Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 8/4/04 04:09 PM, truthbetold wrote: kerrys for socialized medicine

No he's not.

-
But I appreciate his position on the death penalty. And, even more - his positions on environmental issues.

I agree with Raven Grin, especially the second paragraph.

Political parties make the voting process infinitely easier for the voters - they just have to figure out which party they identify with - and they should be able to vote for that parties candidate.

The "party system" is not at fault for our current two party stronghold. The current quagmire we're in, is a result of the founding fathers. They wanted a stable government over a more democratic one. And stability, meant less choice this time around.

The best thing we could do is to reform the system to allow more political parties. The worst - to abolish the political party. Then, the system would totally fail, as we would only have the rich and the famous running.

Gunter, I agree that the Fed exerts the most control. I'm just saying you're all underestimating the amount of power the administration has in steering the economy. They can say "terror" - and the stock market will drop. They can force a tax cut - do you think we would of had the same tax cut if Gore had been in office?

-
Additionally, no one has overwhelming control - the stock market bubble, the corporate scandals, and all these other social and political changes has the most impact - don't you think?

At 8/3/04 10:41 PM, BLUEleaf wrote: Maybe do something like: If they make a lame remark/reply, just dont reply to them in any way, act like their not there.

Guess what? That's been the standard policy for months upon months. The problem is, is that there's nothing worth replying to, thus we're losing all of the decent members, while idiocy continues unabated, because there's always someone new who will respond to any crappy topic that comes along.

And with these schemes on page two - as long as you guys know it'll never happen. The most we can hope for, is a blank check from the Fulp brothers, to allow the mods already here more free reign to lock and ban for idiocy. That's what I'm hoping for.

At 8/4/04 02:09 PM, Greeniemachinie wrote: Oddly enough, so was I. Maybe you should check your sources?

It's at the end of August, going into September to play off of 9/11/01 and also so that they can stretch the $75m in public funding till election day.

This topic is stoopid.

... I was under the impression that the RNC hasn't started yet.

At 8/4/04 01:52 PM, Metal69hed wrote: Jesus christ...does this forum ever have anything else to talk about?

No. Try creating anything other than Bush, Kerry, guns or queers, and prepare for a dead topic.

The administration in power indirectly controls tax policy and such poo-poo as that. You people realize that, don't you? Sure. Congress does it. The Fed controls interest rates. But the administration in power has the authority to use the bully pulpit - to sell tax cuts or increases to the people, to push for such or such in congress, and so on and so forth. With a highly partisan congress, the members of Congress who share party affiliation with the administration usually can't justify going against the administration's wishes. Just because the administration has little explicit power economy-wise, doesn't mean they don't have any implicitly. Come on people, jeez.

We don't need another gun control topic.

The Guardian is a respectable news source.

At 8/4/04 01:30 AM, -Brandon- wrote: Well, let me say as a gun owner, I agree 100% with you. You see, youre very right but thats why you ought to take advanced classes if you intend to carry a firearm as a means of self defense. There is no training that can prepare you 100%, but there is training that can prepare you quite well.

Voila. And there you have it. I'm done posting. I agree. My concern is that the people out there with guns, do not have adequate training. And I mean truly adequate.

I have no problem with gun ownership. Someday I want to buy a handgun, as I've already mentioned. And we have a shotgun in our house (used mostly for scaring away predators back when we had chickens). But I'm also for strong precautions, that carefully monitor weapons, ensure they don't fall into the wrong hands, and make sure that those who have them are properly trained. People who polarize the gun control debate to "all or none" are morons. Unfortunately, I'm getting off-topic.

The thing is, physiological aspects take over when youre in a situation as such. As ironic and absurd as it sounds, typical police officers do not really receive nearly as much training as they ought to in this area.

<not incredibly surprised>

These threads aren't showcasing extreme left or right anything.

Their showcasing extreme idiocy.

And, a friendly reminder - every response bumps the shit back to the top.

At 8/3/04 11:49 PM, TheShrike wrote: Everyone must go watch 'Harold and Kumar go to White Castle'.
That is a command, not a statement.

I did just read a review, it looks pretty good. I'll see it sometime, don't worry hun-hun.

At 8/4/04 01:01 AM, IllustriousPotentate wrote: politics chat

I don't see how it'd be any different than the general chat. Everything written in this lounge, could fit somewhere in general. None of this off-topic crap is political in nature. Basically you'd be doing it for this group of users, right? I know that I don't want to argue politics in real-time. Imagine all the great sources then. Regardless, I can't get NG chat to work for the life of me. Hasn't worked for several months *angiery faise*

At 8/4/04 01:19 AM, -Wraith- wrote: General

I find General more enjoyable many times. At this time of the night, the nubbish users are off, and General has a solid base of genuinely decent regulars.

This thread serves a valuable purpose of keeping off-topic crap off of the other threads in General. But if it was closed, which is inevitable really - people would need to learn to go to General. And, I think the forum would need tighter moderation, to rid the off-topic crap that would crop up 2x as much.

But the plus - it might reinvigorate both political groups, which would be great.

And you're going to do this everytime you hear a noise I assume. Spook, I find your "game plan" for home invasion extremely naive, bred from pop-culture movie schlock.

At 8/4/04 01:08 AM, -Brandon- wrote: Im curious about the statistics however. Justification and "self defense" in my opinion arent always the same. You not only need to use it in self defense, but to justify it the condition that must be present is the choce between using it or dying. I suppose that a lot of it may also be pendantry because terms are used out of context sometimes.

Sure, it depends on the definition of justification, self-defense, etc. Those things could be ironed out however. The trouble is, in my mind, that in the heat of the moment, even the most responsible gun owner might fire, when it was unnecessary. All the training and practice in the world, can't readily prepare someone for an encounter which might - on the surface - warrant using a weapon.

Spookshow proves my point in his post - in the heat of the moment, officers will shoot someone who, in hindsight, is totally innocent. Regardless of their training.

Something goes bump in the night, you pull out the ol' gun, and you kill a family member. It's not the norm, but it's also not hypothetical - it's been known to happen.

At 8/4/04 12:51 AM, -Brandon- wrote: Indeed. I should clarify that in order to justify its use, it must be a last resort. The sad reality is that when its use is justified, youre live is seconds away from being taken, or of the act that is likely to conclude in your death or that of a family members.

Of course.

This is what many people do not understand, and many people do not realize that the majority of responsible gun owners do know this.

I don't agree with you here. There are many, many instances where the firearm was not needed, yet it was used in 'self-defense'. Or, to put it better - there are very few justifiable cases of shooting someone in self defence each year (judging from US censes numbers).

. . . Just make it quick and relatively painless. Perhaps the DAG and PC sites will pick up then again... *shrug*

Actually, I was using the "red" symbolically, refering to the depleted uranium that we're poisoning troops with.

I love the smell of red tanks in the morning...

I will cheer the day that the entire site has a single nav bar, especially if it's this new one (snazzy)

I haven't taken a math course in years. Although next semester I'm taking "Math & Society" or some bull like that.. But I'm going to try to get around math requirements with science classes. woot.

At 8/3/04 09:12 PM, Camarohusky wrote: On a totally unrelated note Camarohusky has finally got his Camaro back! Woohoo!

What was it in for?

-
Oh, and I was just in a bad mood during my posts on that "Moore: Guns" topic =P

The blame has to be placed at the entire system involved.

Not specific military personnel, but the military as a whole, for not adequetely curtailing abuses such as this. In the article, it talks about in one instance, a CO found abuse happening, reprimanded the parties involved, and then left. What happened? They started again.

The blame can lie on those who did disservice to those serving in Iraq - the article talks about food, delivered by contractors, with bugs in it. Food, which the prisoners - and sometimes our military - were suppose to eat. The personnel who guarded Abu Ghraib, were bombarded daily. Etc. and so on.

The blame also lies with the highest tiers of the military - those who read - or disregarded - all of the e-mails, discussion, and memo's on abuse occuring. Additionally, it must lie in the hands of those who - explicitly or otherwise - approved of abuse, of actions which lay in murky legal waters (and which lead to abuse), those who condoned such actions.

Finally, the blame can lie at those who put us in this position. The talking heads in Washington. Those who ultimately dictate foriegn policy and our actions in Iraq.

At 8/3/04 07:30 PM, bombkangaroo wrote: i don't think i've read anything that suggests that it is in any way linked inextricably to neo-conservatives.
all the articles i have read point to it being a problem exclusively within the military.

It's emblematic of the situation. If we cared about the populace of Iraq, we wouldn't be arbitrarily jailing and sodomizing them. That just wouldn't make sense. Our foreign policy is neo-conservative in nature, for the past four years. Our foriegn policy, has put us in this position, and disregard for human rights, et al., from the upper tiers of military officials - as well as squalid conditions for the people on the ground in Iraq - created this.

No, I didn't. The BBC had nothing on it, CNN had nothing on it, and a quick Google had nothing on it.

Care to provide a link, or are we talking about an alternative universe here?

Let me get this out really quick - I don't think this is representative of our military either.

Not one bit.

But I do think this is representative of this current conflict. Of what happens, when you go in half-cocked, with no regards towards international law or human rights. This is representative of neo-con international policy. A disregard for common deceny. For humanity.

So, the Abu Ghraib torture cases are old news. No one cares anymore. The news gave us a glimmer, told us what to think, and then it slipped from the headlines, in favor of more pressing issues, such as who fucked who, who's getting breast implants, and the wonders of dick pills. More time is used whenever a US troop or contractor is murdered, than the atrocities we committed. It only makes sense, since the US, as the victors, has free reign to re-write history.

But hey - what's one more topic about it, eh?

A new expose in Rolling Stone magazine, details some of the more vile acts that the mainstream never picked up on. It details how far the scandal did go, and how the investigation is now being stonewalled, and swept under the rug.

-
New classified military files uncovered, include more than 106 "annexes" that were withheld from earlier reports. This intelligence includes "nearly 6,000 pages of internal Army memos and e-mails, reports on prison riots and escapes, and sworn statements by soldiers, officers, private contractors and detainees. The files depict a prison in complete chaos. Prisoners were fed bug-infested food and forced to live in squalid conditions; detainees and U.S. soldiers alike were killed and wounded in nightly mortar attacks; and loyalists of Saddam Hussein served as guards in the facility, apparently smuggling weapons to prisoners inside.

The files make clear that responsibility for what Taguba called "sadistic, blatant and wanton" abuses extends to several high-ranking officers still serving in command positions. Maj. Gen. Geoffrey Miller, who is now in charge of all military prisons in Iraq, was dispatched to Abu Ghraib by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld last August. In a report marked secret, Miller recommended that military police at the prison be "actively engaged in setting the conditions for successful exploitation of the internees." After his plan was adopted, guards began depriving prisoners of sleep and food, subjecting them to painful "stress positions" and terrorizing them with dogs. A former Army intelligence officer tells Rolling Stone that the intent of Miller's report was clear to everyone involved: "It means treat the detainees like shit until they will sell their mother for a blanket, some food without bugs in it and some sleep.""

In this newly released information, prisoner accounts provide more insight than we had previously gotten. These accounts are described by Taguba as "credible based on the clarity of their statements and supporting evidence provided by other witnesses."

Some memorable quotes:
In one sworn statement, Kasim Mehaddi Hilas, detainee number 151108, said he witnessed a translator referred to only as Abu Hamid raping a teenage boy. "I saw Abu Hamid, who was wearing the military uniform, putting his dick in the little kid's ass," Hilas testified. "The kid was hurting very bad." A female soldier took pictures of the rape, Hilas said.

Finally, after several beatings so severe that he lost consciousness, Waleed was forced to lay on the ground. "One of the police was pissing on me and laughing at me," the prisoner said. He was placed in a dark room and beaten with a broom. "And one of the police, he put a part of his stick that he always carries inside my ass, and I felt it going inside me about two centimeters, approximately. And I started screaming, and he pulled it out and he washed it with water inside the room. And the two American girls that were there when they were beating me, they were hitting me with a ball made of sponge on my dick. And when I was tied up in my room, one of the girls, with blond hair, she is white, she was playing with my dick. I saw inside this facility a lot of punishment just like what they did to me and more. And they were taking pictures of me during all these instances."

There is too much to copy+paste here, but I urge people to read the full article here

The next time someone gets beheaded, or the next time someone talks about spreading democracy in the Middle East, or about all the good we're doing, I'll just respond with a simple picture.

I know several people who have been lifelong Republicans, who voted for Bush in 2000, who are now going Kerry this election. My father's parents, for example.

At 8/3/04 04:34 PM, The_Enforcer wrote: Thats why you work at Ruby Tuesdays in Worcester and I go to college in Waltham. I'm educated, you're a working class slob. Get bent.

Actually, I live in Greenwich, and go to school at Ithaca College, where I'm currently pursuing two BA's. I don't have a job, I'm actually relying heavily on student aid, especially state and federal. You're paying for my education through socialist government policies. I'll graduate, pay down the low-interest loans, while pursuing post-graduate studies in political science. While you'll remain ignorant throughout it all. Have a nice day.

At 8/3/04 04:28 PM, bombkangaroo wrote: you're probably not the mass media's target demographic.

Sure I am. 20-y/o white male. I'm ripe for the picking.

Wow. Every issue? You must of done a lot of research on this topic. A research paper? A newsletter? A handout? Anything? nothing? oh....