|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
 Posted - 09/03/2004 : 22:21:08 [Permalink]
|
I just don't see anything wrong with the following:
quote:
SEN. KERRY: There are all kinds of atrocities, and I would have to say that, yes, yes, I committed the same kind of atrocities as thousands of other soldiers have committed in that I took part in shootings in free fire zones. I conducted harassment and interdiction fire. I used 50 calibre machine guns, which we were granted and ordered to use, which were our only weapon against people. I took part in search and destroy missions, in the burning of villages. All of this is contrary to the laws of warfare,
I just see that Americans can't stand being told that any of their number ever did wrong and instead attack the messenger.
Once again I say that it was the fact that Kerry had the guts to do this that made him better than many of his fellows. He not only knew it was wrong, but he was willing to tell the story publicly knowing how people would take it. I just don't see how anyone can't support someone with this kind of moral integrity.
The part that should have bothered veterans was that Kerry said he was ordered to do these things and that was and is the real issue. If veterans want to defend war crimes then fuck them! Defending crimes is wrong. Covering up evil deeds is wrong. Kerry knew this. I just don't see the problem with this.
@ |
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
Sportsbettingacumen.com: The science of sports betting |
 |
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2004 : 02:21:20 [Permalink]
|
And to follow @tomic's comments..
The idea that Americans are all good, never evil, is sort of a TV version. We are just as human as other people are. Look at the recent Iraq prison scandal, recent revelations Henry Kissinger told Argentina to "get it done quickly" in reference to their mass killing of their own citizens, the Mai Lai Massacre, and on and on.
I personally saw atrocities in Guatemala and Nicaragua in the 70s that were the direct result of USA military support and political backing. In the Dominican Republic we supported one of the most brutal dictators, Trujillo.
Soldiers are only human. If you put them in certain circumstances many will act in ways we ironically call inhuman. In Viet Nam the circumstances were a catalyst for atrocities. There were not clear boundaries between North and South supporters. While in WWII an American would be fighting a German, in Viet Nam you would fight some Vietnamese while others were supposed to be allies. That set up a situation of not trusting people, hating people, and so on.
It's naive to think atrocities weren't going on. What Kerry was trying to say back then, was that American soldiers were suffering terribly under the circumstances. He was defending soldiers, not attacking them.
There still is strong sentiment that the Viet Nam protesters were somehow weakening the US position there. That is nonsense. We didn't have the military commitment to win that war given the fact that half or more of the Vietnamese were against us. Think about it. We went in to support the French colonialists, not to establish some free society. We supported the invading people that were exploiting the native people and their resources.
The protesters saw that while others held some blind trust for the government. Some believed, just as people believe now, that if you protest a war you are aiding the enemy. Well then what are you supposed to do if your government is wrong? Just go along with it?
Well, I'm rambling here and getting a bit upset. We are going through a similar, though different circumstanced event right now. Saddam was not Bin Laden. There was no imminent threat. We are not safer. And some people are blindly following the GOP line without looking at the facts.
There are lots of horrible dictators in the world. Some we even support. There are countries with WMDs and ties to terrorists. What did Iraq have that was different? If you don't think it was about creating a friendly oil market, I'd sure like to know what it was. Because it wasn't the crap we've been sold. |
|
|
|
Renae
SFN Regular
543 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2004 : 06:35:22 [Permalink]
|
Great posts here.
Republicans embrace the respect-for-authority value when it suits them and discard it when it doesn't suit them. They impeached Clinton, for heaven's sake, and called him everything from a rapist to a murderer. Yet those of us who disagree with Bush or who argue for peace are somehow unpatriotic, subversive, America-haters, etc.
Further, Republicans made Clinton's Vietnam evasion a huge issue a decade ago. Why, then, isn't Bush's Vietnam evasion an issue?
I realize that thinking critically and making subtle distinctions is sometimes labeled "hypocrisy" by the other side, and I'm sure the Democrats are guilty of that kind of labeling, too. But the neo-cons show a startling ability to disregard reason on this issue and they no longer even pretend to be fair. And America laps it up as "truth."
On a slightly different note, I was gobsmacked at Cheney's and Miller's speeches at the RNC. I can only hope their mean-spiritedness and dishonesty catches up with them somehow. I wish I believed in karma, but I don't. |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2004 : 10:28:11 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Renae
On a slightly different note, I was gobsmacked at Cheney's and Miller's speeches at the RNC. I can only hope their mean-spiritedness and dishonesty catches up with them somehow. I wish I believed in karma, but I don't.
Hi, Renae-- glad you're back.
Yes, the speeches by Cheney and Miller were filled with lies and distortions. I predicted as much, hence the thread. Also easily predictable was the virtual lack of an outcry by the mainstream press. Sure, lots of people thought that Miller was a bit over the top, but few pundits actually examined what he said. As noted in Friday's Daily Howler, the Washington Post started to do some analysis. However, I fear that it's too little too late. Already, most people have bought into the flip-flop label that the Bush campaign has pushed.
It's very sad. Instead of honest discussion about policy and ideas-- and make no mistake, Bush had some interesting proposals I'd like to hear about-- we're going to hear more of Swift Boats (lies) and Kerry's flip-flops (lies) and little of any substance. The press seems all too happy to go along with it, for reasons I do not understand.  |
|
|
|
Renae
SFN Regular
543 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2004 : 11:09:41 [Permalink]
|
Thank you, Cuneiformist.
I wholeheartedly agree with you, C. I'm profoundly disappointed in the media. If it weren't for independent media and the Internet, I wouldn't have heard about most of Bush's sneaky, under-the-radar policies.
If the media don't do their job, which is to present information fairly and to question authority, Americans can't do THEIR job, which is to be informed and hold our leaders accountable.
It was a stroke of brilliance that Karl Rove and Cheney (and all the neo-cons, really) to choose Bush as a figurehead. Bush is so hapless that it almost seems mean for the media to nail him to the wall. And Cheney et all can work their frighteningly ideological conservative agenda without blame. After all, Bush is the guy the American people want to have a beer with, and Kerry is the elitist, right? 
|
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2004 : 11:26:08 [Permalink]
|
Did anyone catch the news story about Cheney saying that Kerry doesn't know the west? If you read the entire article couldn't you infer that he's also saying, by his own reasoning, that the Bush-Cheney team doesn't know the south and east and north. Hell, they don't know most of the country. It was just a stupid speech really. Cheney knows Washington, DC and Bush knows the inside of his own ass.
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/politics/9577347.htm
What the hell is this argument? Cheney is from an area with a tiny population and so what if Cheney knows it and kerry doesn't? Kerry knows an area with a bigger population with bigger and more complex issues? But so what? The President is, the last time I checked, leader of the entire country and not just selected regions.
@ |
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
Sportsbettingacumen.com: The science of sports betting |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2004 : 16:28:36 [Permalink]
|
RE the Miami Herald article, I loved the final quote:
quote:
Responding to the comment, Anne Womack, Cheney's spokeswoman, said: "The Republicans just came out of a really exciting positive convention in which President Bush laid out an aggressive agenda for next four years. Senator Kerry's only response is to lash out and make personal attacks about the past. We think this election is about the future."
WTF? Half of that fucking convention was making personal attacks against Kerry "about the past"-- (lies about) his war record, (lies about) his votes, (lies about his) his "flip-flopping" and so on!! This administration's ability to spin things is un-fucking-real! |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2004 : 22:38:59 [Permalink]
|
quote:
WTF? Half of that fucking convention was making personal attacks against Kerry "about the past"-- (lies about) his war record, (lies about) his votes, (lies about his) his "flip-flopping" and so on!! This administration's ability to spin things is un-fucking-real!
Yep. And the media's general lack of concern with reporting ethics is quite disturbing.
All the major media people are doing this year is looking for the next 10sec soundbite. It's like the WWN (http://www.weeklyworldnews.com/) has taken control of CBS, NBC, ABC, and the major print media.
I keep hoping that it's all just a misunderstanding and that the press will wake the fuck up and start challenging the crap they are being fed. |
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 09/05/2004 : 03:34:04 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cuneiformist
RE the Miami Herald article, I loved the final quote:
quote:
Responding to the comment, Anne Womack, Cheney's spokeswoman, said: "The Republicans just came out of a really exciting positive convention in which President Bush laid out an aggressive agenda for next four years. Senator Kerry's only response is to lash out and make personal attacks about the past. We think this election is about the future."
WTF? Half of that fucking convention was making personal attacks against Kerry "about the past"-- (lies about) his war record, (lies about) his votes, (lies about his) his "flip-flopping" and so on!! This administration's ability to spin things is un-fucking-real!
I too, was totally taken aback by those same coments spoken on FOX by Billy Crystal and whoever the other commentators were. My god, are the American people that stupid that you can say such things right after seeing the thing with your own eyes? |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 09/05/2004 : 03:49:15 [Permalink]
|
Dude, I swear I wish the WWW and/or Mad Magazine would take over the major media. They'd be more honest and accurate by an order of magnitude than the paid-off blathers we have now.
Does anyone really believe that Bush got a double-digit lead over Kerry from the convention? And if so, from whom? Who and how many did Time and Newsweek poll?
We badly need to get rid of this virilent dose of the clap currently infecting the White House. Bush & Co. foul everything they touch and four more years of these dripping pricks will do immeasurable damage to the country and indeed, the world -- as it has already shown. Hopefully, some penicillin will arive soon.
 |
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
Tim
SFN Regular
USA
775 Posts |
Posted - 09/05/2004 : 04:46:54 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Posted by Kil;The Guard was no guarantee you would not have to face "Charley," but it was close.
I started to think about this, and found out that sometimes it really is guaranteed if you know the right people or get all the right breaks.
When I was a kid back in the sixties I had a thing for fighter jets. I used to build models all of the time and read every account of every jet I could find. The "Delta Dagger" was, for some reason, one of my favorites. (I guess I was a weird kid!)
This thread got me to checking a couple of the links that I went to verify with a few others. I discovered that Mr. Bush was trained to fly an F-102A Delta Dagger. Little alarms started to go off in my head, and these weren't flashbacks.
The F-102A was in the process of being phased out of the Air Force in the late sixties. By '69, all of these planes had been pulled from the Pacific and from Southeast Asia, and moved back to the states for use in the ANG...By 1976 all of these planes had been retired.
President Bush joined the ANG in 1968 where he began basic pilot's training with the lowest possible passing score on his pilot's test. At the end of '69, Mr. Bush had begun full time training on the F-102A. I call this either an amazing stroke of luck or an act of friendly persuasion. Either way, G.W. had been insured that there was little chance he would ever see battle. But, knowing that the Bush family would never use their political and financial clout to get special treatment, this has to be a simple case of coincidence.
http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/f102_1.html
http://www.seanet.com/~johnco/bush102.htm
Now, for anyone wondering why the press seems so lazy these days, it's because the press is lazy these days. Why go through the trouble of hiring an editorial staff and supporting investigative journalists when the political parties and the multi-national corporations are doing your work for you?
Besides most of the folks in the mainstream media make lots of money. Their financial interests would tend to lead them in the direction of fiscal conservatism. And, don't we love our tax cuts. I wish they'd give me one!
Long live Moon and Murdoch...
|
"We got an issue in America. Too many good docs are gettin' out of business. Too many OB/GYNs aren't able to practice their -- their love with women all across this country." Dubya in Poplar Bluff, Missouri, 9/6/2004
|
|
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 09/05/2004 : 13:17:52 [Permalink]
|
I don't know whether this site has already been posted before, but it might interest you guys:
http://www.factcheck.org/
Have fun checking. |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
|
|
|
chaloobi
SFN Regular
1620 Posts |
Posted - 09/07/2004 : 07:14:08 [Permalink]
|
| I think it's more difficult to find public statements from the Vice President concerning any major issue that are NOT laced with decpetions of one kind or another. |
-Chaloobi
|
|
|
|
NubiWan
Skeptic Friend
USA
424 Posts |
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
