fearlessly proclaiming the truth & the other truth! voice of the teknoshamanic institute
The Most Offensive Defence is A Spun Offence.
Published on June 8, 2005 By kingbee In Politics

gulag.

amazing that one small word can be so powerful or evoke such a horrific response. 

i first became familiar with the concept while reading 'one day in the life of ivan denisovich' by alexander solzhenitsyn when i was still in grade school (clearly my recreational reading tastes were a bit precocious as well as extreme).  for a week during the summer between 7th and 8th grade, i shivered in the heat and humidity of late july in da motah city as ivan and i--convict slave laborers--endured the frozen extremes of siberia and the brutally inhumane excesses of a pitiless totalitarian state that had nullified our lives.

why were we there?  for how long would we remain?  there was no way of knowing.  worst of all, no one--least of all our former families and friends-- except those who kept us here and our fellow slaves knew for sure we even existed. 

amnesty international's international report, released on may 25, 2005, characterizes as a gulag the facility at guantanamo, cuba where the us holds some of  those captured in its war on terrorism.   not surprisingly, the current administration refutes that designation.  according to bush, it's an obvious case of disassembly (which he defines as lying).

not surprisingly, there are more than a few ju bloggers who are outraged by the amnesty international report.  

the war on terror is an honorable endeavor being waged against those who hate us and are willing to go to any length to destroy us because--as our president has proclaimed--they hate freedom.

finally  amnesty international has revealed its true agenda  and shown it hates us and our freedom as well.

how could we have been so foolish as to believe that an organization which has, for years, despised  the freedom enjoyed in north korea, china, vietnam, algeria, myanmar,  the maldives, turkey, morroco, today's russia, the former soviet union and its eastern european colonies, chile (under pinochet), argentina, cuba, the sudan and dozens of other bastion of freedom countries wouldn't eventually add us to the list.? 

fortunately we have plenty of examples on which to base our response---thanks to those nations for which this whole thing is old hat.

before we go there, let's clear something up.  guantanamo isn't a network of slave labor camps in the wilds of siberia into which millions of our own citizens disappear, most never to return.  hell, it's not even cold there.

on the other hand, perhaps amnesty international meant it figuratively.  after all, there are 500 people who've been locked up in gitmo for nearly 3 years without ever having been charged with any crime.  as far as they know, it could be another 20 years before they'll have a day in court.  their families have no clue as to their status.  no one except the force that's detaining them knows whether they're well or ill or alive.

nawwww.  that couldn't be it.

ai has a lotta nerve.  after all, didn't the president pledge in his 2nd inaugural address that the us was dedicated to spreading democracy and freedom.  aren't we spending billions and putting our military into harm's way to do just that in iraq?  if you can't trust our government, who can you trust?  

(who better to answer that question than those of you who join heston in announcing that they'll have to pry your gun outta your cold dead hands.  but then again, amnesty international doesn't own any guns huh?)

so anyway we're busy spreading freedom and democracy  not only by deed but by example--certainly there's no better advertisement than good example--and all amnesty international can do is criticize us.

no wonder cheney took offense and won't take ai seriously.  he's a flexible guy and just because he, the president and rumsfeld used to take them seriously enough to cite them multiple times in white house position papers  on hussein's iraq  Link  (In August 2001 Amnesty International released a report entitled Iraq -- Systematic Torture of Political Prisoners, which detailed the systematic and routine use of torture against suspected political opponents and, occasionally, other prisoners. Amnesty International also reports "Detainees have also been threatened with bringing in a female relative, especially the wife or the mother, and raping her in front of the detainee. Some of these threats have been carried out." ) , don't mean he cant change his mind.  or maybe his mind is the same but amnesty international is different. ( i can hear him singing along with joe walsh...'everybody's so different, i'm still the same.' )

fact is, amnesty international provided a good deal of the source material used by bush, cheney and rumsfeld to justify their planned invasion of iraq.  so having ai slam em now must really not bother them a bit because the organization just doesn't have any credibility

not that everything ai had to say about america was bad.  they approved the supreme court ruling that requires a court hearing for prisoners of the 'war on terror'.   big deal huh?

the final straw has to be ai's outrageous demands that the us stop secretly holding prisoners incommunicado (ghost prisoners), permit the international red cross access to all prisoners, ensure due process for all prisoners, implement an independent investigation of all allegations of torture and prosecute all who cause detainees to be brutalized or tortured while in the custody of the us. 

if that sounds familiar, it's probably cuz those damn amnesty international freedom-haters stole it directly from past presidents who demanded the soviet union do the same thing at their gulags.

if all of this pisses you off, you're not alone.

i'm pissed off too.  pissed off really badly that my country has engaged in the type of thing for which we used to condemn rogue states like north korea and the soviet union.   pissed off that my president says he wants to promote democracy and freedom throughout the world while eroding the essentials of democracy and freedom at home. pissed off that such blatant hypocrisy is ignored and--even worse--approved by those who claim to be the most stalwart advocates of the rule of law and our constitution.

one final note: in another thread, one commentor said he was dismayed because amnesty international had diminished the horror of the gulag in its report.  after all, there's no comparison.   this same commentor claims to be a student of history.  not a very good student in my opinion or he'd remember that gulags--like rome--aren't built in a day.  once you lay the first stone, the next one is a little easier. 


Comments (Page 9)
13 PagesFirst 7 8 9 10 11  Last
on Jun 10, 2005
Not a terrorist, just a butthead.


I appreciate the love
on Jun 10, 2005
We were well hated long before 9/11


Have you thought of maybe why people were incited to hate the American way? I know this is a bit of a tangent, but I don't think its as simple as Muslims being told to kill Americans as part of their religious teaching. I know that extremists do this but I think various factors over he years have added to the hatred and given the extremists much more ammunition against the west and America in particular.

Americans are not simply hated because they are Americans.
on Jun 10, 2005
Oh I know why we are hated; the Prince of Saudia Arabia who after the 9/11 presented mayor Guiliani with a $10,000,000.00 check and the advice that we should change our policy in Israel. Translation: Stand by while the Arab world finshes what Hitler started, the extermination of every Jew walking the earth. I am a supporter of no religion in particular, I was raised Baptist but I practice nothing now. I have nothing against any religion, even Muslims. In fact, I work at a facility that produces Kosher certified products and I find Rabbi's to be quite the pain in the ass. I, like apparently all of our previous administration for the last forty years simply will not sit back and watch Israel be destroyed, for that we are hatred.

Bin Laden hates us also because of our presence in Saudi Arabia, he wants to execute the entire monarchy as convert Saudi Arabia to a Muslim state. Again, we won't let him do that.

So it seems to me that terrorists pretty much hate the fact that we won't give them a free a pass to kill whomever they wish.

That would go against your principles would it not? Or are the rules that while we cannot be barbarians, it's okay to stand back and watch someone else do so?
on Jun 10, 2005
Americans are not simply hated because they are Americans.


Yes it is that simple, you are hated because you are an American. A terrorist would not distinguish you from the actual policy makers who create the policies that they despise so.
on Jun 10, 2005
I am going to type real slow so maybe you will understand. No smug comments, a real answer is what I am looking for. I don't care about the "appropriate" guidelines. Once again, these people have been taught from birth, by their church, that we are all evil (even your bleeding heart) and we should all die. These people are willing to blow themselves up as long as they take a few Americans with them so that they get their 70 virgins in paradise. These people are not a bunch of patriotic men paid by their government to kill enemy soldiers. These men kill men, women, children, babies. These men did not come here and target just military installations; no they hit two buildings with the express purpose of killing as many American CITIZENS as humanly possible. Yes, before you reply, I don't need to be reminded that they also went for the pentagon and the white house. We are not interrogating a man simply wanted for murder. We are interrogating people who may just have the information that could save thousands of lives. Look at these guys in California, under the right amount of "stress" shall we say, they might could give us the location of the terrorist training camp that they recently visited so we could put it out of business.


Very well said.
on Jun 10, 2005
Yes it is that simple, you are hated because you are an American. A terrorist would not distinguish you from the actual policy makers who create the policies that they despise so.


See, you seem to be making assumptions there. I'm not actually an American.

Also, you seem to point to the problem in your own statement: the policies and the policy makers
on Jun 10, 2005
See, you seem to be making assumptions there. I'm not actually an American.

Also, you seem to point to the problem in your own statement: the policies and the policy makers


Ah, Vune and you continue to merely point at problems rather than offering your own solution.
on Jun 10, 2005
See, you seem to be making assumptions there. I'm not actually an American.

Also, you seem to point to the problem in your own statement: the policies and the policy makers


Ah, Vune and you continue to merely point at problems rather than offering your own solution.

I think that one of the main points about this that some people seem to be missing is that its not as black and white as its made out to be.

Therefore, the waters are not being muddied, the waters are being shown as they are, not as someone tells you they are


The fact that your answer to my statement is to point out that you are not American only shows that you would rather muddy the waters rather than address the real issue. I was again making a simple analogy and you use statement to avoid the real issue that the reality for Americans is that we hated as a whole for our governments policies towards Israel. You would rather address the issue of your nationality rather than debating the issues that our, excuse me, MY, president grapples with daily.

on Jun 10, 2005
You would rather address the issue of your nationality rather than debating the issues that our, excuse me, MY, president grapples with daily.


I'm quite glad he is your president, rather than mine

As a guy from Belfast I know a little about the everyday issues that go with terrorism.

They implemented a policy in NI during the 70s called internment. This was where the British government were able to detain terror suspects without evidence, due to the potential threat that they posed.

It failed miserably on the security level (most of the big players got away) and on the "publicity" level.

Surely if this is the answer, that you are so concerned with, they would still be using it but, guess what, they don't

I am interested in answers too, but in my mind I would prefer them to be the right answers. It wouldn't be a good arguement post-exam if you had given all the questions an answer, only to find it was the wrong answer, or an answer to the wrong question.

There I go dodging the issue again....
on Jun 10, 2005
How can we debate the issues when someone uses the phrase:

I don't care about someone else's opinion
on Jun 10, 2005
king feel free to delete , I have had this kind of problem several times myself and have had to delete them.


mm
on Jun 10, 2005
it's my understanding the detainees in guantanamo are supposed to be more than mere combatants. if


Actually, less than. Their status is akin to a spy. The GC does not apply to them since they were not wearing the uniform of a soveriegn country.
on Jun 10, 2005
it happen more frequently since me waz hired to do da miss cleo ting. wanna know wot you be tinkin of tursday nex? gurl...cawwlllll me nowwww!


That is pretty damn good! You should try a whole blog on Ms Cleo.!
on Jun 10, 2005
How can we debate the issues when someone uses the phrase:

I don't care about someone else's opinion


Vune, let me go back and get my FULL quote which was an exchange with Tex:






I am going to type real slow so maybe you will understand. No smug comments, a real answer is what I am looking for.


You see, even typing slow did no good, you have yet again ducked one simple question with another bunch of smug comments. I am sincerely asking for what you think we should do with these guys. When I say "these guys" I mean radical Muslims bred from the same cloth as the guys who attacked us on 9/11; who believe the killing of Americans will get them to paradise loaded with 70 virgins. Don't get technical, obviously the men who died during the 9/11 attacks are not at Gitmo, but they are the same breed. Again, you try to attack me with your "liberal intellect". You are only muddying the waters and avoiding answering a very difficult question that our president is forced to answer on a daily basis.

That says a lot about you. If you followed the link I posted, you would find some great information...answers. The link gave a detailed account of methods used and considered for use, their level of success, where they were used, the legality of such methods, etc.


As to your link; I don't care about the link, I don't care about someone else's opinion. I actually did follow the link and the long and short of what I found is they were unable to decide if Americans were assholes or not.


As you can see from the context, I am telling Tex that I wanted HER opinion and HER answer, not a link to someone else's editortial. I did not care to read someone elses opinion, I wanted her to offer her own.

Please Vune, if you can't offer the answer or solution that I have asked of you, don't resort to misquoting me or quoting me out of context.


There I go dodging the issue again....


Indeed you have. While you have done another marvelous job of contradicting me, you have still offered no solution.
on Jun 10, 2005
Americans are not simply hated because they are Americans.


Yes they are. Jealousy and Envy does that to normally rational people.
13 PagesFirst 7 8 9 10 11  Last