Gruesome Stuff Without Sanctuary http://www.musarium.com:16080/withoutsanctuary/main.html The Photos are horrifying Thank God I do not live in those times. Rocket River those who forget the past. . . . .
man, i didn't need that this morning! i can't begin to understand this. people standing around proudly...or with some stupid ass smirk on their face while a corpse dangles beside them.
oh..... my...... god...... Washington was a mentally r****ded seventeen-year-old boy. On May 8, 1916, lucy Fryer, a white woman, was murdered in Robinson, seven miles from Waco. Washington, a laborer on her farm, confessed to the murder. in a brief trial on May 15, the prosecution had only to present a murder weapon and Washington's confession. The jury deliberated for four minutes, and the guilty verdict was read to shouts of, "Get that ******!" The boy was beaten and dragged to the suspension bridge spanning the Brazos River. Thousands roared, "Burn him!" Bonfire preparations were already under way in the public square, where Washington was beaten with shovels and bricks. Fifteen thousand men, women, and children packed the square. They climbed up poles and onto the tops of cars, hung from windows, and sat on each other's shoulders. Children were lifted by their parents into the air. Washington was castrated, and his ears were cut off. A tree supported the iron chain that lifted him above the fire of boxes and sticks. Wailing, the boy attempted to climb the skillet-hot chain. For this the men cut off his fingers. The executioners repeatedly lowered the boy into the flames and hoisted him out again. With each repetition, a mighty shout was raised.
I've seen those lynching photos and they are horrific. What they make me think about is the fact that there are a significant number of people in every culture or country that are capable of incredible brutality. The U.S. and "Western" culture are no exceptions. What is exceptional about the U.S. is that we have a set of ideals (embodied in our Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights) that place great value on equality, justice, freedom, and humane behavior. The existence of these ideals helps us to see the actions depicted in these photos (and some other recent photos) in sharp relief, as inexcusable atrocities. It is this process of constant re-evaluation of our actions against our ideals, finding ourselves (as a nation) wanting, and trying harder to live in accordance with our ideals, that makes this country great. That is why it is profoundly un-American to try and gloss over our mistakes and trespasses against others. It circumvents this process and we are a lesser people for it.
This is exactly why the majority of Americans have reacted the way they have to the prison abuse scandal. Sure, others have done far worse, but we're better than that. Or at least we should be. Great post.
People who say we're better because of our system while turning a blind eye to our wrongs, or marginalizing them, are doing exactly the wronng thing. Nothing in our or any other democratic system makes us better. Rather, it allows us to be better, but only if we choose to look at ourselves with honest criticism. When we don;t...when we assume we're just better, and call people who criticize us jealous, communist, etc., we are skipping the only step in our system that allows us to be better than some other systems: responibility. When we don't take it, we're just as bad as everyone else, only with greater reach.
That is only *part* of the reason. Another *part* of the reason for the reaction is politically motivated Bush-hate from all the usual political suspects. I'm sorry, but panties on a man's head or a man with a hood standing on boxes just isn't enough for that type of outrage. Sure the allegations consist of much more than these two 'offenses', but remember the initial reaction was towards the photos themselves - not all the rest. At least those prisoners *had* heads to put panties on. Nick Berg does not.
I'm outraged at the sodomy, sexual humiliation, and murder that took place, not panties on the head. I'm sure President Bush is outraged about that too. At least he said he was.
Did you miss the significance of the hooded man on the box? And, while you're concerning yourself with timelines, Berg came *after* we/they knew we had killed people. I'm not saying they were Sunday school teachers who would otherwise have been busy at afternoon teas, but you are the one making the distinction, and if so, be accurate.
The initial photos also showed a nude man bleeding from his leg while an attack dog was nearby. This is different than the one with the man in the orange jumpsuit on his knees. I'm curious how you know the people's motivation for being upset at the photos?
i dunno. i don't think the democratic system allows anyone to be better. it just allows us to be who we want to be. it can certainly be the case that under an enlightened despot the people can be MADE to be a whole lot better than they want or care to be. frankly, without our bill of rights, the tyranny of the callous american public makes it frighteningly apathetic, if not altogether ignorant, to even the most fundamental precepts of right and wrong. Our congressmen at the beck and call of special interests. Our voters mired in fractious debates even while blinded by self-righteous hubris. in fact, i think the only strength of our system over others is not that it gives us responsibility, but rather that it limits the amount of damage which poor leadership can inflict on the general populace. it is institutional limits, moral vision and a tendency to elect above-average leadership that lets our system stand above the rest, not responsibility. but otherwise, it was a great post, macbeth!
I agree with a lot of what you say here, but don't feel our points are mutually exclusive. Yes, there is the water anchor aspect to our system, but A) It doesn't always work, and B) It's not the point I was addressing. We are moderated by allowance, not by insitigation, and when we choose to forget our alleged moral priorities, usually out of fear, we can become pretty extreme in our behaviour. Look at our treatment of the Natives, slaves, McCarthyism, etc. Look at the blind eye many have turned to our active role in why many around the world hate us, and choose to chalk it up to jealousy. As I said, the difference in our system is what it allows, but it doesn't compel, and as the founding fathers said, if we are to stay remotely true to our avowed ideals, we have to err on the side of being overly critical of the actions and motives of our government, not err on the side of not criticizing out of a misguided and factually contradtictory sense of patriotism. Yes, dictators, monarchs, etc., benevolent or otherwise, can achieve far more in the short run than can democracies, but that wasn't really what we were discussing.
Well.....back to the original post. That is some horrible, gruesome stuff in those pictures. I can't imagine what would be worse--actually having that happen to you or constantly living in fear that it might happen at any time and without just cause.
That is only *part* of the reason. Another *part* of the reason for the reaction is politically motivated Bush-hate from all the usual political suspects. ... except for the fact that the biggest criticisms have come fairly equally from Democrats and Republicans, Bush, Rumsfeld, from military rank & file, military leadership, independent non-US-related agencies, and more. You seem to be the only one not angered that our military would do things.
Major, your response would be true if I had said "the only reason". However, I did not say that, thus redering your criticism false. Do you deny that part of the attention and outrage given to the prison 'abuse scandal' is motivated by politics?
Do you deny that part of the attention and outrage given to the prison 'abuse scandal' is motivated by politics? If that were a significant component, then you would see liberals harping on it more than conservatives - but that's not the case. Some of the strongest denunciations have come from the Republican side of the aisle. If they are motivated by a sense of "we messed up", then I see no reason why the other side wouldn't be motivated by the same. I'm sure there are a few people out there who are angry because it was Bush, just as there are others (you, for example) that appear to justify it simply because it was Bush. Those people, on both sides, are a tiny minority, though, as has been made clear by the near-universal outrage that these things happened.
Oh that's not the case? Do you read this BBS very often? Which senator said that we had reopened Saddam's torture chambers under new management? Who is leading the charge for Rumsfeld to resign? OOPSIE DAISY
Oh that's not the case? Do you read this BBS very often? This BBS is not representative of anything except a bunch of people b****ing at each other. Which senator said that we had reopened Saddam's torture chambers under new management? Who is leading the charge for Rumsfeld to resign? What is your point? That liberals are criticizing the military? How is that relevent? Conservatives are doing exactly the same. Or that people are demanding that leadership take responsibility for their actions? Both parties went after Rumsfeld pretty hard in his public questioning, and members of both parties brought up the issue of resignation. Pointing out a liberal that blasted the actions of our military at that prison doesn't really tell us anything.
