Thanks, Sparkle!
Thought of it just as I was going to sleep last night. Went with it this morning . . .
-T
Sure, sometimes making fun can make a good point. This time it downplays something entirely unacceptable. The Bush administration's indifference to the situation justifies the extensive exposure being given to the scandal.
Also, the fact that the actual instances of Quran mistreatment were replaced by smirking at Qurans, stacking Qurans, etc. in the article implies that the Quran abuse was not wrong.
No, making the story out to be like it was as bad as putting people feet first in a shredder like Saddam did, is what is wrong. The people ranting over this are trying to make our military look bad. They want to paint the whole military with this brush. It isn't true and it isn't fair.
No one thinks it was right. And the Bush administration was in NO WAY indifferent to it. It was investigated long before it was a story. In fact that is how it became a story, through the Military sources.
We agree it was wrong LWG, we just disagree how the left is using it.
Umm, Sparkle? The shredder story has been debunked. It was false. Using it just lets the DU crowd paint you as a wingnut who prefers propaganda to truth. It doesn't help your case.
Regards, C
Really? Show me how it's been debunked? Come on Cernig. Your gonna start defending Saddam, are you? They had rape rooms for heaven's sake. Would you rather me use that story? Or some other form of torture he used?
or the video of a hand being cut off or arms broken.
Shredder story debunked? Haven't heard that. For the sake of argument, I will provisionally accept that it didn't happen.....
Okay. Saddam is still a monster.
Some people would rather defend Saddam than admit America was right.
Yeah, you take out that shredder story and he's a big pussycat.
By the way, Qu'ran abuse stories still being debunked, even as we speak.
Overblown bs. Even if it was all just like the NYT wants me to think it is, I still wouldn't care.
I have never defended Saddam.
Yes Sparkle, I would prefer you used true stories. Wouldn't you? I was trying to help you, not hinder you.
C
Okay, Cernig, remove "plastic shredder", replace with "mass graves."
Happy?
Cernig, just show me where it has been debunked.
"Debunked" might be a bit strong. It seems rather to have been based on uncollaborated testimony and rumor.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/
analys...1155399,00.html
On the other hand, there seemed to be no shortage of other horrors:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/art...-
614607,00.html
There is no excuse for desecrating anyone's scripture, even accidentally. But it's probably not as bad as beheading Christians for practicing their faith.
http://www.ctlibrary.com/ct/1997...pt1/
7ta86a.html
A few problems here...
1) It's the Guardian who has a clear political agenda, so I no more believe them than they believe the person who told the shredder story.
2) Since no one argues that Saddam did quite a few horrors, why jump on the authencity of this one. Even the article didn't say it wasn't true, it just said it MIGHT not be true. But the left will grab onto ANYTHING to prove their point. Which is what? Saddam wasn't THAT BAD????
3) Why would anyone make up a story about a shredder when any other horror would have done? You have to have quite an imagination to come up with that one. And once again, Why lie? The truth is bad enough.
This is war, and there is worry about the handling of captive’s books? Flush all their books and all the captives if that helps us to win! If it is beneficial to the war effort and there is hope that these folks will ever morph into the elusive docile muslims that are talked about on TV, but never shown, then kindness and respect should be shown. If on the other hand, release or conversion to meekness is impossible, then urine and flushing make for a good interrogation tactic.
Repeated phrases such as "Quran mistreatment" or "Quran abuse” attempt to imply that prisoners are being mistreated and abused. The idea of an enemy of the U.S.A. getting abused turns the emotionally mixed-up liberals into howling moonbats. Moonbats who howl together have a feeling of belonging while at the same time being rebellious. I’m glad the Bush administration has shown indifference because that is what attention it deserves. I suppose a publicly funded shelter for all the mistreated and abused Qurans will be floated soon.
Pete, I have to disagree. Although it easy to feel that after what was done to us that mistreatment of the Koran is no big deal and that these are prisoners, we have to keep in mind that there are millions of good people who are muslim and see this book as holy in and of itself. We need to respect it for that reason.
We don't like it when someone burns or flag, do we? We need to be the better people here.
Rightwingsparkle,
How many Iraqi, Saudi, Iranian, etc. flags have you seen burned? How many hate parades with folks holding automatic weapons have you seen march up and down Main Street USA? I believe we already are the better society, and the fact that we ideally would rather not trample beliefs and feelings proves it. Our enemy seeks to provoke the U.S.A. because of the tolerance Americans show for other religions, this is not found in the countries these prisoners originate from.
I truly am concerned about others feelings, and would not go out of my way to provoke anyone (Christian, Jew, Muslim, Atheist, or whatever). What I say, is if some pee on a book will help save a loved ones life, then let the pee flow. For anyone who disagrees try looking at a photo of someone you love and say to yourself that you would rather have them killed then pee on a book. Pee to keep the country and its citizens safe. Pee just because your bladder is full and there is a book that someone else find sacred, well that would be stupid.
"I believe we already are the better society, and the fact that we ideally would rather not trample beliefs and feelings proves it."
So having ideals puts someone at such a high moral level that they no longer have to follow those ideals?
Leftwingglimmer,
Do you believe in a “high moral level” or do you find that everything is relative?
I ask because relativists often fail to recognize the difference between aiming for a high moral and failing, and talking about a high moral and doing the opposite. In the first case, failing to reach a high moral objective is humanity striving to be its best. In the second case, portraying a high moral with hollow intent makes a hypocrite. Relativists love to group the two together and call them all hypocrites.
Does our military have people that are mean within the ranks? I say there are mean people in the ranks everywhere. Is it possible some mean people did some mean things at Gitmo? Yes it is possible. However, the U.S.A went to great lengths not to provoke others in this instance. Take a look at an excerpt of a memo distributed to military members.
1) Clean gloves will be put on in full view of the detainees prior to handling
2) Two hands will be used at all times when handling the Koran in manner signaling respect and reverence.
3) Place a clean, dry, detainee towel on the detainee bed and then place the Koran on top of the clean towel in a manner, which allows it to be wrapped without turning the Koran over at any time in a reverent manner. Ensure that the Koran is not placed in offensive areas such as the floor, near the toilet or sink, near the feet, or dirty/wet area when doing this activity.
d. How the detainee reacted, observation by other detainees, and other potentially relevant observations will be annotated appropriately on the block significant activities sheet as well as staff journal.
e. The Koran shall be returned to the librarian, Chaplain, or DOC (in that order).
This does not look like policy of intentional provocation when handling a Koran. It makes me think that it was either mean members in the ranks or interrogation. If it was mean members in the ranks then the issue could have been administratively handled on Gitmo. If it was interrogation, I hope there was the goal of a greater good. I don’t find “high moral” value in killing, but if it comes down to a bank robber holding several people hostage with a gun and he has already killed one, I hope the police will do the greater good and kill the robber to save the others. I also don’t find “high moral” value in hurting feelings, but I do find it to be a higher moral not to let people die rather than hurt someone’s feelings.
Commenting by HaloScan
