Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditProfessional associations can be unaccountable, self-interested and reactionary. (It was the American Medical Association that almost single-handedly killed national health insurance during the Truman years.) But at a time when so many independent sources of civic power have been weakened, many have acquitted themselves quite well, and proven to be indispensable counter points to Bushism. The American Medical Association banned doctors from participating in the interrogations at Guantanamo, and the American Bar Association has been outspoken in asserting the detainees' legal rights. Now, the latest professional association to chime in: ethnomusicologists condemn using music for torture. Don't laugh. Blasting music non-stop, like sleep deprivation is sadistic. Kudos to the ethnomusicologists.
Share this article
- Atrios
- Arts and Letters Daily
- The Caucus
- Campus Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- The Daily Gotham
- Daily Kos
- Echidne of the Snakes
- Ezra Klein
- FAIR
- Feministe
- Feministing
- Firedoglake
- Glenn Greenwald
- Gothamist
- In these Times
- Hendrik Hertzberg
- Huffington Post
- Hullabaloo
- Matthew Yglesias
- Media Matters
- Mother Jones
- My DD
- New York Review of Books
- Openleft
- Pam's House Blend
- Pandagon
- Political Wire
- The Progressive
- RaceWire
- Real Clear Politics
- Roberto Lovato
- Romenesko
- Swing State Project
- Talking Points Memo
- Ta-Nehisi Coates
- Tapped
- Tech President
- Tompaine
- The Washington Note
- Utne Reader
- Wonkette
- ZNet
RSS
Listening to "Barney" music is indeed torture.
Imagine now - "I love you, you love me" for hours on end - I'd confess to the Great Chicago Fire if I had to listen to that shit.
Posted by New Dawn at 02/08/2007 @ 6:48pm
Of course, one terrorist's torture is another terrorist's pleasure......For example, I hate country music, but love Rock.....Is there an effort to establish uniform standards? Surely, Rap is more grueling than easy listening.....
Posted by davebarlett at 02/08/2007 @ 6:48pm
"ethnomusicologists condemn using music for torture. Don't laugh. Blasting music non-stop, like sleep deprivation is sadistic."
Yeah...think I will laugh! Bush must be terrified...losing the vital ethnomusicologist vote!
Posted by Mask at 02/08/2007 @ 6:51pm
Of course, one terrorist's torture is another terrorist's pleasure......For example, I hate country music, but love Rock.....Is there an effort to establish uniform standards? Surely, Rap is more grueling than easy listening.....
Posted by DAVEBARLETT 02/08/2007 @ 6:48pm
Country music is also torture.
"If I had to do it all over, I'd do it all over... you".
"You picked a fine time to leave me... you pig".
"I'm so miserable without you, it's almost like having you here".
"Drop Kick Me Jesus Through the Goal Posts of Life" (A REAL SONG, if you can believe that)
Posted by New Dawn at 02/08/2007 @ 7:02pm
Amazing, isn't it, the depths to which the Republican Party has dragged America? Civic associations and organizations having occasion to go on record against torture. What is this- the Middle Ages? The simple, repulsive truth that some Americans have chosen to ignore until now is that the core constituency of the Republican Party contains a dominating component of medievalists who have no concept of human rights, rule of law, or developed human civilization. Hopefully, they've seen enough now to never again let them control American government.
Posted by fromredbird at 02/08/2007 @ 7:57pm
As for myself, I consider RED's posts to be a mild form of torture, but I imagine that anyone who actually knows him might need counseling....
Posted by davebarlett at 02/08/2007 @ 8:00pm
It's unfortunate that you never have anything intelligent to say, DAVEBARLETT, not that anyone expected that from the equivalent of potting soil that can operate a keyboard.
Posted by fromredbird at 02/08/2007 @ 8:30pm
How about getting Nanci Pelosi to condemn torture.
Posted by ZERO 02/08/2007 @ 8:27pm
Looks like the Democratic Party leadership has decided that ethnomusicologists would be more appropriate torchbearers for that.
Posted by fromredbird at 02/08/2007 @ 8:32pm
RED, you're starting to hurt my feelings.....I'm going to report you to the ACLU.........you big, bad boy......
Posted by davebarlett at 02/08/2007 @ 8:33pm
DAVEBARLETT back on ignore. It isn't a good idea to be seen talking regularly to the village idiot.
Posted by fromredbird at 02/08/2007 @ 8:35pm
RED, you're starting to hurt my feelings.....I'm going to report you to the ACLU.........you big, bad boy......
Posted by DAVEBARLETT 02/08/2007 @ 8:33pm
Oh, big, bad DAVEBARLETT implying that he's going to report me to someone. How scary. Bye, bye dog puke.
Posted by fromredbird at 02/08/2007 @ 8:37pm
When you have to preface a claim with "don't laugh," that's a very good indication that the statement to follow it Should Make You Laugh. This case is no exception. If music is torture, then torture means nothing.
Posted by Thrawn at 02/08/2007 @ 8:45pm
Well, I finally got RED to put me on ignore again.....VIVE LA TRIUMPHE!
Posted by davebarlett at 02/08/2007 @ 8:46pm
Posted by DAVEBARLETT 02/08/2007 @ 8:00pm
Be careful mocking FRB, DAVE...
A census taker once tried to test him. FROMRED ate his liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti!
Posted by Mask at 02/08/2007 @ 10:00pm
Masky, Well, maybe he'd eat my brains in an attempt to increase his IQ......Probably wouldn't help, though....
Posted by davebarlett at 02/08/2007 @ 10:12pm
torture bad...
they could use tv too...tape open eyes clockwork orange style, show every eposode of "webster" or "full house"...fiendish.
Posted by ibbleblibble at 02/08/2007 @ 10:32pm
IBBLE, What about soap operas? Watching as the stomach turns would be my idea of truly barbaric torture....
Posted by davebarlett at 02/08/2007 @ 11:06pm
Posted by DAVEBARLETT 02/08/2007 @ 11:06pm
throw in some pro wrastlin, the 700 club, and teletubbies and we got cranial explosion level vibes going...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 02/08/2007 @ 11:10pm
IBBLE, don't forget, Maury Povich and Jerry Springer! AAAAGGGHHH!!!
Posted by davebarlett at 02/09/2007 @ 12:05am
Posted by DAVEBARLETT 02/09/2007 @ 12:05am
as someone who is having a midlife crisis and going back to school to get a degree in some form of shrinkology, although i used to hate the springer show with a pasion, i have developped a strange, somewhat ghoulish, somewhat professional, fascination with the thing...its like bedlam in your very own living room...
although some of the "people" who show up there are probably fake and most are exagerating at least some for the camare, it is staggering how pervasive mental illness is, as jerry springer himself (a smart cookie regardless of what else you think of him)is undoubtedly aware...
most springer people are at least somewhat mentally ill...and mental illness of this type perpetuates itself since most of these people eventually spawn, and whatever the genetic predisposition may be, the first 5 or so years of life (brain hard programed by experience time) assure another generation of springeresque mentally ill people...
not coming anywhere near crazy eugenics talk (lol), but how much does "springeresque" mental illness cost society?
so i gotta admit, springer has become a guilty little pleasure for me...and with a little detachment it is entertaining in a farcical insane sign of the times way...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 02/09/2007 @ 07:37am
but 24 hours of watching it would drive me to become a springer person...
"you are about to waste an hour of your life you can naver get back..." blurb from the beginning of the show...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 02/09/2007 @ 07:40am
If music is torture, then torture means nothing.
Posted by THRAWN 02/08/2007 @ 8:45pm | ignore this person
on the contrary, it is quite clear that almost anything can be used to torture someone. think of the chinese water torture, one harmless drop at a time.Check your Orwell for more details, rats anyone?
my favorite moment of musical torture comes from the Billy Wilder movie,"One, Two, Three" where the late and much missed, Horst Buchholz is tortured by the incessant playing of the song:" Itsy bitsy teeny weeny yellow polka dot bikini."
priceless.
Posted by johannesrolf at 02/09/2007 @ 09:19am
If you really want to torture somebody...
show them the entire run of "Lost"....EXCEPT the final episodes next year (or whenever) that explain the damn show!
Posted by Mask at 02/09/2007 @ 09:45am
The "rule of law"? It's a myth. If enough Americans are willing to tolerate/approve of illegal actions, then it's legal. Even Thomas Jefferson (I cite Tom because he has been made into a deity by the American myth making process, along with the other Founding Fathers [and in the pantheon of American gods, he is the god of democracy, human rights]) indulged in brazenly illegal actions as President. And while our government tortures men and women that have not even been indicted for anything (not that it would be okay if they were) with our tax dollars, we sit and joke, talk lite about it. For the people enduring these crimes, it is every single second of the day, seven days a week...and there's no end in sight for them.
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 10:02am
Is the Nation so desparate for topics that they are reduced to spouting about some obscure group not known by anyone but themselves?
A laughable thread
Posted by LVLIBERTY1 02/09/2007 @ 09:52am | ignore this person
Calling yourself a Christian doesn't make it so.
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 10:03am
Not only must you talk and act Christ like, but you must--most importantly--feel and think Christ like. That goes for you and all the rest of the "red, white and blue" hypocrites.
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 10:12am
Yeah, you're gonna educate me...
Show me a Muslim, Hindu, Bhuddist on here that rants and raves about his religion, all the while contradicting the most basic tenets of the faith, and I'll be sure to point out the sickening hypocrisy of their statements.
Of course you have every right to spew whatever filth oozes from your small, warped mind. Unlike you and your fellow authoritarians, I truly believe in the freedom of speech, even if it makes me want to hurl.
But tell me, Mr. Citizen, how is it that a Christian can turn his faith on and off? How convenient.
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 10:34am
Posted by JOHANNESROLF 02/09/2007 @ 09:19am
i remember when the red brigades in italy kidnapped an american colonel and tied him up, forcing him to listen to punk and heavy metal music for hours on end through headphones...wonder if they were inspired...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 02/09/2007 @ 10:39am
they are using sound torture in the american gulags, such as Guantanamo, it has been reported.
Posted by johannesrolf at 02/09/2007 @ 10:41am
Cant you music, exactly what would be allowable for liberals in questioning terrorists?
Not allowing them to sit in wooden chairs? BC too long in a wooden chair is torture?
What can be allowed to question a terrorist???? Can some enlightened liberal please clarify????????????
And they say liberals are soft on terror..lol
Posted by CPT at 02/09/2007 @ 10:49am
Posted by MTSPENCE05 02/09/2007 @ 10:34am | ignore this person
What basic tenant of faith are those????
Arent you guys all about seperation of Chruch and state??????
Things done to preserve the state are ok, ever since Cardinal Riechelieu.
So why the hypocrisey on your part??? Do you want seperation of Chruch and state or do you not?
The state has no soul to worry about for the afterlife.
Posted by CPT at 02/09/2007 @ 10:54am
I think the rules for interrogation are well stated in various agreements between nations, as well as domestic laws. If--and how many of those poor bastards down in Guatanamo are really terrrorists?--a person is a terrorist, I don't advocate issuing him a recliner and cup of tea; but our government should not be using our tax dollars to employ Stalinist methods. Sensory deprivation, water boarding, stress positioning--it's all torture.
Life is not nearly so black and white and neither are the choices available. That's a tawdry little trick that might work for Rush Limgaugh fans but not here.
How long have you been an O3, Cpt?
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 10:57am
Posted by LVLIBERTY1 02/09/2007 @ 10:23am
Well, LL, what about discussing your "Christian beliefs" and a philosophical/moral discussion of a rationale for using nuclear weapons to kill millions of people to "save" millions of people?
For instance, if somebody had the mistaken impression that to be a follower of Christ would somehow PRECLUDE (not encourage) them from supporting the killing of millions of people for "a greater good"....wouldn't it be within the bounds of discussion to bring that up?
After all the "seeming" contradiction between supporting an agressive, even mass civilian death military theory or strategy....AND supporting a figure who supposedly said--
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God."
"But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust."---Gospel of Matthew
or
"Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them."---Gospel of Luke
(mind you those are only his friends, maybe Jesus said "Nuke 'em til they glow, that'll put the fear of My Father in 'em"...and the Apostles weren't sure what "nuke" meant, so they left it out!)
Posted by Mask at 02/09/2007 @ 11:07am
That long, huh? And it's as far as your gonna get, too. Wow, what an accomplishment. A degree in something like criminal justice, kinesiology, OCS, and then 20 years as a junior officer. (How do you like kissing Academy ass?). Oh well, at least you'll have those VA benefits, unless your Repubs continue cutting that budget.
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 11:11am
Cant you music, exactly what would be allowable for liberals in questioning terrorists?
Not allowing them to sit in wooden chairs? BC too long in a wooden chair is torture?
What can be allowed to question a terrorist???? Can some enlightened liberal please clarify????????????
And they say liberals are soft on terror..lol
Posted by CPT 02/09/2007 @ 10:49am
And again, the simplest of ideas needs further explaining for CPT.
Hey, you find Osama Bin Laden, a CONFIRMED "terrorist", and I'll help you insert bamboo needles under his fingernails to get whatever you need out of him.
There's a difference, however, when you're torturing ACCUSED or SUSPECTED terrorists.
Someone does not become a "terrorist" just because you label him that.
You and your kind, CPT, have been calling Americans treasonous, terrorist sympathizers for years now.
Who would you like to label a "terrorist" and torture next?
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 11:12am
For anyone that missed it over on the "Not Your Father's Antiwar Acitivist" thread (which CPT bailed from when the going got hot so he could come to this thread and say even more stupid stuff), I wanted to share the following instant classic exchange:
If there is any group of Americans who truly believe in "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs," it's our soldiers.
Posted by CPT 02/08/2007 @ 7:00pm | ignore this person
Wait, wait...where have I heard that quote before?
Oh yes, now I remember, Karl Marx in his 1875 Critique of the Gotha Program...the phrase that summarizes the communist system!
So CPT, did you really intend to compare our military to communism?
Posted by LILLIAN 02/08/2007 @ 8:20pm | ignore this person
Do you use that in your military recruitment efforts CPT?
"Be the best communist you can be...in the ARMY!!
Posted by LILLIAN 02/08/2007 @ 8:24pm | ignore this person
Sorry.
:-)
Posted by LILLIAN 02/08/2007 @ 8:27pm
Classic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_each_according _to_his_ability,_to_each_according_to_his_need
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 11:18am
Hey, you find Osama Bin Laden, a CONFIRMED "terrorist", and I'll help you insert bamboo needles under his fingernails to get whatever you need out of him. Posted by NEW DAWN 02/09/2007 @ 11:12am | ignore this person
If the government does it to Osama today, they may do it to you tomorrow. That's the way it works. Laws are by definition exactly that; they're not something that is supposed to be followed one day and not on another. Without consistency it's not law. (The "law of gravity" applies on Earth, the moon, Saturn--wherever; there are no exceptions.)
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 11:18am
Hey, you find Osama Bin Laden, a CONFIRMED "terrorist", and I'll help you insert bamboo needles under his fingernails to get whatever you need out of him. Posted by NEW DAWN 02/09/2007 @ 11:12am | ignore this person
If the government does it to Osama today, they may do it to you tomorrow. That's the way it works. Laws are by definition exactly that; they're not something that is supposed to be followed one day and not on another. Without consistency it's not law. (The "law of gravity" applies on Earth, the moon, Saturn--wherever; there are no exceptions.)
Posted by MTSPENCE05 02/09/2007 @ 11:18am
If Osama were an innocent American citizen, Spence, you might be making a valid point.
If I ever helped mastermind attacks against American citizens and held information on countless others, that would be no less than I would deserve.
Sorry, no liberal softie on this stuff.
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 11:30am
I'm not a liberal. Believe, feel whatever you want; none the less, that's the way things work. It has nothing to do with liberal/conservative or left/right; that is the nature of the beast. Allow it to do something to a bad guy and the next day it could very well be you. And like I said, laws are not laws unless they're always followed.
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 11:36am
Here's a really scary thought -
How'd you like to be strapped for days to a chair in a room with a speaker in every corner....
From one corner, Barry25 screeches 12-year old inanities all day...
From another, Liberty "preaches" his own unique brand of "It's okay to nuke people" Christianity...
From another, CPT talks about the military as he sees it (not hoo-ah, but hooo-boy)...
And from the last, Rio Chickenshit Coward yells "Demoncrats" and brings up forty year old events over and over and over and over and over...
I would chew my own arms off to get out of that chair.
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 11:37am
And the point is more than valid.
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 11:37am
I'm not a liberal. Believe, feel whatever you want; none the less, that's the way things work. It has nothing to do with liberal/conservative or left/right; that is the nature of the beast. Allow it to do something to a bad guy and the next day it could very well be you. And like I said, laws are not laws unless they're always followed.
Posted by MTSPENCE05 02/09/2007 @ 11:36am
I'm curious. If we catch Osama, how far are you willing to go to get him to talk?
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 11:39am
And the point is more than valid.
Posted by MTSPENCE05 02/09/2007 @ 11:37am
No, it isn't.
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 11:39am
laws are not laws unless they're always followed.
Posted by MTSPENCE05 02/09/2007 @ 11:36am
By your rationale, there are no laws, because unless you can name one that has never been broken, your argument just fell apart.
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 11:42am
I'm sorry, ND, I'm obviously speaking above your level. My apologies.
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 11:44am
My argument proved the point, i.e., this "rule of law" our leaders are so fond of praising is a myth, a chimera. Maybe you'd be happier reading Time of Newsweek, ND.
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 11:47am
I'm sorry, ND, I'm obviously speaking above your level. My apologies.
Posted by MTSPENCE05 02/09/2007 @ 11:44am
Have I given you some reason to act like a condescending prick towards me, Spence, or is that just how you argue - when your argument is shown to have a hole in it, you ridicule and run away?
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 11:50am
My argument proved the point, i.e., this "rule of law" our leaders are so fond of praising is a myth, a chimera.
Posted by MTSPENCE05 02/09/2007 @ 11:47am
So, if there's no such thing as a rule of law, why do we have law enforcement agencies, jails, or a justice system?
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 11:55am
Spence? Oh, Spence?
Genius "above my level"? Smart guy?
Hello?
I'm still curious. If we catch Osama, how far are you willing to go to get him to talk?
And should we abandon or abolish all of our lawmaking entities, processes, procedures, and enforcers, since there is really no such thing as the rule of law, since it's a "myth", a "chimera"?
Don't run away, you condescending genius "above my level" - you want to argue that way, I'm game. I was trying to be polite and just discuss this, but we can run it any way you want to.
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 11:58am
Good question.
Tell me, why have any laws if the government is not going to follow them consistently?
The road to Auschwitz is a short, slippery ride. Hitler started out with the communists, socialists, those the Nazis labeling criminals; no one--at least not a number of any consequence--objected. When Adolf went after Jews, Gypsies, Jehova Witnesses there still was no out cry. By the time he came after people like you, ND, there was no one left to speak up. (I'm paraphrasing a statement I heard or read from a victim of the Nazi regime.)
"Have I given you some reason to act like a condescending prick towards me, Spence..."
You can't figure that one out?
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 12:04pm
No, it's not that I'm a genius. Far from it. It's just that you are so lacking.
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 12:04pm
Try to remain calm, ND; just walk it off, rub some dirt on it; eventually the stinging will go away.
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 12:06pm
You fancy yourself a great deal more clever than you are, Spence.
You haven't "stung" me in any way, nor shown me "lacking" in any way, and certainly not intellectually. Your last few posts are full of smart remarks, but little to no substance regarding the discussion.
And you still haven't answered my question, just repeated it:
Tell me, why have any laws if the government is not going to follow them consistently?
You resort to an example of Godwin's law, and still haven't explained the merit of your position.
Are you comparing America to Nazi Germany?
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 12:12pm
Posted by MTSPENCE05 02/09/2007 @ 10:34am
Very precisee analysis of the LVLIBERTY1 hypocrite in a nutshell. But this part was precious:
My rights and privileges as such are totally separate from my Christian beliefs and should be under our "separation of church and state" philosophy.
It isn't possible to conceive of a more dimwitted argument that someone could use to defend their personal hypocrisy. CPT, unsurprisingly, found it to be compelling logic.
Posted by fromredbird at 02/09/2007 @ 12:14pm
"First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists, but I was neither, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew so I did not speak out. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me."
Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Posted by johannesrolf at 02/09/2007 @ 12:15pm
"Have I given you some reason to act like a condescending prick towards me, Spence..."
You can't figure that one out?
Posted by MTSPENCE05 02/09/2007 @ 12:04am | ignore this person
No, actually. I read back over my posts and saw no initial reason for you to act that way, beyond my disagreeing with you.
Again, is that just how you argue? When someone confronts you with a hole in your logic, you ridicule them instead of backing up your argument?
Seems pretty weak to me.
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 12:16pm
Now, how did I KNOW that Johannes would jump on a Nazi argument?
He LOVES Godwin's law...
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 12:17pm
"The test of the morality of a society is what it does for its children."
Dietrich Bonhoeffer
there's plenty more where that came from. you may google.
Posted by johannesrolf at 02/09/2007 @ 12:20pm
Posted by MTSPENCE05 02/09/2007 @ 10:34am
Very precisee analysis of the LVLIBERTY1 hypocrite in a nutshell. But this part was precious:
My rights and privileges as such are totally separate from my Christian beliefs and should be under our "separation of church and state" philosophy.
It isn't possible to conceive of a more dimwitted argument that someone could use to defend their personal hypocrisy. CPT, unsurprisingly, found it to be compelling logic.
Posted by FROMREDBIRD 02/09/2007 @ 12:14am
I found Spence's initial posts pretty interesting. I loved the part about the convenience of turning on and off one's Christianity.
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 12:20pm
I'm suggesting the complete disregard for the laws regarding torture that this administration so blithely ignores and the support it receives from the population is analogous to the Nazi's gradual oppression of the German population.
And, yes, it has been explained. Just because you can't wrap your brain around it doesn't mean it isn't so.
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 12:21pm
"The test of the morality of a society is what it does for its children."
Dietrich Bonhoeffer
there's plenty more where that came from. you may google.
Posted by JOHANNESROLF 02/09/2007 @ 12:20am | ignore this person
Hasn't someone said something like the true nature of a society is reflecting in the conditions of its prisons, prisoners?
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 12:24pm
I'm suggesting the complete disregard for the laws regarding torture that this administration so blithely ignores and the support it receives from the population is analogous to the Nazi's gradual oppression of the German population.
And, yes, it has been explained. Just because you can't wrap your brain around it doesn't mean it isn't so.
Posted by MTSPENCE05 02/09/2007 @ 12:21am
Just because you say it's wrappable doesn't make it so, or true.
You're comparing the Bush administration to Nazi Germany. I reject that, and the weakness and stupidity that would be required of the American people to ever let that happen. Your example of Godwin's law is exactly the kind of hyperbolic talk that makes people think that those who oppose the administration are knee-jerk nuts, and gives those who oppose torture a bad name as reactionary and hyperbolic instead of simply compassionate and well-reasoned.
I'm still curious. If we catch Osama, how far are you willing to go to get him to talk?
And why shouldn't we abandon or abolish all of our lawmaking entities, processes, procedures, and enforcers, since there is really no such thing as the rule of law, since it's a "myth", a "chimera"?
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 12:28pm
Hasn't someone said something like the true nature of a society is reflecting in the conditions of its prisons, prisoners?
Posted by MTSPENCE05 02/09/2007 @ 12:24am | ignore this person
perhaps. don't be lazy, find out what and who and come back with it for us. that's what I did.
Posted by johannesrolf at 02/09/2007 @ 12:30pm
If your religious/spiritual beliefs mean anything to you then you can't separate them from any of your other beliefs because those beliefs become who and what you are.
Posted by i'm nobody at 02/09/2007 @ 12:32pm
Yes, I am lazy. There's no denying that.
I would not torture Osama. Laws, principles--you either have them or you don't. It's that simple.
Why aren't our leaders, police, etc., held to the highest standards, forced to always follow and enforce the law? That should be the question. (Notice the uproar over some lying, covering up border guard that's in a federal joint getting his ass beat? Repub Congressmen are trying to get him out of prison. Why are they any different than any other criminal? How can you expect people to have respect for the law if it is not consistently followed? Do you really believe the law "enforcement" system is there to protect you? And you wonder why I'm condescending. And my original point, since it obviously eluded you is that once you allow the government to do it to one person, sooner or later it will end up doing it to you.)
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 12:39pm
It's been fun. I've gotta do some work. Maybe Johannes can explain it better than my limited ass.
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 12:41pm
"Yes, I am lazy. There's no denying that.
I would not torture Osama. Laws, principles--you either have them or you don't. It's that simple."
me too.
yes, you are correct, our principles and our laws, which are based on those principles, do not permit torture. no exceptions.
new dawn is a thinly disguised fascist/stalinist. he gleefully wants to drag others into the yard to be shot. he is a sadist who relishes the thought of torturing others. he refers to other people as animals, and perhaps most damning of all, he is unaware of the the selfportrait he is painting with such rhetoric.
Posted by johannesrolf at 02/09/2007 @ 12:46pm
Maybe Johannes can explain it better than my limited ass.
Posted by MTSPENCE05 02/09/2007 @ 12:41am | ignore this person
you were and are doing just fine with the explicating. I have found little to add, except the entire quote and its source.
Posted by johannesrolf at 02/09/2007 @ 12:48pm
Hey NEW DAWN....you might want to throw in "Reductio ad Hitlerum"
hehe
Posted by Mask at 02/09/2007 @ 12:55pm
"I would not torture Osama. Laws, principles--you either have them or you don't. It's that simple."
My principles dictate that Osama, the singlemost hated man in America (one would think), merits special circumstances. My comment about needles and fingernails was hyperbolic, of course, but keep in mind that the comment was addressed to CPT, and surely delivered in a manner and level that he would understand. He was mocking making men sitting in wooden chairs as torture, you'll recall.
You've still never answered my question. How far would you be willing to go to get answers about future terrorist acts and existing terror cells out of Osama Bin Laden? What is the limit of stress you would put him through to get answers?
"Why aren't our leaders, police, etc., held to the highest standards, forced to always follow and enforce the law? That should be the question. (Notice the uproar over some lying, covering up border guard that's in a federal joint getting his ass beat? Repub Congressmen are trying to get him out of prison. Why are they any different than any other criminal? How can you expect people to have respect for the law if it is not consistently followed? Do you really believe the law "enforcement" system is there to protect you?"
Yes, I absolutely believe that law enforcement agencies are here to protect and serve you. You really are out of your element on this subject, Spence, and haven't a clue what you are talking about. As a man with a law enforcement education, and as one accepted for police departments in two states, I think it's a gross mistake to lump our police and our political leaders together. Police are held to very high standards and are often removed from their positions for misconduct.
And your statements on the border guards are staggering - have you sat down and read the details of their story? Here's a good one to start with:
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54132
"And you wonder why I'm condescending."
Not any more, I don't. You're condescending when your arguments are challenged with simple logic and polite disagreement. I can clearly see that.
"And my original point, since it obviously eluded you, is that once you allow the government to do it to one person, sooner or later it will end up doing it to you."
I don't believe that, and your saying it still does not make it so.
And even if we "tortured" confirmed terrorists, I would never in my life have to worry about that.
I'm not a terrorist.
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 12:57pm
new dawn is a thinly disguised fascist/stalinist. he gleefully wants to drag others into the yard to be shot. he is a sadist who relishes the thought of torturing others. he refers to other people as animals, and perhaps most damning of all, he is unaware of the the selfportrait he is painting with such rhetoric.
Posted by JOHANNESROLF 02/09/2007 @ 12:46am
Hee hee hee.
Hide behind your little iggy list, Johannes, because you haven't the guts to come debate me.
You really are the old hippie pacifict coward you're constantly protrayed to be here, aren't you?
"new dawn is a thinly disguised fascist/stalinist."
Wrong.
"He gleefully wants to drag others into the yard to be shot."
Who exactly did I say should be dragged into the courtyard and shot, Johannes? Go look up my exact quote and bring it back here. I can't wait.
"he is a sadist who relishes the thought of torturing others."
Relish it? No. Realize that we go to war to protect the way we LIVE, whereas they go to war to DIE? Yes. Osama is not going to tell you anything just because you ask him really, really nicely.
"he refers to other people as animals"
All human beings are animals - we just happen to have reason and opposable thumbs. And your continuing denial of basic biology continues to amuse me.
"and perhaps most damning of all, he is unaware of the the selfportrait he is painting with such rhetoric."
I'm pretty self-aware, thanks. What kind of self-portrait do you paint by talking about me while cowering behind your iggy list instead of debating me directly?
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 1:05pm
Hey NEW DAWN....you might want to throw in "Reductio ad Hitlerum"
hehe
Posted by MASK 02/09/2007 @ 12:55am
Once again, as is occasionally the case, I agree with you, Mask.
That's Johannes' favorite argument - we're all supposed to just buckle to his superior logic when he uses it...
That and talking from behind his iggy list.
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 1:32pm
Posted by NEW DAWN 02/09/2007 @ 1:32pm
Well, JR's ego would need the Vehicle Assembly Building at the Kennedy Space Center for storage.
And his "itchy Ignore Button trigger finger" DOES get set off about as often as DARLADOON's used to, whenever he feels that some magnificent point of logic and reason of his ...is being mocked and shown to be made of Silly Putty.
Posted by Mask at 02/09/2007 @ 1:41pm
are you stepping up to the lie, Mask? I merely posted the quote and its source, after another has brought up the subject.
It's not that I wouldn't, it's not that I shouldn't, and god knows it's not that I couldn't...
so, smart people, who is quoted here?
Posted by johannesrolf at 02/09/2007 @ 1:47pm
He's a funny little peacenik, indeed.
He iggied me because while we were discussing the death penalty, I wrote something along the lines of "Being civil to you isn't any longer my real concern, Johannes. Your refusal to accept that humans are animals is getting on my nerves."
I wasn't even actually uncivil, just said it wasn't my concern any longer.
And bloop - the thin-skinned Johannes disapeared...
He's pretty bold while hiding behind his ego and his iggy list, though isn't he?
Whaddaya know - I agreed with you twice in ten minutes, Mask.
:)
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 1:48pm
Yes, I absolutely believe that law enforcement agencies are here to protect and serve you. You really are out of your element on this subject, Spence, and haven't a clue what you are talking about. As a man with a law enforcement education, and as one accepted for police departments in two states, I think it's a gross mistake to lump our police and our political leaders together. Police are held to very high standards and are often removed from their positions for misconduct.
Oh, you're a pig. That explains a lot. I'm a convict, did time with the Feds. It's always different when law enforcement breaks the law, isn't it? And, of course, anyone that's been through a federal court (except for high profile cases like the Libby fiasco) understand all too well that "justice" has nothing to do with the system. What kind of system is valid that allows the men and women responsible for upholding the law to break it with impunity?
Those two border guards lied and attempted to cover up what they did. If they can't handle it out in population, then they need to check into the SHU. It's their own damn fault.
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 1:53pm
Oh, you're a pig. That explains a lot. I'm a convict, did time with the Feds.
Posted by MTSPENCE05 02/09/2007 @ 1:53pm
Well, THAT explains a lot. A criminal who hates cops and the rule of law arguing about the rule of law - hilarious, in a sick, sad way.
You just shot every ounce of credibility you might have ever had, buddy.
You broke the law, you got arrested. How does your inability to follow the law make cops "pigs" and make the rule of law a myth?
And did you bother to read the article I posted about the lies being told about the border agents?
Nah, probably not.
That was classic, Spence. You just made my day.
:)
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 2:00pm
Tell us, lawbreaker -
What was your federal crime?
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 2:03pm
I got called a pig by a convicted felon.
Classic.
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 2:05pm
Mask and Dawny, they deserve each other.
Posted by johannesrolf at 02/09/2007 @ 2:13pm
Mask and Dawny, they deserve each other.
Posted by JOHANNESROLF 02/09/2007 @ 2:13pm
Keep talking from behind that iggy list, coward.
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 2:14pm
I chose to break the law because our government, the elites, and law eforcement are above the law. The law in this country (like most others) is something to be feared, not respected. My crime involved stealing from banks; I did not hurt anyone; it wasn't "right" but at the same time it wasn't wrong; it was "sporting". In an amoral society there is no right and wrong.
You want to claim my crimes invalidate anything and everything I have to say. So be it. I broke the law in broad daylight; I did not try to lie my way out of it; I accepted responsibility for my actions. You being a pig explains your point of view fine. I am, however, more than qualified to speak on the subject; I've witnessed first hand how the system works and how law enforcement officers and officials are not held accountable. I was, for just one example, in FMC Fort Worth when James McDugall (sp?) died. (Maybe you should read a little Thoreau, pig.)
I've read about the border agents. The government prosecutor lied? That's a real big surprise. Proves my point. And your fellow law enforcement pigs lied too. You obstruct justice with the feds and you're gonna do time, unless, of course, your a pig, then you get special treatment.
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 2:18pm
And calling me a convict doesn't make you any less a pig.
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 2:20pm
here is a personal anecdote that expresses my ambivalence toward the Police:
last winter my 16year odl son was jumped by a group of teens trying to steal his Ipod. he kept his wits and escaped injury and held his Ipod. we went to the precinct and he picked out one of the perps in a line up. they had attacked other kids and he was already in custody.
a month ago, my son and a friend were walking down Broadway in washington heights, our 'hood, when they were acosted from behind by two undercover cops, thrown up against the wall, frisked and told not to hang out there. this was for no reason. they were told they matched a description.complaints against police for these kind of stops have risen from 20 to 30%. since 9/11 the cops have been going crazy. claiming the right to search bags in the subway being just one example.
Posted by johannesrolf at 02/09/2007 @ 2:33pm
Back to the article by Mr Hayes for a second....
"Professional associations can be unaccountable, self-interested and reactionary."
I wonder what the reaction from "The Nation" would be if....that was applied to LABOR UNIONS!??!???!?
Posted by Mask at 02/09/2007 @ 2:39pm
"I chose to break the law because our government, the elites, and law eforcement are above the law."
So, why not torture because others torture? The only real torture here is your tortured logic.
"The law in this country (like most others) is something to be feared, not respected."
Really? I don't fear the law. But then, I am not a criminal.
"My crime involved stealing from banks; I did not hurt anyone; it wasn't "right" but at the same time it wasn't wrong; it was "sporting". In an amoral society there is no right and wrong."
TALK ABOUT TORTURED LOGIC!!! Are you for real?
"You want to claim my crimes invalidate anything and everything I have to say. So be it."
Get your facts straight.
I never claimed your conviction invalidated anyting you had to say - I said that your conviction explains a lot about why you hate cops and the rule of law.
"I broke the law in broad daylight; I did not try to lie my way out of it; I accepted responsibility for my actions."
Really. You turned yourself in and asked for the maximum sentence for your crime?
"You being a pig explains your point of view fine. I am, however, more than qualified to speak on the subject; I've witnessed first hand how the system works and how law enforcement officers and officials are not held accountable. I was, for just one example, in FMC Fort Worth when James McDugall (sp?) died. (Maybe you should read a little Thoreau, pig.)"
LOL. Again with the pig thing - didn't that die out in the 60's?
"I've read about the border agents. The government prosecutor lied? That's a real big surprise. Proves my point. And your fellow law enforcement pigs lied too. You obstruct justice with the feds and you're gonna do time, unless, of course, your a pig, then you get special treatment."
They're in jail, Spence. How are they getting special treatment?
"And calling me a convict doesn't make you any less a pig."
You called yourself a convict, which you are because of your own mistakes and refusal to follow the law.
You continue to make my day, Spence. Keep going.
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 2:39pm
Now back to the more interesting story....
MTSPENCE calls NEW DAWN a "pig"....and JOHANNES is mad with NEW DAWN because he "called human beings animals". Hmm..are pigs animals!?!?!?!
LOL!
"Mask and Dawny, they deserve each other."--Posted by JOHANNESROLF 02/09/2007 @ 2:13pm
"Keep talking from behind that iggy list, coward."---Posted by NEW DAWN 02/09/2007 @ 2:14pm
Guess after that joke, I'll be joining you soon in that luxury resort, ND.
Posted by Mask at 02/09/2007 @ 2:41pm
Yeah, unions are often corrupt and all kinds of other bad things; but unions are here for a reason. Organized labor did not just sprout up one morning like a mushroom. Unions formed because of the abuses of capital. Eliminate those abuses and then you can begin to concern yourself with unions. Until then, they are nothing more than an unfortunate necessity.
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 2:44pm
Posted by MASK 02/09/2007 @ 2:41pm
I just keep shaking my head and laughing every time either one of them posts.
Did you catch the last gem from Spence above? It wasn't wrong to steal from banks (writing bad checks, I'm assuming, which also makes him a liar and a fraud), but it isn't right, either, it's just "sporting"!!!
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 2:47pm
Pig, I openly admitted I broke the law. Too bad you can't fess up to my point about the how the laws apply to some but not others, especially those responsible for enforcing the law. You don't fear the law? That's great--and obvious you have never been abused by a police officer.
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 2:47pm
Yeah, sure, I wrote bad checks. I witnessed it in the navy, I saw it while I was locked up, and the Iran/Contra is a great example of how some are truly above the law, while us lowly citizens routinely get hammered for any and all infractions. I didn't write hot checks; I robbed banks, corporate banks.
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 2:51pm
"Unions formed because of the abuses of capital. Eliminate those abuses and then you can begin to concern yourself with unions. Until then, they are nothing more than an unfortunate necessity."
unions used to do much more. they built housing and ran them as co- ops, they supported the arts, in other words they were part of civitas, a community.that will never go out of style.
Posted by johannesrolf at 02/09/2007 @ 2:51pm
Pig, I openly admitted I broke the law. Too bad you can't fess up to my point about the how the laws apply to some but not others, especially those responsible for enforcing the law. You don't fear the law? That's great--and obvious you have never been abused by a police officer.
Posted by MTSPENCE05 02/09/2007 @ 2:47pm
Actually, you're wrong again. With the exception of the failure to pay a speeding ticket when I was a teenager, every time I have ever been to jail (assault, "fitting the description", etc.), the charges were later dismissed in their entirety - I was wrongly accused, arrested, and incarcerated, one time just because I stared back at a police officer who thought he was intimidating me by staring at me.
My father's also done many years in prison, off and on, and I know a lot of cops who absolutely abuse their power - never said there weren't, so shut your hole about what I refuse to acknowledge. I just don't make blanket judgements about cops or criminals like you do.
And if you insist on calling me "pig", I'll start addressing you as "Criminal Idiot". Works for me.
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 2:56pm
Back after a while - laughing at you and Johannes made me hungry.
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 3:00pm
Assault? And you want to call me a criminal. No, pig, it sounds like the "Crimal Idiot" moniker fits you much better. I've done my time, and the last thing I'll ever do is allow the feds to get their hands on me again.
It's not the cops per se I object to. Of course there are good and bad cops just like everyone else. It's the system that protects them, fails to hold them to account that bothers me.
I call you a pig because you sound like one--arrogant and ignorant.
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 3:02pm
So, why not torture because others torture? The only real torture here is your tortured logic.
That's your logic, not mine. You would torture Osama, not me. When it comes to stealing from corporate America, I have no inhibitions. Hurting fellow human beings--torturing men and women--is a different thing. Now, Mr. Pig, how is it that you can condone breaking the law--torturing Osama or anybody else? You're such a big supporter of the law, how can you rationalize choosing when and where you decide to follow the law?
My original point was simply that do it to terrorists or criminals today and it may be done to you sooner or later. That's my argument. That's the way it works.
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 3:12pm
Posted by NEW DAWN 02/09/2007 @ 2:47pm
Well, MTSPENCE, I did read that and I gotta say your "Robin Hood morality" does throw me for a loop.
After all, doesn't that lighten your credibility to post on articles concerning....Halliburton contracts in Iraq or Republican Congressional corruption?
Technically, neither of those things "hurt people", did they?
"My crime involved stealing from banks; I did not hurt anyone; it wasn't "right" but at the same time it wasn't wrong; it was "sporting". In an amoral society there is no right and wrong."
Posted by Mask at 02/09/2007 @ 3:43pm
(Bizarre - it looks like Spence's last comment disappeared)
Dear Criminal Idiot,
Wow, haven't you had enough of proving yourself a Criminal Idiot? No?
"Assault? And you want to call me a criminal."
Self-defense. Charges dismissed.
"No, pig, it sounds like the "Crimal Idiot" moniker fits you much better."
Pop quiz, hotshot: Between you and I, which of the two of us is dumb enough to commit, be arrested, and incarcerated for a federal crime?
Bing-bing-bing!!! That's right, the answer is: YOU.
"I've done my time, and the last thing I'll ever do is allow the feds to get their hands on me again."
Has it ever occurred to you that if you hadn't been a criminal, you wouldn't be so upset with your jailers? Maybe if you'd followed the law - oh, but that's right, it doesn't apply to you - you say the rule of law is a myth and a chimera.
"It's not the cops per se I object to. Of course there are good and bad cops just like everyone else."
First time you've acknowledged it - backpedal with the best of 'em, doncha?
"It's the system that protects them, fails to hold them to account that bothers me."
That part of the system bothers me, too - as I stated, I've known cops that shouldn't have been cops, but that doesn't make all cops "pigs".
"I call you a pig because you sound like one--arrogant and ignorant."
One last time, Spence. All I had done was disagreed with you when you started to be an arrogant, ignorant dick. Projecting onto me doesn't help your case. How arrogant and ignorant does someone have to be to write bad checks and rob banks because they feel they're above the law?
"You would torture Osama, not me."
Bet your ass I would to protect American citizens and soldiers.
"When it comes to stealing from corporate America, I have no inhibitions."
Criminal Idiot.
"Hurting fellow human beings--torturing men and women--is a different thing."
Agreed.
"Now, Mr. Pig, how is it that you can condone breaking the law--torturing Osama or anybody else? You're such a big supporter of the law, how can you rationalize choosing when and where you decide to follow the law?"
I've explained how: The man is a confirmed terrorist and has definitive inside knowledge about terrorist activities. I've also acknowledged and clarified that my original statement about needles and fingernails was hyperbolic and directed at CPT. You you have STILL dodged my own question for hours:
How far would you be willing to go to get answers about future terrorist acts and existing terror cells out of Osama Bin Laden? What is the limit of stress you would put him through to get answers?
"My original point was simply that do it to terrorists or criminals today and it may be done to you sooner or later. That's my argument. That's the way it works."
No, your original point addressed to me, lying obfuscator, was:
If the government does it to Osama today, they may do it to you tomorrow. That's the way it works. Laws are by definition exactly that; they're not something that is supposed to be followed one day and not on another. Without consistency it's not law. (The "law of gravity" applies on Earth, the moon, Saturn--wherever; there are no exceptions.)
Posted by MTSPENCE05 02/09/2007 @ 11:18am
It was not about what was done to "terrorists or criminals", it was about Osama Bin Laden. And the only way that it would be done to me is if I were a confirmed terrorist like Osama is.
Clearly, you've softened your rhetoric since it came under fire, and yet you still fail to adequately explain why you personally feel that you are above the law.
Keep 'em coming. You're turning out to be a great deal of fun.
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 3:50pm
Posted by MASK 02/09/2007 @ 3:43pm
In the tale, Robin Hood supposedly gave his ill-gotten gains to the poor.
Are we supposed to believe that Spence wrote hot checks to forward on to various charities?
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 3:54pm
Posted by NEW DAWN 02/09/2007 @ 3:54pm
Well, I admit that my use of "Robin Hood" was falling into a trap many liberals use.
i.e. the talk of "Robin Hood in reverse", concerning tax cuts, a la "steal from the poor to give to the rich".
Actually, the Robin Hood myth was based on him stealing back BURDENSOME TAXES from the King and Sheriff's men and RETURNING it to the serfs and Saxons (the classic Errol Flynn film for one example).
Many of the Left twist it and by their own logic, if "bad Robin Hood'ism" ("Robin Hood in reverse") is "stealing from the poor to give to the rich"....then "GOOD Robin Hood'ism" would be..."stealing from the rich to give to the poor".
A semantical mirror-image I'm sure they are not conscious of.
As to MTSPENCE....again, his statement taken NON-ironically that "My crime involved stealing from banks; I did not hurt anyone; it wasn't "right" but at the same time it wasn't wrong; it was "sporting". In an amoral society there is no right and wrong"...
certainly lowers HIS credibility on many issues.
And correct me if I'm wrong, but if a bank is robbed...the bank's insurance company has to reimburse the bank for the money....and the bank's premiums paid to the insurance company, which come out of CUSTOMER service charges, would GO UP.
May only be a few cents to each customer, depending on the size of the bank, but it IS hurting somebody...and not even the "evil banks" or "evil insurance companies".
Plus who's to say that (in the case of processing a bad check), that some poor bank teller wasn't fired for accepting the checks or not confirming the account when the crime was discovered.
I'm pretty libertarian about victimless crimes...drug use, prostitution, gambling....but "robbing the rich" doesn't hurt them given the system of protections...it may even hurt the POOR!
Posted by Mask at 02/09/2007 @ 4:09pm
And correct me if I'm wrong, but if a bank is robbed...the bank's insurance company has to reimburse the bank for the money....and the bank's premiums paid to the insurance company, which come out of CUSTOMER service charges, would GO UP.
May only be a few cents to each customer, depending on the size of the bank, but it IS hurting somebody...and not even the "evil banks" or "evil insurance companies".
Plus who's to say that (in the case of processing a bad check), that some poor bank teller wasn't fired for accepting the checks or not confirming the account when the crime was discovered.
I'm pretty libertarian about victimless crimes...drug use, prostitution, gambling....but "robbing the rich" doesn't hurt them given the system of protections...it may even hurt the POOR!
Posted by MASK 02/09/2007 @ 4:09pm
Three times I've agreed with you, today, Mask - are you absolutely sure we haven't entered a parallel universe?
;)
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 4:26pm
"Actually, the Robin Hood myth was based on him stealing back BURDENSOME TAXES from the King and Sheriff's men and RETURNING it to the serfs and Saxons (the classic Errol Flynn film for one example)."
Never seen it - read the book when I was younger, though.
And this is interesting, from Wiki:
In many stories Robin's nemesis is the Sheriff of Nottingham. In the oldest legends, this is merely because a sheriff is an outlaw's natural enemy,[2] but in later versions, the despotic sheriff gravely abuses his position, appropriating land, levying intolerable taxation, and unfairly persecuting the poor. In some tales the antagonist is Prince John, based on John of England, seen as the unjust usurper of his pious brother Richard. In the oldest versions surviving, Robin Hood is a yeoman, but in some versions he is said to have been a nobleman, the earl of Loxley, who was unjustly deprived of his lands.[3] Sometimes he has served in the crusades, returning to England to find his lands pillaged by the dastardly sheriff. In some tales he is the champion of the people, fighting against corrupt officials and the oppressive order that protects them. In others he is an arrogant and headstrong rebel, who delights in bloodshed, cruelly slaughtering and beheading his victims.
In fact, the Robin Hood stories have been different in every period of their history. Robin himself is continually reshaped and redrawn, made to fit whatever values are pushed on to him. This fact makes any notion of a "real" or "true" Robin Hood largely redundant. Even if a historical Robin Hood could be identified, he could account for only the bare minimum of the rich legend surrounding his name. The figure is less a personage and more of an amalgam of the various ideas his "life" has been made to support.
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 4:29pm
Three times I've agreed with you, today, Mask - are you absolutely sure we haven't entered a parallel universe?
;)
Posted by NEW DAWN 02/09/2007 @ 4:26pm
Actually, now that I check...all the guys have goatees, Sulu has a fencing scar, and DARLADOON is my "Captain's woman"!?!?!?!??!!
Posted by Mask at 02/09/2007 @ 4:35pm
Posted by NEW DAWN 02/09/2007 @ 4:29pm
It's true, but I think the 1938 version is the classic, both in story-telling and acting....after all, Kevin Costner vs. Errol Flynn?!?!?!? Although Alan Rickman was almost as good as Basil Rathbone!
Of course THE perfect one is...."Rabbit Hood" by Chuck Jones, starring a certain anthromorphic lepus named "Bugs".
The classic bit is The Sheriff chasing Bugs into "the King's Garden" with a discussion of "royal ground" that degenerates into Bugs acting as a real estate broker "selling" the garden to the Sheriff (after checking to see if "he's a veteran" for paperwork purposes) and the Sheriff MID-WAY into construction of his 4 room Tudor house, when he realizes what has happened to him!
Posted by Mask at 02/09/2007 @ 4:43pm
Of course THE perfect one is...."Rabbit Hood" by Chuck Jones, starring a certain anthromorphic lepus named "Bugs".
The classic bit is The Sheriff chasing Bugs into "the King's Garden" with a discussion of "royal ground" that degenerates into Bugs acting as a real estate broker "selling" the garden to the Sheriff (after checking to see if "he's a veteran" for paperwork purposes) and the Sheriff MID-WAY into construction of his 4 room Tudor house, when he realizes what has happened to him!
Posted by MASK 02/09/2007 @ 4:43pm
Four freaking times. Boggling. LOL
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 4:46pm
Are we supposed to believe that Spence wrote hot checks to forward on to various charities?
Posted by NEW DAWN 02/09/2007 @ 3:54pm | ignore this person
I've already said I did not write hot checks.
Make fun of me all you want, pig, at least I'm not the son of a convict.
As far as my credibility goes, I never attempted to argue or pretend what I did was "legal". Corporate America, on the other hand, does all kinds of immoral, unethical crap and then hides behind its lawyers, influence, and legality.
Please explain, pig, how you can pick and choose when, where, and which laws to follow? You never have explained that. I know the system is a farce; I advocate something better. You believe in the system and yet rationalize breaking the laws at your convenience.
None the less, as stated, the original argument is that torturing terrorists today opens the door to torturing others tomorrow. You're too dense appreciate this fact. That's your problem, disagree all you want. You're a tool.
My original point was simply that do it to terrorists or criminals today and it may be done to you sooner or later. That's my argument. That's the way it works."
No, your original point addressed to me, lying obfuscator, was:
If the government does it to Osama today, they may do it to you tomorrow. That's the way it works. Laws are by definition exactly that; they're not something that is supposed to be followed one day and not on another. Without consistency it's not law. (The "law of gravity" applies on Earth, the moon, Saturn--wherever; there are no exceptions.)
You really are a simpleton, aren't you.
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 5:21pm
I'm pretty libertarian about victimless crimes...drug use, prostitution, gambling....but "robbing the rich" doesn't hurt them given the system of protections...it may even hurt the POOR!
Posted by MASK 02/09/2007 @ 4:09pm | ignore this person
Tool.
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 5:22pm
Has it ever occurred to you that if you hadn't been a criminal, you wouldn't be so upset with your jailers? Maybe if you'd followed the law - oh, but that's right, it doesn't apply to you - you say the rule of law is a myth and a chimera.
Another example of the pig mentality. It's all your fault. True, I was in prison for breaking the law (and getting caught), but my decision to rob banks in no way excuses the the illegal behavior of the indolent, ignorant, unprofessional scum that represents the law.
Posted by mtspence05 at 02/09/2007 @ 5:28pm
Tool.
Posted by MTSPENCE05 02/09/2007 @ 5:22pm
uh...Phillips head???
Posted by Mask at 02/09/2007 @ 7:13pm
Tool.
Posted by MTSPENCE05 02/09/2007 @ 5:22pm
uh...Phillips head???
Posted by MASK 02/09/2007 @ 7:13pm |
Why am I not seeing any of Spence's posts?
Has the Nation deemed him a useless Criminal Idiot, too?
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 9:02pm
Posted by NEW DAWN 02/09/2007 @ 9:02pm
You must have put him on Ignore...I see them.
Posted by Mask at 02/09/2007 @ 9:16pm
You were right, Mask, I unintentionally iggied the idiot.
Thanks.
I'm glad to see his subsequent post and eviscerate that, too.
=========================================================
Posted by MTSPENCE05 02/09/2007 @ 2:51pm
"I've already said I did not write hot checks."
Actually, you said you did:
"Yeah, sure, I wrote bad checks. I witnessed...
Posted by MTSPENCE05 02/09/2007 @ 2:51pm "
Let's do some more - this is fun!
"Make fun of me all you want, pig, at least I'm not the son of a convict."
No, you're the actual convict, dumb enough to commit, be arrested, and incarcerated for, a federal crime. I knew better than to go my Dad's route in life. What's your excuse, and more importantly, do you have children? Jesus wept.
"As far as my credibility goes, I never attempted to argue or pretend what I did was "legal". Corporate America, on the other hand, does all kinds of immoral, unethical crap and then hides behind its lawyers, influence, and legality."
Which has exactly what to do with the fact that you personally, MTSPence, are dumb enough to have committed, been arrested, and incarcerated for, a federal crime?
How dare you continue to try and claim the remotest shred of credibility? Not only are you the anitithesis of what you preach as the ideal, but you haven't offered ONE example of the widespread police corruption problem you repeatedly reference. What exactly is your beef? Lay it on us. Coherently would be nice.
"Please explain, pig"
No problem, Criminal Idiot Asshole. Speaking of assholes doing federal time, how's your... never mind.
"...how you can pick and choose when, where, and which laws to follow? You never have explained that."
You really need to pay attention, Dippy. I even pasted your words directly above mine when I answered:
I've explained how: The man [Osama] is a confirmed terrorist and has definitive inside knowledge about terrorist activities. I've also acknowledged and clarified that my original statement about needles and fingernails was hyperbolic and directed at CPT. You have STILL dodged my own question for hours:
How far would you be willing to go to get answers about future terrorist acts and existing terror cells out of Osama Bin Laden? What is the limit of stress you would put him through to get answers?
"None the less, as stated, the original argument is that torturing terrorists today opens the door to torturing others tomorrow. You're too dense appreciate this fact. That's your problem, disagree all you want. You're a tool."
You're a liar - your original point to me (again) was:
If the government does it to Osama today, they may do it to you tomorrow. That's the way it works. Laws are by definition exactly that; they're not something that is supposed to be followed one day and not on another. Without consistency it's not law. (The "law of gravity" applies on Earth, the moon, Saturn--wherever; there are no exceptions.)"
Later, you changed it to:
"My original point was simply that do it to terrorists or criminals today and it may be done to you sooner or later. That's my argument. That's the way it works."
Which still isn't true. I just posted this at 3:50 - are you retarded? Your original point to me (in response to my own point about Osama Bin Laden) was NOT about what was done to "terrorists or criminals", it was about Osama Bin Laden. And again, the only way that [torture] would be done to me is if I were a confirmed terrorist like Osama is.
"You really are a simpleton, aren't you."
No.
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 11:28pm
Come back for more, Spence. I want you to.
And if you don't, rest assured that I will bring this up on another thread in the future.
Posted by New Dawn at 02/09/2007 @ 11:29pm