We will be back to the silly show right after these messages from your local sponsers.
Don’t click that link…ya here!
Pretty simple, really.
If one were to say “Jeffrey Dahmer is a monster who killed and ate thousands of people”…
That is a wild exaggeration. He didn’t, at most he did about a dozen or less.
But if you are to suggest that because the initial charge is an exaggeration, Mr. Dahmer is an innocent lamb, cruelly victimized and slandered…
Then in that instance, as in this, you are full of it.
As well, I note that you try to imply that if a cite does offer proof beyond the idea of a shadow of a doubt, that means that the cite does not “support” the charge. That’s not quite true either. Proof is evidence carried to its logical extreme, but evidence still exists even if it does not constitute complete “proof”. Evolution is considered to be truth because the preponderance of evidence weighs in its favor, but by its very nature, it is impossible to prove.
As you yourself have conceded, there is quite reliable evidence that some prisoners have been abused by US troops. If no such evidence existed, your assertion that the cite amounts to slander would carry some weight. Unhappily for your argument, it just ain’t so.
Just couldn’t bring yourself to do it, could you? What kind of red-blooded American backs down in the face of freedom-hating traitors like me? Stand up and denounce the treason in our midst!
Likening our troops to Jeffrey Dahmer. Nice.
Fine. By all means explain how the charge is supported.
Evidence of something, yes. Not necessarily the thing you are trying to prove especially if you go beyond the logical extreme as has been done here.
To start with “21 homicides occured among detainees” and just jump to “Our forces have tortured dozens to death,” is ridiculously beyond that logical extreme. There is simply no reason to assume one from the other and to do so is to commit slander against those you accuse.
That evolution occurs is a proven fact. Have you ever eaten corn?
“Prisoners have been abused by US troops,” is a factually accurate statement. It is supportable and proven.
“Our troops have tortured dozens to death” is a different statement. It does not logically follow from the first statement. The first statement does not prove the second. Pretending it does is a slander.
This is simple stuff.
The subject is not whether or not abuse has occured. The subject is not whether or not homicides have occured. The subject is whether or not it can be stated as a fact that US forces have tortured dozens to death.
To say so when it cannot is slander, and worthy of contempt.
Can you state it as a fact?
There was mention of weasels too. What did weasels do to anyone here? Think about the weasels!
Which is the worse treason? To holler against percieved wrongs, injustice and deceipt, or to casually accept them? Which does any country more harm in the long run? Apathy and acqiescence are the worst treasons.
It isn’t JUST the ACLU. There are army officers too. Captain Fishback has effectively thrown away his career to report violations, and when investigated, his claims were verified by the records of the army Inspector General office. There have been other agencies involved too. Meanwhile, FindLaw had a very damning piece explaining the interplay between Abu, GITMO, the Supreme Court ruling that refused to give Bush/Cheney a blank check etc. Their take on it was (short version) places like GITMO were deliberately chosen, to cricumvent all law. Being outside the US, it is presented as not being answerable to US law. However it is not treated as part of Cuba (which also has laws) since it is the GITMO, not Cuba (somehow). Anything goes. Same goes for Abu and any secret or more secret places. Being out of country keeps the “U.S. sheriff” away, being US controlled keeps the “local sheriff” there away. No laws, no oversight, no controls.
Same with the “disagreement” over prisoner status. If they were criminals, they would have rights. If they were POWs they would have rights. As just “bad people” as Bush calls them, they have no rights (non-entities?). No laws, no oversight, no controls.
Finally, there have been reports from various agencies and news for months or more. There have been photos. Just do google searches for Abu and torture, or GITMO and torture. There have already been lots of threads here in the past year, full of linky goodness too. We (the U.S.) even bit the holy shit out of one of our own soldiers and fucked him up permanently, as a “training exercise”. There was a thread about that too.
Anyone who claims to not be aware must have been living on a deserted island. Either that, or a liar.
Don’t confuse silly with facts.
Nothing good can come of it.
This is a false argument. Hollering against perceived “wrongs”, in this case, “US troops torturing dozens of people to death”, is slanderous and malicious. On the other side of your argument, why should anyone accept, casually or otherwise, things that have not been proven to be true?
Which does our country more harm in the long run? Slanderous, malicious, lies against our troops, or not accepting the perceived wrongs without proof?
I’ve calmed down a bit, but not enough that I trust myself in this thread. So, I’m going to make this rather brief.
One of the things being debated is whether or not one specific detainee really died from being smothered. However, I see little reason to question this as the military has already admitted it.
[
Why does the Army hate America and the Army?
Your presence is requested, yet again, at your party.
What I’m not interested in is your continued dismissal of the reports of others. I’m not going to go through 10,000 pages of documents in order to disprove your allegations of the left being traitors and slanderers for reporting what is in the news. Feel free, though, to add the New York Times and AP to Scylla’s list of evildoers.
For those people who are interested AND have some semblance of rationality though, here are a couple news articles about the things Finn posted about.
Over 100 people have died while in custody of the government. Of those, an estimated 21-31 were homicides.
That’s what the ACLU said. I, unlike the ACLU, do not have the time, inclination, nor commitment to sue for the release of all the documentation or to review all of the documents released.
Good for you. Can I now assume all Republicans are as big of rabid, idiotic assholes with reading problems like you?
No, were not debating that. Finn and others have provided citations supporting that proposition. Citations from people who have had the chance to investigate the issues far beyond the abilities of you or I. You’ve made it perfectly clear that you won’t accept that as proof, yet you seem more than willing to do the exact same thing you accuse others of doing: making accusations without evidence.
The majority of my time, clearly wasted with you, has been to point out that you’re full of shit when you say this evidence is a complete fabrication, that the left are traitors and slanderers. Luckily for your massive ego, my posts have been about YOU, as a poster, being a complete and utter asshole. One who gets his panties in a twist over a poster citing to an ACLU report, yet who remains completely blase about the torture and possible murder of prisoners.
Other things that apparently don’t matter to you as much as a post on a fucking message board. If you held this administration to 1/10th of the standard you hold the ACLU, I’d expect you to be marching on Washington.
I don’t give a flying fuck about you or whether you take allegations seriously. What I do care about is your willingness to attack posters and to paint the left with a broad brush. And, actually, I don’t much care about that anymore. I’ve lost the minutiae of respect I had for you, and now I feel quite comfortable lumping you in with Scott Plaid, ElvisL1ves, and Shodan as posters who are not worthy of my attention.
I have to pause for a note of appreciation. This is classic Scylla. As the Ode to Joy is nearly perfect Beethoven, like the “Soup Can” captures the transcendent banality of Warhol…this is weapons-grade Scylla, it demonstrates to near perfection why you cannot spell “analogy” without “a-n-a-l”.
And so concise! Almost zen like, a haiku of horseshit from the Basho of buttwhistle. A lesser craftsman might have shrieked “AHA! Behold! The Arch-traitor 'luc says our troops are flesh-eating zombies!”
But no. Discipline and restraint, a mountain of pure crap stuffed into a mere seven words. It is a wonder that a mind so clotted with venom can function at all, much less so crisply concise, its like watching Steven Hawkings dance the Funky Chicken! Mirabile dickhead!
(Interested readers may wish to be advised of the forthcoming Scylla’s Greatest Hits: I’m Right and Everybody Else Is Full of Shit But Especially You!, due out soon from Remainder House…)
Does that include “If you’re not with me, you’re a traitorous, lying scumbag - 2005”, where he remixes the classic with a new funky backbeat while sampling Martina McBride?
FinnAgain posted this discussion of proof concerning torture in the Updike/New Iskander pitting, but it bears repeating here.
Then you are hardly in a position to state it’s a fact. Somebody else claiming it, doesn’t make it a fact.
How many of those homicides were perpetrated by American Forces. How many of those died as a result of torture?
Stop fucking around and whining about how hard it is to support your little slander and support it or retract it.
That’s an appeal to authority which is another classical logical fallacy. It’s interesting to note that several of the document the ACLU claims to have in its posession and available under the FOIA is not available on its site. Doubly interesting since these are the ones that supposedly contain the damning evidence.
You might want to check the last several pages.
Another appeal to authority. I can play that game too. The army and the government has much more resources than the ACLU. Bush is in charge of the government. He assures us we do not torture.
You see the problem? Appeals to athority are rhetorically useless and logical fallacies.
Why should accept that athority when we have it differently from higher athority, namely the commander-in-chief?
Once again, I hope you see the problem. You can’t just say “these guys say so, it must be true.”
This is untrue. For the fourth or fifth time, I have an explicit agreement from Finnagain that he is a traitor if he cannot prove his allegation. I have permission and mutually agreed upon conditions beforehand.
No just the one who insist slander is fact, and such.
I guess you’re attacking me because you can’t actually support the argument you’re making.
And yet you do nothing for the starving children of Somalia. Why aren’t you worried about that?
Oh stop fucking whining. Support the argument or don’t but stop whining about how unfair it is that somebody actually called you on your slanderous bullshit.
Hmm. Why should we doubt the word of the C-in-C? Boy, that’s a toughie.
For the 5th time, it’s not mine. It’s not an argument I made. I have no independent idea, and I’m not going to spend the time to research it, because, to be honest, I see no purpose. I’ve said this isn’t my slander, but like the brain dead sponge you are, you still don’t get it. Are you really that stupid? On second thought, I’ll withdraw that question.
The fallacy of an appeal to authority requires that the authority not be in a position to be determine the evidence. The ACLU is. They went to court, sued to get the documents, and reviewed them. You have done nothing to question those findings. All of which, for the 10th time, has nothing to do with my point.
It’s what you’re arguing. What I’m arguing is that you’re an asshole. And with every post of yours, you’re doing your best to support my assertion.
Finally an attempt on your part to counter the ACLU’s evidence. Well done. Surprised it took this long, and, to be honest, I’m not putting a whole lot of credence in it. But at least it’s a start.
Bully for you. And the other millions of people who are “left” of you, including myself, who’ve you’ve accused of slander and treason? Did the ACLU agree with you? The New York Times?
You said it was a fabrication? It’s not. What am I missing?
Actually, you’ve done more to support my argument that your an asshole than anything I could have done.
Another classic Scylla dodge.
God you really are that dumb. Willfully, incredibly stupid. You apparently have the ability to read and comprehend, but you still refuse to do so.
Here’s my argument: You’re an asshole. You can argue that you’re not an asshole, and best of luck with that.
Then why defend it?
This doesn’t actually make any sense that I can see. The one thing for sure is that it has nothing to do with the actual fallacy of the appeal to authority.
Yes I did. I did it several times. Each time it was ignored. For the fourth or fifth time, the reports they claim to be quoting from, and claim they received from the FOIA and claim to have put up so that there findings can be verified…
Don’t appear to be there.
The reports are indexed. The specific ones they refer to aren’t there.
I am an asshole. I’ve been claiming it for ages:
http://www.pursam.org/teemings/extras/general/scylla5.html
I’m sorry, for what did I accuse you of slander and treason? Anyway, I know it’s ok since I have Finn’s permission. We made a deal.
I’m sorry. Are you stating that you know for a fact that our soldiers have tortured dozens to death?
That’s true. You don’t debate very well. I’ve been claiming for years that I’m an asshole, so this is a hardly a stunning victory on your part.
The cites don’t prove what you say they do.
Well… yeah. So?
Riiiight. But the problem with your example is that the Army and Bush have a lot to gain by claiming we don’t torture, while the ACLU has no reason to make the shit up, unless you’re paranoid enough to believe that their goal is to smear the president. I mean, the ACLU is liberal, isn’t it? You’re being puposefully disingenuous if you’re saying every authority’s claims has equal value, regardless of whether they have a stake in the issue or not.
It is good when we can reach consensus on the flaming issues of the day.