Politics: J'accuse!

[SlaveNoMore]

Gattigap
You're using the reference as though Letterman posts one of the photos, calls a prisoner "Batman," and the audience guffaws.

Really? I thought I invented that*

Serves me right for watching Leno/Conan, I guess.


* Even though claming to invent things has become so paigow

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I edited the post above.

Yes, you did edit the post. However, all you have to support your contention are bare allegations by journalists that senior officials ordered this. No proof or evidence, just allegations.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Not Me
Yes, you did edit the post. However, all you have to support your contention are bare allegations by journalists that senior officials ordered this. No proof or evidence, just allegations.

Oh, please. This kind of rearguard refusal to face facts is b-o-r-i-n-g, boring. It is also a sign of desperation on your part. It's pretty clear that there are people in the military and intel communities who are not happy with what Rumsfeld et al. did, and who are leaking furiously. That's where these stories are coming from. Hell, Colin Powell says Bush was briefed.

Here's another story from UPI:

• Indeed, intelligence and regular Army sources have told UPI that senior officers and officials in both communities are sickened and outraged by the revelations of mass torture and abuse, and also by the incompetence involved, in the Abu Ghraib prison revelations. These sources also said that officials all the way up to the highest level in both the Army and the Agency are determined not to be scapegoated, or allow very junior soldiers or officials to take the full blame for the excesses.
  President George W. Bush in his weekly radio address Saturday claimed that the Abu Ghraib abuses were only "the actions of a few" and that they did not "reflect the true character of the Untied States armed forces."
  
  But what enrages many serving senior Army generals and U.S. top-level intelligence community professionals is that the "few" in this case were not primarily the serving soldiers who were actually encouraged to carry out the abuses and even then take photos of the victims, but that they were encouraged to do so, with the Army's well-established safeguards against such abuses deliberately removed by high-level Pentagon civilian officials.

Connect the dots.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by bilmore
Yes. That's why returning soldiers, blogging soldiers, visitors to Iraq, blogging Iraqis, and the like are all saying "what war are they talking about? It's WAY worse than what we're reading!"

If you were merely being sarcastic, and I missed it, I'm sorry. If you weren't, you should be.

I don't even understand what you are getting at, except that you seem to live in alternate universe where every body is reading off the CPA talking points and smiling as they do it. In my world, there is bad stuff happening too. I'm not ignoring the good, but you seem to think that anyone who decides to take off the rose-colored glasses is motivated solely by partisan hatred for the Party of Lincoln.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by bilmore
On a totally different subject, did you catch 60 Minutes a little bit ago? Some imams in England clarified that it's okay to beat your wife if you avoid the eyes and mouth. It's nice to have that cleared up.

There is a battle going on within Islam between fundamentalism and the moderates, and I don't think there's any question who the good guys are. Those Republicans who are tight with Prince Bandar may be a little more confused, though.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Oh, please. This kind of rearguard refusal to face facts is b-o-r-i-n-g, boring.

What facts? Some unnamed sources making allegations to journalists are reason to investigate, but don't prove anything.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
There is a battle going on within Islam between fundamentalism and the moderates, and I don't think there's any question who the good guys are. Those Republicans who are tight with Prince Bandar may be a little more confused, though.

But even the moderate muslims don't allow women to be equal in their religion. Hey, it is better than getting the shit beaten out of you, for sure, but moderate muslims are not an enlightened group when it comes to women's rights.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Not Me
What facts? Some unnamed sources making allegations to journalists are reason to investigate, but don't prove anything.

We'll all bear that in mind when this stuff gets to court.

• Judge: Mr. Hutz w've been in here for four hours. Do you have any evidence at all?
  Hutz: Well, Your Honor. We've plenty of hearsay and conjecture. Those are kinds of evidence.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Not Me
But even the moderate muslims don't allow women to be equal in their religion. Hey, it is better than getting the shit beaten out of you, for sure, but moderate muslims are not an enlightened group when it comes to women's rights.

I think that you are spouting all sorts of generalizations that are not quite true, but I am waiting for my main man Atticus to show up with his expertise in religion.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
We'll all bear that in mind when this stuff gets to court.

• Judge: Mr. Hutz w've been in here for four hours. Do you have any evidence at all?
  Hutz: Well, Your Honor. We've plenty of hearsay and conjecture. Those are kinds of evidence.

Ty, in court named individuals testify under penalty of perjury as to those matters of which they have personal knowledge. Compare that to an unnamed source saying senior officials in the DoD removed safeguards in interrogation practices that then resulted in abuse.

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone Slothrop
It is also a sign of desperation on your part. It's pretty clear that there are people in the military and intel communities who are not happy with what Rumsfeld et al. did, and who are leaking furiously.

As I was saying to someone this weekend in a Berkeley coffeehouse - I still think Rummy steps down after the handover date

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
We'll all bear that in mind when this stuff gets to court.

• Judge: Mr. Hutz w've been in here for four hours. Do you have any evidence at all?
  Hutz: Well, Your Honor. We've plenty of hearsay and conjecture. Those are kinds of evidence.

If you make one more post on this topic w/o answering my post you are intellectually dishonest. I hope not.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I think that you are spouting all sorts of generalizations that are not quite true, but I am waiting for my main man Atticus to show up with his expertise in religion.

It isn't that what I am saying isn't true, it is just that you and I have a different idea of women's equality. Mandating that women cover their heads with scarves is an act of misogynism in my book. This practice is based in this theory of islam that women must not exhibit signs of their sexuality because this is tempting to men. It is the Eve tempted Adam with the apple thing.

I also believe that a religion is sexist if women are not allowed to be spiritual leaders of the same rank as men.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Not Me
Ty, in court named individuals testify under penalty of perjury as to those matters of which they have personal knowledge. Compare that to an unnamed source saying senior officials in the DoD removed safeguards in interrogation practices that then resulted in abuse.

This is about the dumbest line of argument you've ever pursued, which is saying something. You are absolutely right that most of what is printed in the newspaper doesn't meet the evidentiary standards to be admissible. BFD. By the same token, you could say that there's no "proof" that this scandal is just the actions of a few misguided individuals. Little or nothing that's in the media meets your standards, so I guess we just shouldn't form opinions at all until we have trials to watch.

Here is some more reporting that isn't "proof."

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by Not Me
But even the moderate muslims don't allow women to be equal in their religion. Hey, it is better than getting the shit beaten out of you, for sure, but moderate muslims are not an enlightened group when it comes to women's rights.

I can't possibly enter into an argument over the spectrum of Islamic thought on this topic with a thing that believes itself to fall in the centerline of American politics merely because it is a self-described feminist Bircher.

Is this the point where it says it doesn't think the Orthodox Jews or Catholics allow women to be "equal in their religion" either?