I think what New Iklander is saying is that he found one straw of an example that he could possibly justify and so he’s going to disregardin anything else because it would mean he’d have to maybe back off on his love of torture as a means to keep order.
After reading the latest New Iskander posts, I’m beginning to wonder whether Saddam Hussein, wherever he is, has a computer and Internet access. :dubious:
Well. That certainly clears things up. For a moment there, I was actually convinced we live in a modern civilized country, and that the Constitution and the concepts of fair trials and “a nation of laws, not men” actually meant something. Turns out I was incorrect, and that those concepts are merely a thin veneer over the reality of humanity as a seething mass of uncontrolled savagery, in which “whatever we can get away with as long as it achieves our ends” is the only law. There sure is a lot of valuable real estate we can recapture when we tear down our courthouses; what shall we build? And I’m sure our police will be a lot happier not needing to bother with all that pesky evidence and procedure; they can just go capture somebody and torture the shit out of them if they think it’s necessary.
“But this is war!” I hear you protest. “This isn’t about police work. This is a war situation, the rules are different. I would never advocate giving our domestic police limitless powers to apprehend and torture criminals in this country. Well, not much, anyway. Maybe a little. But not like that!”
Wrong: wrong, wrong, wrong. We set the example. We are the shining light. We are the country, we hope, to whose success story everyone else aspires. We must be better than those we seek to replace. We cannot fight fire with fire, or we will burn their country to the ground. Sure, it may be necessary to destroy Iraq in order to save it, but you don’t make an omelette without strapping electrodes to the genitals of a few bad eggs, right?
But obviously, none of that really matters, and I thank Isk for showing me the light. There is no city, there is only jungle, and it is teeth and claws that make the difference between survival and subjugation. Honor? Pfft. Doesn’t matter. Don’t talk to me about morals or ethics, they’re just words. We are entrusted with managing the security of a whole new nation; we are the police there, just as we are our own police at home. And if torturing a few hairy, stinky, wrong-religion yokels in some distant desert shithole is what it takes to keep the rest of them in line and preserve the globe for Our Way Of Life, well, that’s what we do. That, from this time forward, is the New American Way. Praise Jesus!
Fuckhead.
New Iskander:
My, what an active fantasy you have.
As reported by Sy Hersh:
So please, Is, do us a favor, and keep your wet dreams to yourself.
Not gonna “whoosh” me! I get it, this is parody, 'cause there is no “Goodness Gracious” or “Heavens to Betsy” so it ain’t my Rummy, nossir! And clearly its a joke when you talk about the Pentagon spending millions on dog leashes 'cause that’s just stupid, and…
Mmmm. I’ll get back to you.
Actually, my first thought on reading it was “sociopath”. Especially when everyone who doesn’t agree with him is themselves falling to mob psychology…
-Joe, doesn’t have a persecution complex
Never let it be said that I didn’t compliment the President: I am happily surprised to see Bush’s quick, strong, unambiguous denunciation of this behavior and his sincere and unambiguous apology to the tortured detainees. I expected the Administration to try to sweep this under the rug, and I am impressed with them for not having done so.
I hope the administration undertakes the remaining three steps. And I hope they suffice.
Daniel
Oh, dear God, Svin. You have such wonderful rhetorical guns. Use them. Don’t resort to stuff like this. I admire you too much for that. A hate speech accusation around here is like a child abuse allegation in the real world. It sticks even whether it is true or not. It is already bad enough that few, if any, people around here even know what hate speech is, but to stretch it to include merely unpopular or inciteful speech is to do every member — including yourself — an enormous disservice. I apologize for bothering you about this, but I wanted to stomp on this like an infant brush fire at the forest’s edge.
Right Lib, because New Iklander has been nothing but a reasonable, well thought out gentleman up until this scandalous accusation. :rolleyes:
Just wanted to mention that this post made me very sad. It pretty much perfectly captures the sadness and disillusionment that I hide under my protective shell of sarcasm.
[…applause] You said a couple of hours ago that there are conservatives whom you respect. You are a liberal whom I respect. Exactly for this sort of intellectual honesty. We need your kind of liberal in the White House.
sigh
If it makes you feel any better, you’re not alone in that sentiment. 
Can’t you see that Sy Hersh quote exactly parallels my assumption?
I know you are a mentally unstable dimwit, but I thought you could read.
Sure, but it entirely evades the issue. Perhaps these were indeed troublemakers. Perhaps the were running a chador porno ring. Perhaps they were malcontents, fomenting protest. Perhaps they made nasty gestures to passersby.
Or perhaps they actually were enemy combatants.
It makes no difference! We, as a nation, are committed to standards of conduct and decency that allows none of what we have seen to be acceptable, regardless of the presumed crimes of the subjects.
If it should prove, as it very well might, that the subjects of this repulsive behavior were more or less innocent, that can only make it that much worse.
It’s all the fault of the women.
Linda Chavez blames the women in the military for all the trouble.
That’s what’s so infuriating about liberals who are liberal just because they don’t know what else to be. You know nothing about your own philosophy. Whatever you strip away from others, you strip away from yourself. In your myopia, you think you’re giving New Iklander just what he deserves by accusing him of hate speech, like some pissed off soccer mom who accuses the caretaker she hates of child molestation. You think you must become scum to fight scum. If hate speech comes to mean saying things that piss people off, then your post to me qualifies. So, back off.
Lib (and jarbabyj):
Maybe I should hop in here before this dispute gets out of hand.
You may note, Lib, that I haven’t accused New Iskander of hate speech, yet. I’ve merely asked if one might consider his posts an example of hate speech. As you wrote yourself:
I confess membership in that class of people. I don’t really know what “hate speech” is, myself.
Before posting my question I searched through the sticky, Discussion of Pit rules, above, looking for guidelines. I didn’t find any, although I did find that many posts requesting some sort of definition.
I left the US nearly two decades ago, and the term “hate speech” was certainly not known to me at the time. There is no real Swedish equivalent to the phrase: direct translations like “hat språk” and “hat tal” don’t really make sense in Swedish.
I do have some vague notion, or guess, that “hate speech” is racially degrading. Is that correct?
I also want to clarify my thinking a bit, so, with all due respect to Godwin, I offer an analogy. Would denial of the holocaust classify as “hate speech?” Because I have no problem granting a holocaust denier the right to express his views, however despicable, in this forum. But here’s the thing: it seems to me that New Iskander’s arguments are the equivalent of a Holocaust promoter. To me it sounds as if he’s saying, “You’re damn right the Holocaust occurred. And those Jew bastards got just what they deserved.” Would such a statement qualify as “hate speech?”
I have no argument with this point, and appreciate you trying to keep me honest. I concede that I find New Iskander’s posts in this thread so revolting that I’ve lost grip on my rationality, and am reacting from the gut. Which is a shame, in a way, because by stooping to his level I’ve done little more than disgrace myself.
jar: I don’t mind Lib raising this issue, since I find it entirely reasonable to hold me to a higher standard than NI.
[Does some quick math, will only be 34 in 2008…]
**Left Hand of Dorkness for President in 2012! 
Daniel
…so I can get the NSA to help me code!
Daniel
In all fairness to the revolting fuck, I don’t think New Iskander is claiming these people deserve their treatment because they’re Arabs or gay or whatever. He seems to believe this kind of thing is normal everywhere - people get the crap beaten out of them - this proves they were guilty, 'cos what ought to happen to guilty people, so it’s OK by him.
You might accuse him of being prejudiced against the whole of the human race, Arabs, Americans, whoever - he seems to have a low opinion of his fellow man.