Is the Hitler analogy outdated?

[hnumpah]

Another excellent hypothetical, Plane

You've got to be kidding.

[_JS]

The problem is that you cannot stop terrorism completely, no matter how safe and secure you want everyone to feel. The other side to this issue is that, quite frankly, not very many people die each year across the world from international terrorism. It is a very, very overstated threat.

Many people are saying that it is the top priority and the number one issue facing Americans. I think the question is - should it be? What are we giving up to fight this "war?" Don't tell me we aren't giving up anything as I know how public finances work. Everything is a trade-off of limited resources.

Is this really the horrible threat by the "enemies of freedom" that is claimed? Or is there a better way to fight it? How safe should people feel?

[BT]

Many people are saying that it is the top priority and the number one issue facing Americans. I think the question is - should it be? What are we giving up to fight this "war?" Don't tell me we aren't giving up anything as I know how public finances work. Everything is a trade-off of limited resources.

I agree. Let's dismantle Homeland Security ASAP.

[_JS]

I agree.

Thus far it has been useless.

[Plane]

Another excellent hypothetical, Plane

You've got to be kidding.

No we are not kidding , would you want to have Ammonium Nitrate and concentrated Hydrgen peroxide to be tracked by the federal government ?

Most of the tonnage of these things is bought by legitimate Farmers Beauty shopps and rocket hobbyists , only a tiny fraction is ever bought by the likes of Timothy McVeigh or "Shoebomber" Reid.

So for the privacy of Farmers and beuticians and rocket builders should the Federal monitoring of the sale of these chemicals be restricted?

[hnumpah]

My response was to your analogy of milk, and Sirs 'excellent hypothetical' remark.

If the government wants to track Ammonium Nitrate and concentrated Hydrgen peroxide, let them have at it - at least they have the excuse that those can actually be used to make weapons. But milk?

[Plane]

Alfred Hiuchcock was once asked about a murder that occured after the purpetrator watched one of his movies.

He replied that the murderer might have drunk a glass of milk before the murder too but preceeding the event isn't proof of cause.

Milk is seldom associated with wepon , so includeing milk makes the question entirely hypothetical and insulates it from practical consideration.

If the FBI were to notice a demographic simularity bertween assassians , a simularity that was unexplained , like a fondness for milk, would the FBI be wrong to use this demographic data to find assassians?

To track chemicals that are precursors to explosives seems more direct and practical but tracking concentrated Hydrogen Peroxide would lead you to every beautician ten percent of all barbers twenty rocket hobbyists and once in a while a bomb builder.

Tracking one factor will always generate a lot of chaff for winnowing .


But what about tracking several factors and cross referenceing them?

It is likely that a few innocent beauticians have visited web sites and checked out books that instruct on bomb building , but when the tracking shows that a person has done several things that are demographicly tipical of assissains they could still be innocent but perhaps they deserve a look.

[sirs]

[Michael Tee]

<<Of course, then you have Tee's upside down alternate reality confirmation tactic, that the lack of any such evidence, proves the allegations   >>

Alas, like all the rest of sirs' demented fantasies, this one too flunks the reality check.  Tee's basic contention, particularly with regard to the potential misconduct of secret government operations, is that lack of evidence does not disprove the allegations.  A distinction that admittedly may be a little too subtle for those reading comprehension skills which sirs loves to disparage in others.

[sirs]

Tee's basic contention, particularly with regard to the potential misconduct of secret government operations, is that lack of evidence does not disprove the allegations.

Yet you keep focusing on it, as if it does prove the allegations.  Point being, you have squat.  And when that FACT is presented you belly ache "Abu Graib", as if that changes the facts, which it doesn't, you still have squat.  And when pushed for facts to support the asanine claims of widespread military abuse and approved misconduct, you pull out the tried and true tact of how well it's kept under wraps, as if that's what validates your claims.

In other words, you still have squat

[Michael Tee]

<<Yet you keep focusing on it, [llack, or rather alleged lack of evidence] as if it does prove the allegations. >>

That's not true, either.  First of all, there IS no lack of evidence.  There's actually a good deal of evidence:

• Abu Ghraib
  Bhagram Base
  Secret prisons in Eastern Europe
  Secret prisons in Diego Garcia
  Mickey Mouse sentencing of low-ranking personnel
  Lack of prosecution of higher ranking officers
  Reluctance of the "President" to endorse anti-torture legislation

I have NEVER "focused" on lack of evidence as proof of wrongdoing.  Lack of evidence is something the DEFENDERS of torture raise to rebut the charges - - "Tee insists that  . . .  WITHOUT A SHRED of evidence that . . . " and this has to be dealt with.  I am not in the habit of simply ignoring anything said to contradict my beliefs, no matter how idiotic the contradiction may be.  I deal with it.  I point out the simple truth that government wrongdoing is not usually advertised by the wrongdoers, it is usually covered up (again, as anybody with any knowledge of the real world would be forced to admit) and given the resources they have to work under cover, it is often, most of the time, SUCCESSFULLY covered up, so that we never hear about it.

 For example, despite the passage of years, less than TEN PER CENT of the Abu Ghraib photos have ever been released to the public.  What are they afraid of?  What are they hiding?  Of course, to right-wing fantasists and persistent deniers of reality, like sirs, these pictures probably don't show anything wrong at all - - they are probably of birthday parties given by the guards for their prisoners, with everybody wearing funny paper hats and eating birthday cake.  To those of us more acquainted with the real world, those pictures probably show atrocities more horrible than anything the U.S. government has yet revealed, and are kept secret for that very reason.

So, when the non-existent "lack of evidence" is brought up - - inevitably by conservative defenders of the right to torture or by conservative deniers of torture - - the argument is answered with the common-sense proposition that OF COURSE you would not expect there to be much evidence of these things.  Even the Nazis knew better than to publicize their own misdeeds.  But to say that I focused on lack of evidence as proof of the allegations is just more total bullshit.  As usual.

[sirs]

LOL......priceless.  You point out areas where we're actually doing something about the abuses that have been noted, and again, that's your twisted thought process that validates the supposed rampant widespread Government supported abuses.  Your Anti-American pathology obvioulsy has no bounds       

And yea, When the fact that the # of abuses brought up was a mere fraction of what makes up the military, your frequent focus was on how well Bush and Co is able to hide all the rest of the abuses.  All without 1 scintella of facts/evidence to prove such.  Just your severe case of foaming at the mouth BDS

[Michael Tee]

<<You point out areas where we're actually doing something about the abuses that have been noted . . . >>

Yeah, "actually doing something.>>  That's hilarious.  It's called "whitewashing" or "damage control," and yeah, you are actually doing it.  Proving, in my "twisted thought process" what?  That this is a cover-up in process?  BINGO!!!. 

<<Your Anti-American pathology obvioulsy has no bounds >>

Right.  So now it's considered "pathological" to be AGAINST torture and AGAINST the cover-up.  "Normal," of course, in Bush's America, is to SUPPORT these things.   

<<And yea, When the fact that the # of abuses brought up was a mere fraction of what makes up the military . . . >>

LMFAO.  The "fact" that the number of abuses is a mere fraction . . .   A "fact" that exists nowhere on earth except in the delusional fantasies of sirs and his demented ilk.  As if widespread and repeated instances of torture aren't a problem unless they can be proven by demonstrative evidence to affect 85% or more of all prisoners held in US custody.

 your frequent focus was on how well Bush and Co is able to hide all the rest of the abuses.  All without 1 scintella of facts/evidence to prove such.  Just your severe case of foaming at the mouth BDS

[sirs]

Your meritless diatribes aside, the facts still remain the same, your examples are shown to be a mere fraction of the military, the abuses have been being dealt with, and the current treatment of our enemy combatants is nearly a polar opposite of what you keep pertuating they are.  And no one's claiming to be "for torture and cover-up", that'd just your hyperbolic knee jerk reaction to having your POV shot out of the water.   

[Michael Tee]

<<Your meritless diatribes aside . . .  >>

"Meritless diatribes . . . "    So that's what you call it when your ludicrous assertions are exposed for the drivel they are?  Not bad.

"Mere fraction" is hilarious, considering the thousands known to have been tortured in US custody.

Oh, and let me know when the U.S. government decides to release the rest of the Abu Ghraib photos and videos.  Must be taking an extra long time to grind out authentic-looking substitutes and find the scapegoats who will admit to taking them.