A Dare for all of you.

[WhiteAfricanAmerican]

I hear so many times about how the US abuses it's power, about how we're anti everyone else, about how we misunderstand the ====s.

I've even heard Ohio's congresswench, Marcy Kaptur, compare the American Revolutionaries with Al Queida.

I've heard peopl screaming about how they're against this war, how Bush concocted a war for political gain, and every tired worn out catch phrase that decries the US and it's actions in the Middle East.


I DARE EVERYONE ON THIS BOARD, to answer this question HONESTLY!

The answer will show you on which side of the line you should fall on.

Imagine you're on a plane, it has an emergency, and crash lands in the desert.

You are the only survivor, you walk for a few days, and the wreckage vanishes into the desert sun.

You have no papers, or identification OF ANY KIND. No evidence that you exist.

Question: Would you rather be taken into custody by US Forces, or Taliban/Saddam Era/Sudanese/Syrian/Egyptian/Lebanese/Palistinian Forces?

And post your answers would you.

[FightinDaMan]

Congratulations, you have proven that the American military is less brutal than the Taliban, Saddams Iraq, Sudan, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon, and Palestine. Truly America must be a shining beacon of light if THESE are the countries you must compare her to.

[teens4bush]

America for me.

[IHL]

OK then FDM, who would you rather be picked up by than the U.S. Obviously you don't like the U.S. Please enlighten us as to who you would rather have rescue you.

[FightinDaMan]

I think the military of any democratic first world country would be equally hospitable to a white male without paperwork.

[chi1088]

I'd like somebody from Liechtenstein to pick me up.

[FKLBRLS]

I would take the USA, but then when I got back a lone liberal congressman would say that I wasn't ever in a crash, that it was just a "plan" formulated by Bush. Then the media would get on my case and eventually every liberal from Bangkok to BumF*ck Falls, Maine would say that I was never in a plane crash and that "Bush used my story to draw attention".

[HealthyCommie]

I don't understand the question. "...taken into custody...", is that implying that I commited some sort of crime? Well, I don't think I'd very much like being held at Guantanamo for 3 years without being officially charged with anything. Then again, I also don't want to get my head cut off, be held hostage, or what have you. I wouldn't like either of them, but I guess the US over all of those other countries.

[IHL]

Not the 2nd option but not the US, either. So HC, you wouldn't want to be picked up by the U.S? Amazing, and a little sad too.

The suspects at Guantanamo are not Boy Scouts or someone that was caught shoplifting at Wal-Mart. These are people that were caught supporting and fighting with the Taliban in Afghanistan. The liberals like to treat them like 'suspects'. They are prisoners. They can and should be held as long as this war goes on. But, in typical fashion the liberals rush to the defense of the enemies of the U.S. Oh, let's just let these poor people go back to the Taliban so they can start torturing and raping their women and go back on the battlefield to kill our soldiers.

You know what? I wouldn't want the U.S. to pick you up.

And I just noticed your signature. I am removing it. It is not welcome on this site.

[Peace_by_superior _power]

I think the military of any democratic first world country would be equally hospitable to a white male without paperwork.

Thats racist why would you say that? are u implying that people will only help you if your white because your wrong and they would help you regardless... we do take p.o.w's not just chop their heads off. o ya and if you dont like it here then leave, no one is stopping you; see how good it is somewhere else.

[HealthyCommie]

Okay, I was wrong. Between the US and terrorists, of course I'd rather be picked up by the US. But that isn't saying much. And just because the prisoners at Guantanamo are alleged terrorists or whatever, they should still get the same rights that anyone recieves. Surely you can understand why I would be apprehensive about being picked up by the US, they don't exactly have a great record when it comes to treating their prisoners humanely.

[FightinDaMan]

Thats racist why would you say that? are u implying that people will only help you if your white because your wrong and they would help you regardless... we do take p.o.w's not just chop their heads off. o ya and if you dont like it here then leave, no one is stopping you; see how good it is somewhere else.

It's not racist, it's true. A white male would get much better treatment than Arab. If you don't think that's true, why isn't John Walker Lindh at Guantanamo with the rest of his friends?

[IHL]

And just because the prisoners at Guantanamo are alleged terrorists or whatever, they should still get the same rights that anyone receives. Surely you can understand why I would be apprehensive about being picked up by the US, they don't exactly have a great record when it comes to treating their prisoners humanely.

No, you are wrong on both accounts. They do not get the same rights as anyone else. They are not American citizens. They are prisoners of war. They are not criminals, they are enemy soldiers.

And no, I don't understand your apprehension for being picked up by the US military. Their reputation is outstanding. Sure, if you are like the New York Times and the ACLU, you try to paint our military as a bunch of torturing thugs. You, in your tainted liberals mind buy into all that propaganda. You are too young or too naive to realize that if you had any idea, you'd know that the US treats it prisoners better than any other country. Sure, there are exceptions, that the ACLU will rush to point those out.

Again, the big difference between conservatives and liberals is that if there is doubt, conservatives will give the benefit of the doubt to our soldiers and to our country. Liberals will rush to defend the enemy and make every effort to bash the U.S. Don't believe me? Just look at the ACLU, the New York Times, CBS, Newsweek or any host of major news outlets or liberals groups.

[riverman]

I was under the assumption that the rights of people held by the police in the US was different from prisoners of war. These prisoners are while technically being held on US soil they are foreign enemies of the US involved with terrorism. It is funny if a US soldier was held by Al Queda and they asked for a Bible they would be beheaded. Would the ACLU and AI rush to their aid? I think not. I personally care a helluva lot more for our soldiers that I do for these foreign enemies of America. I wish the ACLU and Amnesty International cared for our troops as much as they cared for the "rights" of these murderous bastards whose sole intent is to destroy America.

[Wadi66]

Before answering the question.... where is the desert?

Having said that, while those in Guantanamo are believed to be terrorists, one does need to be careful as nowadays, a person could be labeled a terrorist for opposing whatever. Is that healthy? Right now the terrorist are those opposing US involvement and a free Iraq or their support of the Taliban. What's to say in 5 - 10 years our country has become so socialistic that conservatives on this site take up arms to defend their liberties. Anyone supporting the socialist form of government would then regard us as terrorists. But are we? That is not to say that those in Guantanamo aren't, I just saying we need to be darn careful that we don't allow the term and the treatment to get carried away or out of hand. We certainly wouldn't want our basic rights violated. Not rights as given to us by the Constitution, but rights given to us by God that the Constitution recognizes.

Most of us will oppose a one world government. That makes us the enemy, a terrorist.

[riverman]

of course one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist. I was just saying that when someone commits such a dastardly act as disrespecting the Koran and compares that act to killing innocent people in cold blood there is a disparity of the concept of what true mistreatment is. I wish amnesty and the ACLu would go over to the middle east and fight for the rights of our troops as much as they fight here for our enemies rights. They of course would be laughed at right before they were shot or decapitated. My point is that these AI and ACLU types aren't in it for the sake of fairness or the Geneva Convention or the rights of prisoners. hell no. they are in it for one reasona and one reason alone. They are liberals- thus they hate George Bush thus they hate his policies and his war. They hate verything about conservative america and will do anything to denigrate, embarrass , humiliate, and destroy America. You see the point you made about socialist america and fighting a war against it well we are already in it - deep in it and folks just don't realize it yet as a war because there is not yet shooting. i am not advocating war and don't want war in America by any stretch. But history is the bottom line. those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it and ignore we have. These folks who want to make sure that our prisoners are treated fairly- they are the enemy, they care not one iota for America and Americans. THEY ARE ROOTING FOR THE OTHER SIDE!!. if Bush loses they win! They want to see us lose in Iraq they don't care about the 1000s killed by Hussein.Their persuit is to see america lose and be disgraced. This "mistreatment" of prisoners goes on every day in american jails- and worse. I know AI and ceratain legal watchdogs cover things like this but how come no liberal media outcry from them. Where is the NY Times, the Boston Globe. Time, Newsweek ad nauseum?? where are they?? they are too busy trying to bring down the Bush administration to see beyond the blinders of their rage that there is a Republican president elected by a majority of voters in office. It drives them more nuts than georgia peanut field. It is their all encompassing desire to drive this president from office in disgrace and defeat- that what Abu Grahib is all about. American Gulag??- from the same folks who have outright support for Communists like Stalin and Lennin. Does anyone else see the glaring,blinding hypocrisy here??

[FightinDaMan]

Amnesty INTERNATIONAL is pretty good about giving everybody a mouthfull (or an eyeful since it's mostly letter-writing). the AMERICAN civil liberties union, on the other hand, concentrates on the United States of AMERICA.

[Wadi66]

Its a little difficult to trust the ACLU when ACLU president Nadine Strossen is a CFR member; when Executive Director Anthony D. Romero, a homosexual activist attorney was once a top staff member at the Ford Foundation; when Stanley Sheinbaum, the longtime patriarch of the ACLU of Southern California, one of the organization’s most influential chapters, is also a CFR member; as is Morton Halperin, the Marxist revolutionary who, for many years, ran the ACLU’s project to neuter our police and security agencies. President Clinton tried to appoint Halperin to a top Defense Department post, but was prevented from doing so when people exposed the nominee’s ultra-radical, pro-Communist, pro-terrorist record.

In 1996, ACLU President Nadine Strossen was one of three CFR panelists on the council’s program, "Combating Terrorism: What Works? What Doesn’t?" This conference was broadcast over C-SPAN and was used to measure the American public’s response to proposals for drastic measures to fight terrorism.

The organization’s notorious record with regard to Communist, subversive, and terrorist groups was once fairly common knowledge. Much of this has been all but forgotten, thanks to the media.

In 1931, a congressional report of the Special House Committee to Investigate Communist Activities stated:

The American Civil Liberties Union is closely affiliated with the communist movement in the United States, and fully 90 percent of its efforts are on behalf of communists who have come into conflict with the law. It claims to stand for free speech, free press, and free assembly; but it is quite apparent that the main function of the ACLU is to attempt to protect the communists in their advocacy of force and violence to overthrow the government, replacing the American flag by a red flag and erecting a Soviet government in place of the republican form of government guaranteed to each state by the federal Constitution.

The ACLU’s membership, leadership, and projects gave rise to claims by critics that the organization’s acronym really stood for Atheists, Communists, and Libertines United, or Anti-Christian Lawyers Union.

I hardly think the ACLU can be trusted with our rights and liberties.

[HOKIEHUNTER]

I'd definetly want to be picked up by the poor unfortunate Taliban and Iraq insurgents. I mean look at those poor souls just fighting for what they believe in. Once they picked me up I'd go into their nice air condition huts where I'd be fed grapes by one woman while being fanned with a big leaf by another. They'd offer to give me a Bible to read if I wanted, but that ancient porno is nothin but lies in contradictions, so I'd reject it. After being entertained by my scantally clad mistress (provided mind you) I'm sure they'd let me take a dip in the Olympic sized pool to cool down from the strenuous exercise. After I was fully recooperated from my ordeal, they'd put me on television where I would plead with the US not to come rescue me b/c i'm livin the life. I'd also plead that we be sympathetic to their cause b/c hey aren't we all just "a stranger on a bus trying to make our way home?" After my 15mins of fame, I'd live out the remaining many wonderful years of my life in the lap of luxury never having to work again. Becuase let me tell you the scorching sand of the desert and the bright sun are wonderful.. I'd hate to be put in some terrible prision with air conditioning and tv and weights and a bunch of my good 'ole boys... that would be infinetly worse than the oasis I'd be at in the desert...

[WhiteAfricanAmerican]

Like I said, your answers will show you on what side of the line you should be on.


Amnesty INTERNATIONAL is pretty good about giving everybody a mouthfull (or an eyeful since it's mostly letter-writing). the AMERICAN civil liberties union, on the other hand, concentrates on the United States of AMERICA.

B/S!


A statement by Amnesty boss William Shultz says, "Amnesty International calls on foreign governments to uphold their obligations under international law by investigating all senior U.S. officials involved in the torture scandal...The apparent high-level architects of torture should think twice before planning their next vacation to places like Acapulco or the French Riveria because they may find themselves under arrest as Augusto Pinochet famously did in London in 1998."


http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0526-03.htm



Both Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International USA say there is "prima facie" evidence against Rumsfeld for war crimes and torture. And Amnesty International USA says there is also "prima facie" evidence against Bush for war crimes and torture. (According to Random House Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary, "prima facie evidence" is "evidence sufficient to establish a fact or to raise a presumption of fact unless rebutted.")


Amnesty International USA has even taken the extraordinary step of calling on officials in other countries to apprehend Bush and Rumsfeld and other high-ranking members of the Administration who have played a part in the torture scandal.


Foreign governments should "uphold their obligations under international law by investigating U.S. officials implicated in the development or implementation of interrogation techniques that constitute torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment," the group said in a May 25 statement. William Schulz, executive director of Amnesty International USA, added, "If the United States permits the architects of torture policy to get off scot-free, then other nations will be compelled" to take action.

http://www.progressive.org/july05/roth0705.php

Tell me when was the last time AI called on the world to arrest Zimbabwe or Sudan's top politicians when they went visiting?

FDM, that has to be the most ridiculous thing you have said.

AI's boss compared alleged US human rights abuses with those of The Sudan and Zimbabwe.

Schultz also compared Gitmo with a soviet era gulag, which is ludicrious. In fact I'd love to put Schultz in front of some gulag survivors and have him tell them that gitmo is no different than a gulag.

My money says he wouldn't survive the encounter.

The more I read your post FDM, the more I realise that riverman is right about you. You do traffic in stupid logic.

[FightinDaMan]

The countries mentioned in negative light on Amnesty International's front page: Zimbabwe, USA, Syria, China, Mexico, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Nigeria, Afghanistan.

Just on the front page.

[Avid_Liberal_Hater]

The countries mentioned in negative light on Amnesty International's front page: Zimbabwe, USA, Syria, China, Mexico, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Nigeria, Afghanistan.

Just on the front page.

Who cares?

A big part of their problem is they have their panties in a wad over the death penalty. Somehow, the fact that we put killers and criminals to death is a bad thing.

[WhiteAfricanAmerican]

The countries mentioned in negative light on Amnesty International's front page: Zimbabwe, USA, Syria, China, Mexico, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Nigeria, Afghanistan.

Just on the front page.


Listing the USA in the same breath as everyone else on there is LUDICRIOUS!

Let's change the parameters of the dare.

If given the choice of being apprehended without any form of ID by Zimbabwe, China, Syria, Congo, Nigeria, Afghanistan or the USA, who would you prefer?

The fact that you are attempting to justify AI's position is unadulterated stupidity. You should be ashamed of yourself.


Have you ever experienced life in any of those countries? I have.

I'd reccommend that you and your AI buddies go live there for 10 years, then come back and shoot your mouth off.

Until then any comments you or AI make on the subject defines your irrelevance!

[FightinDaMan]

Again, the fact that you have to compare the US to these countries in order to make it look good does reflect well on the US. Also, why is the AI not allowed to criticize the US simply because its not as bad as some other countries. It's also not listed "in the same breath" as those. All are mentioned in seperate articles.

[WhiteAfricanAmerican]

Uhmm, excuse me, I'm not the one comparing the US to others, AMNESTY IS!

I'm using their warped logic. THey're telling me that the US is as bad as the others listed.....well then, who would you rather be taken into custody by?

I know for a fact that the rest of the world with obvious exceptions such as Britain and Australia, does not hold a candle to the US. And this is proven by the answer that anyone gives...... Everyone would prefer to be taken into custody by the US, vs anyone else, Syria, Lebanon, China, who ever.

The point of this post again is to demonstrate the disingeniousness of the left.


It's also not listed "in the same breath" as those. All are mentioned in seperate articles.


The countries mentioned in negative light on Amnesty International's front page: Zimbabwe, USA, Syria, China, Mexico, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Nigeria, Afghanistan.

Just on the front page.

Anything about the same subject on the FRONT PAGE of a website, IMHO is in the same breath.