March 07, 2004
PREVAILING OPINION QUESTIONED
Guantanamo Bay: hellish outpost of the imperial Bush war machine, or the best holiday destination this side of Disneyland? Teenage former inmates, now returned to Afghanistan, offer their opinions:
The food in the camp was delicious, the teaching was excellent, and his warders were kind. "Americans are good people, they were always friendly, I don't have anything against them," he said. "If my father didn't need me, I would want to live in America."
Asadullah is even more sure of this. "Americans are great people, better than anyone else," he said, when found at his elder brother's tiny fruit and nut shop in a muddy backstreet of Kabul. "Americans are polite and friendly when you speak to them. They are not rude like Afghans. If I could be anywhere, I would be in America. I would like to be a doctor, an engineer _ or an American soldier."
As The Guardian’s James Astill notes:
This might seem to jar with the prevailing opinion of Guantanamo among human rights groups.
Human rights groups were wrong? What kind of crazy world are we living in?
(Via Meyer Raphael)
Posted by Tim Blair at March 7, 2004 11:23 PMObviously the Grauniad has gone over to the other side. I suppose that blood money they're receiving from their BFEE* corporate paymasters helps them sleep better at night.
At least the Sydney Morning Herald still carries the torch.
* For those not familiar with Democratic Underground lingo, BFEE = Bush Family Evil Empire. It is not used ironically by these people.
Posted by: Jeff B. at March 8, 2004 at 12:30 AM"Americans are polite and friendly when you speak to them. They are not rude like Afghans."
This is an outrageous slur on those of us from New York! No damn Afghani is going to outrude us!
Posted by: Lewis at March 8, 2004 at 12:38 AMClearly this is only evidence of the brutal torture and brainwashing that Americans do. Or so Amnesty Intnl will probably claim.
Posted by: Mike Rentner at March 8, 2004 at 12:42 AMI'm guessing these are the same "human rights" groups that opposed removing Saddam from power and stopping the toture and killings?
Yeah, they have so much credibility right now.
The Imperialist, Nazi-Like forces I'm told are ruling my country must have subjected these people to countless hours of torture and brainwashing to cause them to make such statements.
I'm sure the forces of good (various activists) will prevail in the end and explain how things 'really' are in Gitmo and how these people were forced to make such false statements to save their own lives.
Perhaps we'll see an investigation by Sean Penn or Michael Moore. They should be able to get to the 'truth'.
Posted by: Chris Josephson at March 8, 2004 at 01:02 AMThis might seem to jar with the prevailing opinion of Guantanamo among human rights groups.But they'll manage to ignore it. Posted by: Barbara Skolaut at March 8, 2004 at 01:07 AM
Don't worry. Out of the whole Gitmo population, there will be at least one unreconstructed Islamo-boob who will happily spin tales of persecution that the Concerned People will latch onto to prove their prejudices. Just like foreigners base their opinions of race relations in America on the bitching-and-moaning of some lazy losers.
Jeff, I wonder if the DU people remember who first popularized the phrase "Evil Empire"? You'd think they of all people wouldn't want to sully their keyboards with Reagan rhetoric :).
Eh, probably doesn't matter so much when your memories last about as long as a mayfly's.
Posted by: Sonetka at March 8, 2004 at 05:08 AMSoon we will have more terrorist as they go home and tell people of the wonderful sleeping areas and falafull served in American beach resorts in Cuba.
Your idiots. They were detained. Then released. Why were they released? Was it because they were evil terrorist they were released? No Idiots. It was because they couldn't find any charges that would stick. So no matter how good you Idiots may think any prison is, they were still in prison. Please spin on this.
Posted by: IXLNXS at March 8, 2004 at 05:23 AMIXLNXS: Please spin on this
Gee.... Ok....
They were detained on suspicion of criminal activity and were released because they were determined to be innocent...
Detention without trial? Yes, this was a security issue not a matter of civil law.
Clear enough or do I need to get some crayons?
Posted by: RainDog at March 8, 2004 at 05:42 AMGet crayons.
Then justify prison for the innocent one more time.
Exactly how many of the 9-11 highjackers were Afghani?
So in a huge operation undertook in Afghanastan the best they could come up with to arrest were some teenagers who they eventually let go?
Who exactly was it America was attacking in Afghanastan? The Talaban? Al Quieda? Osama Bin Laden?
Oil. Pipelines. Lies.
Posted by: IXLNXS at March 8, 2004 at 05:57 AMThere's no teachers' union at Guantanamo. ``The teaching was excellent.''
Posted by: Ron Hardin at March 8, 2004 at 06:02 AMWho exactly was it America was attacking in Afghanastan? The Talaban? Al Quieda? Osama Bin Laden?
Well, certainly not "Afghanastan" or "Talaban" but perhaps "Afghanistan" and "Taliban"
Oil. Pipelines. Lies.
Yep, the meme about a pipeline certainly is a lie.
Is it built yet? They'd better hurry!
I don't know if IXLNXS is a joke or not, so I'm kinda divided as to whether I should respond or not. What do the rest of you RWDB:s say?
/Döbeln
-Stabil som fan!
Posted by: Döbeln at March 8, 2004 at 06:19 AMThanks Quentin.
Where would good discussion be without those who fight for perfect grammer.
After all one must be civilized, must'nt one.
http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=slv1-&ei=UTF-8&p=John+Maresca%2c+vice+president+of+UNOCAL%2c+pipeline
Now you could google "John Maresca, vice president of UNOCAL" and see what comes up, but guessing your just another idiot who lies on purpose, or refuses to hear facts guesses you won't.
Oh as to correcting my spelling.
Phuq Ewe.
Posted by: IXLNXS at March 8, 2004 at 06:24 AMDobeln,
Wrestling with a pig only makes you dirty and the pig happy. It's especially unwise when said pigs have romantic inclinations towards other species.
Trying to match wits with half-wits is like trying to nail smoke to a log: there is nothing there to deal with, it's pointless, and if you're careless you're likely to burn yourself.
Posted by: Don Eyres at March 8, 2004 at 07:02 AMGo read IXLNXS's webpage, then be sad for him/her/Animal Farm hog. Keep on keepin' on, Ixxie! Or rather, ILBCNU!
Posted by: Screamapiller at March 8, 2004 at 07:03 AMAmnesty International & the rest have been proved WRONG again!!!!!Totally agree with u Mark & Mike!
Posted by: BigTitsGirlie at March 8, 2004 at 07:04 AMWow!
Even more min numbing debate using facts.
Wrestling with pigs? Yeah thats on topic. Or not since the topic deals with Islamics who avoid pigs. Maybe substitute a goat and it'll kind of be on topic.
Wow! take a jab at my web page. I am hurt. really.
Let's try some facts. Or maybe opinions. But lets try some. Or is your last defense the same kind you would find on any schoolyard?
http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/7828143.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp
"The U.S. military had kept the boys segregated from other suspected terrorists at Guantanamo and had made the squat cement-block building where they were kept a showcase stop for visiting reporters to illustrate the prison's humane treatment."
Well. back it up with facts. Statements, or at least something better than name calling.
Posted by: IXLNXS at March 8, 2004 at 07:09 AMWent to his web-site.
Why am I glad that we only have the top half of that picture?
Almost tempted to raise some money to buy him some wipes to get the spittle off the screen and keyboard.
PeterB
Posted by: PeterB at March 8, 2004 at 07:10 AM"Your idiots. They were detained. Then released. Why were they released? Was it because they were evil terrorist they were released? No Idiots. It was because they couldn't find any charges that would stick. So no matter how good you Idiots may think any prison is, they were still in prison. Please spin on this."
Whew!! I was worried I was living in some alternate universe when I read the article in the Guardian. Nice to know things haven't changed. There are still people who just don't get it. Wonderful!! My world still makes sense.
I don't know what I'd do if such people were to actually get a clue as to what's going on. It would remove a lot of the entertainment I get from reading such nonsense.
Posted by: Chris Josephson at March 8, 2004 at 07:13 AM"Not that Asadullah saw much of the Caribbean island. During his 14-month stay, he went to the beach only a couple of times - a shame, as he loved to snorkel."
Yeah they caught some bad old terrorist.
"The boys never spoke to Guantanamo's other prisoners - "lots of Arabs and Afghans," according Naqibullah."
But they never got to hang out with the other guys did they?
"The boys played football every day, and sometimes basketball and volleyball with their guards."
After all they were too busy with other things pertaining to Americas national security.
They were jailed. Shouldn't have been. Then spoiled and treated better than other prisoners there. Then released for political motives.
Posted by: IXLNXS at March 8, 2004 at 07:18 AMI don't know what's more sad; that IXLNXS might be serious, or that you think he might be serious.
Posted by: aaron at March 8, 2004 at 07:25 AMCouple of quick points:
1.) When you are taken prisoner on a battlefield, it's usually not because you have committed any crime - rather it's a way of seeing to that the captured parties don't persist in fighting you, killing your soldiers, etc. You are released when it's deemed unlikely that you will pose a threat to your captor, not when "justice has been served", etc. etc.
2.) The Taliban and their allies used and still use child soldiers. This results in children being taken prisoner.
3.) The problem in Afghanistan wasn't the Afghans themselves, but rather the groups of mainly Saudi Jihadist terrorist groups that had set up camp there, with the aid of the local Taliban militia. There were plenty of saudis on the 9/11 flights, most of them having trained in Afghanistan.
4.) Regarding the pipeline theories, etc, it says more about it's proponents than anything else. Faced with a huge, big, super-reason to go to war in Afghanistan (Had Bush declined to do so, he might as well have resigned right away - the people would have run him out on a rail...), they decide to come up with some obscure pipeline-related theory (Since there is no oil in-theatre...), in order to preserve their precious image of the United States as The Great Satan. Sad, if nothing else...
/ Döbeln
-Stabil som fan!
Posted by: Döbeln at March 8, 2004 at 07:27 AM"Wow!
Even more min numbing debate using facts.
Wrestling with pigs? Yeah thats on topic. Or not since the topic deals with Islamics who avoid pigs. Maybe substitute a goat and it'll kind of be on topic.
Wow! take a jab at my web page. I am hurt. really.
Let's try some facts. Or maybe opinions. But lets try some. Or is your last defense the same kind you would find on any schoolyard?"
Aren't you the same idiot that threatened to kill, cook and eat Australians? Or was that a different combination of I X L N and S?
Posted by: Sortelli at March 8, 2004 at 07:30 AMaaron, yeah, we need some troll sniffing dogs or something.
It is getting harder and harder to tell the people who pretend to be illiterate moonbats for laughs from the actual illiterate moonbats. My current theory is that the jokers don't stay in character for so long (I know I can't).
Posted by: Sortelli at March 8, 2004 at 07:34 AMinxsl -Then justify prison for the innocent one more time.
Exactly how many of the 9-11 highjackers were Afghani?
none to my knowledge
a good deal of them trained there though
inxsl- So in a huge operation undertook in Afghanastan the best they could come up with to arrest were some teenagers who they eventually let go?
i think they arrested more than these 2
i heard it was over 600 actually
inxls - Who exactly was it America was attacking in Afghanastan? The Talaban? Al Quieda? Osama Bin Laden?
al quada who were sheltered by the taliban
gee you really need to read up on your recent history - it seems you cant get a single fact right
IXLNXS is proof positive that when someone invents a nebulous make-believe entity like the "Bush Family Evil Empire" any kind of nonsense can be manipulated to fit in. So which is it, IXLNXS, shiny side in or shiny side out?
Trying to match wits with half-wits is like trying to nail smoke to a logBrilliant. Why, that's even better than the "Trying to teach a pig to sing" line. Posted by: Spiny Norman at March 8, 2004 at 07:39 AM
"Aren't you the same idiot that threatened to kill, cook and eat Australians? Or was that a different combination of I X L N and S?"
Look. The sensless killing of Australians is okay. When you look at all the Australians consume, and what they have produced. All that food and oil does not add up when your basic exports are Paul Hogan, and, well Paul Hogan 2.
If it came down to survival I would gladly throw a few Aussies on the Barbi. Shame is we are closer to that reality due to THEEVILTHATISTHEBUSHEMPIRE, but rather the evil that is corporations working towards the bottom line as any corporation should.
Trouble with eating Australians is how little meat you have once you clean all the shit out.
Posted by: IXLNXS at March 8, 2004 at 07:54 AMWhen looking through his website and seeing his reasons for supporting Dean (he's a "higher up") I thought this guy IXLNSX was just another immature leftie moonbat,
but I think someone needs to check him out.
From his website.
"You stop killing innocents, and start killing the rich assholes who are making these rules and deals, and the world will see you as freedom fighters rather than cowards. The IRA, that Irish group, they had this one bomber who could take out a single person in a motorcade, riding in the second car, without killing anyone else. Learn to do that and the world will show you some respect."
It's in the context of why the terrorists are getting a bad name.
This guy is seriously creepy.
Sorry, that didn't work so well, try this:
http://home.comcast.net/~incubus52/terrorism1.html
Doeblen: Re IXy-baby, never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and it annoys the pig (as evidenced by his repeated posts).:-p
Not that Asadullah saw much of the Caribbean island. During his 14-month stay, he went to the beach only a couple of times - a shame, as he loved to snorkel.He loved to snorkel? He sure as hell didn't learn that in Afganistan, so apparently the Great Satan tortures its enemy combatant prisoners by teaching them to be beach bunnies. Weird. Posted by: Barbara Skolaut at March 8, 2004 at 08:06 AM
Another article on this subject can be found here
I hope that link works... it's on the telegraph from Feb 8th
"Mohammed and his fellow juvenile detainees returned to Afghanistan last week, after the intervention of the International Committee of the Red Cross. His words of praise for the American soldiers in Guantanamo Bay echo those of Faiz Mohammed, an elderly Afghan farmer who was detained at the base for eight months before being released in October 2002.
"They treated us well. We had enough food. I didn't mind [being detained] because they took my old clothes and gave me new clothes," said the farmer, who was partially deaf. "
"The US authorities insist that age plays no role in deciding who constitutes a threat. "Age is not a determining factor in detention. We detain enemy combatants who engaged in armed conflict against our forces or provided support to those fighting against us," said a Pentagon spokesman.
Another US government official contradicted Mohammed's claims that he was entirely innocent when detained. The official said last week that one of the three boys had told of being conscripted into an anti-American militia group; a second said that he was abducted by the Taliban and forced to train and fight; while the third was studying in an extremist mosque and captured while preparing to obtain weapons."
Posted by: Dash at March 8, 2004 at 08:10 AMDash -
"They treated us well. We had enough food. I didn't mind [being detained] because they took my old clothes and gave me new clothes," said the farmer, who was partially deaf. "
Isn't that Cultural Imperialism?
/sarcasm
Posted by: Roger Bournival at March 8, 2004 at 08:14 AMSpiny Norman said, "IXLNXS is proof positive that when someone invents a nebulous make-believe entity like the "Bush Family Evil Empire" any kind of nonsense can be manipulated to fit in. So which is it, IXLNXS, shiny side in or shiny side out?"
Spiny, isn't that what makes people like IXLNXS, by definition, conspiracy theorist? No matter what the evidence, they'll spin it to match their preconceived notions...
I decided to take a stab at conspiracy theorizing, because it seems like so much fun. The result is a conspiracy theory regarding Haiti.
Here goes ... I think American democrats, knowing that both the Bush and Chirac administrations were united in their opinions about Aristide, told Aristide to hang in as long as possible and only at the last moment should he ask for American assistance in leaving Haiti. Then once safe, the democrats wanted Aristide to claim the Bush administration kidnapped him and forced him out of Haiti.
The point is to use this as fodder against Bush for the coming American election.
We know that congressional democrats, through the Congressional Black Caucus, were in constant contact with Aristide. Therefore there was plenty of opportunity for democrats to plan and carry out such a plan.
As well, even before anyone knew where Aristide had gone, American supporters of Aristide were already claiming that it was a coup by the Bush administration. All the accusations seem scripted and rehersed as though democrats in the United States knew exactly what had happened and knew exactly what to say.
Oh boy, this is fun. Let's add another layer of conspiracy.
Now that Aristide and congressional democrats have successfully started this "coup" meme, they're now instigating protests in Port-au-Prince so as to paint American forces as occupiers of Haiti.
Maybe some other people would like to add another layer to this conspiracy theory.
Any way, in trying to stay true to the conspiracy theorist ethos, I'm now going to say that, "The seriousness of these alligations warrants a full scale investigation!"
Posted by: Dwayne at March 8, 2004 at 08:34 AMWhy waste time with trolls like IXLNXS? He's an angry, frustrated sociopath doomed to misery and irrelevence as are thousands of others like him. There's little you can do to him that's worse than the lonely hell of his existence.
Especially hillareous is the 'oil pipeline' supposedly built across a country with no oil. Maybe he means the gas pipeline UNICOL were looking into befor discarding? Yeah that's a much more pausible reason to go to war than sep11. After all who even noticed? Those buildings were old and would probably have needed to be knocked down sometime anyway.
Fucking moron.
As for this story I was a little concerned to hear the kid's dad had racked up such debts (5000 dollars or so) looking for the kid. This is a serious hardship for poor people, couldn't he get some compensation from the yanks? Jesus it's five grand. The pentagon spends that flushing a toilet.
Posted by: Amos at March 8, 2004 at 09:19 AMI've been very uneasy about the situation in Guantanamo Bay - you know locking people up for 2+ years without charge, denying them legal access, using sneaky legalistic trickery to bypass the Geneva Convention, etc, etc, but now that we know that (compared with Afghanistan) there at least a couple of inmates who think the food there is good and the wardens are kind, well that makes everything alright! I shouldn't have worried!
Yeah, it seems that IXLPLXILWIX is a different breed than our usual crew. Even Miss Divide seems quaint in comparison. I wonder if they're going to take IXLXMASDFWTF's side or if they'll distance themselves from the violent cannibal faux-hippie dunce.
Posted by: Sortelli at March 8, 2004 at 09:36 AMPoor Tom can't understand why people have been locked up in Guantanamo for over 2 years without charges. Because it's a war, and their side is still fighting. Not very effectively, some may say, but (a) they have not surrendered, and (b) some say that they still control large swatches of Afghanistan, at least after dark.
It's really very simple. When Mullah Omar and Osama bin Laden (or whoever take their places if and when they are killed) come out of hiding, surrender, and order their men to lay down their weapons, the war will be over -- assuming of course that their men do in fact lay down their weapons and begin pursuing peaceful means to their political goals. Mullah Omar and Osama bin Laden and a few of their high-level henchmen will then be prosecuted as war criminals, and the rest will be freed. Until then, the war continues, and there is no obligation whatsoever under international law to release prisoners just so they can rejoin the enemy army and take up the fight again. Those released so far are the ones we are pretty sure will not do so.
Posted by: Dr. Weevil at March 8, 2004 at 10:00 AMIXLNXLXLXLSNBPSZSLKHPOWBAMBIFFBANGBOOM spaketh:
"Oil. Pipelines. Lies."
Dumb. Ass. Moron.
Posted by: Andrea Harris at March 8, 2004 at 10:02 AMTom said, "I've been very uneasy about the situation in Guantanamo Bay - you know locking people up for 2+ years without charge, denying them legal access, using sneaky legalistic trickery to bypass the Geneva Convention, etc, etc, but now that we know that (compared with Afghanistan) there at least a couple of inmates who think the food there is good and the wardens are kind, well that makes everything alright! I shouldn't have worried!"
To be charged implies they committed a crime, but that was not the case. No one claimed there was a specific crime any of them had committed. Instead, they were deemed enemy combatants and treated almost as if they were soldiers.
The only reason they weren't considered soldiers was due to the fact these people weren't fighting for a specific nation. In fact, they were only fighting against a specific nation - The United States.
As for "sneaky legalistic trickery", there's absolutely nothing duplicitous or underhanded about declaring these people as enemy combants not linked to any specific nation, and subsequently ruling that these men do not fall under the Geneva Convention. In fact, if the United States wanted to be shifty, you'd never know there were enemy combatants held at GITMO.
I'll tell you what "sneaky legalistic trickery" is and that is defense lawyers using technicalities to win or overturn trials of these people, even when the evidence is pretty solid.
Posted by: Dwayne at March 8, 2004 at 10:03 AMAsadullah seems to be an astonishingly impressionable fellow. Not long ago, some other bastards managed to convince him it was sensible to live in a cave and get shot at by Americans.
Now he likes his cage.
Clearly, the chap is a slice or three short of a full loaf. Those of you taking his warblings with any seriousness are presumably similarly challenged in the slice department.
Posted by: Nemesis at March 8, 2004 at 10:28 AMYoung ones are indeed easily impressionable. Cement blocks, pistol grips, clubs, boots and fists have left many impressions on kids not so lucky as Asadullah. You know, the ones who get detained by the other guys who are the lesser evil to the Bush Family Empire.
Let's not focus on them, though, far more important that our Is are crossed and our Ts are dotted, lest we accidentally feed and educate a kid plucked from the battlefield as opposed to mowing him down good and proper.
Posted by: Sortelli at March 8, 2004 at 10:42 AMI've uncovered some shocking images which help support these ex-Gitmo prisoners' tales of horror.
Posted by: Randal Robinson at March 8, 2004 at 11:19 AMI think IXLNSX is a new kind of troll sent to further discredit other leftist moonbats. They don't need the help.
Posted by: aaron at March 8, 2004 at 11:28 AMOh please, anyone who can recite the War in Afghanistan was done for the sake of a minor pipeline, still not even started, definitely has had an illegal lobotomy performed on him.
Posted by: Jakester at March 8, 2004 at 11:34 AMNemesis? Do you like your cave? Are you getting enough bananas and fresh water in your trough? Seriously, I'm concerned. Tell me if the keepers are neglecting you and I'll get on the phone to PETA* right away.
*People Eating Tasty Animals.
Posted by: Andrea Harris at March 8, 2004 at 11:56 AMI am still waiting for the "brutal Afghan winter" all the "gravely concerned" Human Rights organizations and other NGOs warned us about.
Posted by: perfectsense at March 8, 2004 at 11:57 AMizzie i luv u bush sux lol!!1!1! yr site rox w00t
Posted by: Screamapiller at March 8, 2004 at 11:57 AM"Not long ago, some other bastards managed to convince him it was sensible to live in a cave and get shot at by Americans."
Yeah, probably by telling him that Americans are all monsters who just wanted kill everyone, take over the country and "build a pipeline".
(lol..I just realised how much that sounded like IXLNSX)
He would have been one of the poster boys for the anti-america crowd - you know, poor innocent CHILD being held in a cage by the evil overlords and all that.
Now with the honesty of a child he's managed to horrify the more biggoted moonbats like you by telling it like it REAllY is instead of how you wanted it to be seen.
So now of course, he's suddenly just a bit of a moron who doesn't realise the Americans sort of 'tricked' him into believing he was treated well? ....pathetic...
i guess things improved at gtmo. last year, i read about some afghan who complained that americans DIDN"T serve him his favourite egg-plant, while he was locked-up. poor chap mistook detention camp for club med...and gained 10kgs after americans de-wormed him. BUT THEY DIDN"Y SERVE ANY EGG-PLANT!!!
obvios human rights violation.
Thanks Nemisis for that handy example of the casually sleazy dishonesty of leftist fuckheads like you: If the kid had said he was tortured he woulds have been the Infallible Truth-Teller Exposing Bush's Lies, but because he speaks well of the Americans, he's a village idiot not worth out attention.
And for your information, moron, he wasn't in the Taliban which is why he was released.
This poor kid has had a glimps of a better world, education, a chance at advancement and happyness, only to be returned to a medieval village to push cows around for a living. You, you rich, white middle-class spoilt little FUCK, take all this for granted whil you sit on your lazy fat ass and complain you're being oppressed by the military industrial complex.
And yet this bright, motivated kid has to go live in a mud hut... and we're stuck with the likes of you.
You smug, worthless, spoilt fucking child.
Posted by: Amos at March 8, 2004 at 01:01 PMOT: TIM??????
Via Lucianne:
Public faith in the legal system is quickly weakened by decisions like this, writes Paul Sheehan.
Packed in silk and horsehair, two judges, Keith Mason and James Wood, managed, at a single stroke, to damage the public's faith in the judiciary, impugn the professionalism of the Crown prosecutor's office and psychologically brutalise a young woman who had already been brutalised by criminals. She left the court in tears last Thursday.....
Posted by: Sandy P. at March 8, 2004 at 01:16 PMRock on, Amos. Say, regarding your earlier post about getting some cash to the kid's family, I'm with you on that. How do you think we could go about that? I'm thinking that it might be easier to just send some of my own somewhere instead of asking the Pentagon to spare a flush, does anyone have information on how we might do something like that?
Posted by: Sortelli at March 8, 2004 at 01:52 PMSortelli said, "Rock on, Amos. Say, regarding your earlier post about getting some cash to the kid's family, I'm with you on that. How do you think we could go about that? I'm thinking that it might be easier to just send some of my own somewhere instead of asking the Pentagon to spare a flush, does anyone have information on how we might do something like that?"
Sortelli, have you thought about checking with Chief Wiggles?
Posted by: Dwayne at March 8, 2004 at 02:00 PMFind their full names and city. Then find someone you trust to deliver it. Maybe a military officer.
Posted by: aaron at March 8, 2004 at 02:03 PM[RE: OT] Sandy P: were they really packed in silk and horsehair? That must have been something to see. [/RE: OT]
Posted by: Andrea Harris at March 8, 2004 at 02:18 PMWhy Does Moir have, in his cartoon featuring a girl killed during the war, Alexander Downer holding a pistol?
A reader may come to the conclusion that Downer deliberately shot the girl, portraying our troops as a bunch of war criminals and ... wait, maybe that was the intention. Never mind.
Posted by: Andjam at March 8, 2004 at 02:35 PM"Since it is not eating human flesh per se that is wrong, what is it that is wrong, if anything, with raising humans or other creatures for food? Is it the raising, or the killing, or is it both?"
Burp!
"The IRA, that Irish group, they had this one bomber who could take out a single person in a motorcade, riding in the second car, without killing anyone else. Learn to do that and the world will show you some respect"
As in the IRA had a beef with a group of individuals. Often targeting those individuals. Rather than target a building. One filled with people much like yourself. Instead aiming for a very important politician who bragged no bomber could ever get him. The laser timer on the device was a marvel in engineering.
Hmmm revolution. Good or bad. Weren't those nasty folks throwing tea into Boston Harbor terrorist? It's the winners who write the history, or at least pay for it being written, and as such they do not write down they were terrorist, but revolutionaries. Sounds better.
Long ago, say in the 40's late early 50's Israel was still occupied, and the British were warned of a bomb in a hotel they used for daily buisness. They stayed and many died as a result of that bomb. The bomb was planted by Israelis. Who are now considered heroes in their country.
Cuban dissidents in Miami often help finance operations to bomb places in Cuba, but to hear it told they are Freedom fighters. Unless your doing the hearing from Cuba. The point was it is all a matter of perspective.
What sauce would go good with an Aussie by the way.
"there is really nothing extravagant at all in contending that sometimes cannibalism is perfectly right: any extravagance is due to the fact that the admissible cases lead, naturally and coherently, once human chauvinism is properly left behind, to much more controversial cases."
People Eating Tasty Australians
Posted by: IXLNXS at March 8, 2004 at 04:30 PMWhen "freedom fighters" attack their own citizens as well as occupying forces, they cease to be revolutionaries and become terrorists. The Boston Tea Party participants didn't kill anyone that night. The only ones that were "terrorized" that night were shop owners who worried about lost profits. American Revolution soldiers didn't attack their own citizens. The British, on the other hand, were a different story.
IXLNXS, you are a sad and misguided fool. You have my pity.
Posted by: david at March 8, 2004 at 04:57 PM"You have my pity."
And you have mine. You speak for all revolutionaries actions, when we all know at least a few of those American Heroes were killing a few extra here and there.
Where I showed a historic event. One that actually happened, and could be referenced. You blanket all those who participated in the Tea Party as being on good behavior.
Is it not obvious that the victor writes the history? If that is not obvious to you, then we need go no further.
Posted by: IXLNXS at March 8, 2004 at 05:10 PMIf we make him say his name backwards, will he return to his own dimension?
Posted by: Big Dog at March 8, 2004 at 05:30 PMBig Dog - LOL, I kept thinking that.
IXLPLXTZ, seriously, get over your big, fat cannibal ass. I don't blame aaron for thinking that you're a faker, because you seem just too flamingly ignorant to be real with your absurd moral equivalence, poor spelling, and gullible beliefs. You are an embarrassment. You are the "strawman" that the left wishes to deny the existence of.
The American revolutionaries were just that, revolutionaries. They would not have been labelled terrorists even if we were still a British colony. Guerillas, yes, revolutionaries, yes, terrorists, no. They did not practice the wholesale and intentional slaughter of British civilians as political leverage. No suicide bombers went to England, got it? Pointing out that there was a war and that surely, as in all wars, innocent people were hurt and violent wrongs were done, is a poor smokescreen to make your idiot excuses.
It's curious that you are willing to justify and even praise the use of violence to achieve an otherwise impossible end, such as the overthrow of the EEEEEEVIL CORPORASHUNS. Where most people who opposed the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan did so out of an opposition to war, you are simply on the other side. All while sucking up our resources and wasting our time and living our good life while cheering for the destruction of the system that has coddled you since you were squirted out of your mother's smelly womb.
And yet, despite the evil oppression and the lies, you are allowed to be this way. Be thankful that we are more graceful than you are, you who would laughingly slaughter and cook the Australians for wasting your precious resources and giving you only Paul Hogan in return...
G'wan, Mr. Revolutionary, pick up your gun and hustle off to Afghanistan and fight the good fight against that pipeline. Maybe, if you're lucky, you'll be matyred in Gitmo and you can cry about your rights while dining on eggplant. If you're not lucky, you might find out that evil capitalist consumer socities make better laser-guided bombs than your heroes do.
Posted by: Sortelli at March 8, 2004 at 06:30 PMYou blanket all those who participated in the Tea Party as being on good behavior.
Let me explain this to you:
Throwing tea into a harbour, followed by armed conflict between armies in pursuit of independence: Legitimate cause
Flying a plane into twin towers in order to kill as many people as possible for no cause except terror: Terrorism
Posted by: Quentin George at March 8, 2004 at 06:30 PMJesus I don't believe you people are actually humoring a pathetic wank like INXS. His kind are dime-a-dozen on the net, angry loners ranting at an indifferent universe.
He says 'outrageous' things to get attention, like a five-year old, surely this is obvious? Plus he's an amature. Caniballism? Is this the best he can do?
Ignore him, like I said, nothing you can do or say to him is worse than the hell he lives in, believe me. Now he's a pudgly juvenile wanker with only the internet for a friend, in ten years he'll be a pudgier, balding middle age angry loner in a basement and then, late one insomniac night, in some final extremity, crushed by the wasteland of his squandered life and the horrific realisation that things are never going to get any better, he'll pull out that gun and blow his head off.
Problem solved, though not for the paramedics who unpry his door two weeks later to deal with the mess after neighbors complain of the smell.
As for getting some cash to the kid's dad, sounds like a job for the blogosphere, 5 grand isn't much to raise. Chief wiggles would be a good guy to ask, just for advice on proper channels.
Posted by: Amos at March 8, 2004 at 07:16 PMThe Independent and Human Rights Watch are on the case. Brad Adams says Guantanamo (the horrible type) is being replicated all over Afghanistan. The article also does a Kerry on American soldiers.
Independent - US forces accused of looting, torture and death in Afghanistan
The IRA did blow up buildings in England with the intention of killing innocents for political leverage. That is terrorism. Financed in many cases by U.S. citizens.
But that was before 9/11. So i guess it doesn't count.
Posted by: still finding schrapnel at March 8, 2004 at 07:29 PMSigh. Fred Boness, your link isn't working. I don't know what you left out, but here is all that remained, so I can't fix it:
<a>Independent - US forces accused of looting, torture and death in Afghanistan
</a>
Please review the instructions in red at the top of this box. They aren't that difficult. Or just paste the url in straight, with no html tags.
Posted by: Andrea Harris at March 8, 2004 at 08:17 PMIndependent - US forces accused of looting, torture and death in Afghanistan
Posted by: Fred Boness at March 8, 2004 at 08:49 PMWell it looked ok in preview before, sigh, because I checked, sigh. It works now, sigh. Go figure, sigh.
Posted by: Fred Boness at March 8, 2004 at 08:53 PMI dunno, Amos. I think sometimes we should respond to cranks like ol IXLWITZXIT, if only to shatter their desperate illusion that they're putting one over on us by posting gibberish and trying to take the high road afterwards.
But mostly, I really like mangling his stupid handle.
Posted by: Sortelli at March 8, 2004 at 09:01 PMI dunno, I read MZXTLP's stuff, and I think: Hmmm. Mom's basement, his own bedroom, Heavy Metal posters, Game Boy, pimple cream smell all over, pasty complexion, bad knees and weak ankles from too much weight and too little exercise, half-eaten pan of lasagna (made by Mom) on desk, dirty clothes all over room, low lighting, multiple phone lines (courtesy of Mom, who still loves her 35-year-old little darling), slack, drooling mouth, moderately noisy mouth breathing, dog-eared copy of The Anarchist's Cookbook, hair that looks trimmed by a weed-whacker, probably still in pajamas (with little footies, drop-seat, and cute animals) -- you know, LOSER. Just intelligent to vaguely understand his situation and just lazy enough not to do anything about it and therefore angry that the rest of us don't love and care for him as much as Mommy. He'll go on like this for years. If Mom leaves him enough money when she dies so he doesn't get evicted, who knows how long this can last? Eventually, found, after many days worth of junk mail piles up, slumped over his keyboard, dead of a massive heart attack, still angry at the world.
Posted by: JorgXMcKie at March 9, 2004 at 12:11 AMAssuming, for just a second, that in some twisted version of reality American Revolution soldiers intentionally fired on innocent civilians, they did not do so at the behest of their leadership. Al Queda, the Taliban, and the IRA are a different matter.
Posted by: david at March 9, 2004 at 01:23 AMThe IRA did blow up buildings in England with the intention of killing innocents for political leverage. That is terrorism. Financed in many cases by U.S. citizens.
I've been against that too. Whats your point?
Posted by: Quentin George at March 9, 2004 at 06:19 AMYeah, America has Naill's as well. Like that was a surprise. I'd nail his (IXYWIT) missus but...whoof!!
Posted by: Chief Bastard at March 9, 2004 at 09:46 AMI think that was directed to IXLWKNKMSDMASDF and his laser guided super accurate IRA terrorist love poems.
Posted by: Sortelli at March 9, 2004 at 09:46 AMThe lad was unlucky, a few more years of detention in Gitmo and he might very well have walked out with a professional qualification.And good on him if it had been possible.
Posted by: d at March 9, 2004 at 12:05 PMThank you, Fred. Much better. Love the vagueness of the article -- it says Human Rights Watch is accusing American forces of all sorts of atrocities, but gives no actual examples, except for one farmer who was supposedly killed by Americans during a battle, but considering that he was shot in the back, could just have been killed by someone the Americans are attacking. Perhaps we should evacuate the entire country of civilians so we and Al Qaeda can fight it out without any nasty injuries to any supposed "innocents." I'm sure the members of Human Rights Watch and employees of the Independent wouldn't mind bunking a few millions displaced Afghans for an indeterminate amount of time.
Posted by: Andrea Harris at March 9, 2004 at 02:14 PMYo david,
It **REALLY** galls me to offer any sort of support to IXLATWAKNMAWILLY, but unfortunately the American Revolution did include a couple of atrocities by the Continental Army and militia. As I recall it mainly took the form of the occasional killing of civilians (although only one full-fledged massacre to the best of my knowledge) and destruction of property (including homes). Have a look at Hugh Bicheno's "Rebels & Redcoats", which came out last year. Needless to say, the British Army was hardly lily-white in its conduct either. In any event, I don't think IXLINMYOWNLITLWORLD can take comfort from this. The incidents described may well have been excesses, or breaches of the Laws of War, but as they weren't part of an overall plan of warfare, I don't think the combatants can be classed as 'terrorists' in any meaningful sense at all.
But I think Amos is right. Why are we even responding to this fuckedup little troll?
Posted by: National Party Headcase at March 9, 2004 at 05:25 PM