|
comrades, could we tone down the name calling please?
===================================
i kinda agree with jj--dying is in itself not a great achievement. it's not symbolic of anything. stories people tell about the deaths of others make them symbolic of something. but there is no meaning in death itself. certainly not for the dead.
i think the reason the thread's been a name-calling match really is that the topic has been worked through enough that what's left here is the basic conflict over framework that is the conflict between political positions. it's a pretty stark difference between frameworks: more conservative folk see questions of security over-riding questions of legality. others see the legality as the primary frame. conservative arguments tend to lead avoid the fact that it is the state that acted to inflict torture by trying to move the question onto a subjective level: this is the basis for such argument as there is about levels of pain and whether waterboarding is or is not torture. others see that the state was the actor, that the state is bound by law, that torture is a legal construct and that the bush administration violated the law in authorizing torture.
that's the differend.
now its lather'(rinse) repeat.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|