On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 2:59 PM, denstar wrote: > > > Maybe *you* should talk to some people who lived in places like that. > > Maybe they can give you some pointers on what to look out for. >
I spent two years working with former Soviet states on energy programs and I often used former Russian defectors as interpreters. Oh, and I went to school with a bunch of Cubans from Miami whose friends and family members were jailed, tortured, or killed by Castro's regime for expressing their political beliefs. > Sure you would. Most folks probably would. Of course, the point, at > which I'm getting, is that we /used/ to be above that. > In some rosy past when we were nice little American boys and girls? That's a fairy tale. > We had a stance like "you can torture us, but we will not torture > you"-- we WILL NOT SINK TO THAT LEVEL. > We still do. The perpetrators of Abu Ghraib have been tried and convicted. The CIA secret jails thing has been hashed out in public and in Congress. The waterboarding thing has been all over the news forever. I'm implying no such thing. I'm suggesting that at the highest > levels, the "definition" of torture is being tested. > That is why we have an indepedent judiciary, to provide clarity on the limits of Executive and Legislative power. > > What, the fuck, are we doing, pushing the torture envelope? > > I'm thick as a brick, but even I see how blatantly THIS executive > branch has pushed crazy shit. > and the Judiciary and Congress have pushed back. Give and take of the Constitution. > > This is not just normal but expected behavior from the Executive > branch. See > > my earlier comments about how the country actually works. > > That is a sickening attitude, dude. =] > If you believe that then you obviously haven't studied Constitutional history. People are people, they do good and bad. Our structure of government is designed to contain the damage that can be done by any single branch of government, precisely because the Founders expected each branch of government to push the envelope. > > Why do you support the continued erosion of our liberty? "That's how > it works" is just, well- depressing, man. > I don't support it. I support specific measures that are finite in scope and duration to combat terrorism. As I noted in another thread, this business of using the Patriot Act to nail Spitzer for prostitution is no good, and the rules need to be changed. > > By saying we're waging a "war on terror", we're elevating those fools > to the level of combatants. > > Who, exactly, is the enemy, if not "the terrorists"? > > What would The Army of Terror's uniforms look like, do you think? > They don't have uniforms, but they definitely are combatants. Why don't you ask one of the soldiers on the list if they think they guys shooting at them in Iraq and Afghanistan weren't combatants? > > Or are you seriously proposing we'll be fighting this war till we've > won "against" terror? You honestly think war can be waged on an > emotion, and furthermore, that it can be won? > No, I never proposed that. > > > What crap? Abu Ghraib? No one is justifying that kind of abuse. > > WTF? You just said, only a couple paragraphs back, that you don't > give a shit if we're torturing "bad guys". You'd put a bullet in 'em. > No, I said I would put a bullet in KSM, and I stand by that statement. The guy is a mass murderer of the first order. What would you do, put him in a cushy federal prison with cable tv? Screw that. The only reason he is still alive is that he might be useful to us. Otherwise his ass would have been executed years ago. > There are people who actually say "in a ticking time-bomb scenario, it's > o.k." > > You don't see that as justifying? Wonky Rationalizing, perhaps? > > We should be firmly, FIRMLY against torture, as every Good American knows. > Agreed. > What exactly are you saying, Rob? Are you saying you don't mind the > bribery, because you'd do things different? > > I'd do things different too, but I still have a problem with bribery > as a modus operandi. Big problem with it, actually. > Once again you are jetting off to the land of hyperbole. Your implication is that all earmarks are by their very nature some form of bribery, and that is both ridiculous and insulting to the people that represent us in government. My Congressman (the Dukester) was involved in bribery over government contracts, and he is in jail now where he belongs. > > The argument that "we're still not as bad as other countries" doesn't > hold water with me, Munn. > > I'm not holding myself to, say, Iran or China's standards. > No one in this country is, that's the point. > Even the suggestion is preposterous. Yet, here it is: "look at China > and Iran" shining beacons, those. > > You don't make "small accommodations" with the devil. > > The road to hell is paved with good intentions. > > The very fact that you see these changes as "small accommodations" > belays a lack of critical thinking. > I have thought through both sides of the issues very carefully. You only seem to ever think about one side of the argument. Fine, that's your choice, but it hardly represents any kind of serious critical thinking. > Again with the rationalizations! "Hey, this ain't that bad, look at > /them/!" > > That argument won't work for my kid, and it won't work for you, either. > > I had a dollar before, and now I've got 25 cents-- but hey, that's > still better than nothing, right? Heck, that's good! > I'm not your kid, and we're not trading in coins. Our currency is human life and the question is how much accommodation will we make in the short term to protect our lives and the lives our our families, friends, neighbors, and fellow citizens. You want to make no accommodations, that's your choice, but most people in the country are not willing to gamble with their lives, or with yours or mine. > Your faith in the government is astounding. I'm not sure what else to > say. > > Sadly, people who feel the way you do will probably be the death of the > country. > I don't have faith in government generally, I have faith in the checks and balances of our Constitution, because I read history and I understand the grown-up version of how our country actually works, not the fairy-tale version that you believe in. Government is ugly. Welcome to the sausage factory, don't get blood on your shoes. :-) ==== "It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried." -Winston Churchill ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;160198600;22374440;w Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:257154 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
