Two stories of "horrific" abuse by the United Stat

Mister Bushice · Post by **Mister Bushice** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 6:24 am

Dude,

According to that article, the house REPUBLICANS are behind some of this shit.

why are you blaming liberals for all this? what government is now in charge of gitmo?

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 9:18 am

Mister Bushice wrote:Dude,

According to that article, the house REPUBLICANS are behind some of this shit.

why are you blaming liberals for all this? what government is now in charge of gitmo?

LOL!!!

But....but....but....

It's gotta be the liberals' fault!!

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 11:12 am

Mikey wrote:
Mister Bushice wrote:Dude,

According to that article, the house REPUBLICANS are behind some of this shit.

why are you blaming liberals for all this? what government is now in charge of gitmo?

LOL!!!

But....but....but....

It's gotta be the liberals' fault!!

I was thinking of a Sylvester voice for that line.

DrDetroit · Post by **DrDetroit** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 12:45 pm

Mister Bushice wrote:Dude,

According to that article, the house REPUBLICANS are behind some of this shit.

why are you blaming liberals for all this? what government is now in charge of gitmo?

Behind some of what shit?

Bizzarofelice · Post by **Bizzarofelice** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 3:33 pm

"For Sunday they're going to be having Orange Glazed Chicken, Fresh Fruit Roupee, Steamed Peas and Mushrooms, Rice Pilaf - we treat them very well," he told Fox.
Last night, Hunter said, the U.S. "torture victims" enjoyed the same kind of gourmet fare, including an entree of "Lemon-baked Fish."

This guy is spinning as hard as he can. I saw a press conference where he actually brought ingredients used in the making of these meals. During his Fox appearance, the only answer he had to any of the accusations was "orange glazed chicken."

I guess his sad attempt was actually bought by some people. Not surprising Choads is one of them.

Variable · Post by **Variable** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 3:37 pm

You're not fooling anyone!!! "Roupee" means "menstrual blood" in Sunni tribal dialects.

DrDetroit · Post by **DrDetroit** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 3:40 pm

So, Bizarrodickhead...the detainees at Gitmo are not eating fried chicken and vegetables and not getting their traditional Ramadan end-of-fast meals??

Bizzarofelice · Post by **Bizzarofelice** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 3:44 pm

DrDetroit wrote:So, Bizarrodickhead...the detainees at Gitmo are not eating fried chicken and vegetables and not getting their traditional Ramadan end-of-fast meals??

I'm saying that is all the guy had. He tried to spin every accusation of abuse like it was "orange-glazed chicken".

As a person who fully accepts the spin, I'm sure you understand. :roll:

DrDetroit · Post by **DrDetroit** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 3:46 pm

You see, Bizarro, you're just like the rest...unable to articulate a reasonable response you speculate re: their motivation.

He didn't just talk about orange glazed chicken...

And, for the record, it was the journalists who were spinning. Unable to cope with the truth that these detainess are being treated extra well they went right onto the nonsense about the detainees having rights to a trial and whatnot.

Bizzarofelice · Post by **Bizzarofelice** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 3:49 pm

And, for the record, it was the journalists who were spinning. Unable to cope with the truth that these detainess are being treated extra well they went right onto the nonsense about the detainees having rights to a trial and whatnot.

I guess there is the difference. I trust journalists more than I trust the government. You are the opposite.

DrDetroit · Post by **DrDetroit** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 4:24 pm

Bizzarofelice wrote:
And, for the record, it was the journalists who were spinning. Unable to cope with the truth that these detainess are being treated extra well they went right onto the nonsense about the detainees having rights to a trial and whatnot.
I guess there is the difference. I trust journalists more than I trust the government. You are the opposite.

And there you go again, speculating about my motivations...

Why do you do that? Are you that incapable of articulating an argument?

I don't trust journalists, at all. Why? Because I believe that accuracy is more important than feigned objectivity.

Variable · Post by **Variable** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 4:34 pm

bfelice wrote:I trust journalists more than I trust the government. You are the opposite.

Dr.D wrote:And there you go again, speculating about my motivations...

Dr.D wrote:I don't trust journalists, at all.

Uh...

BF, regarding journalists, while many are unbiased and neutral, many are not (clearly). Also, it's not like they write or broadcast for a non-profit. They are selling a product, meaning that it's in their best interests to write the best story, rather than the most factual. Now, that being said, I can probably count the number of politicians that I feel are trustworthy on one hand, so there's that.

Regarding the Gitmo food,etc, I don't think Mr. Orange Glazed Chicken was trying to paint Gitmo as some Camp Chippewa for Boy Scouts, I think he was refuting the "Gulag of our time" allegations. But it's still a freaking prison, for Christ's sake.

DrDetroit · Post by **DrDetroit** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 4:44 pm

Variable, there's no speculation on my part re: the journalistic ethos of objectivity.

Notice the strong streak among journalists of not being an American while reporting the news but a citizen of the world where skepticism of government is the lens through which they perceive the world.

No speculation there. It's a fact and has been since at least Vietnam.

Objectivity is the prime consideration for journalists. There's no debate there.

BF, regarding journalists, while many are unbiased and neutral, many are not (clearly).

Who the hell are you talking about? Are you under the impression that it is possible to be unbiased?

I guess that's the difference between those who view the media with skepticism and those who take the journalists at their word.

I believe that it's impossible to be unbiased. That's why I'd prefer that journalists just be honest with us so that we could then properly evaluate their writing with their opinions out in the open. The way it is now we have no information about how they pick their sources, why they picked their sources, why they print part of their source's statement and not others.

It's the same thing that I pointed out with the NYT thread yesterday.

Also, it's not like they write or broadcast for a non-profit. They are selling a product, meaning that it's in their best interests to write the best story, rather than the most factual

WHAT???? Are you serious??? Now you're speculating about why journalists write the way they do.

Their stories are reflections of their biases. Plain and simple.

Hapday · Post by **Hapday** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 4:51 pm

Bizzarofelice wrote:I trust journalists more than I trust the government. You are the opposite.

Most lefties do. I wonder why..............

WAR HEARNIG WHAT YOU WANT TO HEAR!

Variable · Post by **Variable** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 4:54 pm

I believe that it's impossible to be unbiased. That's why I'd prefer that journalists just be honest with us so that we could then properly evaluate their writing with their opinions out in the open. The way it is now we have no information about how they pick their sources, why they picked their sources, why they print part of their source's statement and not others.

You're right, but I still believe that it's possible to be mostly unbiased. In that, I mean that I can respect another point of view as long as it's reasonably thought out. I think that good reporters are mostly unbiased.

DrDetroit · Post by **DrDetroit** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 5:01 pm

You're right, but I still believe that it's possible to be mostly unbiased.

There is no gray area. You're either biased or not and I don't believe you can be unbiased. It is impossible to separate your personal values and principles like that.

In that, I mean that I can respect another point of view as long as it's reasonably thought out.

That's being tolerant, not unbiased/biased or accepting/unaccepting.

I think that good reporters are mostly unbiased.

What? Your own biases determine what a good reporter is, Variable.

Variable · Post by **Variable** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 5:04 pm

Detroit, I just agreed with virtually everything you said, yet you still did a cut-n-paste of my entire post. Can you like breathe into a paper sack to calm yourself down or something?

It's gonna be okay, man...it's gonna be okay...

DrDetroit · Post by **DrDetroit** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 5:05 pm

I simply responded where I disagreed with you.

Bizzarofelice · Post by **Bizzarofelice** » Wed Jun 15, 2005 6:13 pm

Variable wrote: BF, regarding journalists, while many are unbiased and neutral, many are not (clearly). Also, it's not like they write or broadcast for a non-profit. hey are selling a product, meaning that it's in their best interests to write the best story, rather than the most factual.

No worries. I take a lot of the media with a grain of salt. My McLuhan filter is always on.

Now, that being said, I can probably count the number of politicians that I feel are trustworthy on one hand, so there's that.

Those politicians only talk about so much. The journalists I trust talk about pretty much everything.

Regarding the Gitmo food,etc, I don't think Mr. Orange Glazed Chicken was trying to paint Gitmo as some Camp Chippewa for Boy Scouts, I think he was refuting the "Gulag of our time" allegations.

I'm saying the only retort he had was orange glazed chicken. Chris Meyers was asking other abuse questions and the guy was lost when not talking about honey and dates for ramadan. The talking points were in full effect. The guy was evading the truth by going back to this food thing.