Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mantus
- The material is obviously biased. How else would one write an article with an aim of condeming an individual or a group with crimes? Yet it being biased doesn't necisarilly mean it's suspect nor tainted.
|
But if your bias gets in the way of truth, it definately taints your efforts. As the above article demonstrates.
Quote:
|
- Obviously the above article could be false. Yet this is not the first such case made against the curent administration. IF this matterial holds any truth it's certainly not a good thing. Thus it's worth discusing.
|
But part of the discussion should be about the validity of the claims. It seems many people here don't want that, they just want to discuss the various ways that people in the Bush administration are war criminals. They don't even accept the possiblility that they aren't war criminals.
Quote:
|
- So if they behead, we are alowed to sink to their level?
|
That's the point, we aren't sinking to their level. I'm sure the numerous people whos beheading videos appeared on the internet would've gladly switched places with any of these phantom torture victims.
Quote:
|
- Guantanimo Bay, prison tourture in Iraq and Afghanistan, sending terrorist subjects to countries that are more liberal with their use of interigation techniques are not hearsay and innuendo. The article is about finding acountability.
|
It's about finding accountability for wrongs that haven't even been proven yet. This article starts with a presumption of guilt, then works from there.
Quote:
This should be an issue of great concern to everyone. The fact is that we must uphold a standard on human rights. The war on terrorism isn't won by capturing avery single terrorist becasue that can't happen. Terrorism will only be stoped if we cease to be a valid target. The only way to do that is to stop perpetuating the hate for this country around the world. We commited crimes, for us it's not a big deal because we arnt the victims. We think we can sweap them under the rug and forget about it, and we will. Others may have longer momories, especially if their homes and children ended up as colateral damage during our attempts to bring them "freedom". Not holding anyone acountable for these actions is the equivalent of handing out Al Quida inlistment pamphlets. So it's not just about morality. Oposing these actions is logicaly beneficial to the US.
I am not saying, burn Bush and Co. at the stake. I realize the situation they are in. I realize drastic actions have to be taken. But they CAN go too far and we can't just keep counting these crimes an "necessary". It is discusion like this one that allows us to decide on that issue.
|
I don't even know where to begin here. Not only are you instantly condemning an entire country based on some actions which have yet to be proven, but you then go on to say that we should essentially need to bend over to the terrorists so they won't dislike us. You seem to believe that Al Queda and terrorism sprang up as a reaction to some allegations of wrongdoing in Iraq.
And personally, it disgusts me that people give credence to an article like the one in the OP, yet ignore when people are killed. What they are essentially doing is making it a two-front war: you have the terrorists in the field and the terrorist enablers at home. Al Queda couldn't
pay for press like this.