|
|
Post by chrisfan on May 17, 2004 11:54:21 GMT -5
I read that story in the newspaper on Saturday and was outright APALLED. What in God's name were those two idiots thinking? How can anyone find anything even remotely humourous in Berg's plight? They got less than they deserved when they were just fired. You might have noticed that the station didn't release their REAL names to the press, only their on-air monikers. If they had I guarantee the backlash would have been so brutal that both of those DJs would be driven from the country, and hey, they deserve it (freedom of speech or not, I don't think it's even about that). I hope they never get top work in radio again. I am not condoning the DJs actions, nor am I objecting to their firing. However, with appropriate timing (there is no way for me to word this correctly, just work with me and hear me out) there is a time and place for humor in everything. I say that because I think that some of the best humor CAN come from some of the worst situations ... the humor becomes a way of surviving the tragedy. It becomes a way of taking control of the situation, and proving that it can't take you down. Yes, there is an appropriate way to do it, and an appropriate time and place. But I would not venture to say it can NEVER be done. |
|
|
|
Post by shin on May 17, 2004 12:00:41 GMT -5
So, does that mean that if, as Newsweek is now apparently reporting ( www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4855930/), Bush and Ashcroft as well as Rumsfeld signed off on a legal maneuver to make such torture possible, abandoning the Geneva Convention and opening the door for US soldiers to be "accused of war crimes"...we should only bring punishment as far up the ladder just until it becomes politically damaging? Jail the lackeys but spare the big fish? Anything for justice, as long as the GOP has clean hands? I guess it's not so much a question of how dastardly those nefarious Democrats are, but more to the point, how seriously do we take these abuses and their implications? Are we going to hold responsible those who ARE responsible, or are we just going to make a spectacle of these 7 reservists who were just following orders? It's a bastard deal, having integrity is. And it's a lot bigger than politics... |
|
|
|
Post by chrisfan on May 17, 2004 12:10:13 GMT -5
I guess it's not so much a question of how dastardly those nefarious Democrats are, but more to the point, how seriously do we take these abuses and their implications? Are we going to hold responsible those who ARE responsible, or are we just going to make a spectacle of these 7 reservists who were just following orders? It's a bastard deal, having integrity is. And it's a lot bigger than politics... Why does it have to be an either or equation? Why not punish EVERYONE who was involved, once it's known who was involved whether they're at the top ranks or reservists? Okay, while I'm on my "things I perhaps shouldn't say" rant, I'd also like to say that while I'm sympathethic to him, I'm quite angry at Nick Berg's father right now. Saying that Bush and Rusmfeld are at fault for his son's death? Hello? The man was not a soldier. The US government did not ASK him to go there. In fact, they asked him to go home. He went over there of his own free will. what happened to him is horrible and inexcusable. But to blame ANYONE but the terrorists who killed him is letting the killers off the hook IMO. |
|
|
|
Post by shin on May 17, 2004 12:19:50 GMT -5
My post was largely in response to the WP article, but mostly just to the notion that should Bush or anyone close to him, whether Rumsfeld or even Cambone, be held accountable for anything that may come up, it WON'T just be because of political headhunting. As far as I'm concerned, it's not an either/or scenario. It just seems that if anyone actually wants there to be any justice, should said scenario require any to begin with, and they make that clear, and they happen to be *ahem* of the political left-leaning establishment, that's when the "silver bullet" stuff comes out. I agree with you. There need not be either/or. Anyways, as far as Berg's father goes...his anger has a lot more to do with his son being detained AND that he (the father) was on an "enemies list" that either originated at Free Republic or went through it, about a month or less before Nick was arrested by Iraqi police. Not only was Michael Berg's name on it, but so was the name of Nick's company. americanpolitics.com/20040512Baker.htmlwww.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1092851/postsIt all just makes me wonder why those on the right would rather the media talk about Berg's beheading than the Abu Ghraib abuse...I mean, this sort of stuff would have to come out just as widespread as the abuse scandal, right? How is this any better politically? |
|
|
|
Post by chrisfan on May 17, 2004 12:25:12 GMT -5
It all just makes me wonder why those on the right would rather the media talk about Berg's beheading than the Abu Ghraib abuse...I mean, this sort of stuff would have to come out just as widespread as the abuse scandal, right? How is this any better politically? Which is what the right thinks, and you know because ... Shin, I don't know how many different ways I can say it to you. Be careful how you categorize "the right's" thinking. You're off the mark more often than you're on it. |
|
|
|
Post by shin on May 17, 2004 12:35:35 GMT -5
And just like that, you've upped the obnoxious factor a few notches. Guess what? I never claimed to have my finger on the pulse of "the right" nor did I claim that all those on the right feel the same way. Hence my use of "those". It's a select group. But such complaints are out there, and they do proclaim to come from just such a prospective. www.instapundit.com/archives/015532.phpSo please. For once. Knock off the patronizing talk like you're talking to a five year old. Please? |
|
|
|
Post by chrisfan on May 17, 2004 12:42:23 GMT -5
And just like that, you've upped the obnoxious factor a few notches. Guess what? I never claimed to have my finger on the pulse of "the right" nor did I claim that all those on the right feel the same way. Hence my use of "those". It's a select group. But such complaints are out there, and they do proclaim to come from just such a prospective. www.instapundit.com/archives/015532.phpSo please. For once. Knock off the patronizing talk like you're talking to a five year old. Please? If my "behavior" is so wrong, why do you give me back what you object to getting from me? I simply find posts such as the one I responded to frustrating. Your arguing about an ideology, and your perceived viewpoints of that ideology. The problem is, you're doing so without anyone around here expressing those viewpoints. Why? For those of us who identify with the right on more issues to defend it? To speak out expecting no response? I guess it's just that because it can't really be responsed to ... no one is going to take up an argument they don't believe in, that it frustrates me to see on a DISCUSSION board. My own personal wish is that you'd debate what people HERE are saying, rather than what other people you disagree with that we knownothing about have said. That's all. Am I wrong to wish this? Maybe. But I said it anyway, and now that it's been said, I'll stand behind it and say no more. |
|
|
|
Post by shin on May 17, 2004 13:04:46 GMT -5
Which is to say that I should limit my understanding and discussion of viewpoints to those which are presented to me and hold my tongue unless given the opportunity to speak? I know how you think at least well enough to know that you don't really feel that way, so I have no idea what you're trying to tell me otherwise, except to say that this is just another round in the Semantics Game.
Look. It's this simple. The comparison of the Berg video and the Abu Ghraib in terms of politics and the media is an ongoing conversation. As I see it, "the right" is claiming this to be an example of media bias. They claim (accurately or not, I don't know, nor does it really matter) that more people want to see the Berg video than the Abu Ghraib pictures, not to mention there being a supposed unified motive behind it: the desire to become enraged at "The Enemy" for what they've done to Nick Berg (apparently there's no such thing as morbid curiosity).
And I'm merely stating, in an broad, nonspecific "What is the sound of one hand clapping" way, why do "they" want to follow down this path when any journalist with integrity would HAVE to give ink to the charge by Michael Berg that the Bushies are at fault? Wouldn't this just turn into another Jessica Lynch, praised by the Freepers (to specify a group), only to be turned on politically once they fail to act the part? Wouldn't the Berg fiasco eventually morph into an embarrassment nearly as deep as the prison abuse pictures? The point is: what IS the point? Why compound the problem?
I was not asking this question of anyone here nor attributing it to anyone here. I was adding a thought I've had ever since I read Jeff Jacoby's op-ed the other day in the Globe about just such a complaint by someone who clearly considers himself of "the right" and claimed to speak for many many people with his viewpoints. A few letters have already come into the paper verifying his views as attributable to "the right", if not the general public.
I'm free to bring up any topic I wish to, Chrisfan. I don't need clearance from you, especially when I'm not overstepping any bounds socially, nor am I even making any outrageous statements. As I see it, you've become accustomed with the perception that I'm impossible to talk to, for whatever reason you see this, and you now have a knee-jerk reaction that filters my posts into that perception, forcing them if need be. You can't read anything I post with a neutral mind. And that's what I mean when I say knock it off. This sort of thing is what drove me from CE a year ago.
And for the overreaction on my part, I apologize. But I'm not going to take responsibility for how you talk to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rit on May 17, 2004 13:30:26 GMT -5
yes Chrisfan. i for one would appreciate hearing more of Shin's perspective on this.
|
|
|
|
Post by RocDoc on May 17, 2004 13:54:32 GMT -5
Well, I'm sure you will...just as you'll hear someone like Chrisfan or others questioning(and trying to answer...and trying to 'discuss')what now seemed to meant to be rhetorical questions he'd posed...
That's all that it seemd to me that Chrisfan was doing to shin's "Why the Right's emphasis on Nick Berg and NOT on Abu Ghreib?'
I for one, honestly haven't seen any sort of an OVERemphasis on either one of these news events....well, except from Democratic quarters.
Shithead Ted Kennedy for one of many...grrrrrinding this one out for the party.
....and a graphic and exceedingly cruel event such as Berg's tortuously slow beheading is going to have a far greater gut level reaction from most folks than a group of Iraqi combatants being pissed on...
|
|
JACkory
Struggling Artist
Posts: 167
|
Post by JACkory on May 17, 2004 14:44:54 GMT -5
I for one, honestly haven't seen any sort of an OVERemphasis on either one of these news events....well, except from Democratic quarters. I absolutely agree with you on that point, Doc. I think it will backfire on 'em. |
|
|
|
Post by chrisfan on May 17, 2004 15:05:15 GMT -5
I was not asking this question of anyone here nor attributing it to anyone here. Exactly, here is where we differ. I see this as a place for DISCUSSIONS ... when I post, I'm either responding to something I've read here, or throwing out something to see how others here respond. I see it as a discussion board, not a BLOG. Based on this statement of yours, it appears that you differ on this point. That's cool. You're more than welcome to differ. Doesn't mean I won't agree with you, or that I'll hold my tongue, but this is obviously where we differ. |
|
|
|
Post by Ampage on May 17, 2004 15:38:55 GMT -5
That’s why I like being all stoopid and stuff and junk, keeps me out of twubble!
|
|
|
|
Post by Galactus on May 17, 2004 16:26:45 GMT -5
OK, here's my two cents (I know you were chomping at the bit to know)...Why aren't more people outraged of the Nick Berg? They are, but isn't this just the terrorist being terrorist? Isn't that what we're being told? On the other hand WE (the good guys) are ordering prisoner torture...something that we (the good guys) don't do, right? I'm more outraged by our(the good guys) actions then those of our enemies(The bad guys). Am I disgusted by the beheading? Hell yes. If we are fighting pure evil though, should we really be surprised? I absolutly think the attempt to stir up more outrage over Nick Berg is ploy to down play the Abu Ghraib "incident". Both are inexcusable, but one could have been and should have prevented or at least taken care of much sooner.
|
|
|
|
Post by chrisfan on May 17, 2004 16:34:20 GMT -5
OK, here's my two cents (I know you were chomping at the bit to know)...Why aren't more people outraged of the Nick Berg? They are, but isn't this just the terrorist being terrorist? Isn't that what we're being told? On the other hand WE (the good guys) are ordering prisoner torture...something that we (the good guys) don't do, right? I'm more outraged by our(the good guys) actions then those of our enemies(The bad guys). Am I disgusted by the beheading? Hell yes. If we are fighting pure evil though, should we really be surprised? I absolutly think the attempt to stir up more outrage over Nick Berg is ploy to down play the Abu Ghraib "incident". Both are inexcusable, but one could have been and should have prevented or at least taken care of much sooner. Here are my questions for you DED ... First, who is not outraged by the Nick Berg murder? It's been all over just about every newscast I've watched. It's been a top topic of roundtable discussions, and it's been a top topic here. Where is the lack of outrage you speak of? Second, aren't you basically reversing your "where is the outrage" question with your statements about the terrorists being terrorist vs the good guys behaving badly? Thirdly, who is it out there that you believe is cooking up this Nick Berg thing to down play the prison issues? Do you believe the W Va chick was actually in one of hte masks beheading Berg? The news is reported as it happens. Can't control that. Who is behind all these conspiracies your'e cooking up? Who is this elusive "they"? |
|
