I absolutely cannot believe the R's are trying to actually JUSTIFY torture

This is friggin obscene. I've said it before and I'll say it again. We desperately need a huge sweeping victory in november both in the exectuive branch and the legislative branch.

every vote counts. to any nader supporters out there, personal plea from me. vote for kerry. these guys HAVE to go.

:puke:

I would expect nothing less from the :puke:s

It's not just Republicans, either. Elements in the self-proclaimed aristocracy of this country want to systematically cheapen the concepts of war and tyranny; if the rest of the world is just a bunch of meanies who are jealous of us and willing to do anything to cheat us of our due, they're not deserving gentle treatment.

We're being softened up to the concept of becoming hard-hearted. Then they can really get cooking.

They want to make sure responsibility doesn't reach the top.

It seems that there was no one in charge and no goverining policy.
My question is: Isn't 'no policy' a form of a policy?

Republicans and Conservatives will sink to any depth. No surprise here. They're shameless.

that is they all got the talking points. Over time, Bush will repeat it, Rice will repeat it, Powell will repeat it and Cheney will repeat it. After about two weeks, it will have morphed into only a few, who took it upon themselves to do these things, are guilty. No one gave them orders, and no one can put a finger on why.
Bush is seeing to it that they will be punished, is very angry and Laura is very saddened.

Bush, with the support of everyone, including our own party, and perhaps no word from our nominee, will emerge as a tough leader who has a conscience.

That is what happens when people are too cautious, too afraid to speak out, condemn anyone who does speak out in the manner of a Dean, because they might lose the election

I don't buy it--it is enabling and if we do not know how our candidate feels about it, specifically, we can only guess what he would do, if elected.

I do not vote on guesses , a wing and a prayer, and unsubstantiated reasons to hope.

and on to the next atrocity that 50 years we will look back on with due contrition.

They were seriously(or jokingly, which is worse?) talking about detention camps for liberals or dissenters in America. Make no mistake these people are cut from the same moral and psychological cloth as the Nazis in Germany. It just depends on how much they can get away with.

Just how much more evidence of this slide into darkness do we need?

I only fear, really fear, that the job of facing up to America's fall will not even come close to the partially successful efforts in postwar Axis countries or the sour debacle of Vietnam.

Better than prison terms is getting everyone to face the truth in this country.

Then we can use it on THEM.

Bastards!

Can we say

Republican=Nazi

we can now say Republican = Fascist.

I still say they are more like Mussolini than Hitler.

Naziism was actually a spinoff of Fascism if my understanding is correct...just more brutal!

I think we're going to be hearing a lot of that.

he might as well have said "I did not have relations with that scope and scale" Jeezus what crap this is, it looks like that Karpinski woman will be the one getting fragged on this, her and the 7 bad apples. Thhis i just a cover up, thats it.

I predict that some courageous congressional aide or military person will get copies of the new photos and videos being provided to legislators and make them public. Or, as Seymour Hersh has suggested, there are probably many copies circulating already that will end up in the hands of foreign publications.

that we could have George Bush molesting a ten year old boy live on national television and somehow people would find a way to support it.

This is ALMOST exactly that.

Sometimes I feel like it's been one long weird dream. It can't really be happening, right?

Let me say, we have a real problem in the conservative base (you all have your own problems, too, but this is not about you).

The Republicans are having a real hard time trying to reconcile what their leaders are doing with true conservative principles. There are only a small number of us who believe that the current administration has hijacked our party. It seems like most of them believe we should do whatever is necessary to win the war. The hatred this is brewing is getting a little scary.

I was a county delegate in a recent Republican convention out here and there sure was a lot of cheering for Bush. I refused to clap, let alone stand up and cheer. I can only imagine what people around me thought. I can't believe there's not a single serious opponent to Bush.

You can change these people's minds (I am only talking about the prisoner abuse, leave the socialist ideas to yourself), but you have to do it calmly because these people are really worked up. Don't yell back, use logic (which I know is hard for liberals, ha ha, just kidding).

What's odd is that the Republican leadership is calling this a disgrace, but a lot of the rank and filers are still bent on even torturing the prisoners more. I think Rush had a big hand in this. When he said that this was no big deal, a lot of Republicans took that idea and started arguing it. Now they are stuck: they either must say they were wrong, or remain in opposition to their leadership.

It's hard for conservatives to admit their own guys screwed up. They really want their ideas to work (and they do if the leaders actually stick to them), so they think that if they disavow Bush et al., then they disavow their beliefs. I haven't had much success in convincing them that that it not necessarily so.

what their leaders are doing with true conservative principles."

Of course they are! Because their leaders are not following ANY principles you could call "conservative". Go watch Lou Dobbs.. or read recent George Will!

As for republicans (conservatives?) that choose to follow rather than fight, they are lemmings.

fascist disease in the Republican party to the ills of the Democratic Party. The two just aren't even close.

Your party is sliding towards Nazism, and your brothers are behaving more and more like Brownshirts every day.

I was pointing out that both parties have their problems. There's no pure and innocent party. Now it's just the Republicans turn to have theirs take the stage.

But like I said, this thread is not about the Democratic Party.

and trashing the future of America.

when the real shit starts hitting the fan here soon. It's now known that our soldiers and contractors beat a 12 year old girl, sodomized prisoners with light tubes, filmed Iraqi guards sodomiozing young Iraqi boys. Numerous Iraqis under detention have been killed in captivity. This is all far, FAR worse than the simple humiliation we've seen so far. I'm just dreading the moment when I hear Rush Limbaugh and his listeners try to justify all that somehow. If that happens, we'll know which party has the worse problem...

Dirk

When people have spent a lot of effort and reputation arguing one side, they seem to continue to argue that side in the face of evidence against them in order to save face. They don't want to admit they were wrong.

So...this is my guess as to what will happen when we see more evidence of abuse:

First the Republicans will think that it is all political, that the media is blowing everything out of proportion, and that all we focus on is the bad stuff because liberals want to undermine the war.

Then they might argue that this is a non-issue and that only the liberals care, and that the Iraqis don't even really care. This gets us off of arguing about the actual acts and start arguing about whether people really care about this.

More pictures will come out; some will be fake or of somewhere other than Iraq, some will be trumped up to be really awful, and when they are not the Republicans will accuse the media of blowing everything way out of proportion. The images that show actual abuse will lose their effectiveness on the public mind because they will be drowned out by other pictures.

There will be an attempt to show the value of the prisoner abuse in intelligence gathering efforts, and that it really did help us in saving the lives of the troops. This argument won't last long I don't think.

There will definitely be lots of talk about how the troops in the picture were just doing what their leader expected them to do. People will try to make us feel sorry for the soldiers, and try to direct the blame onto the officers in charge. Someone will get disciplined as the proof that the problem has been taken care of.

Finally, the Republicans will acknowledge that the soldiers went a little overboard, but they were just acting as their leaders expected them to, and justice has been done because an officer or two gets disciplined, and any more talk about it is just the liberals media trying to destroy Bush. Then the Republicans will feel like they have done the right thing and they will think they will have been consistent all along.

A final word. I know a lot of you probably would just like to vent your anger of conservatives on me. So far you all have been pretty good, and I thank you for that. I am not going to get into a debate on who's party has more problems here, so please don't try to bait me into it.

I never thought I'd see the day when a freeper posting on DU would be ok. LOL!

are goose-stepping racist white-homophobic fascists would want to blow the world up with nuks, and not all of you are red commie bleading-heart elitists who want to bail out every welfare mom. Ha ha. (or are you?)

But it's not like I am a moderate or anything. I am very conservative, but I very much disagree with a lot of the Republican base on this issue of prisoner abuse. Things can be debated without getting all hot and heavy and regressing back to junior high insults. I am passionate about what I believe, but it persuades no one if I act like a spoiled brat.

The fact that you guys haven't booted me increases my chances of getting booted off of FreeRepublic (if they can figure out who I am on FR, shh...), which I actually have more in common with. Like I said, I don't really have a political home.

what does it say about their commitment to their principles when they continue to support a man whose policies (which they also support) contradict their "deeply held" principles?

(And please note that "they're human too", while true, does not answer the question, which is restricted to conservative's commitment to conservative principles)

This is the heart of the matter with this prisoner abuse story. They are following a guy who says he believes in the same values as the conservatives, but then goes and does something different. This is the idea that you can disavow the man but not necessarily disavow the principles, which I am having a hard time convincing them of. But this is not unique to conservatives, but now they are in the spotlight.

Conservatives have very little forgiveness of their leaders if their leaders "deny the faith", so to speak. You either are, or are not, conservative, in their minds. So any indication that you stray from their principles means that that person never really was a conservative. So what happens is that the conservatives try in their own minds to reconcile the behavior they observe of the leaders with the principles that they believe in. When they contradict, they look for all sorts of explanations and excuses that would justify the behavior of their leaders and still keep it consistent with their beliefs. That's why I think there is such an outcry of liberal spin on the media, everything being political, democrats just hate Bush, because then there is only a perception that Bush is contradicting their principles, rather than the reality of it.

But what this also means is that the Republicans are a prime target for political hijacking. Just say you adhere to the principles they want to hear, and then do whatever you want. It would be very hard for many of them to admit they were wrong after defending Bush and suporting him for so long. They have a lot invested in it, so they try hard to give him every benefit of the doubt, even in the face of evidence to the contrary.

Again, this is why I think the Republican Party is the best place to promote totalitarianism, not because Republicans want totalitarianism, but because they can hardly believe their guy would be the one bringing it about.

I've seen supposed conservatives espouse views all over the political spectrum because then to them it eliminates the contradiction between what they believe conservatism to be and what their leaders are doing. I've seen awesome party platforms and then see the elected officers do the exact opposite, and the base doesn't complain because he's "their guy."

Both Gore and Clinton lost lots of votes from gun owners, because those people aren't the sort who can't distinguish principles and politicians. I think you are closer with your 2nd point (ie "Conservatives have very little forgiveness of their leaders if their leaders "deny the faith'") Conservatives can't say "Bush* was wrong" because they equate that with saying "My conservative principles are wrong".

Basically, I find your response as contradictory as the behavior of conservatives who stick to Bush* despite his failure to uphold conservative principles. I asked you about conservatives commitment to principle, and instead of making the obvious conclusion (ie that conservatives are NOT truly commited to conservative principles. They are only committed to those who CLAIM to be committed to conservative principles) you merely explain what's going on in their heads, without stating the obvious truth - their committment is to people who CLAIM to be committed to conservative principles. If they were truly committed, they wouldn't have such trouble discerning who is behaving consistently with those principles, and who is not.

"Commitment to principle" is not merely a feeling. It also includes behavior. Unfortunately, conservatives are only committed to the appearance of consistent principles.

It would be very hard for many of them to admit they were wrong after defending Bush and suporting him for so long. They have a lot invested in it, so they try hard to give him every benefit of the doubt, even in the face of evidence to the contrary.

Exactly!! Their "committment to principle" disappears as soon as their ego is challenged. Some commitment.

I wasn't trying to excuse conservatives out of abandoning their principles. I was showing what I think goes on in their heads. They don't think they are abandoning their principles because they think the explanations of what happended is wrong, not that what happened was wrong. Which I see as different from one thinking, "it's ok if we do this only once", as opposed to "this isn't what it looks like." One overtly admits to oneself that they are deviating from principle but justifies it, the other denies the deviation. To an outside observer, they could both right be seen as abandoning principle

--how many true Conservatives are willing to keep a Republican in power, despite their strong objections over not only his failure as a Conservative, but his creation of the situation that allowed these abuses and tortures in the first place?

I'd like to think that the Dems would dump any Democrat who had done what George Bush has done. I know I would; I'd be voting for Nader in a second if the show were on the other foot.

I would also just like to send you a nod of respect for your intelligent discussion of this central issue. I hope you can survivie around here, if that is your desire; it's been done before. True Conservatism has a valid philosophical basis, just as true Liberalism does; I'm glad to see that *you* can see that these horrors in Iraq are outside of politics, and are objectively, well, objectionable. All Americans, regardless of political stripe, should feel that way--frankly, it is simply immoral to condone or explain away such conduct.

I have respect for true conservatives. We even have some things in common, I suspect. It's the neoconservatives--the ones currently running things--that make no sense to me. There's no way to justify or excuse the treatment we've seen, and any attempts to do so will probably backfire, as you said. I appreciate your points and your candor.

Regarding the 'partisanship' -- when the only defenders of the atrocities at Abu Ghraib are (most) Republicans while (some) Republicans and virtually all Independents, Greens, Democrats, and others are condemning these acts, the only 'partisanship' I can see is among those who defend or minimize such behavior. Thus, proclaiming 'partisan' motives seems to be sheer projection.

It's NOT the pictures ... it's the acts portrayed. No matter how many faked photos are added to the mix in order to attempt to impeach the veractiy of other photos and witnesses, the underlying acts are extensive and reported by international NGOs like the ICRC and Amnesty International.

There is no intelligence value to torture and abuse. None. This gets proven over and over again. Furthermore, even by the US military's own release statistics, about 90% of the people in Abu Ghraib are innocnet of anything that warrants even the incarceration they've already been subjected to.

Finally, there is absolutely no virtue in ultimately doing that which one is pushed kicking, objecting, resisting, and screaming into doing. These crimes against humanity have been taking places since over a year ago and US authorities have been notified by various NGOs and even by people within the ranks. These reports were resisted. No proactive behavior was undertaken at the most senior levels. Finally making corrections cannot be something to take pride in.

is that it's hard to know how many people oppose Bush but find not fault with the prisoner abuse. Why not add to the chorus against Bush? So the fact that only the Republicans practically are the ones on the defense is not surprising. I suppose you could argue that only conservatives would defend this type of act, but I think my point still is valid.

... oppositional. In that sense, one can be a 'liberal-conservative' who believes in the inalienable rights of the indvidual and decries change/disruption of an existing 'order.' It seems to me that those who'd defend/support the treatment of the Iraqi detainees are 'authoritarians' -- and could call themselves either 'conservative' or 'progressive' (more truly oppositional terms). (My own major concern regarding the term 'progressive' is that it speaks to change, but not value.)

Lawyer: Female MP Ordered to Pose for Photos

That's consistent with what I said about absolving the soldiers of blame and trying to peg their officers.

The article also says that the photos were basically created for propaganda, to be shown to other prisoners. This is consistent with what I said about the accusation that the media is blowing this out of proportion.

Remember what I said about republicans believing that the explanation of the acts was faulty, not the acts themselves? There you go.

And still in the article it says that they soldiers were told that these pictures helped in gathering intelligence, just like I said they'd argue. Shazaam.

It's not the party of Everett Dirkson any longer for sure -- it has been hijacked by neofascists bent on serving the interests of their own power. While it's pretty certain that your DU posting priveleges will be short-lived (on principle), I personally appreciate the candor regarding the division within the ranks of those who support a "uniter, not a divider."

if my posting privileges were pulled because of principle. I could understand it if I had bad forum etiquette. But I would hope that this site would recognize the value of differing opinions (sometimes the opinions don't differ). I don't mind being defeated in a discussion based on my points, assuming I practice good forum etiquetee, but to boot me because of my points would be disappointing.

My hat's off to you, posting openly, honestly, without deceit or disguise, or intention to deliberatly disrupt.

Obviously, you're a thinking person, or it's doubtful you would be here in the manner that you are.

I've been around long enough to see the Republican Party hijacked by the radical right-wing, and it has brought our country to a very difficult and serious position in the world. We are rapidly loosing our vital system of checks and balances in government.

As a liberal, I've always believed that conservatives have often had much to offer, and that liberals and conservatives complemented each other in many ways. I think of conservative men of principle, like Everett Dirksen, Barry Goldwater and John McCain. Unfortunately, this is not the brand of conservatism that is now running our country into the ground, both at home and overseas.

Have you ever considered becoming a conservative Democrat? :)

Best to you --

but the thing is, I am really a constitutionalist at heart. I really believe I see government the same way the Founders did. I love reading their stuff. I like to mull over it and apply it to the issues of today. The Republican Party is still the closest thing to what I believe. Although I have investigated third parties, especially on the right, none of them seem to "get it".

But I agree with you about conservatism being hijacked. Do the Republican Leaders define conservatism? Not currently. So then when Republicans behave badly, guys like me are guilty by association. Whereas how I see it, the Republican Leaders (some at least) are con-men, and don't define conservatism, they just define modern Republicanism.

It's about shared goals ...

WHO IS WELCOME ON DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND, AND WHO IS NOT

We welcome Democrats of all stripes, along with other progressives who will work with us to achieve our shared goals.

This is a "big tent" message board. We welcome a wide range of progressive opinion. You will likely encounter many points of view here that you disagree with.

We ban conservative disruptors who are opposed to the broad goals of this website. If you think overall that George W. Bush is doing a swell job, or if you wish to see Republicans win, or if you are generally supportive of conservative ideals, please do not register to post, as you will likely be banned.

If you have been banned from Democratic Underground, you are not permitted to log on again using a different username. Previously banned members will be immediately banned, regardless of behavior.

People who repeatedly and willfully break the rules, or who generally engage in rude, antisocial behavior, will be banned. It doesn't matter if you are a progressive or a long-term member of this board.

So, even if one is not intentionally disruptive or trollish, the mere expression of goals (even by rhetorical qustions) that're antitheitcal to the goals of the DU Community can/will result in cancellation. Clearly, however, the "litmus" goals are very few (support for Bush being a clear one) and it usually takes as much as 100 posts (or more) before the weight of attitudes gets too heavy.

This isn't a Forum for "conversions" (any more than FreeRepublic) ... it's a forum for progressives. Hell, we argue far more than enough among ourselves. :shrug:

then who defines what I am?

Attempts to commodify human beings into standardized commodities appalls me. I rankle under the shorthand terminology myself, eschewing it more often than not and often use terms like "anti-partisan" myself. That, though, betrays a posture of support for individual liberty unamplified by wealth or privelege. I eschew any notion or inference that rights are derived from or subordinate to property of any kind. When our populist support for inviolable "ownership" gets to the point that only "owners" have rights, I rebel.

is taking any shit from the gop today.

If one can't even take a stand against child torture and rape, and the rape, torture and murder of innocents, come right out and admit to having sided with evil.

(You know, for me this is like sneaking behind enemy lines. I feel like I am going to get shot at any moment).

I see it as not so much that the Republicans think torturing and raping children is ok. It's that those incidents are rare and not indicative what all is going on in the military. However, many of them do feel like if the prisoner is really guilty, then just about anything is fair game.

a little thought. Can we get there from here using those methods?

Can we get there at all?

I would argue the war is now LOST. Just like 'Nam was.

Then there is the Republican trend of privatizing EVERYTHING... to maximize profits for their buddies and to avoid regulation. There are some roles that "private contractors" (i.e. mercenaries) are not appropriate for.

One way to reason with that viewpoint is to talk about due process and the idea of innocent until proven guilty.

If we as Americans are truly coming from a higher moral standard (for the sake of argument), then we should be treating prisoners as innocent until proven guilty.

Since when the torture occurred, no trial had occurred and no proof of guilt had been established - how can the torture be justified?

I, personally, don't think it can be justified even if guilt is certain, but just for the sake of argument it seems the previous points apply,

How can the Republicans be for principles in the Bill of Rights and also be for prisoner abuse? I know, I've been trying to explain this to them. They'll say that this is WAR! and that the enemy animals don't respond to anything else, and that they did worse things to our guys and their own kind.

I tell you, I don't quite have a political home right now. But I must say, there are many Republicans who think the prisoner abuse is disgraceful. It's not like I am the only one. But there still is this prepondernce of justification from a large portion of the party members.

//It's that those incidents are rare and not indicative what all is going on in the military//

It's not rare, it is indicative(read the report), nor is it rare stateside...I'ts only been made to artificially seem rare by lack of major coverage or lack of outrage.

also if you read the report, one of the major things being pointed out(something that conveniently seems left out of coverage)is the lack of prisoner accounting, normal low level criminals were mixed with high level questionables, but accurate ways to tell which was which was not available under the system in place.

I wonder, as further revelations are made public and events unfold, will the net result be to weaken or strengthen Alan Dershowitz's proposal to create a torture warrant? I hope, as Americans consider the nightmarish scenarios revealed in the report by General Taguba, that millions will rise up and speak out against torture.

It would be horrible enough for these things to be done to enemy fighters. But when you consider that many of the abused inmates are apparently civilians who have committed no criminal acts, who were just rounded up and thrown in this prison to be the playthings of sadists acting as representatives of our country, it's maddening to contemplate.

Sen. Hillary Clinton nailed it in the hearings last Friday when she said a) that the focus of the investigation should be on the criminal acts at Abu Ghraib (and elsewhere?) themselves and the systems enabling them--not on the leaks; and b) that Rumsfeld and others in the administration helped create an environment that encouraged torture and abuse by declaring that "enemy combatants" are not covered by the Geneva Convention.

This is a chance for the U.S.A. to make a strong statement against torture and in favor of ethical behavior. Whether our current leadership is capable of doing that remains very much in doubt.

It's the same way Hitler did it in steps!

I'm more afraid of the public opinion on the prisoner abuse, rather than what the interrogators do, or even what the President does. Because if the people accept this, you know it will be everywhere. Say good bye to civilization.

We have been led down a path that accepts the torture of our foes or perceived foes, regardless of their guilt or innocence. It is the "with us or against us" false choices that inflame the chasm that divides us. Most Americans support the death penalty. (I am not one of them.) Thus, people accept that it is OK for a government to kill its own citizens. Therefore it is not a stretch that people would be dulled to the torture committed against our "enemies." If we, as Americans, accept these actions, I fear that the United States, my beloved country, will go the way of the collapse of Rome. I grieve and mourn the erosion of our liberties and our sense of moral consciousness. I want my country back.



The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.
- H.L. Mencken

The populace has been conditioned into thinking that the ends justify any means to ensure our protection. Principle has been replaced with "Authority." The only way we can survive is by treating the enemy like animals, so they say.

If a Democrat were president, there is no way the Republicans would allow this, which leads me to wonder: if you were evil and wanted to cause these attitudes to develop among the people, would you do it under a Republican or Democratic leadership. (Sorry, this is getting conspiratorial, but I can't help but to think about it).

I suppose you could argue that this is a natural development under conservatism, but I don't think so. I think the Republicans will accept all this, though, and become the vehicle for implementation, because they are so willing to fight for their country and they can be confused into thinking they are doing the right thing by crushing the enemy, and not thinking about whether what they are doing adheres to their own principles.

the erosion of the level of discourse and the redefinition of our vocabulary ala 1984. If we hear the word "compassion" over and over while our actions are the opposite, how does one reconcile what that means? Fredom is Salvery. War is Peace.

This torture goes beyond politics. I wish that folks like Rush and Hannity would have waited before they pounced on this subject to justify these horrible actions. This is a bell that cannot be unrung, nor can it be in any way justified. Arabs and Persians have long memories. Alexander of Macedonia is still referred to as "Alexander the two horned devil." He is still reviled after two thousand years. If we delude ourselves and think that this will blow over, we are in serious trouble.

In the current political state of the United States, however, this form of totalitarianism can only originate on the right because of the demonizing of the left for the past 40 years or so.

So to answer your original thought here, if you were evil enough to concoct a plan to implement a level of totalitarianism whereby torture is simply a means to an end in the United States, you would have to approach it from the Right. If you were to do the identical thing in France, it would probably work better from the Left.

I think you saying that you can only approach this totalitarianism from the Right because they have been conditioned to hate the Left. I disagree. I was saying that you can approach this totalitarianism through the Right because they won't suspect their own guys of bringing on totalitarianism; they won't think they are going against their won princples because their own party is leading the way. They let their guard down and forget to watch, assuming that a conservative is a conservative.

Brilliant. You have just described the underlying theme of Coulter/Insannity/Limbaugh/Gingrich/DeLay/O'Reichley and the rest of the Bushevik Party-Loyal Sub-Media for the last 15 years towards the Jews, errrrr, Liberals.

NOW you choose to renounce it? Interesting. Just when people are fighting back.

What a surprise.

I posted what Limbaugh said on FR and the thread got pulled. I posted the thread another way and it stayed. At first, I think I was in the minority over there trying to show that Limbaugh was wrong. I didn't jump on the bandwagon after it was already moving. I know you want to pick a fight and make me guilty by association about everything you hate about Republicans. I don't think your preconceived notions about me are accurate. Don't you think it would be better to judge me on what I post rather than what you think I believe?

As I said, people are ANGRY.

I am a Veteran and someone who cares deeply for this nation, and for the Constitution and Bill of Rights that I believe are STILL the greatest documents ever produced by human beings in the realm of governance.

I am also a Moderate, as I said below, with more than a few "Right-Wing" or "Center-Right" positions. I also share a distrust of both sides. I would not want the Democrats to enjoy the unchecked power the Busheviks have enjoyed.

Having said all of that, I am energized precisely because this ISN'T "politics-as-usual", but something more and something beyond left-right politics.

Your posts, if sincere, indicate perhaps that thought is occurring to you now.

Once again, I apologize for venting on you. But you and the other Moderate Republicans (if that's what you are) bear responsibility for what has come to pass, what may be coming to pass.

I hate Republicans (Busheviks realy, I don't have much of a problem with Treu Conservatives with whom I share several philosophic stances) because after hearing the Limbaugh/Coulter/Insannity/O'Reichley Pravda for years now, they have convinced me.

They have convinced me that they are Totalitarians, unapologetically. They have convinced me that, like the Nazis and Commies before them, they accuse other of what they are doing themselves.

Some things never change.

I salute you for taking the first steps away from your Totalitarian Masters and towards the Light of Freedom.

Keep coming now. Your Bushevik Masters have told you to be a Democrat, you ust be a welfare cheating, feminist, anti-gun Socialist.

Like so many things they told you: It is a bald-faced and odious lie.

My ontime-billpaying, pro-gun, meat-eating Capitalist self stands in clear contrast to the LIE.

Keep coming into the light. Free America awaits you.

LOL...thank you so much for that phrase. I needed a giggle to lighten my spirits after this horrible news day. You rock, tom paine.

Busy busy busy and haven't had a chance to look.

I think I am overwhelmed today due to a cumulative effect of the state of the world, rather than a specific news story. I have had spirited debates and disagreements with people over the death penalty etc. but I have never, ever, had to make an argument against torture. I have never, ever, experienced anyone who defended torture to me; to my face. This has now changed. This has sent a chill to my very core.

My friend just returned from Iraq. I attended a reception this past weekend in celebration of his return. He is a libertarian and we have had many wonderful debates where we both learn something from one another. He, unfortunately, has a few armchair patriot friends, who can justify any behavior, even torture, because they have received the talking points of the day. My friend, however, is horrified by the torture scandal, and has made him wonder why the hell he was away from his family for a year.

I still get goosebumps when I read the preamble to the Constitution. I was raised to believe that America was the greatest country in the world because we believed in the right for all people to live with dignity, and that all people were created equal. I took all of this to heart. The right claims that the left is the "blame America first" crowd, which may be true at times, but I submit that it is because we expect more from our Country and of ourselves. We are to be a country to be admired and a country for others to aspire to become. We were the beckon to the world, not for military might, but the might of our ideals and principals. Lady liberty was to welcome all to her shores...

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me:
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.

Now I feel an agony for what has befallen. Even worse, is that it was done in my name.

Wow...I'm not very coherent, but I guess I needed to get this out.

I try to stick to my own principles, which I think are consistent with the Founders. That causes me sometimes to be the odd man out with my party. However, I still find the Republican Party to be the best party that _states_ to believes in the same principles I do. But, something fishy is going on, and I do think it is outside politccal parties. I know at least that many of the Republican leaders, President included, are not sticking to the principles I find in the Republican Platform. Now whether it is intentional, or they are con-men, or they truly think desparate times call for desparate measures, I haven't decided yet. Regardless, these are powerful men with powerful friends, so I know they aren't naive to happenings in the world.

But I do feel like I do the most good trying to change the base in my own party. For the most part, I think the people believe in the right things, but they unthinkningly defend and support people who betray them.

Keep finding your own way and in your own time. Don't let anyone bullrush or bully you. Skepticism in all things is healthy, especially when you are hearing what you expect or want to.

It took me over 10 years to come to my final conclusion about the Busheviks. And while time for all of us and especially Liberty may be short indeed, I wouldn't ask you to rush a thoughtful decisionmaking process.

Watch these Con-Men, these grandchildren of Hitler's Money Launderer, these Busheviks until you are satisfied one way or another.

And while the Imperial Family may not be naive, they are incredibly, aristocratically arrogant. And extreme arrogance sometimes resembles naivete for different reasons.

Think about it.

What makes Kerry et al. different? Why wouldn't the Democratic Leadership being pulling similar cons but from a different angle? Sometimes I think that the political parties can just be different groups of people to be fooled by different means.

(In case anyone is ready to flame me, I am serious. If Bush is a devious trickster, how do I know they all aren't devious tricksters? Could the democratic base conned like the republican base?)

I don't believe Kerry is all that different, but there are varying degrees at work here.

Kerry is a politician. Enough said.

Bush and his Henchmen are something different. You noted quiter correctly that they aren't actually conservatives. It is my studied opinion that they are Totalitarians, like Stalin on the Left or Hitler and Ferdinand Marcos and Pinochet on the Right.

So, even that alone, Kerry an Old American Republic kind of politician vs. Totalitarians.

No contest. In the end, everything comes back to that. Kerry ain;t perfect but I strongly desire a return and restoration of the Old American Republic, complete with Checks, Balances, and a Free Press.

In my opinion, a "vote" (if we are even allowed to have a say in the selection of Emperor anymore) for Kerry is a vote against this trend towards Totalitarianism, a "vote" for Bush* is a vote of approval of Totalitarianism, Endless lies, Nazi/Soviet propaganda.

Even IF Kerry was ultimately just as bad as the Busheviks, his methodology for instituting Totalitarianism would take longer, thus giving Free Americans like myself the chance to enjoy the Good Life of Liberty & Happiness' Pursuit for a few more years.

But I don't believe Kerry is a Totalitarian in the way Bush, Cheney, Rove, Ashcroft are. As you can see, even if I did I would STILL "vote" for him over the current Emperor.

Now, I didn't flesh out my opinions on why the Busheviks are Totalitarians. It would take up too much space and it's easier to just send you this link:

http://www.cursor.org/stories/fascismintroduction.php

Now, I don't agree 100% with everything the authors assert here, but if you want to understand my reasoning, this is pretty close to it, in a nutshell.

Finally, it may well be that Kerry will be as bad as Bush (though at this point I cannot imagine how), but my "mission" is to help America REJECT that which will bring the End of Liberty and the destruction of the American Experiment in Self-Rule in the shortest possible time.

THAT is Bush*.

One day, decades from now, if the reverse ever becomes true I will stand just as forcefully and zealously on the side of Republicans.

If you were around during the primaries, you probably saw the many "so-and-so isn't pure enough" threads about the various candidates. The left has a very vocal side that doesn't take marching orders from anyone. The environmentalists protested Clinton, for instance. We have a long and distinguished history of eating our own.

The right is very well-organized, with daily talking points issued, but that strength can become a weakness. Their usual reaction to dissent is to stifle it. They respond with utter disbelief when one of their own is found to be unworthy. When situations like this one warrant outrage, even if it means breaking with their own party, many will find themselves unable to do so.

So I'm more optimistic about the left than the right in being able to distance themselves from an "evildoer" in their ranks; but you're correct that both are vulnerable to blindness and putting party over principle. I would say that our fondness for independent media might be our salvation here.

I found it strange that Rumsfeld readily admitted that there are more horrible pictures and videos than have been released so far. It is very unusual for him to be ahead of bad news like that. It makes me wonder whether the ulterior motive is to engender outrage now so that a subsequent terrorist attack can be blamed on too many people focusing on human rights and not getting info from "terrorists."

Though I'd be thrilled to be wrong about it.

The Old American Republic began to sicken when you Real Republicans sat back and allowed the Amerikan Taliban to take you over without a whimper.

It died a little further when Limbaugh came on the scene, using the tactics of Josef Goebbels to define his enemies and "spread his message".

It died even further when a horde of Hannity/Coulter/O'Reichley clones appeared and mainstreamed Nazi-style propaganda for the first time since 1945 Germany (note I said Nazi-style, not actual Nazi propaganda...that would be bad PR).

It died more when the Goebbels v2.0 propaganda created a Nazi subclass of Busbevik who, like the Nazis, felt that any act against the Greater Evil...in this case Jews, errr, I mean Liberals...was justified no matter how illegal, immoral, or unethical.

It sickened and turned gaspingly green when Extreme Gerrymandering became possible with the advent of the computer and information collection strategies, as well as personality profiling and advances in marketing.

It died when Fat Tony and the other $ Bushevik Poltiical Operatives (Imperial Amerika is a lawless nation with no High Court, resembling the Old Soviet Union i.e. one set of rules for the Imperial Family and their Lawbreaking Minions, one set for Enemies of the State such as Liberals, Blacks, Jews (only the liberal ones, though), gays, etc.

Now it is clear that Bush-Occupied Amerika essentially has the same rule of law as the Soviets.

Comrade Stalin (or Emperor Bush*) can get away with anything up to and including murder.

In my mind, the Old American Republic is already gone, most likely too far gone to save.

On the other hand, if you successfully stifle these pangs of conscience, there is likely a spot on the Nationalized Neighborhood Watch for you, spying on liberals, gays, Jews, Blacks, and anyone else you don't like.

C'mon, the Nazis and Commies had great fun with it. I imagine the mindless Bushevik automatons you speak of it will enjoy it just as much as their spiritual forebears did.

It's all waiting for you as long as you quell these Free Thoughts, which are BAD BAD BAD don't you know. You need to listen to more Party-Approved Bushevik Sub-Media. Turn the volume up loud so Goebbels v2.0 has the desired effect.

Or you can finish awakening and join Free America. Unlike what your Bushevik Masters have told you (and by now you are beginning to realize the depth and extreme number of their repeated LIES), most of us, at least a solid majority of us are NOT socialist.

But then, so much of what Goebbels v2.0 imparts to you and the rest, is not designed to make you think but just the opposite.

You are correct that no one single party has a monopoly on morasl rectitutde. But the Busheviks have so far outdistanced the Democrats in odious corruption, shameless fraud and theft, and unAmerican Totalitarian Values, that I who once voted for many Republicans will not do so again until Imperial Amerika belongs to the Free World again.

I said at the end of another post that I know a lot of you would like to vent your anger of conservatives on me. I was surprised that I didn't get too many ad hominem and guilty-by-association attacks, but I've always expected some. I don't see how it is helpful to attack me on ideas I have not espoused. I posted my ideas on the Republican reaction to the prisoner abuse. That's what I am here to discuss, and that's the topic of this thread.

Whether or not you personally agreed with it and partook of it: YOU are responsible as much as any Nazi was responsible for Hitler.

YOU were a Party Member who might have spoken up when it made a difference, may have fought the extremism that was taking over, might have railed and ashamed the propagandists who were reading directly from the Mein Kampf playbook.

When Ann Coulter and Rush Limbusgh said, "The Liberals are responsible for everything that is wrong with America", it was YOUR DUTY to remember, "Hey, that sounds a lot like 'The Jews are responsible for everything wrong with Germany.'" and that no matter how many victories it brought you nor how FUN it was to beat up on unresisting liberals verbally, it was a dsiturbing track for your Party to embark.

Now, because of your failure and those of MILLIUONS of Moderate Republicans, the Old Republic we loved so well and that which made us so rich, happy, and able to disagree civilly while remaining ONE, is dying or perhaps dead already. NOW that Moderates like myself have leapt off the bench and are fighting back, ONLY NOW do you choose to concern yourself with "staying on issue, no ad hominems, and reasonable discussion".

NOW, after drinking from the Goebbelsian Fountain for a decade you've GOT RELIGION on civil discourse?

Well, pardon me for not getting too upset about your admonishments and your sudden discovering how you are in favor of civilized dialogue.

Well, Free America is NO LONGER interested in your "newfound civility" and we Free Americans mostly realize it's probably a lie like everything else. Just the bullies' whine that his victim bloodied his nose this time, but just wait until NEXT time is what he's muttering underneath the whining and blubbering.

And YOU HAVE espoused those ideas, whether you are capable of realizing it or not. Even on this thread, you posts contain a number of ad hominems on "Liberal Logic" and others I have no desire to read again and acatlogue.

So, even as you plead for civility out of one side of your mouth, you ad hominem out of the other.

As typical as a Nazi whining about why the Jews are shooting at his innocent self in the Warsaw Ghetto, or a Bushevik whining that Democarts are so angry.

Spare me your crocodile tears, you self-admitted Freeper.

It's goddmaned near too late for such talk. After listening to your Bushevik Pravda Whores call Liberals (and I'm a progun, anti-affirmative-action Moderate just so you know) welafre cheats, lazy, illogical, stupid, cruel, liars, and just about every epithet the Nazis used against the Jews including the old RATS canard.

www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-gop/1112808/posts

www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/ewig.htm

www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1124086/posts

www.historylearningsite.co.uk/ propaganda_in_nazi_germany.htm

Your attack of Civility is too little too late. The die is cast. You wholly embraced Nazi propaganda tactics of demonization and dehumanization of your "Rat-like" foes.

I shall give all the sympathy a Nazi Party Member crying about Jewish barbarism deserves.

http://www.therainiervalley.com/violin.html

here's the world's smallest violin playing the "Horst Wessel Song" for your newfound beliefe in civil discourse.

Sorry, you reap what you sow. And your Bushevik Masters have sown the seeds of hatred and Tyranny. You shouldn;t be surprised when the Jews, errr, Liberals, start to return to you what you have done to them.

You should not be surprised at all, Hans. But such is the Totalitarian Mentality that your hurt, whiny surprise is unremarkable, like Goering at Nuremberg.

I'll bet during the Salad Days of the 90s, you Brownshirts didn't EVER think the Jews, errrr, Liberals would fight back EVER.

Surprise. Free America rises to stop your and your Masters.

And your crocodile tears are thsoe of the SS Guard on Trial. I feel as unperturbed at his whining about "ad hominem" attcks as I do about yours.

I keep re-reading this for it's unbelievable outrage and telling it lke it is. It's such a relief to read the truth with no parsing of words. Thanks.

Out of the tens of millions killed in World War two there was one great lesson to be learned! That lesson was how NEVER AGAIN to be! How quickly we forget the hard lessons! And how like Hitler's Fatherland we may soon pay for it! It's time to step back from the abyss now! There will be no more chances after November if Bushco remains in charge!

I hope you are wrong about it being too late already Tom, but it's boiling to the point of a total boil over and VERY SOON it will be clear to everyone but the irredeemably blinded! I think we still have a slim chance in November to rescue the US, but if our guys vote for Nader all will be over, but the gnarling and gnashing of the teeth!

EDIT} Yes, what picture???

Hey Tom_Paine,

I've always enjoyed the clarity of your posts. I think this is the first time I've seen you document the progression of your observations and the reasoning behind your position. My own observations have coincided all along over the years.

We are like minded.

Therefor -- you are a smart mofo! Thanks for your contributions so far, TP.

Jokerman

:yourock:

You'r pretty damned cool too, dude.

:yourock:

How else would they behave? With compassion? They are only concerned with themselves...like a spoiled 4 year old.

Prolly got no choice in their minds, Brains stolen a long time ago as to what is good and what isn't, they got taught diff from us to be sure.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Please Please!

I have sprayed coffee on my monitor due to laughter, but I have never thrown up at work. I hope to god that photo wasn't real. Oh my god I am so sick.

I've seen it in, both times deleted (thank god). I fear it might have been real.

is graphic material within. My god, that awful image is going to be burned into my minds eye forever. I am still shaking.

What did the image show?

their positions are threatened.

And They will use defensive language to convince the citizenry that, by these "unjustifiable" acts committed by our military, we're somehow safer.

They hitched their wagon to rapists. I don't expect we'll ever see the worst of the lot. Down the memory hole it goes.

Would be better...to set the record straight.


http://www.cafeshops.com/indigobusiness

I didn't think they'd try to do one more thing that's sure to backfire on them.

Direct quote from him today:

First of all, I regret I wasn't here on Friday. I was unable to be here. But maybe it's better that I wasn't because as I watch this outrage that everyone seems to have about the treatment of these prisoners I have to say and I'm probably not the only one up at this table that is more outraged by the outrage than we are by the treatment.

The idea that these prisoners, they're not there for traffic violations. If they're in cell block 1A or 1B, these prisoners, they're murderers, they're terrorists, they're insurgents, and many of them probably have American blood probably on their hands and here we're so concerned about the treatment of those individuals.

<snip>

And he wasn't the only one.

I guess they're just testing this out. There was a newbie poster saying last night saying this would be a wedge issue, but these guys must be dreaming.

Winning is all that counts.

I thank everyone for humoring me. These are some the arguments I used against my fellow Freepers on why the Iraqi abuse was wrong. Of course I posted my more than this, but I didn't any rebuttals to this post:

BEGIN
I heard Michael Savage, too, and I disagree with him. I do not accept the notion that we can only survive by stooping to their level. I see the assumptions in his argumemts as 1) the prisoners in the abuse photos were the worst of the worst, 2) the prisoners have intelligence we need to be victorious, 3) the only way we can get the information out of them is to stoop to their level, and 4) our survival justifies any action that secures our survival.

For point 1, we don't know who the prisoners are. They probably were not friendly. However, there is still a chance that some may be incarcerated mistakenly or on minor charges. The Red Cross has asserted that many prisoners are falsely imprisoned. And then there' this man's story which is that he was in a taxi, stopped at a checkpoint, didn't have papers, and then went to jail, for 10 months and was abused. Are they all guilty? We can't be sure.

2) I have not seen any reports on whether we actually got intelligence out of these prisoners. You'd think that our troops were humiliating the prisoners in order to get intelligence. We can only assume, but I've not seen evidence, and I doubt we ever will. That would probably be classified.

3) There are various forms of intelligence, one of which is HUMINT, Human Intelligence. People know stuff, but sometimes they're wrong, either purposefully or by accident (like the HUMINT on Saddam's whereabout's with that first cruise missile strike at the start of the war). There are other ways to get intelligence other than HUMINT from a prisoner: electronic, papers, satellite observation, plants and spooks, etc. There are many methods of interrogation that do not involve torture or even the threat of pain or death. How do we get away with not torturing prisoners in the US in order to get information? The Founders actually had a good amount to say on torture. Thank goodness for the 8th.

4) Are there any rules in war? Why do we (supposedly) adhere to the Gevena Conventions? The GC explicitly mention the treatement of POW's. Why would we sign on to the GC if it potentially limits our ability to get information of of POW's using bad treatment? Why don't we just go ahead and use NBC weapons against the Iraqis? We probably wouldn't have lost a single soldier. There is a minimum level of treatment of another human being that we as a country have decided to not go below. We have decided that even enemy combatants that would love to kill us deserve a certain level of humane treatment by virtue of them being human. That doesn't mean we let them go, or let them attempt to kill us, and it may mean that we execute them, but it doesn't mean that we torture them. I think the ends rarely if ever justify the means.

I have confidence in our troops that they can get the information they need without abusing the prisoners. I have had some training on this. I think that we actually dehumanize ourselves when we abuse\torture the prisoners. I don't even think torture works well in getting information anyway. I think Savage's views are reminiscent of other times where people were comfortable doing horendous things to others all in the name of national survival.