can continue - but you will lose any continued argument on this - simply because you're wrong; and I will prove you wrong every time.
More...

ART, oops I mean "Ginginho", the only person you're convincing is yourself. First, the Geneva Convention does not even apply. Second, you have no evidence that real "torture" took place. All you have is a few photos of naked prisoners. Third, you are being totally disingenuous when you say you didn't mean "US" troops, just any troops. It's perfectly obvious whose troops you meant. Certainly you and your buddies at Moral Equivalency University have never condemned any communist or Islamist forces, only those representing freedom and democracy.

Thank goodness we now have a president with enough good sense not to sacrifice our troops to the "justice" of international socialists, dictators, thugs and communist murderers under the guise of the International Criminal court.
 
Quote from Turok:

Gringingo:
>I wouldn't be at all sorry if some soldier who tortured
>prisoners of war was shot by some guerilla elements/enemy
> - or even subjected to torture himself before a slow death.

AAA:
>You lost any shred of moral authority or legitimacy
>by your first post in which you expressed a longing
>to see American soldiers killed or even tortured.
>That kind of expression may go over well in a university
>setting or in a mosque but it is deeply offensive to the
>rest of us.

I'm confused by your assessment of his statement...it seem to me that he is ONLY suggesting that it would be valid justice for someone who violated such a trust as these soldiers did to get a taste of their own medicine. I'm not sure I follow the loss of moral position in his "eye for an eye" situation.

It's not a loaded question and not seeking confrontation, just honestly interested in how you see it.

JB
More...

You can't see that advocating American soldiers be tortured and killed because they, at worst, took some pictures of naked Iraqi terrorist suspects, is hideous? That is justice? And it's ok to turn it over to terrorists to decide the guilt and punishment? This kind of vile posturing by the hate America crowd under the guise of even-handedness provides justification for the terrorists and murderers of people like Nick Berg. Even some news stories reported it was "retaliation" for the prison fiasco when we know they have been doing the same sort of thing for years.
 
Yes, as you describe it it is hideous, but the way you describe it is not even consistent with the BEST light that the pictures portray LET ALONE consistent with first hand sworn witness reports.

There a are pictures of *actual* (forced painful positions) and perceived (fake or real wires to body with threaths of harm) torture. Additionally at a minimum Sivits sworn testimony completely conflicts with your "at worst..." scenario.

But now I know why your position is such.

I still believe that Gringinho was simply stating that he wouldn't mind 'eye for an eye' justice in this case and I'm right with him.

JB


Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

You can't see that advocating American soldiers be tortured and killed because they, at worst, took some pictures of naked Iraqi terrorist suspects, is hideous? That is justice? And it's ok to turn it over to terrorists to decide the guilt and punishment? This kind of vile posturing by the hate America crowd under the guise of even-handedness provides justification for the terrorists and murderers of people like Nick Berg. Even some news stories reported it was "retaliation" for the prison fiasco when we know they have been doing the same sort of thing for years.
More...
 
Quote from Turok:

Yes, as you describe it it is hideous, but the way you describe it is not even consistent with the BEST light that the pictures portray LET ALONE consistent with first hand sworn witness reports.

There a are pictures of *actual* (forced painful positions) and perceived (fake or real wires to body with threaths of harm). Additionally at a minimum Sivits sworn testimony completely conflicts with your "at worst..." scenario.

But know I know why your position is such.

I still believe that Gringinho was simply stating that he wouldn't mind 'eye for an eye' justice in this case and I'm right with him.

JB
More...

lol

You're right, but I wouldn't bother even discussing with these trailer camp rednecks, it's a total waste of time and effort.
 
Quote from bungrider:

OK guys -- let me make it abundantly clear why this whole prisoner torture thing is pure chaos for the US military's fighting men and women --

the whole point of the geneva convention is to prevent torture of any and all soldiers/prisoners. it's to allow a nation to say "OK, if we capture your guys, we will treat them the same way that we expect you to treat our soldiers if you can capture them"

when one rogue nation decides to ignore those rules, they're basically saying "OK, if you capture any of our guys, please torture them in the same way we tortured your soldiers"

anyone OK with this torture engineered by the rumsfeld camp clearly only wants to see american soldiers get the same treatment by other nations.

now i can see why the bush regime wants that to happen -- when american soldiers/contractors etc get captured and tortured by iraqis/al queda etc, it gets shown on TV, and makes it REALLY fucking easy to get the whole country into a flag-waving hysteria...

but the people who will ultimately pay the price for this are AMERICAN SOLDIERS -- your friends, children, neighbors, and all the other brave american soldiers who put their lives on the line for you and me so that we can enjoy these basic freedoms.

anyone who doesn't see it this way is a fucking retard.
More...

the boys got a point....but i can assure you that it doesnt matter how we handle IRAQI prisoners these animals will still kill and/or torture our prisoners of war....its the sad fact.

I'll tell you this much, i can understand some of the frustrations/anger our soldiers feel toward their enemies ( even prisoners )....so in short i would also most probably do soe ass whoopin myself...I mean cmon, these animals drag dead bodies and cut off peoples heads, surely you would want to build an ass pyramid yourself.......peace
 
Cubano, it's that you reap what you sow.

We invaded them based on nothing but spin lies and deceit, commit war crimes and torture etc - and again, that kind of shit is simply endemic to all wars - so they just react.

You wouldn't be doing anything much different if Mexico or Canada invaded the US, in war times people just turn into animals.

You just reap what you sow.

Peace, as you say:D

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=33314

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=33261
 
Quote from TigerO:

Cubano, it's that you reap what you sow.

We invaded them based on nothing but spin lies and deceit, commit war crimes and torture etc - and again, that kind of shit is simply endemic to all wars - so they just react.

You wouldn't be doing anything much different if Mexico or Canada invaded the US, in war times people just turn into animals.

You just reap what you sow.

Peace, as you say:D

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=33314

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=33261
More...

i didnt say it was right...i said under the circumstances of seeing their fellow soldiers/contractors being dragged while dead and heads being cut off...i can surely understand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top