Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2006 - 01:55pm PT
|
Not naive. I just find it hard to justify using force against prisoners who are already subdued.
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
So. Cal.
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2006 - 02:07pm PT
|
How can anyone call themself *Pro-Choice* and not believe the People of Iraq deserve to have a *choice* (Vote) of who runs their country?
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2006 - 02:25pm PT
|
Whether it's torture by the military or abuse by the cops, it seems that the informal justice that "might' be meeted out isn't worth the loss of crediibility and respect that it brings to the whole proffessions.
The rest of the world doesn't believe we are really trying to sell freedom and democracy, even if some of us still believe in it
Peace
Karl
|
|
Tahoe climber
Trad climber
Austin, TX to South LakeTahoe, CA
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2006 - 05:32pm PT
|
I think it's pretty short-sighted to blaim abuse on the victims, regardless of your experiences. My guess would be that you don't exactly fit the profile of the most commonly abused people. Mid to upper class white woman? What cop would want to beat on them? Are you joking?
As a crime reporter for a number of years, I commonly (every two days or so) interviewed the higher ups in the city police and the sheriff's office. The higher-ups: Chief of Police, Public Information Officer, the County Sheriff, PIO of the Sheriff's Department, etc.
Time and time again, I was struck by the incredible ignorance, incompetence, base character, and nearly complete lack of education. Though there were a couple of intelligent exceptions, the vast majority were, in a word, idiots.
Does this mean they'll abuse people?
Not directly - but I'd guess that sort of person is more prone than others to exhibit that characteristic.
-Aaron
|
|
d-know
Trad climber
electric lady land
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2006 - 07:42pm PT
|
LEB,
your bellicose nationalism and jingoist rhetoric is a very poor excuse for patriotism.
might makes right is the base belief of bandits & bullies.
w/your concept of survival at all costs you probably weren't surprised at all when 911 occured. the chicken came home to roost and you must have known it was bound to happen given your views on the benevolence of our empire.
shed not a tear for those who died that day for this is the cost of emperical ambition, and there will be much more to come. death, destruction, and suffering is all right as long as you have the upper hand, but what goes around comes around.
|
|
d-know
Trad climber
electric lady land
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2006 - 10:40pm PT
|
beneficiaries of empire those poor innocent souls were, hence thier guilt by association. yes it could of been me , my best friend or my mother, but that does not change the fact that this is the cost of empire, lets call it "collateral damage".
lets be honest about it.
mr.churchill spoke truth to power and thoroughly unsettled the thoughts of many.
that to me is patriotism.
american exceptionalism may very well be our biggest weakness.
|
|
Mountain Man
Trad climber
Outer space
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 10, 2006 - 11:39pm PT
|
Karl,
More BS from you. McCarthy's big plum was nailing Alger Hiss, A REAL SPY, who was at FDR's side at Yalta and engineered the give away of Eastern Europe to the Soviets. So your assertion that it was all Hollywood types is specious.
Likewise your assertion that McCarthy would have persecuted Jesus Christ. Joe was deeply religious, and concerned about the REAL communists in our government. A fact you self confessed pinkos will never admit was true. That house of cards.
I expect nothing less from someone who thinks Goodnight and Good Luck is a great movie. One it's boring, two it's propaganda, and three, it's one more effort to blur the truth that McCarthy was right.
Read "Venona" (Yale University Press); "The Secret World Of American Communism" (Yale University Press); "The Haunted Wood" (Random House); "The Venona Secrets" (Regnery); "The Secret History Of the KGB" (Basic Books); "Whittaker Chambers: A Biography" (Modern Library); and "Joseph McCarthy: Reexamining the life and legacy of America's most hated Senator" (Free Press).
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2006 - 11:43pm PT
|
"Joe was deeply religious, and concerned about the REAL communists in our government. A fact you self confessed pinkos will never admit was true. "
You mean, real commies like General Marshall? How about getting your facts straight?
|
|
Mountain Man
Trad climber
Outer space
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 10, 2006 - 11:46pm PT
|
Like you?
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Jul 10, 2006 - 11:55pm PT
|
Yeah, that's me, a commie. But just about anyone who opposes Bush, had second thoughts about the Iraq War, holds the government accountable when it doesn't follow the law, or ever voted Democratic is a commie according to your twisted world view.
Now, care to discuss McCarthy's baseless accusations that General Marshall was a commie?
|
|
Mountain Man
Trad climber
Outer space
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 11, 2006 - 12:00am PT
|
Care to read some books before shooting your mouth off?
It's useless trying to talk to someone with a closed mind.
Rage all you want to, it's a free country, but it's a waste trying to talk with you about anything factual.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Jul 11, 2006 - 12:06am PT
|
I just talked about something factual, but you'd rather insult me. I don't think you even know who General Marshall was, but don't let that get in the way of your hero worshipping.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jul 11, 2006 - 12:21am PT
|
No no
I believe it's YOU Mountain man who is on a rage not dirtbag.
|
|
Dusty
Trad climber
up & down highway 99
|
|
|
Jul 11, 2006 - 12:44am PT
|
MM's a freaking moron....
|
|
426
Sport climber
Buzzard Point, TN
|
|
|
Jul 11, 2006 - 01:02am PT
|
Commie seems to be bandied about a lot lately. Think "COMMUNIST islands" LEB/MM. The thought of lining Fidel's pockets with your 'rent money' doesn't strike a chord, yet?
MM/Jody, no thoughts my post outing the "rest of the world" also voting against "Yoooou...S"??? Do tell!
If the country is "So Free" like you claim why hasn't Padilla (a citizen, FYI) seen his day in court? Think of the amendments here before you answer. We already know you despise the Sep. Clause, which of the others are you hatin' on?
I'll give you extra credit if you can name the prominent Republican from the south who called the new Abu Ghraib tapes (*the ones you haven't seen) "rape and murder".
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jul 11, 2006 - 01:08am PT
|
Senator McCarthy: So Mr. Jesus, is it true that you are a leader of a group that shares it's possessions in common?
Jesus: For us there are no rich and poor. We share all.
Senator McCarthy: and is it true to live with your group, a man must sell everything they have and give it to the poor?
Jesus: A man cannot serve two masters, God and Money
Senator McCarthy: Mr. Jesus, the following passage was attributed to one of your closest followers, can you confirm this?
"The church of believers were of one heart and soul, and none claimed anything as belonging to himself, all property was common property. ... There was not one needy among them, because those who owned land or houses sold them and brought the monies to the apostles, and they would distribute it to whoever had a need." (Acts 4).
Jesus: It is as you say
Senator McCarthy: Sounds kinda commie to me. and the Jesus I heard about is a white guy with blue eyes. Send em to Gitmo!
Alger Hiss wasn't as important as you make him out to be. He served less time in prison that the guys in Gitmo have, was reinstated to the bar, the ruskies, once they were our allies, claimed to have no record of him, and the evidence of him is pretty thin. If McCarthy was part of "nailing" him, it doesn absolve him of his abuse of the law and vilification of some of the greatest military leaders in our county's history, like Marshall.
Peace
karl
|
|
Mountain Man
Trad climber
Outer space
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 11, 2006 - 01:37am PT
|
Senator McCarthy made a speech about General Marshall. Is that a great crime?
Here is the speech
Speech delivered by Senator Joseph McCarthy before the Senate on June 14, 1951
How can we account for our present situation unless we believe that men high in this Government are concerting to deliver us to disaster? This must be the product of a great conspiracy, a conspiracy on a scale so immense as to dwarf any previous such venture in the history of man. A conspiracy of infamy so black that, when it is finally exposed, its principals shall be forever deserving of the maledictions of all honest men.
Who constitutes the highest circles of this conspiracy? About that we cannot be sure. We are convinced that Dean Acheson, who steadfastly serves the interests of nations other than his own, the friend of Alger Hiss, who supported him in his hour of retribution, who contributed to his defense fund, must be high on the roster. The President? He is their captive. I have wondered, as have you, why he did not dispense with so great a liability as Acheson to his own and his party's interests. It is now clear to me. In the relationship of master and man, did you ever hear of man firing master? Truman is a satisfactory front. He is only dimly aware of what is going on.
I do not believe that Mr. Truman is a conscious party to the great conspiracy, although it is being conducted in his name. I believe that if Mr. Truman bad the ability to associate good Americans around him, be would have behaved as a good American in this most dire of all our crises.
It is when we return to an examination of General Marshall's record since the spring of 1942 that we approach an explanation of the carefully planned retreat from victory, Let us again review the Marshall record, as I have disclosed it from all the sources available and all of them friendly. This grim and solitary man it was who, early in World War II, determined to put his impress upon our global strategy, political and military.
It was Marshall, who, amid the din for a "second front now" from every voice of Soviet inspiration, sought to compel the British to invade across the Channel in the fall of 1942 upon penalty of our quitting the war in Europe.
It was Marshall who, after North Africa had been secured, took the strategic direction of the war out of Roosevelt's hands and - who fought the British desire, shared by Mark Clark, to advance from Italy into the eastern plains of Europe ahead of the Russians.
It was a Marshall-sponsored memorandum, advising appeasement of Russia In Europe and the enticement of Russia into the far-eastern war, circulated at Quebec, which foreshadowed our whole course at Tehran, at Yalta, and until now in the Far East.
It was Marshall who, at Tehran, made common cause with Stalin on the strategy of the war in Europe and marched side by side with him thereafter.
It was Marshall who enjoined his chief of military mission in Moscow under no circumstances to "irritate" the Russians by asking them questions about their forces, their weapons, and their plans, while at the same time opening our schools, factories, and gradually our secrets to them in this count.
It was Marshall who, as Hanson Baldwin asserts, himself referring only to the "military authorities," prevented us having a corridor to Berlin. So it was with the capture and occupation of Berlin and Prague ahead of the Russians.
It was Marshall who sent Deane to Moscow to collaborate with Harriman in drafting the terms of the wholly unnecessary bribe paid to Stalin at Yalta. It was Marshall, with Hiss at his elbow and doing the physical drafting of agreements at Yalta, who ignored the contrary advice of his senior, Admiral Leahy, and of MacArtbur and Nimitz in regard to the folly of a major land invasion of Japan; who submitted intelligence reports which suppressed more truthful estimates in order to support his argument, and who finally induced Roosevelt to bring Russia into the Japanese war with a bribe that reinstated Russia in its pre-1904 imperialistic position in Manchuria-an act which, in effect, signed the death warrant of the Republic of China.
It was Marshall, with Acheson and Vincent eagerly assisting, who created the China policy which, destroying China, robbed us of a great and friendly ally, a buffer against the Soviet imperialism with which we are now at war.
It was Marshall who, after long conferences with Acheson and Vincent, went to China to execute the criminal folly of the disastrous Marshall mission.
It was Marshall who, upon returning from a diplomatic defeat for the United States at Moscow, besought the reinstatement of forty millions in lend-lease for Russia.
It was Marshall who, for 2 years suppressed General Wedemeyer's report, which is a direct and comprehensive repudiation of the Marshall policy.
It was Marshall who, disregarding Wedemeyer's advices on the urgent need for military supplies, the likelihood of China's defeat without ammunition and equipment, and our "moral obligation" to furnish them, proposed instead a relief bill bare of military support.
It was the State Department under Marshall, with the wholehearted support of Michael Lee and Remington in the Commerce Department, that sabotaged the $125,000,000 military-aid bill to China in 194S.
It was Marshall who fixed the dividing line for Korea along the thirty-eighth parallel, a line historically chosen by Russia to mark its sphere of interest in Korea.
It is Marshall's strategy for Korea which has turned that war into a pointless slaughter, reversing the dictum of Von Clausewitz and every military theorist since him that the object of a war is not merely to kill but to impose your will on the enemy.
It is Marshall-Acheson strategy for Europe to build the defense of Europe solely around the Atlantic Pact nations, excluding the two great wells of anti-Communist manpower in Western Germany and Spain and spurning the organized armies of Greece and Turkey-another case of following the Lattimore advice of "let them fall but don't let it appear that we pushed them."
It is Marshall who, advocating timidity as a policy so as not to annoy the forces of Soviet imperialism in Asia, had admittedly put a brake on the preparations to fight, rationalizing his reluctance on the ground that the people are fickle and if war does not come, will hold him to account for excessive zeal.
What can be made of this unbroken series of decisions and acts contributing to the strategy of defeat? They cannot be attributed to incompetence. If Marshall were merely stupid, the laws of probability would dictate that part of his decisions would serve this country's interest. If Marshall is innocent of guilty intention, how could he be trusted to guide the defense of this country further? We have declined so precipitously in relation to the Soviet Union in the last 6 years. How much swifter may be our fall into disaster with Marshall at the helm? Where Will all this stop? That is not a rhetorical question: Ours is not a rhetorical danger. Where next will Marshall carry us? It is useless to suppose that his nominal superior will ask him to resign. He cannot even dispense with Acheson.
What is the objective of the great conspiracy? I think it is clear from what has occurred and is now occurring: to diminish the United States in world affairs, to weaken us militarily, to confuse our spirit with talk of surrender in the Far East and to impair our will to resist evil. To what end? To the end that we shall be contained, frustrated and finally: fall victim to Soviet intrigue from within and Russian military might from without. Is that farfetched? There have been many examples in history of rich and powerful states which have been corrupted from within, enfeebled and deceived until they were unable to resist aggression. . . .
It is the great crime of the Truman administration that it has refused to undertake the job of ferreting the enemy from its ranks. I once puzzled over that refusal. The President, I said, is a loyal American; why does he not lead in this enterprise? I think that I know why he does not. The President is not master in his own house. Those who are master there not only have a desire to protect the sappers and miners - they could not do otherwise. They themselves are not free. They belong to a larger conspiracy, the world-wide web of which has been spun from Moscow. It was Moscow, for example, which decreed that the United States should execute its loyal friend, the Republic of China. The executioners were that well-identified group headed by Acheson and George Catlett Marshall.
How, if they would, can they, break these ties, how return to simple allegiance to their native land? Can men sullied by their long and dreadful record afford us leadership in the world struggle with the enemy? How can a man whose every important act for years had contributed to the prosperity of the enemy reverse himself? The reasons for his past actions are immaterial. Regardless of why he has done what be did, be has done it and the momentum of that course bears him onward. . . .
The time has come to halt this tepid, milk-and-water acquiescence which a discredited administration, ruled by disloyalty, sends down to us. The American may belong to an old culture, he may be beset by enemies here and abroad, he may be distracted by the many words of counsel that assail him by day and night, but he is nobody's fool. The time has come for us to realize that the people who sent us here expect more than time-serving from us. The American who has never known defeat in war, does not expect to be again sold down the river in Asia. He does not want that kind of betrayal. He has had betrayal enough. He has never failed to fight for his liberties since George Washington rode to Boston in 1775 to put himself at the head of a band of rebels unversed in war. He is fighting tonight, fighting gloriously in a war on a distant American frontier made inglorious by the men he can no longer trust at the head of our affairs.
The America that I know, and that other Senators know, this vast and teeming and beautiful land, this hopeful society where the poor share the table of the rich as never before in history, where men of all colors, of all faiths, are brothers as never before in history, where great deeds have been done and great deeds are yet to do, that America deserves to be led not to humiliation or defeat, but to victory.
The Congress of the United States is the people's last hope, a free and open forum of the people's representatives. We felt the pulse of the people's response to the return of MacArthur. We know what it meant. The people, no longer trusting their executive, turn to us, asking that we reassert the constitutional prerogative of the Congress to declare the policy for the United States.
The time has come to reassert that prerogative, to oversee the conduct of this war, to declare that this body must have the final word on the disposition of Formosa and Korea. They fell from the grasp of the Japanese empire through our military endeavors, pursuant to a declaration of war made by the Congress of the United States on December 8, 1941. If the Senate speaks, as is its right, the disposal of Korea and Formosa can be made only by a treaty which must be ratified by this body. Should the administration dare to defy such a declaration, the Congress has abundant recourses which I need not spell out.
Source:
from The Congressional Record: Proceedings and Debates of the 82nd Congress, First Session, Volume 97, Part 5 (May 28, 1951-June 27, 1951), pp. 6556-6603.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Jul 11, 2006 - 01:47am PT
|
Crime? No. But that speech is a reckless and baseless character assassination of Acheson and Marshall for the sake of McCarthy's own political gain. It is utterly despicable crap.
|
|
Mountain Man
Trad climber
Outer space
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 11, 2006 - 01:48am PT
|
Senator McCarthy was upset about the selling of the Republic of China into the arms of the Communists. No wonder you hate him!
from Wikipedia:
As Secretary of State, Marshall strongly opposed recognizing the State of Israel telling President Truman, "If you (recognize the state of Israel) and if I were to vote in the election, I would vote against you."[1][2] In 1949 he resigned from the State Department and was named president of the American National Red Cross. He was named Secretary of Defense in 1950, but retired from politics for good in 1951, after Senator Joseph McCarthy made a speech on the Senate floor stating that "if Marshall was merely stupid, the laws of probability would dictate that part of his decisions would serve America's interests."
|
|
Patrick Sawyer
climber
Originally California now Ireland
|
|
|
Jul 11, 2006 - 09:47am PT
|
Karl, your post of Jul 9, 2006, 12:00am PST speaks volumes of how I feel.
Hey right twits: Anti-American? Me? No I am not anti-myself. Anti-Bush? You betcha. Anti neo-con agenda? Yep, that’s me. Do I love my country? You bet and my native state of California. Am I a liberal? By some people’s standards. Am I a leftie? I don’t think sooooo. Do I try to be open minded? I try as hard as I can.
Do I need some close-minded right-twit neo-con tell me how I feel about my country? Nope and I am getting fed up with these kind of people telling me that if I’m not with Bush then I am against the USA.
Am I surprised that Mountain Man idolises Joe McCarthy? Not in the least.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!