Politics As Usual

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Not Me
OMG!!! You are such a fucking asshole and you are proving everything I always have thought about you was right!!! We have posted nothing but the truth about the enemies of America. Yet you want to censor that.

Do you see now why those of you who call the panties on the head torture are so out to lunch? Can you even look at these photos of true torture? They are sickening. Now compare them to the pictures of Abu Ghraib.

Why can Ty allow photos of US soldiers smiling over dead Iraqis but not Iraqis smiling over dead bodies of Americans? Why, Ty, why?

No need to answer. I know why.

You are a moron. I didn't censor anything -- I asked for comments about my non-censorship. [A few weeks ago,] There were pictures out of Fallujah of burnt corpses that would turn your stomach. I replaced those with a link -- which is hardly a form of censorship. If you look at the board FAQ, you will see that it says:

• At present we only allow posting of explicit images on the Adult Board. Explicit images include those that have nudity or that depict graphic violence. If you intend to post such images on any board other than the Adult Board, you MUST post a link to the image, rather than posting the image itself, with a CLEAR explanation of what the link will lead to.

I think the pictures that you and Gin Rummy posted are explicit, and are not things that people will want on their screen in an office, but I was hoping to get more feedback tonight.

Has anyone posted pictures of dead Iraqis here? I don't remember them, but I think the same standard applies.

eta bracketed text

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Gin Rummy When they kick in your front door, how you gonna come, with your hands on the Geneva Convention or on the trigger of a gun.....
[/IMG]

I'm guessing not bilmore.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Your partisanship knows no bounds.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Gin Rummy
Damn straight!

It’s about time.

I have been discussing this issue with my granddad, a WWII Vet who made it through the Bataan death march and his recollection was during his hallowed stint in the military, soldiers were allowed NO contact with the outside world, families included. No letters, NO calls, NO postcards, NO teletype, NO Western Union, NO pony express, NO Nothing. It was called wartime security.

Now the left wing media traitors and their comrades in the democrat party are whinging about restrictions on cell phones?

Roosevelt was bad enough, but it’s a damn thing that you modern day post-60’s freak liberals weren’t in charge of things in WW II or we’d all be dancing the goosestep over a platter of sushi now.

Any query for you leftist boys, how come the media doesn’t show these pics as many times as we have seen the panty-headed prisoner pics. No bias? BULLSHITE!

Ed Anger?

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
I'm guessing not bilmore.

I am not so sure.

Many religions are little more than organized hate groups. Islam is one of them. The hatred for women and infidels permeates islam. Moderate islam is a myth unless you think it is moderate to treat women as subhuman.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by The Larry Davis Experience
In the hopes of distracting us from the spinning of the UN loop before Gatti vanishes into some time vortex, did anyone watch Bush's speech last night? There wasn't much new besides the proposal to bulldoze Abu Ghraib, so I kind of found myself watching Bush's mannerisms more than concentrating on the words he was saying.

I don't know if the strain is getting to him or the military audience wasn't applauding at the right times or what, but he seemed to be more off-balance than usual. For instance what we lefties usually deride as his smirk kind of morphed into an amiable half-smile, almost a "you guys believe me, right?" But the half-smile would come out at weird times, like when he was describing Brahimi's work. And it seemed like he kept leaning over the podium as if to make sure that there were people in the front row and they were paying attention. Did anyone else notice this?

This really isn't a rip-on-Bush's-speaking-style rant; I save those for DU and my repartee with the baggers at the whole foods coop. On the plus side for Bush, I will say that he certainly looks better giving a prepared speech than he does taking inpromptu questions, and his first look away from the teleprompters into the camera for the "we will not fail" line at the end was good theater too. I guess I'm just curious if someone who has watched him more often got the same impression I did.

Interesting that there has been little discussion there has been of Bush's speech, here or elsewhere, especially when one takes into account how seldom Bush addresses the nation. Honestly, I tried to watch it, but it was too predictable, even for prime time. It was nothing more than the "everything's fine here" that we've all heard before. I'm starting to think of this as the Brobeck Administration.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Interesting that there has been little discussion there has been of Bush's speech, here or elsewhere, especially when one takes into account how seldom Bush addresses the nation. Honestly, I tried to watch it, but it was too predictable, even for prime time. It was nothing more than the "everything's fine here" that we've all heard before. I'm starting to think of this as the Brobeck Administration.

If that means we're starting a Death Pool, put me down for early November.

eta: You can find a variety of reaction to Bush's speech here. Having heard that he was not going to announce new policy, but was engaging in a PR effort to change the tone, I saw no reason to watch.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Not Me
Your partisanship knows no bounds.

I will take this as confirmation that no one posted explicit Abu Ghraib photos above.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by Not Me
Many religions are little more than organized hate groups. Islam is one of them.

Name some others. I think you will find the requisite Googling broadening.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
If that means we're starting a Death Pool, put me down for early November.

I know what you mean by this, but I'd choose my words more carefully in these post-Patriot Act days. Terrorist fuck.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
Name some others. I think you will find the requisite Googling broadening.

It is alll a matter of degree. Some, like islam, are heinous in the degree of subjugation of women and misogyny.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Not Me
OMG!!! You are such a fucking asshole and you are proving everything I always have thought about you was right!!! We have posted nothing but the truth about the enemies of America. Yet you want to censor that.

Do you see now why those of you who call the panties on the head torture are so out to lunch? Can you even look at these photos of true torture? They are sickening. Now compare them to the pictures of Abu Ghraib.

Why can Ty allow photos of US soldiers smiling over dead Iraqis but not Iraqis smiling over dead bodies of Americans? Why, Ty, why?

No need to answer. I know why.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
You are a moron. I didn't censor anything -- I asked for comments about my non-censorship. [A few weeks ago,] There were pictures out of Fallujah of burnt corpses that would turn your stomach. I replaced those with a link -- which is hardly a form of censorship. If you look at the board FAQ, you will see that it says:

• At present we only allow posting of explicit images on the Adult Board. Explicit images include those that have nudity or that depict graphic violence. If you intend to post such images on any board other than the Adult Board, you MUST post a link to the image, rather than posting the image itself, with a CLEAR explanation of what the link will lead to.

I think the pictures that you and Gin Rummy posted are explicit, and are not things that people will want on their screen in an office, but I was hoping to get more feedback tonight.

Has anyone posted pictures of dead Iraqis here? I don't remember them, but I think the same standard applies.

eta bracketed text

Ty:

I think Not Me is channeling her outrage at my post earlier today, which was not a post of photos of GIs smiling over dead Iraqi prisoners, nor even a link to the photos. Instead it was a fucking link to an article that discussed the photos, without even a link to the photos themselves. Given the context, it makes her outrage misplaced at best, and stupid at ... um ... well, stupid in pretty much all respects, really.

Not Me:

(1) You're a fool. If you're jonesing to flame Ty as a "fucking asshole," and partisan censor, you should spend the time to ensure that your facts are right.

(2) You're a hypocrite. If you truly are horrified by these "pictures of true torture," and think it's sickening for everyone to look at, then don't post them in the first place, dumbass.

I don't like the pictures. It reminds me of a time that's still raw for many folks. (In response to Ty's question, I don't think that these particular pics should be converted to links, as (unfortunately) there was a time that these damned things were splashed across CNN.) Not Me, I think that your prediliction to post images of the burning towers, and individuals leaping from them, is in the worst taste. Get some persp .... ah, never mind.

Slave:

Not that you have to weigh in here, but FWIW it's moments like these where I fail to see the amusing part.

Gattigap

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Gattigap
Slave:

Not that you have to weigh in here, but FWIW it's moments like these where I fail to see the amusing part.

Gattigap

Fuck you asshole. There is nothing amusing about my post. You are so blinded by partisanship that you cannot even remember what the word torture means!!!!

If nothing else, Iraq has been the fly paper to attract islamic terrorists. If we can only succeed in establishing a representative republic there, maybe then we will have made some progress in the war against terror by bringing some beacon of light to the darkness that is the Arab world.

The Arab world is dark because it is a seething cesspool of anger and hatred. Anger at the failures of Arabs and the hatred of the west propagated by islam.

Bury your head in the sand and weep your crocodile tears over the "torture" at Abu Ghraib. Forget those who died on 9/11 at your own peril. I won't forget and won't let some fucking cocksucker like you intimidate me.

[Not Me]

So what is this? We cannot post pics of Americans suffering? Why? What does this do? Hurt the Dem cause by reminding you who are enemies are? But yet we have to see pictures of something akin to fraternity pranks shoved down our throats to make us feel like we have collectively done something wrong?

What a fucking bunch of hypocrits.

Yes, the wounds are raw. Burying your heads in the sand and forgetting what it is we are up against only endangers us all.

AQ is in Iraq and was in Iraq before we invaded. There are sarin gas containing warheads in Iraq, too.

[Mister_Ruysbroeck]

Originally posted by Not Me
So what is this? We cannot post pics of Americans suffering? Why? What does this do? Hurt the Dem cause by reminding you who are enemies are? But yet we have to see pictures of something akin to fraternity pranks shoved down our throats to make us feel like we have collectively done something wrong?

What a fucking bunch of hypocrits.

Yes, the wounds are raw. Burying your heads in the sand and forgetting what it is we are up against only endangers us all.

AQ is in Iraq and was in Iraq before we invaded. There are sarin gas containing warheads in Iraq, too.

I don't post on this board at all and I'm the one who made the call that the pics violated the rule. I have no idea what the pics are or what there context is. I was asked about them, shown the post, and I saw a pic with burned corpses. I didn't even look at who posted it. All I know is that pictures containing depictions of graphic violence are clearly against this website's rules. I don't care if it's a burned up american, israeli, muslim, or angus cow. Post a link/spree or it will be converted for you.

That's not censorship. It's courtesy to other posters who may not have as strong of a stomach for violence as you do. And even if you do consider it censorship, let me remind you that the First Amendment doesn't apply to these boards. The only thing that constrains anyone's speech here is the board's TOS, and on this point the TOS is clear.

ETA: I am obviously talking about the burned corpses pic. I don't think the jumper pics violate the graphic violence rule. They are extremely distasteful, but they don't depict graphic violence.