Violation of the Constitution

[Michael Tee]

<<  I think that the origional stratergery was to repeat "Bush Lied " with no supporting facts so many times that the defense was exausted and simply allowed th naked assertion to stand.


<<But apparently the strain is starting to show on the strategisers. >>

Bass-ackward like everything else you write.  "Bush lied" was a conclusion that started to become apparent on its own for some people as soon as they saw his lips moving, for others as soon as he made claims about WMD that were at odds with the accounting that Saddam gave to the UN and for many many more, as soon as it became apparent that there were no WMD in all of Iraq.

As the impression grew that Bush was a liar, based on nothing more than the exposure of his lies, the defenders of Bush began a campaign to extensively defend every lie, no matter how absurdly, causing those who knew that Bush had lied to go back and research what they already knew.  Naively thinking that those who denied the lies were simply misinformed and would see the error of their ways.

The will to exhaust was always a factor, but it was the will of Bush's defenders to exhaust those who knew that Bush lied, and not the other way around.  It was the will of the liars to exhaust the will of those who told the truth.

[sirs]

"Bush lied" was a conclusion that started to become apparent on its own for some people as soon as they saw his lips moving, for others as soon as he made claims about WMD that were at odds with the accounting that Saddam gave to the UN and for many many more, as soon as it became apparent that there were no WMD in all of Iraq.

As the impression grew that Bush was a liar, based on nothing more than the exposure of his lies, the defenders of Bush began a campaign to extensively defend every lie, no matter how absurdly, causing those who knew that Bush had lied to go back and research what they already knew.

Close.  The "defense" was in simply extensively demonstrating how every lie about Bush lied, was just that.  No matter how absurd, they weren't ignored, simply shown to be acutely lacking in any logical, factual and/or rational merit, with probably the most pathetic of that being he lied about WMD. 

[Universe Prince]

My thoughts are that we weren't so "unconstitutional" then, or now

That contributes to it being amazing. But maybe it's just me. I don't know how anyone can read the Constitution and conclude that the Japanese internments or the current administration's attempts to deny habeas corpus are in any way constitutional. Whether it is or is not constitutional doesn't seem to matter in the least, so why bother justifying it as constitutional? Maybe this "it's constitutional because I'm okay with it" attitude is the way we should all think about it, but I don't and honestly don't want to do so.

[Universe Prince]

c) Supporters of the war support it

They didn't support it exactly. More like they just tried to dismiss it. I recall lots of talk about "putting it in perspective" and comparing it to a college frat prank. I guess that isn't really support, but it hardly looks like a condemnation either.

[Lanya]

<<Amazing how unconstituional this nation was to the Nazis and Japanese POW's back in WWII. >>

I guess you have proof that the Japanese and Nazi POWS of WWII were suffocated, beaten and kicked to death, tortured, anally raped, attacked by guard dogs while naked, denied communication with their families, held in secret prisons in undisclosed locations and sexually humiliated don't you?  How'd you like to share some of that proof with the group?

----------------------------------

When the same things happen to our troops is when we won't be OK with it.   

[Plane]

Quote from: Michael Tee on October 20, 2006, 04:27:40 PM
<<Amazing how unconstituional this nation was to the Nazis and Japanese POW's back in WWII. >>

I guess you have proof that the Japanese and Nazi POWS of WWII were suffocated, beaten and kicked to death, tortured, anally raped, attacked by guard dogs while naked, denied communication with their families, held in secret prisons in undisclosed locations and sexually humiliated don't you?  How'd you like to share some of that proof with the group?

----------------------------------

When the same things happen to our troops is when we won't be OK with it.     

When has anything nice been the norm for Captured Americans?
In the Revolutionary War Captured Americans were rotting alive on prison barges .
In the Civil War Prison Camp conditions were uniformly awfull with a few outstandingly awfull camps like Andersonville.

In WWII Allied Prisoners of Japan were worked to death , starved , beaten , beheaded etc.


I don't think you can hold the US to shame by comparison to the advradge of the world in this subject.

[Michael Tee]

<<In WWII Allied Prisoners of Japan were worked to death , starved , beaten , beheaded etc.


<<I don't think you can hold the US to shame by comparison to the advradge of the world in this subject.>>

I'm not sure you understand the point of the thread from which the quote was taken.  To the best of my recollection, sirs was trying to argue that the U.S. wasn't treating its POWS any differently than they had been treated in WWII and my challenge was to find Abu-Ghraib-type treatment of Japs (who really would have deserved it) in WWII.  The point was that sirs COULDN'T find that kind of treatment because it did not exist, thereby disproving his point.

In other words, I did not intend to hold up the U.S. to shame for its treatment of Japanese prisoners in WWII, who IMHO were treated much better than they deserved and certainly than they treated Canadian and Allied prisoners.

[Lanya]

In WWII Allied Prisoners of Japan were worked to death , starved , beaten , beheaded etc.


I don't think you can hold the US to shame by comparison to the advradge of the world in this subject.

We did not have legalized torture then.  At least one Japanese war criminals was tried and put to death.  Deservedly so.   

We should treat prisoners as we are supposed to under the Geneva Accord and the military rules. 

[BT]

We did not have legalized torture then.  At least one Japanese war criminals was tried and put to death.  Deservedly so.

How many have been convicted and sent to prison for their actions at Abu Ghraib?

[Lanya]

"How many have been convicted and sent to prison for their actions at Abu Ghraib?"

You mean the low-ranking soldiers like Graner and England? 

I'm talking about Generals.  That is who you try and that is who you put to death or hold in prison, if you want war crimes to stop. Who ordered the abuse? 

[BT]

I don't believe i qualified my question. How many people have been convicted.

How many people who directly participated in the torture have been charged and or convicted?

Of those how many have shown orders demanding that they perform the torture?

Wouldn't that be a prerequisite for going after higher ups?

 

[Mucho]

I don't believe i qualified my question. How many people have been convicted.

How many people who directly participated in the torture have been charged and or convicted?

Of those how many have shown orders demanding that they perform the torture?

Wouldn't that be a prerequisite for going after higher ups?



 

Not to worry all that is coming after the Dem landslide on 11/7/06.

[BT]

Hopefully the dems will campaign on that theme for the remaining weeks.

[Universe Prince]

When the same things happen to our troops is when we won't be OK with it.

I don't think you can hold the US to shame by comparison to the advradge of the world in this subject.

Probably not. But Lanya's comment is probably correct. If some of our troops were being treated the way prisoners at Abu Ghraib were treated, most of the folks who have been saying the treatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib was no big deal would be making a big deal out of the way our troops were being abused. And frankly, it doesn't matter how bad the rest of the world treats military prisoners. We are supposed to be better than that. We're supposed to be the guys who care about human rights and set the higher example for the rest of the world. And we leave that behind to point fingers and say "at least we're not as bad as they are".

[Plane]

  Can you tell me who has actually said that the mistreatment of prisoners in Abu Garaib is "no big deal"?



If a crime were to send you to prison for five , twenty or life in prison , would you think it was a big deal?



Who thinks that sending some one to a federal prison for a long part of his life is no big deal?