Take the Abu Ghraib test

[dude1394]

If you think you know the facts about Abu Ghraib, you are wrong.
Not that knowing the facts will change a liberals mind however..

--------------------------------

mudville

Torture Test

Abu Ghraib is but a stone's throw from where I now type these words, and it's ugliness is more than skin deep. It's a very real place, and an undesirable home to criminals and those whose duty it is to guard them. But to many it's an abstract image, a debate point to be used against opponents like garlic to frighten vampires, a boogy man to frighten children. They inject that ward into any writing they do on certain topics in an attempt to frame the discussion around what is unquestionably now the immediate mind's eye association most people in the world make with the word "torture" - the horrendous photos from the notorious prison.

Here's an illustration from the Washington Post: Does the Right Remember Abu Ghraib? See, it's about Abu Ghraib people! Defend that! The title alone is an attempt to frame the debate on two points. 1) The issue is a right/left issue, and 2) The notorious digital images from Abu Ghraib are a result of government policy.

Both claims lack merit.

Let's dispense with the right/left aspect of this outright. Not everything can be pigeonholed into those political categories, and certainly no one on either end of the political spectrum feels torture is one of the defining points of their position. As much as some may take delight in setting up a "torture aficionado straw man" who supported that other guy in the last election" it's certainly not a legitimate starting point for any reasonable discussion on the matter. Unfortunately there are those who would have it that way in the US Senate, and whatever the outcome the nation will be the worse for it.

If you're looking for further discussion on that political topic move on. The remainder of this post is not for you. But you will miss a chance to look a little deeper into the ugly mirror that is Abu Ghraib, perhaps to clear a bit of fog from it's surface, and discover if you know all you think you do on that topic.

Take this simple 10 question quiz. The answers follow (no fair peeking). There are no trick questions, and no opinion questions. Just the facts, ma'am, just the facts. But perhaps not those you'll find on the editorial pages of your local paper.

[Mavdog]

Originally posted by: dude1394
If you think you know the facts about Abu Ghraib, you are wrong.
Not that knowing the facts will change a liberals mind however.

Those who presume that they know what others know are typically wrong.
Not that not knowing this fact will change their mind however....

FYI I only missed one question in the quiz.

Here's some news for you and any others who seem to believe that there were no criminal acts by US military interrogators, There were, they were a result of the position taken by Gonzalez and others that there were no rules these interrogators must follow.

There are rules of conduct that must be adhered to, lest we become just ax culpable and despicable as those we battle.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brutal interrogation in Iraq
Five detainees' deaths probed
By Miles Moffeit
Denver Post Staff Writer

Wednesday, May 19, 2004 -

Brutal interrogation techniques by U.S. military personnel are being investigated in connection with the deaths of at least five Iraqi prisoners in war-zone detention camps, Pentagon documents obtained by The Denver Post show.

The deaths include the killing in November of a high-level Iraqi general who was shoved into a sleeping bag and suffocated, according to the Pentagon report. The documents contradict an earlier Defense Department statement that said the general died "of natural causes" during an interrogation. Pentagon officials declined to comment on the new disclosure.

Another Iraqi military officer, records show, was asphyxiated after being gagged, his hands tied to the top of his cell door. Another detainee died "while undergoing stress technique interrogation," involving smothering and "chest compressions," according to the documents.

Details of the death investigations, involving at least four different detention facilities including the Abu Ghraib prison, provide the clearest view yet into war-zone interrogation rooms, where intelligence soldiers and other personnel have sometimes used lethal tactics to try to coax secrets from prisoners, including choking off detainees' airways. Other abusive strategies involve sitting on prisoners or bending them into uncomfortable positions, records show.

"Torture is the only thing you can call this," said a Pentagon source with knowledge of internal investigations into prisoner abuses. "There is a lot about our country's interrogation techniques that is very troubling. These are violations of military law."

Link

[vinnieponte]

test, no test, does it matter. The soilder (s) were wrong and will pay. Blame bush

[dude1394]

Originally posted by: vinnieponte
test, no test, does it matter. The soilder (s) were wrong and will pay. Blame bush

Ah... how refreshing that there are still some things in life are so predictable and can be counted on.

[aexchange]

Originally posted by: dude1394

Ah... how refreshing that there are still some things in life are so predictable and can be counted on.

just to play the devil's advocate. have you EVER disagreed with anything bush has done? your song and dance is just as predictable as vinnie's. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

[vinnieponte]

Originally posted by: aexchange

just to play the devil's advocate. have you EVER disagreed with anything bush has done? your song and dance is just as predictable as vinnie's. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

yea, good question.

[FishForLunch]

Why even bother with interrogation, just put the suspects in Jail and hope they will volunteer information. I guess the Dems will then want every Iraqi suspect to have US liayers representing each one.

[dude1394]

Let's see what don't I like about dubya.... That's a really tough question as there is so much that I like about him.

There are some times when it seems he backs off due to public pressure but honestly that just seems to be good politics. The question however really shouldn't be what I don't like about dubya but if I'm a complete knee-jeark against anything liberal. However I'm not.

- The NCLB act is alright with me even though it includes a pretty traditionally liberal method of trying to solve the problems. Expansion of the ferderal governments role education. Of course I feel it was a good compromise as it created some accountability which is sorely lacking.
- Medicare drug-prescription bill. Again certainly a liberal approach by providing drug-benefits to seniors. Nothing really conservative about it, except there was a proponent of competition I believe in bill, not much but at least some beginnings.

I guess if there is one thing that I didn't like much was how progressive dubya made the tax code. I don't think it healthy that ~50% of the populace has no stake in the amount of money spent by the federal government, that looks untenable in the long run. Good for dems, but bad for the country.

Also not exactly sure how I fall down on immigration reform. I think that there has to be something done here, we can't just turn out 8-10 million people or so, however to reward illegal immigrants is terrible. Some mechanism of getting mexican immigrants into the system needs to be devised. Bush may have the best idea here really, but it's iffy.

Social Security we'll just have to see. The one thing that I admire MOST about dubya and least about the Dems is that he's willing to put it out there and take on problems. The dems are stuck in the 60's. They actually seem to reflect their constituencies that are still locked there, status quo, status quo...Nothing needs to change, all governement is good it just needs more money. Minorities still clamoring for reverse-discrimination laws, unions that have completely be passed by with respect to their ability to compete. That party is a mess.

[reeds]

"just to play the devil's advocate. have you EVER disagreed with anything bush has done? your song and dance is just as predictable as vinnie's. " PRICELESS....HAHAHAHA

[vinnieponte]

HERE IS WHAT WE KNOW............................

[vinnieponte]

ANY QUESTIONS???????

[vinnieponte]

AND ANOTHER....................


(edited by a Dallas-Mavs.com moderator)

[vinnieponte]

Originally posted by: vinnieponte
AND ANOTHER....................


(edited by a Dallas-Mavs.com moderator)

Even the republican mods couldn't handle this picture now could you?

[Chiwas]

A pic was censored? tsk, tsk, tsk.

[mavsman55]

Yes vinnie. Screw the rules. You can post anything you want, right?

[vinnieponte]

so where is dude? I want him to answer to these pictures. Here is what we know, their all we need to know!

[vinnieponte]

I find nothing wrong with the following picture as it is censored in the right area! It pertains to this thread, and although it's shocking and sad, anything vulgar, or revealing, is covered up. So if you must remove it, give me a "real" answer to as why??






(edited by a Dallas-Mavs.com moderator - post it again and get a strike)

[dude1394]

It's stupid to reply to these pictures vinnie, but more stupid to post them as if they somehow make a point. If you'd actually read anything about abu gharib you would know that it's a few prison guards who have a very warped sense of fun. That's about it?

There is no US policy here. There is no eeeevvvvvviiiiiiillllllll republican plot here to humiliate all iraqi's, it's just a a sad display of sadism by some deviants, some soldiers who got out of line and are being punished for it. If you look hard on the net you can find much more deviant pictures if you get your jollies that way.

You post them here like they are supposed to mean something significant? They really don't, just a bunch of young knuckleheads in our military getting their jollies.

Now if you want to see the eeeeeevvvvvviiiiiiillllll that is loose in our country here is a picture for you... [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]

[vinnieponte]

Originally posted by: vinnieponte
I find nothing wrong with the following picture as it is censored in the right area! It pertains to this thread, and although it's shocking and sad, anything vulgar, or revealing, is covered up. So if you must remove it, give me a "real" answer to as why??






(edited by a Dallas-Mavs.com moderator - post it again and get a strike)

I'm shaking (edited by a Dallas-Mavs.com moderator)

[vinnieponte]

Originally posted by: vinnieponte

I'm shaking (edited by a Dallas-Mavs.com moderator)

who is editing my posts? please raise your hand and stop hiding. Censorship at it's finest

[dude1394]

Good for the mods, vinnie's obsession with nekkid iraqi's is disturbing.

[vinnieponte]

Originally posted by: dude1394
Good for the mods, vinnie's obsession with nekkid iraqi's is disturbing.

You're obsession with a president who send over a 1000 us troops to their death for a cause that was based on false information and lies is disturbing

[dude1394]

Originally posted by: vinnieponte

You're obsession with a president who send over a 1000 us troops to their death for a cause that was based on false information and lies is disturbing

I think that's actually your obsession, mine is just pure admiration. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]

[vinnieponte]

Originally posted by: dude1394

I think that's actually your obsession, mine is just pure admiration. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]

you admire a man who send his on troops to their death for no reason at all? You put smiley faces at the end of your posts like it's a joke they died and your turning my point about their deaths into a funny comeback

[dude1394]

I admire a man who had the cajones to do what was needed to protect this greatests nation on god's green earth. Who did not and will not falter even though the lying - CBS, NYTimes, Maggot Moore, vinnies of the world whine incoherently.