NationStates Jolt Archive

*this must be Donald Rumsfelds idea of "liberating" Iraqis. I hope he wasnt selling these videos as porn to the White House

Hersh: Abu Ghraib Abuse Worse Than Reported
Journalist Seymour Hersh, who broke the Abu Ghraib prison torture story, is now saying the US has evidence showing that the abuse was even worse than previously reported. Although he has yet to report on it in the pages of the New Yorker, Hersh recently told a crowd in California that the US has videotape showing young male Iraqi prisoners being sodomized by U.S. troops at the prison. Hersh said "The boys were sodomized with the cameras rolling, and the worst part is the soundtrack, of the boys shrieking." He added, "this is your government at war."

www.democracynow.org

*this must be Donald Rumsfelds idea of "liberating" Iraqis. I hope he wasnt selling these videos as porn to the White House

Hersh: Abu Ghraib Abuse Worse Than Reported
Journalist Seymour Hersh, who broke the Abu Ghraib prison torture story, is now saying the US has evidence showing that the abuse was even worse than previously reported. Although he has yet to report on it in the pages of the New Yorker, Hersh recently told a crowd in California that the US has videotape showing young male Iraqi prisoners being sodomized by U.S. troops at the prison. Hersh said "The boys were sodomized with the cameras rolling, and the worst part is the soundtrack, of the boys shrieking." He added, "this is your government at war."

www.democracynow.org

If it was Hersh who said it, it's probably BS. That guy's such a lying asshole it's not even funny.

If it was Hersh who said it, it's probably BS. That guy's such a lying asshole it's not even funny.
what makes you say that?

If this is true, I'm sad to find out I'm not suprised.

If it's false, it's sad to find out it seems so plausable.

Either way, horrible news.

Dude, the guy's an asshole. Ever hear of the My Lai massacre? Hersh said over 500 civilians were killed, but, according to a Vietnamese (yes, Vietnamese) source, only about 100 people were killed, and only 20-25 were civilians, and most of them were caught in the line of fire, not deliberately killed. By the way, it was General Hoang Xuan Lam of ARVN that wrote the report. The South Vietnamese government said itself the massacre was BS.

If it was Hersh who said it, it's probably BS. That guy's such a lying asshole it's not even funny.
Yeah, cos those photos from the prision: liberal media forgeries, right?

Yeah, cos those photos from the prision: liberal media forgeries, right?

I'm not saying that. I'm just saying I don't believe anything that bastard Hersh says.

If this is true, I'm sad to find out I'm not suprised.

If it's false, it's sad to find out it seems so plausable.

Either way, horrible news.
its true--its in the New Yorker

If it's false, it's sad to find out it seems so plausable.Very good point.

Would you prefer to hear the news from Fox?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0%2C2933%2C119632%2C00.html

Aparenlty It happened.

Dude, the guy's an asshole. Ever hear of the My Lai massacre? Hersh said over 500 civilians were killed, but, according to a Vietnamese (yes, Vietnamese) source, only about 100 people were killed, and only 20-25 were civilians, and most of them were caught in the line of fire, not deliberately killed. By the way, it was General Hoang Xuan Lam of ARVN that wrote the report. The South Vietnamese government said itself the massacre was BS.
I dont know much about the veitnam war other then that it was a BAD war

If an honest person said it happened, I'd believe it. But Hersh is a dirty goddamn moron, so I don't believe a word that comes out of his s***ty-smelling mouth.

I'm not saying that. I'm just saying I don't believe anything that bastard Hersh says.
So, does that mean that the Abu Graib photos and stories aren't real? I mean, given that he broke the story, and we're not supposed to believe what he says, I don't see what other conclusion you can be drawing about what went on there.

http://www.rdi.st/flamewar.jpg

Fan the flames, people.

So, does that mean that the Abu Graib photos and stories aren't real? I mean, given that he broke the story, and we're not supposed to believe what he says, I don't see what other conclusion you can be drawing about what went on there.

Exactly. The guy's a lying, no-good @$$hole.

Would you prefer to hear the news from Fox?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0%2C2933%2C119632%2C00.html

Aparenlty It happened.
wow if even the liers at Fox arent covering this up then it must be really BIG

http://www.rdi.st/flamewar.jpg

Fan the flames, people.


Holy crap, where did you find that?

I love you. lol

wow if even the liers at Fox arent covering this up then it must be really BIG

All people in the media are liars. They're a bunch of dirty bastards.

All people in the media are liars. They're a bunch of dirty bastards.
Sure, Fox are "dirty bastards" and "liars", but they're Pro-America "dirty bastards" and "liars". If Faux admits the Abu Ghraib Abuse, it's true.

Sure, Fox are "dirty bastards" and "liars", but they're Pro-America "dirty bastards" and "liars". If Faux admits the Abu Ghraib Abuse, it's true.

They're not pro-American. They're just neoconservative, pseudo-right-wing, only-pretending-to-be-patriotic bastards.

All people in the media are liars. They're a bunch of dirty bastards.
I totally agree--I wish teachers around the nation have their students burn newspapers and write hate mail to TV stations all around the country and demand the deportation of that trash Rupert Murdoch to protest corporate facism in our media. We need to takeback and liberate our airwaves from the clutches of the corporate beast and return them to the american people who are its rightful owners

Exactly. The guy's a lying, no-good @$$hole.
I can't see for the life of me how you managed to get the idea from my post that I was supporting or agreeing with you.

If he says something, and you say that nothing he says is true, then clearly you think that what he said isn't true.

Holy crap, where did you find that?

I love you. lol

Oh, I found it off google searching "Flamewar."

And baby, if you love me:

me- :fluffle: -you

LET'S GET FLUFFLING!

They're not pro-American. They're just neoconservative, pseudo-right-wing, only-pretending-to-be-patriotic bastards.

Right. But while pretending to be patriotic, they have to pretend to be pro-American, no? Same conclusion.

Would you prefer to hear the news from Fox?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0%2C2933%2C119632%2C00.html

Aparenlty It happened.

Apparently something happened but there is some conflict on what "it" was- the first post in this thread asserts that videofootage shows *US* troops raping young iraqi males- however foxnews in the link i have quoted asserts that the video footage in question shows *iraqi* guards raping young iraqi males.
There seems to be disagreement within the media as to what exactly occured//is alleged to have occured ?

...I love you in a very friendly, not-making-out manner ;)

Hersh and his flunkies are probably rapists themselves!
Oh, god, I'm sorry. I didn't realise you were just trolling. Carry on.

Apparently something happened but there is some conflict on what "it" was- the first post in this thread asserts that videofootage shows *US* troops raping young iraqi males- however foxnews in the link i have quoted asserts that the video footage in question shows *iraqi* guards raping young iraqi males.
There seems to be disagreement within the media as to what exactly occured//is alleged to have occured ?

ah yes, on re-read I see that you are correct.

The US involvement, according to Fox, seems to be restricted to standing around videotaping the event while Iraqi employees did the dirty deed....

Well, that's diferent then.

Apparently something happened but there is some conflict on what "it" was- the first post in this thread asserts that videofootage shows *US* troops raping young iraqi males- however foxnews in the link i have quoted asserts that the video footage in question shows *iraqi* guards raping young iraqi males.
There seems to be disagreement within the media as to what exactly occured//is alleged to have occured ?
maybe the US troops were just filming it then?

maybe the US troops were just filming it then?

Could be.

That doesn't make it any better, though.

That doesn't make it any better, though.

No, it doesn't.

Am I the only one to find it very ironic, coming from the armed forces who persecuted gays for so long and even today barely tolerates them? It would seem they can hardly claim the moral high ground any more.

Am I the only one to find it very ironic, coming from the armed forces who persecuted gays for so long and even today barely tolerates them? It would seem they can hardly claim the moral high ground any more.

Are you calling soldiers homophobes? If you are, I'm going to take it personnally.

Their allegations up to now. I'm surprised how fast people are willing to spin this when its simply bits of information.

If an honest person said it happened, I'd believe it. But Hersh is a dirty goddamn moron, so I don't believe a word that comes out of his s***ty-smelling mouth.
Hersh said the sky is blue...

All people in the media are liars. They're a bunch of dirty bastards.
the media says you are gay

Yes, they are allegations at this point.

If the allegations are true then it is terrible and I hope the perpetrators of the acts are punished for their actions. If they are found to be false, the people who falsified the claims should be punished also.

However, it is an extremely long bow to draw to paint the entire military with the same brush if these allegations are correct. It is also a feeble argument to try and state that this was the intent of the war in Iraq.

Also, the introductory paragraph made by the OP is in poor taste. Especially as it was created by someone who, in another thread stated they despise the sensationalist media in the US.

Apparently something happened but there is some conflict on what "it" was- the first post in this thread asserts that videofootage shows *US* troops raping young iraqi males- however foxnews in the link i have quoted asserts that the video footage in question shows *iraqi* guards raping young iraqi males.
There seems to be disagreement within the media as to what exactly occured//is alleged to have occured ?
There seems to be disagreement within FOX...and some other...as to what exactly occured

lets compare FOX credibility...with ANYother anonymous media...Lets see...who shall I trust? :D

There seems to be disagreement within FOX...and some other...as to what exactly occured

lets compare FOX credibility...with ANYother anonymous media...Lets see...who shall I trust? :D

Yes, rather than wait and see what actually happend you are better to just jump to the conclusion thats suits you and only accept information that supports it. :rolleyes:

Yes, rather than wait and see what actually happend you are better to just jump to the conclusion thats suits you and only accept information that supports it. :rolleyes:

I say FOX likely lied...
wanna bet?

*this must be Donald Rumsfelds idea of "liberating" Iraqis. I hope he wasnt selling these videos as porn to the White House

Hersh: Abu Ghraib Abuse Worse Than Reported
Journalist Seymour Hersh, who broke the Abu Ghraib prison torture story, is now saying the US has evidence showing that the abuse was even worse than previously reported. Although he has yet to report on it in the pages of the New Yorker, Hersh recently told a crowd in California that the US has videotape showing young male Iraqi prisoners being sodomized by U.S. troops at the prison. Hersh said "The boys were sodomized with the cameras rolling, and the worst part is the soundtrack, of the boys shrieking." He added, "this is your government at war."

www.democracynow.org

The above poster for this thread hardly deserves replying to when one considers the source. What a nasty little troll you are MKULTRA. Haven't you already received warnings about this type of thing - copying and pasting big chunks of text from highly suspect sources to "prove" your point etc, or at least paraphrasing (almost verbatim) from the same source? You should be ashamed of yourself.

I say FOX likely lied...
wanna bet?

Noone knows what exactly happened so it is wise not to jump to conclusions until you know what has actually happened.

Are you calling soldiers homophobes? If you are, I'm going to take it personnally.


I am. I know a guy who's in the US army who needs to hide when he goes to gay bars because his unit has guys patrolling to see if they can catch anyone there - despite the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. And I saw a statement from a general before that policy was implemented saying that gays weren't good enough to defend their country.

If you're a soldier and it works differently in your unit, though, feel free to share.

highly suspect sources.
Like i said FOX vs WhateverMedia...I take whateverMedia...not even close

Noone knows what exactly happened so it is wise not to jump to conclusions until you know what has actually happened.
We jumped on Iraq based on Bush "conclusions" about WMD...

Would you prefer to hear the news from Fox?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0%2C2933%2C119632%2C00.html

Aparenlty It happened.

I like that...a link to the FOX News website followed by "Aparenlty It happened."

Dude, the guy's an asshole. Ever hear of the My Lai massacre? Hersh said over 500 civilians were killed, but, according to a Vietnamese (yes, Vietnamese) source, only about 100 people were killed, and only 20-25 were civilians, and most of them were caught in the line of fire, not deliberately killed. By the way, it was General Hoang Xuan Lam of ARVN that wrote the report. The South Vietnamese government said itself the massacre was BS.

Seymour Myron Hersh (born April 8, 1937) is an American investigative journalist. His work first gained worldwide recognition in 1969 for exposing the My Lai massacre and its cover-up during the Vietnam War, for which he received the Pulitzer Prize for international reporting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seymour_Hersh

Under the orders of Lt. William Calley, the soldiers killed hundreds of civilians – primarily old men, women, children, and babies. The precise number killed varies from source to source, with 347 and 504 being the most commonly cited figures. The soldiers also engaged in torture and rape of the villagers. According to a South Vietnamese army lieutenant to his superiors, it was an "atrocious" incident of revenge.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai_massacre

Whether it was 100, 300, or 500, the sad part is that it DID happen. Now do you have a source that support YOUR claims that it was BS?

Why are you trying to discredit Hersh?

I like that...a link to the FOX News website followed by "Aparenlty It happened."
In all fairness zeppistan made an innocent mistake- he acknowledged this elsewhere in this thread.....Considering zeppistans avowedly liberal politics its surely a sign of good character that the chap is nonetheless seeing what the(notably conservative) FOX news network has to say on the issues of the day.
Perhaps your reproduction of Zeppistans harmless spelling error also has a message regarding the content of your character sir? Or Perhaps not?
Hmm, you may well be that legend of the internet "the man who never typoed"..

We jumped on Iraq based on Bush "conclusions" about WMD...

No, the Iraq war began based on intelligence presented to Bush about WMDs not Bush's conclusions on WMDs.

In all fairness zeppistan made an innocent mistake- he acknowledged this elsewhere in this thread.....Considering zeppistans avowedly liberal politics its surely a sign of good character that the chap is nonetheless seeing what the(notably conservative) FOX news network has to say on the issues of the day.
Perhaps your reproduction of Zeppistans harmless spelling error also has a message regarding the content of your character sir? Or Perhaps not?
Hmm, you may well be that legend of the internet "the man who never typoed"..

I think you will find Zeppistan was throwing the Fox News report in Roach-Busters' face when he said the initial report was BS. Only when Zeppistan read the Fox News story did he realise the discrepancies and make the other post.
I doubt it was an act of balance on behalf of Zeppistan to post the Fox News link but a sarcastic post to belittle Roach-Busters and his scepticism over the initial report posted by MKULTRA. The comment preceding the Fox News link tends to support my theory.

The above poster for this thread hardly deserves replying to when one considers the source. What a nasty little troll you are MKULTRA. Haven't you already received warnings about this type of thing - copying and pasting big chunks of text from highly suspect sources to "prove" your point etc, or at least paraphrasing (almost verbatim) from the same source? You should be ashamed of yourself.
I dont make the news I just report it--dont you have the slightest bit of guilt when by attacking me the messenger that you end up condoning kiddie rape?

p.s. I may have a short temper and zero patience but I dont have a "nasty" bone in my body

.....And how does THAT work? o.O

.....And how does THAT work? o.O
Im not sure but its an excellent sound bite

I like that...a link to the FOX News website followed by "Aparenlty It happened."


Just keeping my standards up to the fine example shown regularly by Fox!

:D

No, the Iraq war began based on intelligence presented to Bush about WMDs not Bush's conclusions on WMDs.


Really?

So when Tenent told Bush's team AND the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in October of '02 that the uranium claims were not credible, but GW STILL used it to raise the spectre of a mushroom cloud in the State of the Union Address three months later, that was just an honest "whoopsie?"

So, when GW sent a memo to Congress prompting them to vote for the War on Iraq in order to "take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001. " he was being honest give that it was well known that Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11?

So, despite having since admitted that many of the caveats and qualifiers on intelligence regarding Iraq WERE presented to the administration, he and other members of his team regularly made statements such as "there is no doubt" regarding Saddam's continued ownerships of stockpiles of WMD?


You sir, are very very gullible.

No, the Iraq war began based on intelligence presented to Bush about WMDs not Bush's conclusions on WMDs.
The Amrican Gov. Quoted "American Intelligence" Reports...And Attaqued Iraq...

Now "American Intelligence" Reports are Blaming IRAN...What are we waiting for?...Lets Bomb the hell out of Iran... :D

Next years we will "get" reports that blame Syria or NK...

The Amrican Gov. Quoted "American Intelligence" Reports...And Attaqued Iraq...

Now "American Intelligence" Reports are Blaming IRAN...What are we waiting for?...Lets Bomb the hell out of Iran... :D

Next years we will "get" reports that blame Syria or NK...

I'm betting on Iran if Bush is elected to 4 more years.. but Syria would be easier to take out.. so he might go after them instead. America in recent years, certainly since the Vietnam war have a history of going after the easy small defenseless countries.. I can't see them taking any one on that might actually put up a half decent fight.

I'm betting on Iran if Bush is elected to 4 more years.. but Syria would be easier to take out.. so he might go after them instead. America in recent years, certainly since the Vietnam war have a history of going after the easy small defenseless countries.. I can't see them taking any one on that might actually put up a half decent fight.

I never knew warfare had to be 'fair' and the opposing nations had to be 'equal.'

Me!

Really?

So when Tenent told Bush's team AND the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in October of '02 that the uranium claims were not credible, but GW STILL used it to raise the spectre of a mushroom cloud in the State of the Union Address three months later, that was just an honest "whoopsie?"

So, when GW sent a memo to Congress prompting them to vote for the War on Iraq in order to "take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001. " he was being honest give that it was well known that Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11?

So, despite having since admitted that many of the caveats and qualifiers on intelligence regarding Iraq WERE presented to the administration, he and other members of his team regularly made statements such as "there is no doubt" regarding Saddam's continued ownerships of stockpiles of WMD?


You sir, are very very gullible.

Do you not put any blame on the previous administration, then? How the Clinton admin. made 'regime change' our official policy in regards to Iraq? Are you going to say that Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism at all? Are you going to dismiss the score plus of shells we've found that contain sarin, cyclosarin, and mustard gas? Are you going to dismiss all of the equipment we've found, including the chemical suits in Saddam's armories?

Me!

I never knew warfare had to be 'fair' and the opposing nations had to be 'equal.'

Me!

I never said any thing about that.. However, one could hardly argue that N.Korea was a real threat.. Iran had known ties to international terror.. it would seem to me that many other countries besides Iraq would have been smarter targets.. but they went for the easy one..

including the chemical suits in Saddam's armories?


Any army should have units with Chemical/Radiation-Proof suits...Specially in the ME...Since Israel does have Chems and Nukes...

maybe even Iraq has them...They sure used to have Chems...Reagan gave them to Saddam.

Do you not put any blame on the previous administration, then? How the Clinton admin. made 'regime change' our official policy in regards to Iraq? Are you going to say that Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism at all? Are you going to dismiss the score plus of shells we've found that contain sarin, cyclosarin, and mustard gas? Are you going to dismiss all of the equipment we've found, including the chemical suits in Saddam's armories?

Me!

So it's Clinton's fault for the policy, and not Bush's fault for deciding on the manner in which to pursue it? Interesting.

And I see that somebody else has pointed out that chemical suits are also considered defensive equipment, and should hardly be considered unreasonable to want to have in a region where all of your neighbours have WMD and one also has an equal histories of using them... against Iraq.

However, if you think that Congress would have voted for a multi-hundred billion dollar commitment and all of the lost and ruined lives in order to remove a regime because it paid pensions to Palestinians, and might have had a few forgotten rusty remenants of artillery shells containing WMD that were no longer potent - I think few would agree that the votes would have gone that way.


Especially given that the target they were chasing at the time were people that WERE a direct threat.

-Z-

the media says you are gay

Screw you, too.

Seymour Myron Hersh (born April 8, 1937) is an American investigative journalist. His work first gained worldwide recognition in 1969 for exposing the My Lai massacre and its cover-up during the Vietnam War, for which he received the Pulitzer Prize for international reporting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seymour_Hersh

Under the orders of Lt. William Calley, the soldiers killed hundreds of civilians – primarily old men, women, children, and babies. The precise number killed varies from source to source, with 347 and 504 being the most commonly cited figures. The soldiers also engaged in torture and rape of the villagers. According to a South Vietnamese army lieutenant to his superiors, it was an "atrocious" incident of revenge.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai_massacre

Whether it was 100, 300, or 500, the sad part is that it DID happen. Now do you have a source that support YOUR claims that it was BS?

Why are you trying to discredit Hersh?

I told you, General Huong Xuan Lam wrote an official government report that says what the media said about the 'massacre' was "totally inaccurate." And doesn't the fact that no two versions of the story are the same suggest embellishment and lying on Hersh's part?

By the way, Thou Shalt Not Lie, thanks for disagreeing without flaming. I respect you for that.

Screw you, too.
What took you so long?

What took you so long?

You both suck!!!!

I told you...
He told you better...

He told you better...

Shut up!!! You're BOTH dumbo-jumbos!

Shut up!!! You're BOTH dumbo-jumbos!
I plead the first amandement...Cody the morony

I plead the first amandement...Cody the morony

I plead the 28th amendment...YOU SUCK!!!! I HATE YOU!!!!!! :sniper: :gundge: :mp5:

No, the Iraq war began based on intelligence presented to Bush about WMDs not Bush's conclusions on WMDs.
No it was based on Bushs faulty conclusions--Bush didnt want to hear any message from Intelligence that Iraq was no threat, he wouldnt accept it. He only would tolerate a message that made Iraq look like a threat so you cant blame intelligence when its Bush who was forcing the message he wanted to hear

I'm betting on Iran if Bush is elected to 4 more years.. but Syria would be easier to take out.. so he might go after them instead. America in recent years, certainly since the Vietnam war have a history of going after the easy small defenseless countries.. I can't see them taking any one on that might actually put up a half decent fight.
correct--thats why Bush attacked Iraq--he knew how utterly defenseless it was--when Bush first uttered the WMD lie I knew back then he was fulla crap

Do you not put any blame on the previous administration, then? How the Clinton admin. made 'regime change' our official policy in regards to Iraq? Are you going to say that Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism at all? Are you going to dismiss the score plus of shells we've found that contain sarin, cyclosarin, and mustard gas? Are you going to dismiss all of the equipment we've found, including the chemical suits in Saddam's armories?

Me!
Saddam was just a typical arab leader-he presented no threat to us at all -these weapons you claim he had were all sold to him by the west and Bushs own father .The Saudi Royal family had FAR more links to terrorism then the helpless unarmed Saddam did

Saddam was just a typical arab leader-he presented no threat to us at all -these weapons you claim he had were all sold to him by the west and Bushs own father .The Saudi Royal family had FAR more links to terrorism then the helpless unarmed Saddam did

A: You're saying that no Arab leader presents any threat to us? That's absurd....and it's going to come back to by you later in your post....

B: You really need to stop listening to that old fark Chomsky.....

C: But you said that no Arab leader is a threat to us -- the Saudi Royal Family isn't Arab?

D: Would you have supported invading Saudi Arabia?

E: Helpless and unarmed Saddam? :rolleyes: My God, you're too far gone to try to save....

Me!

I am. I know a guy who's in the US army who needs to hide when he goes to gay bars because his unit has guys patrolling to see if they can catch anyone there - despite the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. And I saw a statement from a general before that policy was implemented saying that gays weren't good enough to defend their country.

If you're a soldier and it works differently in your unit, though, feel free to share.

I'm a reservist MP in the Canadian Forces. I volunteered to go to Bosnia due to shortages. Just like there are homophobes in the general populace there are in the army. There are also other types of cooky people. Insinuating that the Armed Forces of Canada or the U.S. somehow intentionally discriminate is a diservice to our professionalism. I take offence to it.

I'm a reservist MP in the Canadian Forces. I volunteered to go to Bosnia due to shortages. Just like there are homophobes in the general populace there are in the army. There are also other types of cooky people. Insinuating that the Armed Forces of Canada or the U.S. somehow intentionally discriminate is a diservice to our professionalism. I take offence to it.

See, that's not what I was saying. I am Canadian, and I know Canadian armed forces have a strong policy against discrimination(be it against gays, women, or any other minority). But the US army doesn't, and some detachments are indeed intentionnally discriminating by bending the don't ask don't tell policy to suit their contempt of gays.

Like I said, I have inside information regarding this. My friend has seen situations like this happen before: men patrol gay bars' vincinity in hope of catching a soldier going there. If they do, they say said soldier is being openly gay, and thus doesn't respect the don't ask don't tell policy. Even though it's a strecth, because they were actively looking for gay soldiers to expulse them, they still have the legal means of getting them out of the forces.

See, that's not what I was saying. I am Canadian, and I know Canadian armed forces have a strong policy against discrimination(be it against gays, women, or any other minority). But the US army doesn't, and some detachments are indeed intentionnally discriminating by bending the don't ask don't tell policy to suit their contempt of gays.

Like I said, I have inside information regarding this. My friend has seen situations like this happen before: men patrol gay bars' vincinity in hope of catching a soldier going there. If they do, they say said soldier is being openly gay, and thus doesn't respect the don't ask don't tell policy. Even though it's a strecth, because they were actively looking for gay soldiers to expulse them, they still have the legal means of getting them out of the forces.

And you fail to see my point.

This is hearsay, second hand information. I spent time with U.S. soldiers in Bosnia, their for the most part consumate professionals. Any type of insinuation that their as an organisation homophobes is stereotyping and narrow-mindedness.

The fact that some fools somewhere choose to act stupid while in uniform is beside the point. You made an overarching generalization (like many people do) about the U.S. (you said originally "the armed forces"). In the past, the Canadian Armed Forces also had problems with gays and women. I've seen stupid privates continue the same stupid stereotypes.

The U.S. army is no more homophobic than the CAF; however, there are homophobic soldiers within the services.

And you fail to see my point.

This is hearsay, second hand information. I spent time with U.S. soldiers in Bosnia, their for the most part consumate professionals. Any type of insinuation that their as an organisation homophobes is stereotyping and narrow-mindedness.

The fact that some fools somewhere choose to act stupid while in uniform is beside the point. You made an overarching generalization (like many people do) about the U.S. (you said originally "the armed forces"). In the past, the Canadian Armed Forces also had problems with gays and women. I've seen stupid privates continue the same stupid stereotypes.

The U.S. army is no more homophobic than the CAF; however, there are homophobic soldiers within the services.democracynow said that the pentagon purged thousands of gay soldiers many of them translators of arabic tounges and now they have a shortage of translators

And you fail to see my point.

This is hearsay, second hand information. I spent time with U.S. soldiers in Bosnia, their for the most part consumate professionals. Any type of insinuation that their as an organisation homophobes is stereotyping and narrow-mindedness.

The fact that some fools somewhere choose to act stupid while in uniform is beside the point. You made an overarching generalization (like many people do) about the U.S. (you said originally "the armed forces"). In the past, the Canadian Armed Forces also had problems with gays and women. I've seen stupid privates continue the same stupid stereotypes.

The U.S. army is no more homophobic than the CAF; however, there are homophobic soldiers within the services.

Unlike what you just said, it's not secondhand information: it's first-hand information. A friend of mine has been in a situation where he had to hide and stop going out at bars in fear of being caught. And I'm afraid you cannot blame it on a few homphobic soldiers: if it were the case, he could always appeal to his superiors to end those soldier's antic. However, doing so would tell his superior officers he indeed did want to frequent such places(gay bars) and get him expelled. The "don't ask don't tell" policy seems intrinsincly homophobic to me, in the sense that it prevents any gay soldier a right to have his rights defended by his superiors.

I.E You're supposed to be left alone if you don't flaunt your sexuality, but if some homophobe soldiers willingly want to stir trouble for gay soldiers, you cannot even ask for them to stop because that would be breaching the policy by telling your superior you're gay.

That's the situation he was in. And it's something that could not happen in any armed force that openly welcomes gays (and/or lesbians).


Note: I never implied that US soldiers weren't professionnal, nor that all of them were homophobes. But the fact that the high-ranking officers forces gays to "hide" themselves, and deny them any support in cases of breach of policy from homophobic soldiers makes the organization as a whole very unwelcoming to gays and lesbians who wanted nothing more than defend their country.

Unlike what you just said, it's not secondhand information: it's first-hand information. A friend of mine has been in a situation where he had to hide and stop going out at bars in fear of being caught. And I'm afraid you cannot blame it on a few homphobic soldiers: if it were the case, he could always appeal to his superiors to end those soldier's antic. However, doing so would tell his superior officers he indeed did want to frequent such places(gay bars) and get him expelled. The "don't ask don't tell" policy seems intrinsincly homophobic to me, in the sense that it prevents any gay soldier a right to have his rights defended by his superiors.

I.E You're supposed to be left alone if you don't flaunt your sexuality, but if some homophobe soldiers willingly want to stir trouble for gay soldiers, you cannot even ask for them to stop because that would be breaching the policy by telling your superior you're gay.

That's the situation he was in. And it's something that could not happen in any armed force that openly welcomes gays (and/or lesbians).


Note: I never implied that US soldiers weren't professionnal, nor that all of them were homophobes. But the fact that the high-ranking officers forces gays to "hide" themselves, and deny them any support in cases of breach of policy from homophobic soldiers makes the organization as a whole very unwelcoming to gays and lesbians who wanted nothing more than defend their country.

Then your friend should skip one level of command and go above. If the unit commander is a bigot then obviously that won't help. The information is second hand since its not you in the situation. Again the actions of a few boneheads shouldn't reflect poorly on the rest.

I don't know of any armed force that openly accepts people of gay/lesbian sexuality, even here in Canada. People just learn to live with it or ask for transfers.

This is probably my fault for asking whether you consider soldiers homophobes (too general should have asked whether you consider the U.S. Army policies homophobic). You answered yes and that just rubbed me the wrong way.:P

Then your friend should skip one level of command and go above. If the unit commander is a bigot then obviously that won't help. The information is second hand since its not you in the situation. Again the actions of a few boneheads shouldn't reflect poorly on the rest.

I don't know of any armed force that openly accepts people of gay/lesbian sexuality, even here in Canada. People just learn to live with it or ask for transfers.

This is probably my fault for asking whether you consider soldiers homophobes (too general should have asked whether you consider the U.S. Army policies homophobic). You answered yes and that just rubbed me the wrong way.:P

Skipping a level of command, he could still end up with a bigot. It's what's so pernicious about it: without any clear directive on how to handle this type of situation through policy, you cannot be certain you'll be more welcome no matter how higher up you'll go. I know it's what held my friend from doing any complaint at all on any hierachical level. They're not allowed any margin of error: if at any time they fall on an homophobe officer, that's ground enough for expulsion.

Even though we can't say the Canadian forces welcomes gays and lesbians with open arms, at least they do a fair job of protecting their rights through their policies. And they know they can always count on someone higher up to enforce the policies should they end up with a bigot as their immediate superior.

Sorry about the misunderstanding about homophobes versus homophobic policies :-P I wasn't very clear myself in the way I worded my answer. No hard feelings, eh?

Skipping a level of command, he could still end up with a bigot. It's what's so pernicious about it: without any clear directive on how to handle this type of situation through policy, you cannot be certain you'll be more welcome no matter how higher up you'll go. I know it's what held my friend from doing any complaint at all on any hierachical level. They're not allowed any margin of error: if at any time they fall on an homophobe officer, that's ground enough for expulsion.

Even though we can't say the Canadian forces welcomes gays and lesbians with open arms, at least they do a fair job of protecting their rights through their policies. And they know they can always count on someone higher up to enforce the policies should they end up with a bigot as their immediate superior.

Sorry about the misunderstanding about homophobes versus homophobic policies :-P I wasn't very clear myself in the way I worded my answer. No hard feelings, eh?

We have the same regulation as they do (well just about, we got some extra regulations on language use...). Odds are about the same here as in the U.S.. Your friend should work up the chain of command, he doesn't need to state he's being the target, simply that rules are being violated while the COs ignore the problem. Last step, and I hate to say it, would be to go to the press. As much as I sometimes hate them, they do a decent job at setting things right in the end anyway.

Bah no hard feelings...this just hit too close to stupidities I saw in Bosnia.

I'll just say this: I love my country and my military, I support our troops, but I will NOT stand for this sort of behavior! (If it happened, that is...)

democracynow said that the pentagon purged thousands of gay soldiers many of them translators of arabic tounges and now they have a shortage of translators
I'm sure posting your source for this claim just slipped your mind. I look forward to unbiased references and actual figures.

I'm sure posting your source for this claim just slipped your mind. I look forward to unbiased references and actual figures.


baa sources are for the weak, they just mean someone else tells the same lies you do. be bold, let your lies stand tall without the props of birds of a feather. there is no political truth.

baa sources are for the weak, they just mean someone else tells the same lies you do. be bold, let your lies stand tall without the props of birds of a feather. there is no political truth.

That reminds me:

Dick Cheney is going to be replaced with Dan Quayle on Bush's presidential ticket. Pass it on.

That reminds me:

Dick Cheney is going to be replaced with Dan Quayle on Bush's presidential ticket. Pass it on.


actually dick cheney(aka mr. burns) is going to have his brain transplanted into dan quayle's somewhat more virile body, but to avoid offending/frightening the pro-life anti-science religious right, he will from then on go by quayle's name. who's wife he sleeps with is yet to be determined, but he will continue his weekly treesomes with rummy and wolfy paul.

I'm not sure I believe that........

I'm sure posting your source for this claim just slipped your mind. I look forward to unbiased references and actual figures.
I'm coming to this thread late, Hack, so I don't know if anyone else has posted this, but here's a link (http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/07/294874.html) to a story with Hersh's claims about the sodomy and there are links to the video of the speech Hersh made to the ACLU where he made the claims.

Wouldnt surprise me at all. Seeing what the US military has done before, this is just another incident on the pile of crap the failures of the US military amount to.

I'm coming to this thread late, Hack, so I don't know if anyone else has posted this, but here's a link (http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/07/294874.html) to a story with Hersh's claims about the sodomy and there are links to the video of the speech Hersh made to the ACLU where he made the claims.
No, I was referencing TRA's claim that the military had a good ole fashioned gay-hunt, and kicked about a bunch of homosexuals who just happened to be the only people who spoke Arabic.

People, this is getting thoroughly investigated. Right now all we have are allegations. Allegations can be false too! Until this matter is investigated and the conclusions come out and they will, then I'll believe it.

If Americans are involved, then JAG (Judge Advocate General) will prosecute the criminals. We have STRICT guidelines on this. I would also like to know when this took place since Abu Ghrab is a closed prision.

Right now, speculation isn't going to help an arguement. Speculation would just basically start a flamewar and that is the last thing anyone needs in here. Let the investigation go to its conclusions.

I'm sure posting your source for this claim just slipped your mind. I look forward to unbiased references and actual figures.
it was on democracynow a few weeks ago--I remember cause I also annoy people in political chatrooms C&Ping in there

GWbush: "SADDAM HAS WMD...he either give them up or we BOMB the hell outa his people..."
.
Hans Blix: "this is getting thoroughly investigated. Right now all we have are allegations. Allegations can be false too! Until this matter is investigated and the conclusions come out and they will"

GWbush: "Fack You !!"

it was on democracynow a few weeks ago--I remember cause I also annoy people in political chatrooms C&Ping in there

you annoy people here too :D

People, this is getting thoroughly investigated. Right now all we have are allegations. Allegations can be false too!

...

Right now, speculation isn't going to help an arguement. Speculation would just basically start a [flame]war and that is the last thing anyone needs in here. Let the investigation go to its conclusions.



Gee... you sounded just like Hans Blix for a moment there.... ;)

Gee... you sounded just like Hans Blix for a moment there.... ;)

nice edits! har har! Now that I look at it.

Kills herself! LOL!!!

If this is true (and I'm hoping it's a big if), each soldier in the video should be courtmarshalled and given life imprisonment.

I also belive that their COs should be investigated to see if it was authorised or known about before the media got hold of it. If so, they should be courtmarshalled too.

Too often attrocities committed during war are palmed off as "the actions of a few bad eggs", when in reality, the structure of an organised military makes it almost impossible to believe that this could happen without someone in authority knowing about it.

You want the truth? You can't handle the truth!

Come on! Who doesn't want to rape little boys?

you annoy people here too :D
yeah -I seem to have this talent LOL

Come on! Who doesn't want to rape little boys?
Well...uh, I for one don't want to rape little boys...little girls however does sound intriguing...JUST KIDDING...uh, sounds like a good poll though...heh

uh, excuse me for being a dumbass and not reading all the posts, but what are little boys doing in prison?

uh, excuse me for being a dumbass and not reading all the posts, but what are little boys doing in prison?

Holding the women and children of people suspected of being involved in insurgency has been deemed an acceptable form of applying pressure.

Of course, now that the rumours of sexual misconduct are out there, any woman held in that prison will now likely have to fear for her life on the outside as any suspicion that she was violated could result in her death as an "honour killing"....

its true--its in the New Yorker

That must make it true then. jesus people, don't believe everything you read/hear.

That must make it true then. jesus people, don't believe everything you read/hear.
And at the same time, don't call everything you don't agree with a lie...not everything the republicans hear from the democrats is a lie...not everything the democrats hear from the republicans is a lie...most of what you hear from FOX news however...is a lie...

Holding the women and children of people suspected of being involved in insurgency has been deemed an acceptable form of applying pressure.
Who was the bright light that came up with that idea? Hey Zeus Christo...what did they do?

Unless one of you has is a major power in the US military forces or in a nice place in our government, nothing being talked about in here is going to matter. Plus with the elections beginning to come aroun the media is going to probably talk about nothing but whether the Green Party actually has a chance this time around, so no new info can be relied on to greatly. And with out new info we can't know whether they HAVE court-marshalled the little devils. But I will admit that I will be greatly surprised if nothing is done. Especially with all the publicity already on it. But perhaps the public has already forgotten.....

If these had been Grazhkjistani soldiers, I would have ordered them Publicly executed long ago.

--Supreme Overlord Vladimir I.

Unless one of you has is a major power in the US military forces or in a nice place in our government, nothing being talked about in here is going to matter.
Wrong.

Let's assume the reports are correct, and we do have American soldiers guilty of this. Why does everyone assume they won't be punished. Even the Abu Ghraib scandal was being taken care of. The story was "broken". The military found these sick pictures and within a couple days were investigating. When the Army gave the pictures to the media, the perps were well on their way to being court martialed.

its really bizarre that the lasting impression from the war in iraq in the eyes of the world is that of American soldiers as sadists and prison rapists. no longer will gay s&m pornos be set in turkish prisons or nazi concentration camps, the new chiche will be be "lets US mp and the pretty iraqi boy at abu garib". people will say things like, "man i got screwed on that deal, i feel like a fullujah shopkeeper after his first night in marine custody".

we are becoming the world's sick joke, we don't impress the world we don't even frighten them, we just disgust them.

Let's assume the reports are correct, and we do have American soldiers guilty of this. Why does everyone assume they won't be punished. Even the Abu Ghraib scandal was being taken care of. The story was "broken". The military found these sick pictures and within a couple days were investigating. When the Army gave the pictures to the media, the perps were well on their way to being court martialed.


Actually, that took months and the Military only really took action when the press found the pictures. The International Red Cross had been reporting violations and pressing for answers for months prior to that, and the army responded with a few procedureal changes, but with not much more aparent movement on the issue until they finally sent Taguba (sp?) over to investigate. Even after his report was filed, it was over a month until the first soldiers were charged. By then, the department had had the photos in their possession since before they even sent Taguba to write the report.


Which is not to say that the military would not have got around to doing anything about it, eventually. It's just that it seemed to be moving at glacial speed and might have been handled quietly to avoid the embarrassment.


Oh, and if you might recal - the army did NOT give the pics to the media until after a few had already surfaced. Indeed, Rumsfeld called the leak of the photos "criminal".

-Z-

Nothing was being done about these criminals because if the army moves too quickly, than the soldiers out on the feild who know nothing but that their comrades were all of a sudden court martialed, will begin to hesitate eliminating a threat. Soldiers will start to fear that their actions made in haste will land them a court martial. Also, if the public begins to see how much control we actually have over Iraqi lives and how little the common peoples' lives have actually changed (which the media acomplished this time) than support for the war goes down. This forces the government to either withdraw or pour in more funds. Neither of which an invading government wants to do when he is winning.

[QUOTE=Zeppistan]Holding the women and children of people suspected of being involved in insurgency ....[QUOTE]

So those Wives with their children ...are not guilty of breaking any law...

Unless one of you has is a major power in the US military forces or in a nice place in our government, nothing being talked about in here is going to matter. Plus with the elections beginning to come aroun the media is going to probably talk about nothing but whether the Green Party actually has a chance this time around, so no new info can be relied on to greatly. And with out new info we can't know whether they HAVE court-marshalled the little devils. But I will admit that I will be greatly surprised if nothing is done. Especially with all the publicity already on it. But perhaps the public has already forgotten.....

I'm sure the something will be done - a few sacrificial lambs (low ranking troops) will be sentenced to appease public outrage. But you can bet your bottom dollar that noone in authority will ever be brought to accountability.

I have enough friends in the militaries of various countries, including the US armed forces, to know that this kind of crap simply cannot happen on this scale without the knowledge, and most likely support, of commanding officers.

If it was Hersh who said it, it's probably BS. That guy's such a lying asshole it's not even funny.
Corollary: if it's Hersh who says it, and it's on democracynow, it IS 100% pure, unadulterated B.S.

It's got to kill you, Panhandlia, watching your party go down in flames like they are. Don't believe Hersh? Fine--that makes you an idiot, but whatever. But you ought to believe the Taguba report--not just the 50 page summary, but the entire 6,000 pages, excerpts of which can be found here (http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/world/iraq/abughraib/151108.pdf) and here (http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/world/iraq/abughraib/150427.pdf) hosted by the Washington Post. They're pdf files, so you'll need the reader, but hell, you won't even bother looking at them, will you Panhandlia? You're scared that you might find out the people you've idolized so long are actually wicked bastards.

Actually, that took months and the Military only really took action when the press found the pictures.
No, the military first discovered the photos January 14, 2004. Two days later, in the daily briefing the military has with the press over in Iraq, it was mentioned that possible abuses had occured at Abu Ghraib and an investigation was underway. The press pretty much ignored it.
Two months go by. The military investigates, and charges the dozen or so soldiers who committed crimes. The Army then TURNS OVER the photographs to the New York Times.
It was only after the press was GIVEN the photos was the ruckus raised.
Indeed, Rumsfeld called the leak of the photos "criminal".
-Z-
What Rumsfeld was calling "criminal" was the trickle of new photographs being printed by the Times and others for pure shock value without providing any new information.

Roach-Busters said:
"Dude, the guy's an asshole. Ever hear of the My Lai massacre? Hersh said over 500 civilians were killed, but, according to a Vietnamese (yes, Vietnamese) source, only about 100 people were killed, and only 20-25 were civilians, and most of them were caught in the line of fire, not deliberately killed. By the way, it was General Hoang Xuan Lam of ARVN that wrote the report. The South Vietnamese government said itself the massacre was BS. "

You may be interested in this article (but then maybe not):
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/vietnam/trenches/mylai.html

This was my generation's war so I consider myself well informed on this issue. I heard many first hand accounts from the guys who came back from Viet Nam- there were many more stories than My Lai to be told. I don't think any of us who have not fought in a war can comprehend the horrors that go on. When humans commit horrible crimes against each other every day right here in our own towns and cities, why is it so hard to believe that humans are capable of horrible crimes during war?

It's not that it's unbeliveable, it's just that it's hard to prevent such actions. I think the first step in preventing horrible acts in the face of war were actually writing the rules of war in print. But since there is almost never a nation who plays referee for a game of war, the rules are often violated and the offenders are usually given a slap on the wrist. In war, there is really only one rule:
The victor gets the spoils.

I'm betting on Iran if Bush is elected to 4 more years.. but Syria would be easier to take out.. so he might go after them instead. America in recent years, certainly since the Vietnam war have a history of going after the easy small defenseless countries.. I can't see them taking any one on that might actually put up a half decent fight.

I don't disagree, but is there anything of worth in Syria to Bush's controller's minds?

this is aweful but I am not suprised to hear it.