Rr - I don't think you understand what kind of information is gathered from torture...it's unreliable and almost always completely fabricated...this has been confirmed by the highest levels of government and military. it is used as propaganda; that's the true intent of it. Seeing a person break and spill some elaborate plot is more Hollywood propaganda. Do you realize just how involved the CIA gets with war movies? They were actually able to pull scenes that showed them in any negative light from zero dark thirty. I have to wonder how much critical thinking most people do while thinking they're engaged in simple escapism.
Now....state-sponsored terrorism....this is where I start repeating myself again. Pilots green-lighted to kill journalists and paramedics. Entire apartment buildings levelled or weddings bombed kill a single person. Sanctions that deny medicine to sick kids. These things are done intentionally, as a matter of policy. Innocent people are absolutely targeted. Then there are the non-policy acts that happen over and over and are only occasionally brought to light.
The CIA does not always operate with full government knowledge, and even if it did, does that make acts of violence on foreign soil acceptable? Does this view apply to all intelligence agencies, or just American ones? It wouldn't be terrorism if the ISI or VAJA killed americans in their homes? Even if you say no, it's an act of war...does it make it any less heinous? I don't know where this is going - are you still trying to say that terrorists can be tortured because they're terrorists, despite my comment about your Supreme Court? How about mercenaries acting on behalf of government? Not terrorism? Blackwater was responsible for large scale massacres and only low level people were ever prosecuted. Who gives a shit if they're state sponsored? They're acting with immunity, without oversight, and contrary to international laws. You're using semantics to muddy the waters here.
Also, I always try to differentiate between 'the West', 'NATO' or 'the US' and use the terms in the correct context and at the proper times. I"m well aware that my country has blood on it's hands. This is not an American witch hunt. But lets be clear.....wars involving western/nato nations very rarely happen without US approval.
Are you going to answer my question about torturing American troops or citizens?
Here's the deal Drowned. As always you bring up many thought provoking well thought out questions.I think I'm trying to figure out why I feel the way I do about this subject.I know I don't want innocent people tormented,tortured or detained without cause,and do I agree with what is considered torture.I also want and think we need a strong clandestine intelligence gathering system.And we should go to great lengths to protect our interests.But at what cost?Will it bite us in the ass later? So I find myself at a bit of crossroads on this topic.The Muddy Waters of which you speak may be in my head on this one.
Rr - I don't think you understand what kind of information is gathered from torture...it's unreliable and almost always completely fabricated...this has been confirmed by the highest levels of government and military. it is used as propaganda; that's the true intent of it. Seeing a person break and spill some elaborate plot is more Hollywood propaganda. Do you realize just how involved the CIA gets with war movies? They were actually able to pull scenes that showed them in any negative light from zero dark thirty. I have to wonder how much critical thinking most people do while thinking they're engaged in simple escapism.
Now....state-sponsored terrorism....this is where I start repeating myself again. Pilots green-lighted to kill journalists and paramedics. Entire apartment buildings levelled or weddings bombed kill a single person. Sanctions that deny medicine to sick kids. These things are done intentionally, as a matter of policy. Innocent people are absolutely targeted. Then there are the non-policy acts that happen over and over and are only occasionally brought to light.
The CIA does not always operate with full government knowledge, and even if it did, does that make acts of violence on foreign soil acceptable? Does this view apply to all intelligence agencies, or just American ones? It wouldn't be terrorism if the ISI or VAJA killed americans in their homes? Even if you say no, it's an act of war...does it make it any less heinous? I don't know where this is going - are you still trying to say that terrorists can be tortured because they're terrorists, despite my comment about your Supreme Court? How about mercenaries acting on behalf of government? Not terrorism? Blackwater was responsible for large scale massacres and only low level people were ever prosecuted. Who gives a shit if they're state sponsored? They're acting with immunity, without oversight, and contrary to international laws. You're using semantics to muddy the waters here.
Also, I always try to differentiate between 'the West', 'NATO' or 'the US' and use the terms in the correct context and at the proper times. I"m well aware that my country has blood on it's hands. This is not an American witch hunt. But lets be clear.....wars involving western/nato nations very rarely happen without US approval.
Are you going to answer my question about torturing American troops or citizens?
Here's the deal Drowned. As always you bring up many thought provoking well thought out questions.I think I'm trying to figure out why I feel the way I do about this subject.I know I don't want innocent people tormented,tortured or detained without cause,and do I agree with what is considered torture.I also want and think we need a strong clandestine intelligence gathering system.And we should go to great lengths to protect our interests.But at what cost?Will it bite us in the ass later? So I find myself at a bit of crossroads on this topic.The Muddy Waters of which you speak may be in my head on this one.
Forgive me for interjecting but when you say our interests, who is the our and what are the interests?
Our is The US and her Close allies (The west). Interests are safe guarding our people home and away.And protecting our Buisness/financial interests globally.
The USA has No moral standing over any other countries/societies. We are Evildoers.
Might as well just drop the charade.
I hope we cut off all foreign aid. Embrace the evil and save taxpayer money. Haiti can go screw themselves the next time God decides to smote them and their lack of building codes.
The USA has No moral standing over any other countries/societies. We are Evildoers.
Might as well just drop the charade.
I hope we cut off all foreign aid. Embrace the evil and save taxpayer money. Haiti can go screw themselves the next time God decides to smote them and their lack of building codes.
Good luck, John Travolta.
I agree but there's a better chance of you and I opening up for pearl jam on new years in tel aviv then cutting off foreign aid to Israel. What's our "aid" to Haiti compared to Israel anyway?
The USA has No moral standing over any other countries/societies. We are Evildoers.
Might as well just drop the charade.
I hope we cut off all foreign aid. Embrace the evil and save taxpayer money. Haiti can go screw themselves the next time God decides to smote them and their lack of building codes.
Good luck, John Travolta.
I agree but there's a better chance of you and I opening up for pearl jam on new years in tel aviv then cutting off foreign aid to Israel. What's our "aid" to Haiti compared to Israel anyway?
I agree that "aid" to Israel is BS. Dumb way to justify taxpayer money for aid.
But it shouldn't deflect that the US is usually the biggest responder to foreign disaster aid in times of dire. No matter the country.
I'm looking forward to playing "Drifting" on acoustic guitar in Tel Aviv next May.
The USA has No moral standing over any other countries/societies. We are Evildoers.
Might as well just drop the charade.
I hope we cut off all foreign aid. Embrace the evil and save taxpayer money. Haiti can go screw themselves the next time God decides to smote them and their lack of building codes.
Good luck, John Travolta.
I agree but there's a better chance of you and I opening up for pearl jam on new years in tel aviv then cutting off foreign aid to Israel. What's our "aid" to Haiti compared to Israel anyway?
I agree that "aid" to Israel is BS. Dumb way to justify taxpayer money for aid.
But it shouldn't deflect that the US is usually the biggest responder to foreign disaster aid in times of dire. No matter the country.
I'm looking forward to playing "Drifting" on acoustic guitar in Tel Aviv next May.
Biggest in terms of dollars or % of GDP? May? You mean September?
I'm covering pearl jam covering Otis Reed the dock of the bay
Industrial band Skinny Puppy sent a $666,000 invoice to US Department of Defense for allegedly using its music to torture prisoners in Guantanamo Bay.
“We sent them an invoice for our musical services considering they had gone ahead and used our music without our knowledge and used it as an actual weapon against somebody,” Skinny Puppy's Cevin Key told CTV News.“I wouldn’t want to be subjected to any overly loud music for six to 12 hours at a time without a break."
Above, Skinny Puppy's "Dig It" from their 1986 album, Mind: The Perpetual Intercourse.
Industrial band Skinny Puppy sent a $666,000 invoice to US Department of Defense for allegedly using its music to torture prisoners in Guantanamo Bay.
“We sent them an invoice for our musical services considering they had gone ahead and used our music without our knowledge and used it as an actual weapon against somebody,” Skinny Puppy's Cevin Key told CTV News.“I wouldn’t want to be subjected to any overly loud music for six to 12 hours at a time without a break."
Above, Skinny Puppy's "Dig It" from their 1986 album, Mind: The Perpetual Intercourse.
Last time I checked, a CD costs about $15. Did the cia illegally download their CD?
“Like many Americans, I was shocked and disgusted by the Senate Intelligence Committee’s publication of a torture report today,” Cheney said in a prepared statement. “The transparency and honesty found in this report represent a gross violation of our nation’s values.”
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
As always you bring up many thought provoking well thought out questions.I think I'm trying to figure out why I feel the way I do about this subject.I know I don't want innocent people tormented,tortured or detained without cause,and do I agree with what is considered torture.I also want and think we need a strong clandestine intelligence gathering system.And we should go to great lengths to protect our interests.But at what cost?Will it bite us in the ass later?
So I find myself at a bit of crossroads on this topic.The Muddy Waters of which you speak may be in my head on this one.
Our is The US and her Close allies (The west).<br />
Interests are safe guarding our people home and away.And protecting our Buisness/financial interests globally.
JC already called you on this - and your reply verifies it:
The bolded sentence in the first post, and your clarification, is where you cross the line from supporter of humanitarianism, with a wish for safety and security for your own people, to become a supporter of global capitalist imperialism, who puts money above the interests of subject nations and the lives of it's inhabitants.
What would happen if a foreign military decided to protect it's people and it's business interests on American soil? What gives the US the right to do so? Why do some people have such a hard time with empathy? Can you never put yourself in another's shoes? Pure exceptionalism....but some just can't see that.....or maybe they do see it, and these conversations are just hot air meant to (again) muddy the waters and absolve guilt or paint a pretty picture....because just saying what they really think would make them look greedy and overly self-interested? not sure.
As always you bring up many thought provoking well thought out questions.I think I'm trying to figure out why I feel the way I do about this subject.I know I don't want innocent people tormented,tortured or detained without cause,and do I agree with what is considered torture.I also want and think we need a strong clandestine intelligence gathering system.And we should go to great lengths to protect our interests.But at what cost?Will it bite us in the ass later?
So I find myself at a bit of crossroads on this topic.The Muddy Waters of which you speak may be in my head on this one.
Our is The US and her Close allies (The west).<br />
Interests are safe guarding our people home and away.And protecting our Buisness/financial interests globally.
JC already called you on this - and your reply verifies it:
The bolded sentence in the first post, and your clarification, is where you cross the line from supporter of humanitarianism, with a wish for safety and security for your own people, to become a supporter of global capitalist imperialism, who puts money above the interests of subject nations and the lives of it's inhabitants.
What would happen if a foreign military decided to protect it's people and it's business interests on American soil? What gives the US the right to do so? Why do some people have such a hard time with empathy? Can you never put yourself in another's shoes? Pure exceptionalism....but some just can't see that.....or maybe they do see it, and these conversations are just hot air meant to (again) muddy the waters and absolve guilt or paint a pretty picture....because just saying what they really think would make them look greedy and overly self-interested? not sure.
Bold the whole thought.Im asking a question.dont just pull out half of it.
And responding to one.
I don't think wanting to protect my fellow country men from terrorist attacks is being self interested.And I don't agree with the accusation that one cannot support humanitarianism and want safety for our people as well.Thats a very narrow view.
And Drowned no ,another military conducting any operation on American soil would not be welcome.But you ask what gives us the right?Well,some of these nations suck many billions of dollars from uncle SAMs generous tit.As long as the hand is out then that is what allows us access.
I notice you dropped the business interest angle from your response. Why? Doesn't fit your narrative?
I bolded the one sentence because as stated, it's where you cross the line. Protecting your countrymen from terrorism does not excuse military intervention in a sovereign state. How do other nations handle these threats? Diplomacy, evacuations, etc. we use humanitarianism to implement policies and actions that inevitably benefit our business communities. Every time. If humanitarianism was the true driving factor, we would have military interventions in a lot of places we don't now. And since when does giving aid give us 'access' as you call it? That kinda proves my point - you view your humanitarianism with strings. And think it's ok to do what you want as a result.
Drowned I didn't mention the buisness angle again because it is a by product of what I already stated.Right or wrong it comes with it.its a given.
As for access for aid. Yeah it comes with strings in many parts of the world. Not all military based.some commercially based, some just straight up humanitarian stuff.look it's not a perfect system.But USA is without a doubt the most benevolent,Philanthropic nation on earth.Again we are not perfect in both action and intention.But damn if we ain't always there to help.
Drowned I didn't mention the buisness angle again because it is a by product of what I already stated.Right or wrong it comes with it.its a given.
As for access for aid. Yeah it comes with strings in many parts of the world. Not all military based.some commercially based, some just straight up humanitarian stuff.look it's not a perfect system.But USA is without a doubt the most benevolent,Philanthropic nation on earth.Again we are not perfect in both action and intention.But damn if we ain't always there to help.
Drowned I didn't mention the buisness angle again because it is a by product of what I already stated.Right or wrong it comes with it.its a given.
As for access for aid. Yeah it comes with strings in many parts of the world. Not all military based.some commercially based, some just straight up humanitarian stuff.look it's not a perfect system.But USA is without a doubt the most benevolent,Philanthropic nation on earth.Again we are not perfect in both action and intention.But damn if we ain't always there to help.
Drowned I didn't mention the buisness angle again because it is a by product of what I already stated.Right or wrong it comes with it.its a given.
As for access for aid. Yeah it comes with strings in many parts of the world. Not all military based.some commercially based, some just straight up humanitarian stuff.look it's not a perfect system.But USA is without a doubt the most benevolent,Philanthropic nation on earth.Again we are not perfect in both action and intention.But damn if we ain't always there to help.
This isn't chicken or egg.... I'm telling you.....business is not a byproduct of charity, nor intervention. It's the other way around. If you think capitalism is driven by humanitarianism....well, I've got a bridge to sell you.
Still, there is no denying that the US is very charitable! I think your low taxes might skew the numbers a bit when it comes to charity per capita (most of you guys would shit yer pants if you saw what your wage looked like after deductions in Canada), but of course I recognize the US as philanthropic. Still, the benefits of that aid is up for debate. You see a lot of hype when westerners are filling sand bags in a flood zone, or doctors are helping kids....rightly so.
But I don't think that kind of aid is the typical aid flowing out of the country. Aid from some of th bigger NGO's is often set up a covert political funding. Even aid from missionary charities can have ulterior motives - working on behalf of business interests. They've been caught doing this in central/south America a few times. The most obvious example of how aid is NOT aid - is 'development aid' from western-controlled bankers. This is NOT a country (read: a country's people), suckling off uncle sam's tit! It is not normally some poor nation approaching the US with their hand out. It is usually Western businessmen approaching the government of a poor country with a business proposal. The corrupt government accepts it (usually with lined pockets), knowing full well it will almost exclusively benefit the upper class of their country - with often devastating results amongst the poor. You want to increase your GDP by 10% next year? Build a hydro-electric plant....with our contractors....at interest. That plant will only improve the lives of people with the infrastructure to use it, obviously. The profits will mainly be kept by the contractors and bankers who pushed the plan, and the people who approved it. ....And it will displace 10,000 indigenous people. Yet in the west, it's promoted as US companies working to improve lives in the 3rd world. And this is the kind of shit that we use to justify military might to 'protect our interests'? When those locals start fire bombing the US contractors who are there to bulldoze their land, destroy their livelihoods....we send in armies or fund mercenaries to kill them? Cause this shit happens all the time, and it's what you're defending. anyway, I'm ranting and off topic now.
Drowned I didn't mention the buisness angle again because it is a by product of what I already stated.Right or wrong it comes with it.its a given.
As for access for aid. Yeah it comes with strings in many parts of the world. Not all military based.some commercially based, some just straight up humanitarian stuff.look it's not a perfect system.But USA is without a doubt the most benevolent,Philanthropic nation on earth.Again we are not perfect in both action and intention.But damn if we ain't always there to help.
This isn't chicken or egg.... I'm telling you.....business is not a byproduct of charity, nor intervention. It's the other way around. If you think capitalism is driven by humanitarianism....well, I've got a bridge to sell you.
Still, there is no denying that the US is very charitable! I think your low taxes might skew the numbers a bit when it comes to charity per capita (most of you guys would shit yer pants if you saw what your wage looked like after deductions in Canada), but of course I recognize the US as philanthropic. Still, the benefits of that aid is up for debate. You see a lot of hype when westerners are filling sand bags in a flood zone, or doctors are helping kids....rightly so.
But I don't think that kind of aid is the typical aid flowing out of the country. Aid from some of th bigger NGO's is often set up a covert political funding. Even aid from missionary charities can have ulterior motives - working on behalf of business interests. They've been caught doing this in central/south America a few times. The most obvious example of how aid is NOT aid - is 'development aid' from western-controlled bankers. This is NOT a country (read: a country's people), suckling off uncle sam's tit! It is not normally some poor nation approaching the US with their hand out. It is usually Western businessmen approaching the government of a poor country with a business proposal. The corrupt government accepts it (usually with lined pockets), knowing full well it will almost exclusively benefit the upper class of their country - with often devastating results amongst the poor. You want to increase your GDP by 10% next year? Build a hydro-electric plant....with our contractors....at interest. That plant will only improve the lives of people with the infrastructure to use it, obviously. The profits will mainly be kept by the contractors and bankers who pushed the plan, and the people who approved it. ....And it will displace 10,000 indigenous people. Yet in the west, it's promoted as US companies working to improve lives in the 3rd world. And this is the kind of shit that we use to justify military might to 'protect our interests'? When those locals start fire bombing the US contractors who are there to bulldoze their land, destroy their livelihoods....we send in armies or fund mercenaries to kill them? Cause this shit happens all the time, and it's what you're defending. anyway, I'm ranting and off topic now.
We are talking the same thing here Drowned.I think we are on the same page with the why and how.Only difference is our view on what part is good and what's bad.But props man .you can write a fucking response.All that Schollarly stuff really paid off for you.All joking aside ,you always have great substance to your postings.Even if I don't always agree with it.Cheers.
I don't know if there will be retaliatory attacks in the future and neither does Glenn Greenwald. I hope he is right and that list remains blank. Kind of early though for him to be taking a victory lap.
dick cheney said he would go for torture again in a second.
can we arrest this motherfucker?? is there a statute of limitations on human rights violations?
I would rather see him arrested and tried for the murder of thousands of US troops that he led into Iraq based on lies. I'm sure they could tack on torture charges.
Comments
Might as well just drop the charade.
As always you bring up many thought provoking well thought out questions.I think I'm trying to figure out why I feel the way I do about this subject.I know I don't want innocent people tormented,tortured or detained without cause,and do I agree with what is considered torture.I also want and think we need a strong clandestine intelligence gathering system.And we should go to great lengths to protect our interests.But at what cost?Will it bite us in the ass later?
So I find myself at a bit of crossroads on this topic.The Muddy Waters of which you speak may be in my head on this one.
Interests are safe guarding our people home and away.And protecting our Buisness/financial interests globally.
Good luck, John Travolta.
What's our "aid" to Haiti compared to Israel anyway?
But it shouldn't deflect that the US is usually the biggest responder to foreign disaster aid in times of dire. No matter the country.
I'm looking forward to playing "Drifting" on acoustic guitar in Tel Aviv next May.
May? You mean September?
I'm covering pearl jam covering Otis Reed the dock of the bay
When available ill post it with comments.
http://boingboing.net/2014/12/15/skinny-puppy-invoices-us-milit.html
Industrial band Skinny Puppy sent a $666,000 invoice to US Department of Defense for allegedly using its music to torture prisoners in Guantanamo Bay.
“We sent them an invoice for our musical services considering they had gone ahead and used our music without our knowledge and used it as an actual weapon against somebody,” Skinny Puppy's Cevin Key told CTV News.“I wouldn’t want to be subjected to any overly loud music for six to 12 hours at a time without a break."
Above, Skinny Puppy's "Dig It" from their 1986 album, Mind: The Perpetual Intercourse.
http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/cheney-calls-international-ban-torture-reports
“Like many Americans, I was shocked and disgusted by the Senate Intelligence Committee’s publication of a torture report today,” Cheney said in a prepared statement. “The transparency and honesty found in this report represent a gross violation of our nation’s values.”
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
The bolded sentence in the first post, and your clarification, is where you cross the line from supporter of humanitarianism, with a wish for safety and security for your own people, to become a supporter of global capitalist imperialism, who puts money above the interests of subject nations and the lives of it's inhabitants.
What would happen if a foreign military decided to protect it's people and it's business interests on American soil? What gives the US the right to do so? Why do some people have such a hard time with empathy? Can you never put yourself in another's shoes? Pure exceptionalism....but some just can't see that.....or maybe they do see it, and these conversations are just hot air meant to (again) muddy the waters and absolve guilt or paint a pretty picture....because just saying what they really think would make them look greedy and overly self-interested? not sure.
And responding to one.
I don't think wanting to protect my fellow country men from terrorist attacks is being self interested.And I don't agree with the accusation that one cannot support humanitarianism and want safety for our people as well.Thats a very narrow view.
And Drowned no ,another military conducting any operation on American soil would not be welcome.But you ask what gives us the right?Well,some of these nations suck many billions of dollars from uncle SAMs generous tit.As long as the hand is out then that is what allows us access.
I bolded the one sentence because as stated, it's where you cross the line. Protecting your countrymen from terrorism does not excuse military intervention in a sovereign state. How do other nations handle these threats? Diplomacy, evacuations, etc. we use humanitarianism to implement policies and actions that inevitably benefit our business communities. Every time. If humanitarianism was the true driving factor, we would have military interventions in a lot of places we don't now.
And since when does giving aid give us 'access' as you call it? That kinda proves my point - you view your humanitarianism with strings. And think it's ok to do what you want as a result.
As for access for aid. Yeah it comes with strings in many parts of the world. Not all military based.some commercially based, some just straight up humanitarian stuff.look it's not a perfect system.But USA is without a doubt the most benevolent,Philanthropic nation on earth.Again we are not perfect in both action and intention.But damn if we ain't always there to help.
And switch up positions constantly
We are ALWAYS there to help.
Even if we created the disaster.
Exactly Scott!
Still, there is no denying that the US is very charitable! I think your low taxes might skew the numbers a bit when it comes to charity per capita (most of you guys would shit yer pants if you saw what your wage looked like after deductions in Canada), but of course I recognize the US as philanthropic. Still, the benefits of that aid is up for debate. You see a lot of hype when westerners are filling sand bags in a flood zone, or doctors are helping kids....rightly so.
But I don't think that kind of aid is the typical aid flowing out of the country. Aid from some of th bigger NGO's is often set up a covert political funding. Even aid from missionary charities can have ulterior motives - working on behalf of business interests. They've been caught doing this in central/south America a few times. The most obvious example of how aid is NOT aid - is 'development aid' from western-controlled bankers. This is NOT a country (read: a country's people), suckling off uncle sam's tit! It is not normally some poor nation approaching the US with their hand out. It is usually Western businessmen approaching the government of a poor country with a business proposal. The corrupt government accepts it (usually with lined pockets), knowing full well it will almost exclusively benefit the upper class of their country - with often devastating results amongst the poor. You want to increase your GDP by 10% next year? Build a hydro-electric plant....with our contractors....at interest. That plant will only improve the lives of people with the infrastructure to use it, obviously. The profits will mainly be kept by the contractors and bankers who pushed the plan, and the people who approved it. ....And it will displace 10,000 indigenous people. Yet in the west, it's promoted as US companies working to improve lives in the 3rd world. And this is the kind of shit that we use to justify military might to 'protect our interests'? When those locals start fire bombing the US contractors who are there to bulldoze their land, destroy their livelihoods....we send in armies or fund mercenaries to kill them? Cause this shit happens all the time, and it's what you're defending. anyway, I'm ranting and off topic now.
could not have said it better.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
We are talking the same thing here Drowned.I think we are on the same page with the why and how.Only difference is our view on what part is good and what's bad.But props man .you can write a fucking response.All that Schollarly stuff really paid off for you.All joking aside ,you always have great substance to your postings.Even if I don't always agree with it.Cheers.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
can we arrest this motherfucker?? is there a statute of limitations on human rights violations?
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
I would rather see him arrested and tried for the murder of thousands of US troops that he led into Iraq based on lies. I'm sure they could tack on torture charges.