Conquer Club

Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Re: Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

Postby Neoteny on Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:46 am

armati wrote:Your comments tell me you havnt checked out the Yinon Plan.


I did google it and saw what it was and how it is pushed by conspiracy theorists and decided I'm not going to engage with it because it's dumb. But don't get smarmy about my googling your nonsense when you can't be fucked to google the turner diaries. On further reflection, though, it's probably best that you don't.
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
User avatar
Major Neoteny
 
Posts: 3396
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 10:24 pm
Location: Atlanta, Georgia

Re: Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

Postby tzor on Sun Mar 18, 2018 7:48 pm

Dukasaur wrote:We've gone through all this. There's nobody active in the Democratic Party of today who supported slavery or Japanese internment camps. All the white supremacists of the old Democratic party tore up their memberships and moved over to the Republican party in the '60s or at the latest in the early '70s. They're your friends now.


NO THEY ARE NOT. Perhaps we can go through this again and again, tracing the history of the Democratic Party through the 20th century into the 21st century.
Let's start with President Johnson, "I'll have them n****** voting Democratic for two hundred years."
How about President Clinton about Obama, "A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee."
If you just think I'm spouting Republican nonsense, consider this article from the Huffington Post, The Democratic Party’s Two-Facedness of Race Relations
How long will the Democrats continue their absurd charade? All the while claiming Republicans are racist, meanwhile the Democrats are the party clearly responsible for the contemptible Jim Crow laws. Let’s see how proud these secret, racist beliefs make current day Democrats. Let’s see how they like the real truth being told about their party.

“I do not think it is an exaggeration at all to say to my friend from West Virginia [Sen. Robert C. Byrd, a former Ku Klux Klan recruiter] that he would have been a great senator at any moment . . . He would have been right during the great conflict of civil war in this nation.”
— Sen. Christopher Dodd (D., Conn.), 2004, Chairman, Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, 2008



Not the 70's nor the 80's nor even the 90's ..., they are racists then and they are racists now. The only difference is that they don't need labor slaves they need voting slaves, minorities of all kind are welcome, as long as they are completely dependent on the party. You see the "North" won that war and the "North" was Tammany Hall (who did the same to the Irish who flooded the nation during the potato famine).

Dukasaur wrote:As for inner city violence, it's a direct result of the (bipartisan) War on Drugs.


Why not cite Vietnam while you are at it? The "War on Drugs" doesn't do squat. Decades of Democratic rule has destroyed the social fabric of the inner cities. It's not drug lords that rule, it's gangs. Once again, I'll cite this Conservative trash rag (wait it's not) the New York Times, The Real Problem With America’s Inner Cities

In all inner-city neighborhoods, however, there is a problem minority that varies between about 12.1 percent (in San Diego, for example) and 28 percent (in Phoenix) that comes largely from the disconnected youth between ages 16 and 24. Most are not in school and are chronically out of work, though their numbers are supplemented by working- and middle-class dropouts. With few skills and a contempt for low-wage jobs, they subsist through the underground economy of illicit trading and crime. Many belong to gangs.

Their street or thug culture is real, with a configuration of norms, values and habits that are, disturbingly, rooted in a ghetto brand of core American mainstream values: hypermasculinity, the aggressive assertion and defense of respect, extreme individualism, materialism and a reverence for the gun, all inflected with a threatening vision of blackness openly embraced as the thug life.


Dukasaur wrote:Bottom line, I don't care about your petty feuds between the Demlicans and Repocrats.


But you will insist on the Democratic falsehood that they are no longer racist. You don't care but you parrot. AND THAT IS THE PROBLEM.

This isn't a problem between Democrats and Republicans. This is a problem between that fundamental evil that arose in Europe in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. An evil that has called itself many names, Socialism, Communism, and even "Progressivism." It is a nostalgic look at all the most stupidest ideas that ever came from Greece (the notion of the philosopher king who was somehow a superior race above mortal man) and put it on hyper drive. It has become a religion like Christianity and like Christianity it has two factions only instead of Protestant / Catholic it is national socialist (NAZI) and international socialist (Communist).

Those Skin Head NAZIS are SOCIALISTS. Just read the modern literature ... they want their bigotry enforced by the government.

Do you know what an extreme right wing nut is? It's someone who goes off in the woods and wants to be left alone. That's the extreme side of libertarianism.
the Fascists, the Communists, the Progressives, are all just shards of the fractured crystal of Marx who in turn is just a reflection of the disaster of the French Revolution.

Dukasaur wrote:
tzor wrote:And you complain about waterboarding?

Waterboarding was developed by the Imperial Japanese Army in WWII. You HANGED their people for war crimes when they tortured prisoners. Now you want to emulate them?


Oh crap Duk you just went off the deep end and there ain't no water in the pool. I suppose I will have to bring out Wikipedia now.

R. J. Rummel, a professor of political science at the University of Hawaii, estimates that between 1937 and 1945, the Japanese military murdered from nearly 3 to over 10 million people, most likely 6 million Chinese, Koreans, Malaysians, Indonesians, Filipinos and Indochinese, among others, including Western prisoners of war. According to Rummel, "This democide [i.e., death by government] was due to a morally bankrupt political and military strategy, military expediency and custom, and national culture." According to Rummel, in China alone, during 1937–45, approximately 3.9 million Chinese were killed, mostly civilians, as a direct result of the Japanese operations and a total of 10.2 million Chinese were killed in the course of the war. The most infamous incident during this period was the Nanking Massacre of 1937–38, when, according to the findings of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, the Japanese Army massacred as many as 300,000 civilians and prisoners of war, although the accepted figure is somewhere in the hundreds of thousands.

Special Japanese military units conducted experiments on civilians and POWs in China. One of the most infamous was Unit 731 under Shirō Ishii. Unit 731 was established by order of Hirohito himself. Victims were subjected to experiments including but not limited to vivisection and amputations without anesthesia and testing of biological weapons. Anesthesia was not used because it was believed that anesthetics would adversely affect the results of the experiments.

According to historians Yoshiaki Yoshimi and Kentaro Awaya, during the Second Sino-Japanese War, gas weapons, such as tear gas, were used only sporadically in 1937, but in early 1938 the Imperial Japanese Army began full-scale use of phosgene, chlorine, Lewisite and nausea gas (red), and from mid-1939, mustard gas (yellow) was used against both Kuomintang and Communist Chinese troops.

The Japanese military’s use of forced labor, by Asian civilians and POWs also caused many deaths. According to a joint study by historians including Zhifen Ju, Mitsuyoshi Himeta, Toru Kubo and Mark Peattie, more than 10 million Chinese civilians were mobilised by the Kōa-in (Japanese Asia Development Board) for forced labour.

Soon after the war, the Allied powers indicted 25 persons as Class-A war criminals, and 5,700 persons were indicted as Class-B or Class-C war criminals by Allied criminal trials. Of these, 984 were initially condemned to death, 920 were actually executed, 475 received life sentences, 2,944 received some prison terms, 1,018 were acquitted, and 279 were not sentenced or not brought to trial. These numbers included 178 ethnic Taiwanese and 148 ethnic Koreans.


So don't give me this shit we killed officers for "waterboarding."
Image
User avatar
Cadet tzor
 
Posts: 4076
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 9:43 pm
Location: Long Island, NY, USA

Re: Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

Postby Neoteny on Mon Mar 19, 2018 11:44 am

ITT Tzor calmly explains he has no clue what Nazism or Communism are.

EDIT: haha I called Tzor "Thor"
Last edited by Neoteny on Mon Mar 19, 2018 11:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
User avatar
Major Neoteny
 
Posts: 3396
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 10:24 pm
Location: Atlanta, Georgia

Re: Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

Postby mrswdk on Mon Mar 19, 2018 11:50 am

If I'm reading his post correctly, fascists and communists are all just libertarians, and all are ultimately inspired by Marx.

But the Japanese didn't waterboard any of them, so at least there's that.
Lieutenant mrswdk
 
Posts: 14898
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Red Swastika School

Re: Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

Postby armati on Mon Mar 19, 2018 12:15 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcEYa48 ... 9unhiNaVMc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qM287j4 ... cmI1IcJVHZ

The New World Order - Communism by the backdoor
Dennis Wise

maybe one of those links will work.

mrswdk
"If I'm reading his post correctly, fascists and communists are all just libertarians, and all are ultimately inspired by Marx."
Sergeant armati
 
Posts: 1369
Joined: Sun May 29, 2016 12:49 am

Re: Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

Postby Neoteny on Mon Mar 19, 2018 12:49 pm

Image
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
User avatar
Major Neoteny
 
Posts: 3396
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 10:24 pm
Location: Atlanta, Georgia

Re: Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

Postby Neoteny on Mon Mar 19, 2018 1:01 pm

Ok so I watched the trailer and that's some Poe's law level shit. I'll watch part one and get back to y'all, but this is starting to look very unhealthy.
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
User avatar
Major Neoteny
 
Posts: 3396
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 10:24 pm
Location: Atlanta, Georgia

Re: Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

Postby Neoteny on Mon Mar 19, 2018 1:09 pm

Oh lawd this shit is deranged. I don't recommend watching it, but if you want some insight into how the people currently controlling the United States government view the world, give it a few minutes. These people all have a prion disease or something.
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
User avatar
Major Neoteny
 
Posts: 3396
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 10:24 pm
Location: Atlanta, Georgia

Re: Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

Postby tzor on Mon Mar 19, 2018 3:24 pm

Neoteny wrote:ITT Tzor calmly explains he has no clue what Nazism or Communism are.


why don't you educate me. I could use a good laugh.

Neoteny wrote:EDIT: haha I called Tzor "Thor"


Crap, now I'm going to have to kill you; my one eyed father doesn't want to let the mortals know of my involvement in this game. :twisted:

mrswdk wrote:If I'm reading his post correctly, fascists and communists are all just libertarians, and all are ultimately inspired by Marx.


I can always rely on you to understand NOTHING. 8-)
Image
User avatar
Cadet tzor
 
Posts: 4076
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 9:43 pm
Location: Long Island, NY, USA

Re: Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

Postby Dukasaur on Mon Mar 19, 2018 3:56 pm

Well, tzor, since you didn't respond to the actual core of my post, and only quibbled with some minor things around the outer edge, I take it you surrender on the main points. I'll turn to your trivial quibbles in a minute, but first I want to remind everyone about what this thread is actually about:
Dukasaur wrote:
All that shouldn't matter. When someone commits a crime, do you ask who they voted for before you choose their punishment?

The party politics circus shouldn't be an issue when considering a high-level appointment. Ethical considerations should be something that one takes more seriously than party loyalties and squabbles over the pork barrel. Gina Haskel is not only a sadist, she is more importantly a scofflaw who believes the CIA should be free to do whatever it wants without civilian oversight. Basically, to emulate the KGB. She ordered the destruction of evidence while holding in her hand an order from a federal court to turn the evidence over. That kind of blatant contempt for the rule of law should scare the shit out of you, utterly regardless of any party loyalties.

tzor wrote:OMG, she tortured fanatic religious zealots who wanted to destroy America and she liked it. (Allegedly)

I'm not convinced that all the men she tortured were religious zealots, nor am I convinced that all of them wanted to destroy America. No doubt some were, but a great many of the prisoners taken in Afghanistan were ordinary foot soldiers fighting for ordinary reasons, because their country was invaded and their (lawfully constituted) government sent them into battle. I could go on a rant here about the hypocrisy of a nation that invades a foreign country on a trumped-up pretext and then labels the foreign nationals "terrorists" when they try to defend themselves. It's not directly relevant and probably counterproductive, so I'll just leave it at that.

What is directly relevant is that torture is against the laws of the U.S., as well as a violation of many international treaties that the U.S. is signatory to. Bush and the CIA deliberately subverted the law, base on some really bogus legal arguments. They knew their arguments were bogus, which is why they hid their activities in black sites deep in the jungles of Thailand and other places. If they hadn't been blatantly violating the law, they could have brought the prisoners to a prison in the U.S. and interrogated them in accordance with normal law.

The man at the centre of Haskel's main torture scandal, Zubaydah was not found guilty of terrorism. After 16 years in jail, he still has not been charged with ANY crime. Haskel's report concluded that he had no useful information to give. After weeks of incredibly cruel torture, he was a broken man, completely subservient, but he still hadn't given up any useful intel because he just didn't have any to give. But even if he had reams of intel to provide, at what point are you willing to accept that the end does not justify the means? That torture of prisoners is not acceptable in a democratic society, no matter how strong the temptation or how valuable the goods to be procured?

More importantly, at what point should duly-elected Senators decide that the end does not justify the means, and that people who don't care about things like ethics don't belong in high office?

To me, though, the more compelling argument for why the Senate should not confirm this woman is not the torture itself, disgusting as that is. It is the fact that she ordered the records of the torture to be shredded, after she was already in possession of a court order to turn those records over. People shred evidence all the time, and it's certainly wrong, but they can always pretend, with more or less success, that they didn't know it was important enough to keep. But she already had the subpenoa in hand! Her shredding of the evidence was a massive, huge, gargantuan "UP YOURS!" to the rule of law. She couldn't have communicated her character more clearly if she hired a skywriter to write "Spies can do whateverthefuck they want! We don't give a shit what the law says!"


No shit, Sherlock! ISIS is fucking evil! What was your first clue? Is this really your argument, that it's okay for us to be evil because the enemy is evil? I don't know where you went to school, but where I went to school I was taught that "the other kids are doing it" is not a valid defense. Two wrongs don't make a right! If your strategy for fighting evil is to become evil and "fight fire with fire" then evil has already won. You may as well just surrender.

You don't disagree with any of that, then. You agree that a sadistic monster who sneers at the rule of law and deliberately destroys subpoenaed evidence does not deserve a cabinet-level position.


Now we'll deal with some of your quibbles.
tzor wrote:
Dukasaur wrote:We've gone through all this. There's nobody active in the Democratic Party of today who supported slavery or Japanese internment camps. All the white supremacists of the old Democratic party tore up their memberships and moved over to the Republican party in the '60s or at the latest in the early '70s. They're your friends now.


NO THEY ARE NOT. Perhaps we can go through this again and again, tracing the history of the Democratic Party through the 20th century into the 21st century.
Let's start with President Johnson, "I'll have them n****** voting Democratic for two hundred years."
How about President Clinton about Obama, "A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee."

Johnson left office in 1969. You realize that was still the '60s, right?

tzor wrote:If you just think I'm spouting Republican nonsense, consider this article from the Huffington Post, The Democratic Party’s Two-Facedness of Race Relations

You do realize that just because the Huffpost is mainly liberal doesn't mean it's exclusively liberal, right? The particular article you're citing is written by a Huffpost columnist so right-wing and so virulent that he doesn't have the balls to sign off with his real name, but only by the pseudonym "The Relentless Conservative." I don't know who it is (though his pic looks suspiciously like Anthony Scaramucci) but I'd say his pseudonym pretty much says it all. He relentlessly throws about all the tired ultraconservative tropes without the slightest attempt at objectivity.

In any case, digging up the occasional racist quote from some modern Democrat means nothing. You had to scour the earth and go 40 years back to dig up a couple quotes. I did a quick google and saw a dozen examples of Republicans ranting on these subjects, like Roy Moore talking about how families were able to stay together in the good old days of slavery. Yes, white families could have the luxury of staying together with their families, but black families could be ripped asunder and have their mother or father sold down river any day of the week. Or Steve King posting "We can't restore our civilization with somebody else's babies." (Factually wrong, in fact. Adopted babies normally follow the cultural norms of their adoptive parents. Ditto for adoptive countries -- immigrants may arrive with their old culture, but their children generally have a foot in both worlds and their grandchildren are completely acclimatized to the culture of their adopted country.)

Anyway, this is getting farther and farther afield. Feel free to go dig up some more obscure examples of Democrats saying racist things. I don't care, for two reasons. One, I'm not here to defend the Dems; we only got here because I corrected your original false assertion. But second, and most importantly, it's not relevant to the core of what this thread is about. Rejecting Gina Haskel's appointment is an ethical issue that should transcend party politics.


tzor wrote:
Dukasaur wrote:As for inner city violence, it's a direct result of the (bipartisan) War on Drugs.


Why not cite Vietnam while you are at it? The "War on Drugs" doesn't do squat. Decades of Democratic rule has destroyed the social fabric of the inner cities. It's not drug lords that rule, it's gangs. Once again, I'll cite this Conservative trash rag (wait it's not) the New York Times, The Real Problem With America’s Inner Cities

In all inner-city neighborhoods, however, there is a problem minority that varies between about 12.1 percent (in San Diego, for example) and 28 percent (in Phoenix) that comes largely from the disconnected youth between ages 16 and 24. Most are not in school and are chronically out of work, though their numbers are supplemented by working- and middle-class dropouts. With few skills and a contempt for low-wage jobs, they subsist through the underground economy of illicit trading and crime. Many belong to gangs.

Their street or thug culture is real, with a configuration of norms, values and habits that are, disturbingly, rooted in a ghetto brand of core American mainstream values: hypermasculinity, the aggressive assertion and defense of respect, extreme individualism, materialism and a reverence for the gun, all inflected with a threatening vision of blackness openly embraced as the thug life.

Sure, why not cite Vietnam while we're at it? I wouldn't disagree with you -- PTSD among veterans as a result of all your imperialistic wars is a major contributor to drug addiction rates. Still, your original point was about gang violence, so I was responding to that. Gangs have wars over drug-selling turf. The presence of unemployed youth in the inner city might lead to crime, yes -- vandalism and petty theft and robberies -- but not to the bloody carnage that consumes your cities. That kind of thing happens because getting a piece of the multi-billion dollar drug industry is the only thing that can propel an inner-city kid from abject poverty to relative wealth. (Not including civil war) gang wars are always the result of huge payoffs alongside major poverty, and those huge payoffs almost always revolve around controlling the supply of some victimless crime -- the drug trade, prostitution, or gambling.


tzor wrote:
Dukasaur wrote:Bottom line, I don't care about your petty feuds between the Demlicans and Repocrats.


But you will insist on the Democratic falsehood that they are no longer racist. You don't care but you parrot. AND THAT IS THE PROBLEM.

I just look at the evidence. Your beloved President refers to a gang of murdering Klansmen as "good people" and millions of Republican cheer. Bill Clinton made one racist joke and was condemned by by everyone who heard it. (Can't say "millions" only because it didn't become public knowledge at first -- but those who knew were immediately repulsed.) The proof is not just in what someone said, but in the reaction of those who heard.


tzor wrote:This isn't a problem between Democrats and Republicans. This is a problem between that fundamental evil that arose in Europe in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. An evil that has called itself many names, Socialism, Communism, and even "Progressivism." It is a nostalgic look at all the most stupidest ideas that ever came from Greece (the notion of the philosopher king who was somehow a superior race above mortal man) and put it on hyper drive. It has become a religion like Christianity and like Christianity it has two factions only instead of Protestant / Catholic it is national socialist (NAZI) and international socialist (Communist).

Those Skin Head NAZIS are SOCIALISTS. Just read the modern literature ... they want their bigotry enforced by the government.

Wrong. Socialism by definition is a desire to improve the living conditions of one's fellow man. Skinhead want to stomp on the face of their fellow man. It's pretty much the exact opposite.


tzor wrote:Do you know what an extreme right wing nut is? It's someone who goes off in the woods and wants to be left alone. That's the extreme side of libertarianism.

Absolutely wrong. Libertarians are not right-wingers, although they often make the mistake of forming alliances with right-wingers and become, sadly, guilty by association. Libertarianism is a belief that personal liberty and economic liberty are inseparable. Right-wingers share the belief in the economic liberty, but they don't believe in personal liberty. Right-wingers believe in criminalizing sexual behaviour they don't approve of, criminalizing drugs they don't approve of, in some cases criminalizing singing and dancing, and so on and so forth. In most cases these views are rife with hypocrisy (it's fine and dandy for the good ol' boys to get trashed on Southern Comfort, but dem pot-smokin' hippies should go to jail for life. It's fine for a rich assholes to have easy access to call girls, but working-class johns should go to jail, etc., etc.)

Yes, going off into the woods Thoreau-style and minding your own business is a very libertarian way to live. Right-wingers demanding ever-growing draconian sentences for victimless crimes, along with no-knock warrants, civil forfeiture, and all the other tyrannical trappings are the antithesis of that.


tzor wrote:the Fascists, the Communists, the Progressives, are all just shards of the fractured crystal of Marx who in turn is just a reflection of the disaster of the French Revolution.

You're not entirely wrong. All of those do have some lineage in common there. However, they have evolved in such drastically different ways and nowadays mean such utterly different things, that the statement is effectively meaningless. You might as well say "birds, mammals, and reptiles are all just shards of the fractured crystal of Metaspriggina". True enough, but extending that to dismiss any differences between birds and mammals would be plain idiocy. An elephant is not a stork, no matter how much you try to up-sell their common ancestry.


tzor wrote:
Dukasaur wrote:
tzor wrote:And you complain about waterboarding?

Waterboarding was developed by the Imperial Japanese Army in WWII. You HANGED their people for war crimes when they tortured prisoners. Now you want to emulate them?


Oh crap Duk you just went off the deep end and there ain't no water in the pool. I suppose I will have to bring out Wikipedia now.

R. J. Rummel, a professor of political science at the University of Hawaii, estimates that between 1937 and 1945, the Japanese military murdered from nearly 3 to over 10 million people, most likely 6 million Chinese, Koreans, Malaysians, Indonesians, Filipinos and Indochinese, among others, including Western prisoners of war. According to Rummel, "This democide [i.e., death by government] was due to a morally bankrupt political and military strategy, military expediency and custom, and national culture." According to Rummel, in China alone, during 1937–45, approximately 3.9 million Chinese were killed, mostly civilians, as a direct result of the Japanese operations and a total of 10.2 million Chinese were killed in the course of the war. The most infamous incident during this period was the Nanking Massacre of 1937–38, when, according to the findings of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, the Japanese Army massacred as many as 300,000 civilians and prisoners of war, although the accepted figure is somewhere in the hundreds of thousands.

Special Japanese military units conducted experiments on civilians and POWs in China. One of the most infamous was Unit 731 under Shirō Ishii. Unit 731 was established by order of Hirohito himself. Victims were subjected to experiments including but not limited to vivisection and amputations without anesthesia and testing of biological weapons. Anesthesia was not used because it was believed that anesthetics would adversely affect the results of the experiments.

According to historians Yoshiaki Yoshimi and Kentaro Awaya, during the Second Sino-Japanese War, gas weapons, such as tear gas, were used only sporadically in 1937, but in early 1938 the Imperial Japanese Army began full-scale use of phosgene, chlorine, Lewisite and nausea gas (red), and from mid-1939, mustard gas (yellow) was used against both Kuomintang and Communist Chinese troops.

The Japanese military’s use of forced labor, by Asian civilians and POWs also caused many deaths. According to a joint study by historians including Zhifen Ju, Mitsuyoshi Himeta, Toru Kubo and Mark Peattie, more than 10 million Chinese civilians were mobilised by the Kōa-in (Japanese Asia Development Board) for forced labour.

Soon after the war, the Allied powers indicted 25 persons as Class-A war criminals, and 5,700 persons were indicted as Class-B or Class-C war criminals by Allied criminal trials. Of these, 984 were initially condemned to death, 920 were actually executed, 475 received life sentences, 2,944 received some prison terms, 1,018 were acquitted, and 279 were not sentenced or not brought to trial. These numbers included 178 ethnic Taiwanese and 148 ethnic Koreans.


So don't give me this shit we killed officers for "waterboarding."

Not sure what you're quibbling with. According to your own quotes, you did hang Japanese generals for torturing prisoners. Now you think you should emulate them and torture prisoners. In what way do you think this contradicts what I said? You think it's just a matter of degree -- that because you only torture a few thousand and they tortured hundreds of thousands, that makes it okay? Not sure what you're saying here.
Image
User avatar
Lieutenant Dukasaur
Community Coordinator
Community Coordinator
 
Posts: 26964
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 4:49 pm
Location: Beautiful Niagara
32

Re: Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

Postby mookiemcgee on Mon Mar 19, 2018 4:18 pm

tldr
User avatar
Brigadier mookiemcgee
 
Posts: 4836
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2013 2:33 pm
Location: Northern CA

Re: Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

Postby DoomYoshi on Mon Mar 19, 2018 9:53 pm

www.cnn.com/issues/special_features/Haspel_promotion
WASHINGTON—Acknowledging the gender discrimination she faced in her field before receiving President Trump’s nomination to become the first female director of the CIA, career intelligence officer Gina Haspel recalled Tuesday having to torture many more prisoners than her male colleagues to prove herself. “For a long time, no one would take me seriously even though I was abusing twice as many detainees and employing far crueler methods than most of the men I worked with,” said Haspel, the current CIA deputy director, adding that her work overseeing the “Cat’s Eye” secret prison in Thailand in the early 2000s proved she could run an extralegal black site just as well as any man. “It was really frustrating how I’d have to continually come up with more innovative and brutal ways to torture high-value assets just to receive the slightest bit of recognition from my superiors, whereas the men who held the same position as me could just coast by on the same old sensory-deprivation techniques. I mean, I had to waterboard one suspected al-Qaeda member 83 times in a single month until he lost an eye—you think any of my male coworkers had to work that hard to get ahead? When you’re a woman, they never fully appreciate the things you do for them. It doesn’t matter how many videotapes of illegal torture you help destroy on the CIA’s behalf.” Haspel added that she hoped her promotion would help usher in a new age where there were more women like her in power.
░▒▒▓▓▓▒▒░
User avatar
Captain DoomYoshi
 
Posts: 10715
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:30 pm
Location: Niu York, Ukraine

Re: Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

Postby armati on Tue Mar 20, 2018 12:07 am

Doesnt say when or where she said this so really is no way to know if any of it is true or not.
Rumour does have it she was torturing tho.

If it is true, what a sick b!tch.
IMO people like that need to be shot on sight, I dont think we need them in the gene pool.
Sergeant armati
 
Posts: 1369
Joined: Sun May 29, 2016 12:49 am

Re: Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

Postby DirtyDishSoap on Tue Mar 20, 2018 5:24 am

Should torture be completely condemned, or is it acceptable in special circumstances?

I'll throw out a hypothetical - A nuclear bomb was smuggled into the states and it's set to blow in the next 48 hours. One of the planters was later captured as he was crossing the border. In an attempt to get information, what tactic would you use to get the location of the bomb?

I personally would torture the guy for that information. One mans pain/discomfort/dismemberment/mental health/life is worth the thousands or even millions saved.

Is torture a fool-proof way to go? No. Given that it's a hypothetical, he could give me the wrong information in a bid to buy time. He could hold out until the bomb goes off. Someone finds the bomb and breathes on it wrong. Guy goes into shock and dies. A lot of variables, but given that the guy is willing to condemn millions, I don't much care for his feelings or his life, and given his mentality of the situation, simply asking him where the bomb is more than likely won't work, and if we can't initially deduce where the location of said bomb is, then I see no other option than just to torture the information out of him.

Real talk - We caught a guy in a village trying to pose as one of the locals who just happen to be on our most wanted list. Our local attachment, The ANA (Afghani National Army) personally tortured the guy by beating him within an inch of his life. I imagine all of the information extracted from that man gave us names, locations, IED placements and labs (raided later) and weapon caches. Without that information, I sincerely believe our time would have been made a hell of a lot harder.

Do I condemn torture? Sure, if it serves no other purpose other than to make the guy suffer. If it ends up saving lives over one guy, then I'll back it.
Dukasaur wrote:
saxitoxin wrote:taking medical advice from this creature; a morbidly obese man who is 100% convinced he willed himself into becoming a woman.

Your obsession with mrswdk is really sad.

ConfederateSS wrote:Just because people are idiots... Doesn't make them wrong.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class DirtyDishSoap
 
Posts: 8721
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 7:42 pm

Re: Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

Postby mrswdk on Tue Mar 20, 2018 6:06 am

I think the reservations you expressed about torture are all pretty valid, especially the first. There's a good chance that you're not necessarily going to get correct information out of the person you're torturing - especially if it's the sort of scenario you describe, where you have some sort of radical who is fighting some cause that they believe in. Why would they spend months or years struggling towards their terror attack and then throw it all away because they're being skewered in a dark room? When they only have to either confuse you and/or feed you lies for a day or two before their information becomes useless to you?

I remember seeing a case in China where someone disappeared and the police immediately lifted someone else from the area who had a beef with the disappeared guy, on suspicion of murder. The guy they'd arrested confessed to the murder and went to jail, and then like 5-6 years later the person who'd disappeared suddenly showed up again alive and well. Turned out the police had tortured their suspect into a confession in order to solve the case, and to get the torture to stop he'd confessed to a murder he never actually committed.

Ever since a read that I figured torture is just BS. You might as well just let a trained interrogator loose on them to persuade them that they don't actually want to fight for their cause any more, and try to get them to fold and give up everything because they've now changed their mind and want to sabotage their plan.
Lieutenant mrswdk
 
Posts: 14898
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Red Swastika School

Re: Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

Postby warmonger1981 on Tue Mar 20, 2018 7:34 am

User avatar
Captain warmonger1981
 
Posts: 2554
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 7:29 pm
Location: ST.PAUL

Re: Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

Postby mookiemcgee on Tue Mar 20, 2018 12:56 pm

warmonger1981 wrote:


I thought it was against the rules to post videos about actual members real life info (xtratabasco)?
User avatar
Brigadier mookiemcgee
 
Posts: 4836
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2013 2:33 pm
Location: Northern CA

Re: Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

Postby KoolBak on Tue Mar 20, 2018 2:01 pm

I wonder when the rest of the 320 million of us will reply to this thread and stand up for Dukky? Just not enough circulation I guess.
"Gypsy told my fortune...she said that nothin showed...."

Neil Young....Like An Inca

AND:
riskllama wrote:Koolbak wins this thread.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class KoolBak
 
Posts: 7001
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 1:03 pm
Location: The beautiful Pacific Northwest

Re: Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

Postby nietzsche on Tue Mar 20, 2018 3:45 pm

DirtyDishSoap wrote:
I personally would torture the guy for that information. One mans pain/discomfort/dismemberment/mental health/life is worth the thousands or even millions saved.


this is a problem. of course anyone would sacrifice a person over thousands.. but is it really like that?

you're operating under the "information" others give you. you cannot avoid this responsibility only because you're pledged to the army IMO.

I mean of course you can, and millions do. But it's not right to do so. Not if you really want to tackle the problem. The problem lies with giving a government the right and power to torture and kill other persons on your behalf AND at their discretion.

Also, what seems right to you might seem wrong to others, and who is to say who's right? For you the enemy appears to be Bin Laden or whatever, for them it seems to be the US and it's never ending interests expansion. When you are fed propaganda 24/7 you end up buying it.

That's why we have human rights and due process, to try to prevent from abuse of power.
el cartoncito mas triste del mundo
User avatar
General nietzsche
 
Posts: 4597
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 1:29 am
Location: Fantasy Cooperstown

Re: Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

Postby tzor on Tue Mar 20, 2018 3:58 pm

This is definitely going into tldr land, so I'm breaking it up.
Dukasaur wrote:
tzor wrote:Let's start with President Johnson, "I'll have them n****** voting Democratic for two hundred years."
How about President Clinton about Obama, "A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee."

Johnson left office in 1969. You realize that was still the '60s, right?


So when did the Democratic Party cease to be racist? Remember I merely started with Johnson. Was it with the death of Robert Byrd in 2010? Remember who was praised by that former first lady who ran against Trump a few years ago. The party was racist is racist and will forever be racist because that is how they are. Look at the slate for the last presidential election; too old / too white, too old / too white, and too old / too white female. (But at least her husband was African American, right? ... LIke Senator Warren is Native American! I just love when Hillary used to go to the minority communities and started to talk black - like that old joke in Airplane "I speak Jive.")
Image
User avatar
Cadet tzor
 
Posts: 4076
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 9:43 pm
Location: Long Island, NY, USA

Re: Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

Postby tzor on Tue Mar 20, 2018 4:02 pm

Dukasaur wrote:I just look at the evidence. Your beloved President refers to a gang of murdering Klansmen as "good people" and millions of Republican cheer.


Given that I can recall that so called "incident" as though it was only a few years ago (hey wait, it was) and I know the full context of that story, I call bullshit. No, he did not. This is, what we like to call, FAKE NEWS. (This fake news made possible by a generous grant from Moscow.)
Image
User avatar
Cadet tzor
 
Posts: 4076
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 9:43 pm
Location: Long Island, NY, USA

Re: Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

Postby riskllama on Tue Mar 20, 2018 4:08 pm

Dukasaur wins this thread.
Image
User avatar
Lieutenant riskllama
 
Posts: 8873
Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2014 9:50 pm
Location: deep inside Queen Charlotte.

Re: Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

Postby DoomYoshi on Tue Mar 20, 2018 4:23 pm

That's not an old joke... that's June Cleaver!
░▒▒▓▓▓▒▒░
User avatar
Captain DoomYoshi
 
Posts: 10715
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:30 pm
Location: Niu York, Ukraine

Re: Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

Postby mookiemcgee on Tue Mar 20, 2018 4:41 pm

tzor wrote:This is definitely going into tldr land, so I'm breaking it up.
Dukasaur wrote:
tzor wrote:Let's start with President Johnson, "I'll have them n****** voting Democratic for two hundred years."
How about President Clinton about Obama, "A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee."

Johnson left office in 1969. You realize that was still the '60s, right?


So when did the Democratic Party cease to be racist? Remember I merely started with Johnson. Was it with the death of Robert Byrd in 2010? Remember who was praised by that former first lady who ran against Trump a few years ago. The party was racist is racist and will forever be racist because that is how they are. Look at the slate for the last presidential election; too old / too white, too old / too white, and too old / too white female. (But at least her husband was African American, right? ... LIke Senator Warren is Native American! I just love when Hillary used to go to the minority communities and started to talk black - like that old joke in Airplane "I speak Jive.")


Tzor this rant smell so much like bullshit even the flies are scared to come near it. So the democratic part nominated and elected Barack Obama to the presidency because they are racist? Do i have that right?
User avatar
Brigadier mookiemcgee
 
Posts: 4836
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2013 2:33 pm
Location: Northern CA

Re: Will America's Conscience Please Stand Up?

Postby DoomYoshi on Tue Mar 20, 2018 5:07 pm

They only voted for him because he's black. That seems pretty racist to me. Then they gave him a Nobel Peace Prize for being black. If all they can look at is skin color, they are racists, pure and simple.

Republicans can look past his skin color and see him for the Muslim non-American that he is.
░▒▒▓▓▓▒▒░
User avatar
Captain DoomYoshi
 
Posts: 10715
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:30 pm
Location: Niu York, Ukraine

PreviousNext

Return to Practical Explanation about Next Life,

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron