Where is the Outrage at the inhumane treatment?
Posted by: Tarquin Maynard - Portly on 23 June 2004
I seem to recall that when Saddam Hussein was shown on TV having a dental and external medical examiniation, there was much faux outrage at the despicable treatment meeted out to this guy, who most people would view as pretty evil: having been responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, Iraqi and Iranian: invading a sovereign Arab State and torturing any opponents etc etc.
Eight matelots delivering a boat cross an unmarked border, are captured and paraded blindfolded on TV and are coerced into making a statement.
Not a word about this.
Mike
Eight matelots delivering a boat cross an unmarked border, are captured and paraded blindfolded on TV and are coerced into making a statement.
Not a word about this.
Mike
What you or I may term as abuse, are quite often 95% of the time perfectly legal arrest proceedures in any western Country.
Fritz Von Don'tgototheriotinthefirstplace
Fritz Von Don'tgototheriotinthefirstplace
Hmm
What I feel outrage over, is all the civil libertarians protesting about Iraqi prisoners being stripped naked, and having their pics taken whilst in positions of simulated sexual acts, having barking dogs on a leash yapping at them etc, all bringing huge outcry and claims of torture, whilst blithly turning the eye from captured Westerners having their heads literally hacked off whilst still alive.
On one hand I see abuse - not torture - and an arguable case re human and civil rights - and on the other acts of such barbaric cruelty that defy belief - yet WHERE is all the angst and outrage form the civil libertarians then?
We seem to be spending far too much time navel-gazing upon our own errors, whilst quietly shelving the outrage of the Iraqis actions, which seems to be the more politically correct point of view for the time being.
Just a thought
John...
This is my last upgrade.... after this my system will be finished...:-)
What I feel outrage over, is all the civil libertarians protesting about Iraqi prisoners being stripped naked, and having their pics taken whilst in positions of simulated sexual acts, having barking dogs on a leash yapping at them etc, all bringing huge outcry and claims of torture, whilst blithly turning the eye from captured Westerners having their heads literally hacked off whilst still alive.
On one hand I see abuse - not torture - and an arguable case re human and civil rights - and on the other acts of such barbaric cruelty that defy belief - yet WHERE is all the angst and outrage form the civil libertarians then?
We seem to be spending far too much time navel-gazing upon our own errors, whilst quietly shelving the outrage of the Iraqis actions, which seems to be the more politically correct point of view for the time being.
Just a thought
John...
This is my last upgrade.... after this my system will be finished...:-)
Constructive criticism accepted.. 
I could've been more particular, and less emotional with my choice of words...
Agreed. There is no argument. I was using the term more as an expression of phrase, rather than as literal meaning. Sorry about that. On the other hand though, whether that abuse is actually torture is less clear, even though some commentators claim that it is, I tend to disagree, in at least as far as I am aware/can judge by the news services, which is where like most I get my doubtless edited and misinformed news from.
It is of course only my opinion, and one garned again sadly from news services, but it did strike me that there was day after day of finger pointing, accusations, general hue and cry etc over the Iraqi prisoner abuses, whereas the beheadings got an evenings coverage at best. Not exactly the best method of establishing such things, but my impressions nonetheless. And of course I could always be wrong.
Well again I only have the news services to go on - I do remember that yes, however I can only guess that the numbers are accurate - perhaps more, perhaps less. I agree that it is an act of barbaric cruelty, just as I believe all war to be just that. Barbaric cruelty.
I don't turn a blind eye to it; rather that I think barbarism is barbarism, no matter who perpetrates it; in this case IMHO the US is perhaps no better than the Iraquis, or for that matter any 'side' in war, however to concentrate on one, whilst ignoring the other (or others as you have pointed out) seems to be unfair, and as I opinioned, navel gazing whilst ignoring the sins of others.
On the fact of my not choosing my words more carefully and perhaps being a bit emotional in my choice of words, I not so long ago was a Victim of crime where I was held hostage for the best part of an hour with a pyshological nutcase, at the sharp and pointy end of a handgun.
At the end of some of the most difficult moments of my life, he was captured by armed police, and somewhat roughed up.
Later in court, the usual statements were made about what a poor disadvantaged sod he was, etc, and the poor handling he had at the hands of the police. Being held over for trial, he then showed his true colours by absonding from bail - yet to be found I might add.
So I tend to get a bit emotional about such things unfortunately, as civil libertarians were more concerned about his 'civil rights' etc, than what happened to me, and how I almost but not quite lost my life AND the effects I suffered for a long time afterward.
When one has been in such a situation, and believe me nothing prepares you for it, or could even explain it unless you've experienced something similar, right or wrong, one tends to have little time for seeming civil libertarians protesting the rights of people who were basically intent on killing you.
My apologies if my tone was a bit harsh, or perhaps one-eyed - I confess I have at times still, a bit of an axe to grind in the regard of civil libertarians.
Hope this helps explain what may have seemed a rather insensitive post.
Best
John...
This is my last upgrade.... after this my system will be finished...:-)
I could've been more particular, and less emotional with my choice of words...
quote:
Also how is the abuse of prisoners "an arguable case re human and civil rights"? Surely these abuses, and indeed any abuses of detainees, are clear infringements of human and civil rights. Where or what is the argument?
Agreed. There is no argument. I was using the term more as an expression of phrase, rather than as literal meaning. Sorry about that. On the other hand though, whether that abuse is actually torture is less clear, even though some commentators claim that it is, I tend to disagree, in at least as far as I am aware/can judge by the news services, which is where like most I get my doubtless edited and misinformed news from.
quote:
How exactly have you established that all the civil libertarians have "blithly turned the eye"?
It is of course only my opinion, and one garned again sadly from news services, but it did strike me that there was day after day of finger pointing, accusations, general hue and cry etc over the Iraqi prisoner abuses, whereas the beheadings got an evenings coverage at best. Not exactly the best method of establishing such things, but my impressions nonetheless. And of course I could always be wrong.
quote:
You don't seem to mention the 10,000 innocent and long-suffering Iraqis who were promptly blown to smithereens by UK and US bombs. Have you expressed angst and outrage at this act of barbaric cruelty that defies belief or do I take it that you have blithly turned your eye?
Well again I only have the news services to go on - I do remember that yes, however I can only guess that the numbers are accurate - perhaps more, perhaps less. I agree that it is an act of barbaric cruelty, just as I believe all war to be just that. Barbaric cruelty.
I don't turn a blind eye to it; rather that I think barbarism is barbarism, no matter who perpetrates it; in this case IMHO the US is perhaps no better than the Iraquis, or for that matter any 'side' in war, however to concentrate on one, whilst ignoring the other (or others as you have pointed out) seems to be unfair, and as I opinioned, navel gazing whilst ignoring the sins of others.
On the fact of my not choosing my words more carefully and perhaps being a bit emotional in my choice of words, I not so long ago was a Victim of crime where I was held hostage for the best part of an hour with a pyshological nutcase, at the sharp and pointy end of a handgun.
At the end of some of the most difficult moments of my life, he was captured by armed police, and somewhat roughed up.
Later in court, the usual statements were made about what a poor disadvantaged sod he was, etc, and the poor handling he had at the hands of the police. Being held over for trial, he then showed his true colours by absonding from bail - yet to be found I might add.
So I tend to get a bit emotional about such things unfortunately, as civil libertarians were more concerned about his 'civil rights' etc, than what happened to me, and how I almost but not quite lost my life AND the effects I suffered for a long time afterward.
When one has been in such a situation, and believe me nothing prepares you for it, or could even explain it unless you've experienced something similar, right or wrong, one tends to have little time for seeming civil libertarians protesting the rights of people who were basically intent on killing you.
My apologies if my tone was a bit harsh, or perhaps one-eyed - I confess I have at times still, a bit of an axe to grind in the regard of civil libertarians.
Hope this helps explain what may have seemed a rather insensitive post.
Best
John...
This is my last upgrade.... after this my system will be finished...:-)