by 
All I keep hearing is Terrorist this and Terrorist that. Anyone we don’t like, apparently, can and should be labeled a “Terrorist”. And, then, we can say, oh they have no rights – they are Terrorists. Prisoners of War are an entirely different matter. These men were captured on the battlefield of the War on Terror – they are Terrorists. Oh, their rights are different all right. So different, in fact, that one could say they have no rights at all. Why does that bother you? Why are you supporting the Terrorists? Do you want the Terrorists to win? A Vote for a Democrat is a Vote for Terror.
How much Fox News does someone have to watch to get this fucking brainwashed? Is it piped straight into your brain while you’re sleeping?
It’ll make you crazy if you let it.
When we supported those fighting the Russians in Afghanistan, we called them Freedom Fighters. When those same people come back and bite us on the ass, we called them Terrorists. What changed, exactly? They’re still the same bastards they were when we gave them weapons and training. They just happened to be pointing their guns elsewhere at the time. The enemy of my enemy is my friend and all that. Works great in the short term, I suppose. Left a bit lacking in the long view.
And then, as a little bonus crazytown conceptualizing, do these people not realize the difference between “Terrorist” and “Freedom Fighter” is not much more than a matter of perspective? Yeah, I said it. Even Guilded Saint Ronny is guilty.
When we threw US tax dollars at some very unsavory people in Nicaragua, we called also them Freedom Fighters. Regardless of their behavior – the ends justified the means.
Angry insurgents blowing up infrastructure. Killing supporters of the current government. Kidnapping local hostages. Suppressing the populace. Aided by clandestine foreign powers.
Sounds like Iraq. No, it was Nicaragua. 1980-1990.
Interesting that Americans seems to have forgotten that the American government sponsored terrorism in Nicaragua to overthrow the Nicaraguan government. The CIA trained Contra “Freedom fighters” who were in fact the former dictator’s death squads trained at the School of the Americas. The International Court of Justice declared the CIA interference in the country to be illegal.
You can’t play it both ways. If you want a definition of terrorism call it for what it is. Acts of violence against civilians. Acts of destruction against a government in power.
Source: danielpipes.org
The truth wants to come out. And it ususally does sooner or later. It has on this sad chapter.
The 8 years Reagan was in office represented one of the most bloody eras in the history of the Western hemisphere, as Washington funneled money, weapons and other supplies to right wing death squads. And the death toll was staggering–more than 70,000 political killings in El Salvador, more than 100,000 in Guatemala, 30,000 killed in the contra war in Nicaragua. In Washington, the forces carrying out the violence were called “freedom fighters.” This is how Ronald Reagan described the Contras in Nicaragua: “They are our brothers, these freedom fighters and we owe them our help. They are the moral equal of our founding fathers.”
Source: www.democracynow.org
Read that one more time: “They are the moral equal of our founding fathers.”
Were our founding fathers terrorists? Because that sure sounds like what you’re saying oh great Saint Ronald King of Fries.
by 
I live in California and there used to be a German POW camp a few miles from my town. They never got trials the years they were prisoners.
Did they deserve trials Johnny?
We didn’t torture the German POWs.
We gave them descent food and one beer a day.
And they were not tried because they committed no crime. They were repatriated after the cessation of the war.
Those who did commit crimes were tried, publicly, by an internationally seated panel of judges. They had widely accepted rules of evidence, order and guilt.
We have no intention of repatriating these supposed terrorists. We are torturing them. And the rules for these farce trials are broken.
Don’t be daft.
I call a MONSTROUS LOAD of bullshit on KG for his ‘internment camp’ bullshit. They were citizens, NOT MILITARY who were interred in those camps. Same with the Japanese camps that were set up. If you were ‘one of them’ you got carted off in the name of ‘national security’ even tho most of them had left heir countries to come to the US to make a greater, better life for themselves.
And let’s not forget they had OVER 500 of these fuckers before we sent HALF of them home (usually after a few years in El Gitmo ) with no charges whatsoever.
Hopelessly brainwashed Fox news watcher it would seem.
Bush came to England yesterday and somehow pursuaded our fuckwit Prime minister to give him even more British troops to go and fight the “Freedom fighters”. God I do hope the American people get the right person in the White house this November and our troops can return home.Where you lead we will surely follow, it’s called economics not politics in this country.
Hey…I watch Fox News (among other sources) and I vote Republican (even though I’d much rather back a Libertarian), but I have to agree that this Guantanamo deal is really disconcerting to me. I can’t believe that holding people hostage without charging or trying them is anything but a serious violation of human rights and base-line HIPOCRACY for a country founded upon those rights. But then, what about a governmental entity is not, in some way, full of hipocracy?
In addition, how in the HELL do you think holding these people is “preventing” terrorism? These people have families and friends, don’t they? I’d think the affected F & F would not exactly be filled with love for the US for the unwarranted detention of their kin. It is my sincere hope that one John McCain would find a sliver of sympathy for those prisoners…I mean…he was in that position at one time…and either try them or toss them.
Hey, maybe they are the moral equivalent of the Founding Fathers, after all, they were slave owners.
True…and the whole “human rights” thing was really just a way better and more justifiable rallying cry for a revolution as opposed to “Fuck you and your taxes.”
Hey bikepunk, take another look, KG was right. We did have POW camps for german soldiers. Even here in the midwest, Iowa for one, there were a few of them. The Interment camps were a whole nother story. Didn’t pay attention in History class did ya?
One mans terroist is another mans freedom fighter.
Where can I get a St. Ronald King of Fries T-shirt?
amen brother Jonny…
that shit about afgan is what I’ve been saying all along…
Just think, if we’d let the russians take out Afgan w/o our supporting the “freedom fighters” well… heck what would you know, they’d probably be a nice well established country now instead of what it is and what it lead to…
Oh and the republican’s don’t like you to confuse facts that cloud their evangelical zeal about “politics” and what is “black and white”
fight the good fight Big Jonny…
The war drums are pounding and we’ll be bombing Iran before the election. This goes back essentially to when our CIA helped take out the DEMOCRATICALLY elected government of Iran in the early 50’s and we installed the Shah.
I get so tired of republicans who are sure that we (USA) have never done anything to foment anti-american feelings around the world.
“They hate our freedom” is the neocon rallying cry. Bullshit.
KG~
Nice of you to chime in, as intellectually disingenuous as ever. The difference between German Prisoners of War and what is happening in place like Guantanamo is, of course, the Germans were POWs.
There was a formal declaration of war against Germany, and captured German solders had rights.
Yes, they had rights.
And when the war ended, because Germany surrendered, the POWs were dealt with. The “war on terrorism”, on the other hand, is an open ended abstract. It may never end. Just as the war on poverty, crime, drugs, etc, cannot end. Poverty, crime and drugs are not entities that can be defeated. They cannot surrender.
The men in Guantanamo are not POWs. They are, for lack of a better term, simply disappeared. Off the radar. Underwater. Gone. These men are to be held indefinitely.
It is not the same thing. Not by a long shot.
“The Moral equivelant of our founding fathers”
John Negroponte was placed very close to or in the cell with death squads in central america under Reagan, that’s why he was top dog here.
The number of new tin hat dictators with their own death squads & torture has skyrocketed in the last 7 years.
Instead of the US being a strong voice for justtice & human rights, our policy is to backslide & enable things the “School of the Americas” in Georga would never have dreamed of. (they were one of the last customers for hand cranked phones, btw)
It will be years before the range of hidious things done in dark rooms because of W will be discovered. That’s normal when ever an adminstration like this happens.
…good post, big jonny…
…“rights ???…we don’t give no steekin’ rights to nobody what don’t agree w/ our version of freedom”…
…what an amazing dichotomy…we not only get to enjoy great freedom in this country but w/in reason we can dissent against it’s manufacture & yet it’s packaged so slickly by the republicats, utilizing news services like fox, that most americans just see our world wide actions as maintaining the “status quo”…
…it doesn’t seem to matter to the vast majority, as long as their vision of the “american dream” is visible from their front window…
Big Juan,
Read Noam Chomsky’s Manufacturing Consent. We are doing the same shit we have done for the last 50 years. Then Read Charlie Wilson’s War. Yes, the one that T hanks just played. Sucka MC’s.
Guys-
The underlying issue here is how to use statecraft to deal with stateless belligerents. This is the key point that the entire feel-good “war = terrorism” crowd fails to grasp. War is explicitly NOT terrorism, it is statecraft. Hence, the failure of the above WWII references to apply to the current situation.
Terrorist organizations claim they have been marginalized such that truck-bombing civilians is their only choice. Well that’s bullshit. How do you deal with such and not be drawn into their methods?
The answer if completely obvious: economically.
Oops, it seems we’re hopelessly addicted to Saudi oil.
Mikey
I can’t believe Kevin Garnett even has time to post right now.
Seattle,
That is one of the funniest things I have read in a long time.
Go Celtics!
The thing that history is going to judge most harshly about this administration is that they were so catastrophically bad at achieving their stated goal of reducing terrorism. How could they not realize that every innocent civilian killed (even if it was an accident) and “unlawful enemy combatant” in Gitmo has a shitload of brothers, uncles, and cousins who are now the sworn enemy of the US.
I guess I should check here more often, and bike punk, there were POW camps in the US, I believe in almost every state, there were many in California. Watching you get huffy over something you were ignorant to was enlightening.
I asked if those POW’s deserved a trial. Were all of them capture on the field of battle in uniform after surrendering? Were any innocent bystanders mistakenly picked up as POW’s?
I mean, there were thousands and thousands of people taken prisoner, held for years…. were they just let go after being held for those years… were they ever given a trial to challenge the validity of their capture? Out of the thousands of people captured, were any of them beaten? None? Were any of them made to listen to really loud annoying music?
As for the formal deceleration of war? Who do we declare war against in this case?
It’s just so hard to take so many of you serious when a year ago you were ready to surrender to AQ in Iraq. The surge won’t work crowd now has to figure something else out.
Here’s an question…and I’ll give you it’s a hypothetical and assumes a few things but let’s just supposes for a minute so I can better understand your positions. After all, I’m sure that you’re in favor of me have a deep understanding of your position.
If you knew that adopting the Patriot Act before September 11th would have prevented it the whole plane thing, would it be worth adopting it?
Now I know that is making an assumption that the Patriot Act prevents anything. So for a minute, humor me. Imagine it like those party games that gives you impossible choices and you have to make the decision.
I’m interested in your thinking process.
No, the Patriot Act is antithesis to the freedoms and personal liberty enshrined in the constitution.
Life isn’t single serving, saran wrapped, hermetically sealed accident free. Bad shit happens to good people, and Assholes get on well in life. Such is the cards, but there’s no “sense” of security worth losing personal liberty for.
KG, I will answer your question with a quote:
That is my thinking process.
“Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” – Richard Jackson (or possibly Ben Franklin, it’s a little unclear)
The world is a dangerous place KG. The Patriot Act doesn’t make us any safer. It is a pointless intellectual exercise.
You forget that AQ was not in Iraq until we went in. You forget that we made AQ. You forget that if we had stopped at Afghanistan and taken the last 6 years to actually get Bin Laden and create a functioning democracy there, the Taliban wouldn’t be making a comeback and the Bush legacy would have been one of success. The Bush administration is not about success, it’s about cronyism. Invading Iraq was about nothing but power and it has been a miserable failure, and mismanaged at every turn. It has ruined our international reputation, and is in the process of bankrupting our economy. I hope your kids like it.
Ok, I will admit I was wrong about there being POW camps on American soil AS WELL AS internment camps. Fair is fair.
Howsthat SURGE working for us again?
We should have finished the job THERE before we started in Iraq.
Like I said, I am able to admit my error, but I wasn’t completely wrong either. I’d like to see the history books from your school. Mine didn’t have any of that information. I re-read ‘A Peoples History” by Howard Zinn recently, and I think many others should too. Anyone want to start a DC book club? (As opposed to the DC skin-mag trading club already established.)
…kg…i think your supposition that the patriot act has a direct correlation to 9/11 says more about your personal political beliefs than any informed objective viewpoint…
…all these years later, there are too many unanswered questions
& obscured facts that have been explored & queried about by even ‘moderate’ researchers, for any intelligent human being to simply believe this administrations disingenuous “answers”…
…don’t sell yourself short…joust w/ a few windmills…some of them bear much deception…
********************************************
re: german prisoner of war camps in this country (& canada) during the war…there are written reports from that era wherein prisoners performed certain community service jobs due to lack of local manpower…they were reasonably well-fed considering the wartime shortages & well treated enough that when given the opportunity, more than a few of them eventually relocated to a country & the freedoms they became fond of…
…perhaps just a smidgen different than the situation in “gitmo”…
Whattaya sayin’ bgw? The gitmo guys ain’t gonna want to move to sunny Miami when they are released?
Is the freedom vs security quote something you apply to all decisions or just the ones that fit your criteria?
The quote quote applies to many things besides the patriot act.
Gun Control
Will you give up the freedom of your arms for the ‘security’ of safety? Yes? No?
National Healthcare
Will you give up the freedom of making your own medical decisions for the security of guaranteed health care?
So using the freedom v security quote, you’re against a national healthcare system and against gun control.
Let’s see what else you can apply the quote to.
Doping in cycling.
Should you be free to use the drugs you want to improve your performance even though it could be a detriment to your health?
Freedom of your body vs security of your health?
Freedom of your body vs the security of a ‘fair’ race?
Hmmmmm……
The British DID call our founding fathers “terrorists”, although I’m not sure they used that exact word. Yep, all in the point of view.
…sommerfliesby…those poor fucking gitmo guys are probably so disoriented by the shit they’ve been through (& do you really think we’ve been told the worst of it ???) that they should be given mansions on fisher island…
…& kg…i’m not even convinced you believe all the questions you raise…i think it’s simply called “shit-disturbing”, no ???…
…just sayin’…
KG,
Disingenuous as ever. At least you are consistent.
It applies to all decisions. I own guns. I used to hunt a lot. That I don’t now has more to do with the draws on my time than any change in beliefs. Find me a place to hunt feral hogs and I’m there. That said, I have no issue with having to wait for a week or two to cool off, and to make sure that felons don’t have (legal) access to guns.
There is no reason that we have to give up choice to have universal health care. There is no validity in your statement. You are talking about different forms of security. Universal health care is a basic human rights and liberty issue.
Your desire to stretch the argument is laughable. You’re wrong. I’m right. I quit.
Really? You don’t think you will be giving up ANY freedom if universal healthcare is imposed?
You really believe that.
The government is going to run the healthcare system and they will let you (and the doctor you choose) make the decision? Right now I can see any doctor I want, I can see any specialist without approval. Any test that the doctor wants to run is OK with my coverage.
Government run healthcare will be that good?
KG, if your coverage actually does all of that, it is far better than any health care plan I have been part of. Currently I cannot see any doctor I want, I cannot see any specialist without approval and I cannot have any test I desire done. And that is for my wife, my two children and I.
I simply cannot believe government run insurance could be any worse than what I’ve been dealing with for my entire working career.
KG, if you are so wealthy that you can see any doctor you want and have any test run you want, what the fuck are you slumming here for? Put the crack pipe down buddy. You don’t have that option now. Hell, even when I’ve had cushy government health care I didn’t had that option. As someone who has had to use my health insurance to cover large hospital bills, only to have my insurance company try to take the meager settlement back, I can tell you the current system is fucked.
You hold onto a few fallacies so let me correct them: 1) There is no such thing as “the free market” in the US. Everything is managed and subsidized. The country would crumble if we went to a true free market. 2) You do not have complete choice in your current health care plan. They can tell you who to see, and will choose not to pay for anything the bean counters determine to be unnecessary. And 3) The Patriot Act did not make us any safer. It made cronies of Bush Co. more money, and made the sheeple easier to control. Bush Co. capitalized on a horrible event to grab more power and for that they are evil.
Now go spread your crazy somewhere else.
Hey, it’s my insurance. I’m a teacher in California, and so is my wife.
My daughter has been to specialists at Stanford Med for her epilepsy when even though her first specialist wasn’t really for it (the dick).
My insurance didn’t care and covered it.
My wife has had some serious lung issues in the last couple of years and seen various specialists a major surgury that has left a fucking 14 inch scar in her side and a chunk of her lung gone multiple tests and scans.
Even a visit to one of those Dr. House type of guys who diagnoses shit when no one else can.
We’re not the only ones with this coverage. Should a few people have to give up their coverage, (their freedom) for the security of a many?
Justify your response if you think I should, justify it using the freedom v security quote.
1. Consider yourself lucky. Most insurance does not allow that sort of flexibility. Even people with insurance generally don’t have that.
2. NO ONE is suggesting that you would have to give that up. What has been suggested are programs in which everyone has the ability to buy reasonable insurance at fair prices. And yes it will take the government managing it for that to happen. There isn’t a place in the world where the private sector has provided that. Again, your making an invalid argument.
3. Health insurance is not the same thing as whether the government has the permission to listen in on your phone conversations, track your movements, or suspend elections.
4. I have nothing that I need to justify. Especially to you.
5. Didn’t I quit… Fuck… I’m going away now…
So if a national health care system would reduce my coverage, would you be for it?
The argument is giving up freedom for security and I believe the line has been set as
………no freedom should ever be given up for any security.
That’s the quote.
I just want to find out how far to take it…..
You don’t like the healthcare application… let’s take it somewhere else.
Let’s take it to social security.
People are giving up freedom to spend their money as they see fit, for the security some income in the later years.
Is that a freedom given up worth the security that is gained?
KG – we certainly spar from time to time. And I think we both benefit from it. If nothing else, let me be clear on this point tonight – I’ve nothing but respect regarding your daughters epilepsy and you wife’s recent medical issues.
Let me also be clear that I meant lucky in your insurance only. I have sympathy for what your daughter and your wife are going through. Now put yourself in the shoes of the millions of people who don’t have insurance like that (or insurance at all) and think about how much more difficult it would be. Beyond that I’m done. Let’s argue about something else for a while…