| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 7/8 |
| 2004/5/21-22 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:30354 Activity:insanely high |
5/21 More and more pics and videos from Iraq. Some at the washingtonpost.
\_ Is there some reason I'd WANT to see more gruesome pictures?
\_ Why, as explained by a Washington Post editor:
http://csua.org/u/7ek
\_ Not compelling to me.
\_ Well, now you know, at least.
\_ Expect ongoing politicizing of the images slowly leaked out
by the media until the election. And people wonder
why the left is accused of treason.
\_ You should raed the above URL, first. Then you can come back
and call the liberal left treasonous. I don't care.
\_ You should read the above URL, first. Then you can come back
and call the liberal left treasonous. There's nothing I don't
like more than an uninformed Bush supporter.
\_ Uhm, I think we all know bad shit happened to some Iraqis
in US custody. Is it necessary to see all 1000 photos and
17 videos spread out over every 3 days between now and the
election? No, it is not. I mostly support the original
revealing of what was going on. I do not support the
politically motivated trickling we're now seeing.
\_ Well you should care, because the media is trying to
recreate Vietnam all over again. Its disgusting and
treasonous. Please explain to me how I am uninformed.
I am waiting to be enlightened, please deign to do so!!!
\_ Do you agree with suspending our obligations in the
Geneva Conventions?
\_ Like this section: "..shall encourage the
practice of intellectual, educational, and
recreational pursuits, sports and games
amongst prisoners"?
A combatant is someone in the military
service of a country that wears a uniform with
a fixed distinctive insignia, openly carries a
weapon, obeys the laws of war and answers to a
chain of command. American military forces
diligently follow these rules. Terrorists that
the American military is fighting in Afghanistan
and Iraq do not. Even under the Geneva
Convention, spies, saboteurs, terrorists and
criminals may be tried and punished (up to death).
So in conclusion there are no "obligations".
\- fine. if there are no obligations than
"the media" has no obligations not to
publish these. in addition to looking
backwards toward the "obligations" how
about considering the "repurcussions".
do you think it would be better if the
non-american press covered this and the
us press was silent?
\_ Yes obviously the policies should
be reconsidered but that does not
necessitate invoking Geneva. What
I am speaking to is the use of this
by the media as a political tool
to bludgeon the President and
by extension the effort in Iraq. What
will happen is the media will continue
to leak photos until the election in
an effort to recreate Vietnam. Its
disgusting, transparent, and
treasonous. I would gladly trade a
Bush loss and Iraq victory. The Dems have
decided to do anything to win, country
be damned.
\- arent you conflating "the dems" and
"the press". let me ask you this:
if corporations can take out ads
and write checks to parties and
congresspersons, why cant editorial
boards express their opinions?
what change to the status quo are
you recommending. it's not like
BUSH CO is saying "lets wait for the
legal process to work" ... they are
certainly promoting their "few bad
apples" position. you know the 1st
amd doesnt just apply to rep senators
from oaklahoma.
\_ dems = the press. whats the problem
with that statement?
\_ No problem with editorial boards.
To pretend the media has no
left bias is patently absurd.
So you trot out the totemic evil of
the GOP - the corporations - igoring
the largest constuencies of the Dems,
trial lawyers and unions. Unlike
the left, I have no delusions about
politicians who 'care' for the little
guy. I operate from simple principles
extolled by the founders: government
is inherentely evil.
\_I hold it to be self-evident that
you're a fucking idiot.
\_ Lawyers gave more money to Bush
than Gore, and corporations gave
an order of magnitude more money
to republicans than unions gave
to democrats. -tom
\_ source? I don't think you
know what you are talking about.
\_ http://opensecrets.org works. Labor
has given $90m in each of
the last 2 election cycles.
Add up the corporate sectors
and the order of magnitude
claim holds true. The site
groups lawyers and lobyists,
but on
http://www.opensecrets.org/2000elect/sector/AllCands.htm
his claim again holds true.
--scotsman
\_ Then how is it that the
Bush and Kerry campaigns
have roughlt the same
amount of money when you
add in proxy groups such
as http://moveon.org? Got math?
\- making hay out of something like
does BUSH go to his daughters
graduation is silly and probably
deperate partisanship. The AbuG
Show is not a "vast leftwing
conspiracy". Maybe the legit
press has a leftwing bias but
the right uses media as a means
too, eg. the fake press reports.
if you cant tell the difference
between the WP and partisan
hacks, you are simply not use-
ful to talk to. The WP editor
above is hardly Michael Moore.
Why dont you also add "all the
climate scientists are leftwing
freaks, as are development
economists and most law profs."
\_ Well, yes, that would be
true. They mostly are.
\_ Which is directly opposite of what Rumsfeld has
stated this week. You don't keep up all that well
do you...
\_ To clarify on what this person just said,
Rumsfeld's subordinate said that the Geneva
Conventions apply to Iraq (but not Guantanomo).
\_ They are bowing to political
expendiency. You can read it
yourself, article 4 is very clear:
http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/91.htm
\_ So, have you read the URL yet?
\_ Why don't all of you understand? The geneva conventions applies
to America only to the extent it protects our soldiers, because
we are the good guys. Why we are acting on order of God and
punishing the bad guys, it does not apply to us.
\_ Not hard core enough to me.
\_ Why do you bother writing sarcastic nonsense like this? You're
not going to get a real response that will further debate in any
real way. Does it make you feel good to spit in the wind? It's
just you and the echos when you go off all frothy. |
| 7/8 |
|
| csua.org/u/7ek -> www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A44952-2004May21.html Discussions Transcript Iraq: New Abuse Details Leonard Downie Jr. Executive Editor, The Washington Post Friday, May 21, 2004; The Post also obtained additional photos and digital video documenting detainee abuse. Video Washington Post Executive Editor Leonard Downie Jr. was online Friday, May 21 at Noon ET, to discuss the new evidence of detainee abuse and The Post's decision to make the documents, photos and video available to the public. com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; These statements show even more extensive and repulsive kinds of abuse than we had previously reported. Do we have any idea what Sy Hersh has not yet published that may unfold in the next few weeks? The documents, photos and videos we reported on today were obtained within the past two days. We never know what Hersh will report next, but he is working just as vigorously on this as we are and he is a good reporter. But we are going to publish only those images that give readers essential information. Many of the images are so shocking and in such bad taste, especially the extensive nudity, that they are not publishable in our newspaper or on our Web site. Did The Post entertain any calls from government officials asking that this information not be made available to the public? How many others do you think feel like me now, and what impact do you think that will have on the election? I, for one, just donated money to Kerry's campaign online! It is been emotionally difficult for our reporters and editors to review all of them. Germantown, Md: How is the Post's continuing coverage shedding any new light on the abuse? It seems excessive and just sensationalistic at this point. Do the new pictures and continually rehashed descriptions of the abuse do anything but inflame the situation? Loaded questions, I know, but it seems that the daily pictures on the cover are just there to sell newspapers. And we are not just rehashing previously published information. We are adding new information in an effort to determine the full extent of the abuse and who was responsible for it up the chain of command. Why is it that The Post chooses to further degrade the victims in this scandal by publishing both their name and number? Most ethical papers wouldn't treat Americans this way, but it's okay to treat the Iraqis this way? It certainly exposes the victims to further shame in their own communities, and it would have been easy to rely on The Post's integrity to simply say the victim's names were known to The Post, as is usually done in these circumstances. publishing scores of images of naked Iraqi victims of abuse because of our concern for their dignity. And are soldiers routinely interviewed as part of an investigation such as this? Or are they not among the information obtained by The Post? The soldiers have been interviewed and we are seeking to report on what they told investigators. Do you think that the media's continued running of these stories is damaging to our troops efforts in Iraq? Is a conscious effort made by the staff at The Post to run the positive Iraq stories along with negative? We have over the months of the occupation of Iraq reported stories about positive things American troops have done there. That has become much more difficult to do in recent weeks because the security situation has deteriorated there to the point that it is too dangerous for our reporters to travel as widely as they did before. In addition, is your publication of copies of the actual statements preemptive, reflecting a concern that the administration is going to challenge the validity of your front page story today? We published the actual statements to give our readers as much information as possible. There would have been no way to challenge the validity of this information. Baltimore, Md: Your decisions to publish certain pictures and to withhold others are inevitably subjective -- to some extent matters of personal taste. How many editors review the pictures, and has there been general consensus among them about what should and should not be published? " I type too fast, thanks to my tenth grade typing class. Our overriding interest is to inform the American public. But I wonder, why all the photos and videos you have obtained are not made available to those who want to see them. I understand they may not be suitable for general publication, but why can't you make them available on a separate site or link? Many of us do not want the information or images we see to be sanitized on our behalf. After all, nothing like this was published before the 9/11 attacks. It is important, however, that the American people be fully informed about how their government and military are behaving because, in our constitutional democracy, the government and military are answerable to the American people. Columbia, Md: First, thanks to you and the Post staff for all you have done in helping bring these terrible abuses to the light. Is the material in the Post today typical of the type of material Secretary Rumsfeld warned was coming? I am sure you will be the subject of some scorn for advancing this story. As such, I think it is important that the public be reminded of the wisdom handed down from the fictional Chicago barkeep Martin Dooley: "It is the newspaper's job to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable." Does it appear that the abuse was limited in time to the one period associated with the photographic evidence? What about the other shifts of guards that worked the cell block during the period? We believe these are the MPs who were primarily involved. But we want to find out more about the roles of civilian contractor, military intelligence and other interrogators and their commanders. Also, do you have any sense or reaction to the story from overseas yet? How do you characterize the reaction you sense from Americans to the entire prison abuse scandal? And we periodically conduct polls of American public opinion. I think The Post is brave for publishing such sensitive material and feel that your writers researchers and editors deserve praise for their integrity. What shocks me is that there are those who see this as some kind of falsity or "he said, she said." And please, if you could speak to this, I have never understood why the offending soldiers documented everything on video and in photographs. Has The Post learned why their tortures were pushed into voyuerism? Do you feel a better picture has emerged yet of how high up the chain of command this goes? Furthermore you have stated that you will not publish all the photos or video in that they are too disturbing. Isn't it true that such photos could be edited to mitigate the most offensive part but yet still provide us a view of the degree of depravity the prisoners suffered? In short how do you select the photos and yet remain true to your duty to the public? Do you have a panel or do you yourself make the sole decision on what photos will be published? Torture is more loaded term and its use requires more information about whether the abuse constitutes torture. Don't you think that by "editing" which images of the prison the public may view, you are contributing to the sanitizing of an issue? Perhaps people would be even more outraged than they presently are, and a positive change in administration policy and accountability would be more likely to occur, if they had complete access to all the images? com every day -- editing for length, relevance, taste, fairness, libel,etc. That is what we have done with these stories and images. We have not withheld anything from publication that would expand our readers' knowledge about the extent or seriousness of this abuse. Which is the more important story in your view -- the abuse of the prisoners in Iraq or the apparent discrediting of Chalabi, who was the source of so much information that supposedly supported our going to war? However, there has been no mention in the media of abuses against Iraqi women. I'm curious to know if the Iraqi women prisoners have simply been safe in the prison system ... |
| www.opensecrets.org/2000elect/sector/AllCands.htm More detailed breakdowns of these broad sectors can be found in the chart that lists "top industries." METHODOLOGY: The totals on these charts are calculated from PAC contributions and contributions from individuals giving more than $200, as reported to the Federal Election Commission. Individual contributions are generally categorized based on the donor's occupation/employer, although individuals may be classified instead as ideological donors if they've given more than $200 to an ideological PAC. NOTE: All the numbers on this page are for the 1999-2000 election cycle and based on Federal Election Commission data released on October 1, 2001. Feel free to distribute or cite this material, but please credit the Center for Responsive Politics. |
| www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/91.htm Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War Adopted on 12 August 1949 by the Diplomatic Conference for the Establishment of International Conventions for the Protection of Victims of War, held in Geneva from 21 April to 12 August, 1949 entry into force 21 October 1950 PART I GENERAL PROVISIONS Article 1 The High Contracting Parties undertake to respect and to ensure respect for the present Convention in all circumstances. Article 2 In addition to the provisions which shall be implemented in peace time, the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them. The Convention shall also apply to all cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party, even if the said occupation meets with no armed resistance. Although one of the Powers in conflict may not be a party to the present Convention, the Powers who are parties thereto shall remain bound by it in their mutual relations. They shall furthermore be bound by the Convention in relation to the said Power, if the latter accepts and applies the provisions thereof. Article 3 In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions: 1 Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria. To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons: Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment; The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples. An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict. The Parties to the conflict should further endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present Convention. The application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal status of the Parties to the conflict. Article 4 A Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy: 1 Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces. B The following shall likewise be treated as prisoners of war under the present Convention: 1 Persons belonging, or having belonged, to the armed forces of the occupied country, if the occupying Power considers it necessary by reason of such allegiance to intern them, even though it has originally liberated them while hostilities were going on outside the territory it occupies, in particular where such persons have made an unsuccessful attempt to rejoin the armed forces to which they belong and which are engaged in combat, or where they fail to comply with a summons made to them with a view to internment. Where such diplomatic relations exist, the Parties to a conflict on whom these persons depend shall be allowed to perform towards them the functions of a Protecting Power as provided in the present Convention, without prejudice to the functions which these Parties normally exercise in conformity with diplomatic and consular usage and treaties. C This Article shall in no way affect the status of medical personnel and chaplains as provided for in Article 33 of the present Convention. Article 5 The present Convention shall apply to the persons referred to in Article 4 from the time they fall into the power of the enemy and until their final release and repatriation. Should any doubt arise as to whether persons, having committed a belligerent act and having fallen into the hands of the enemy, belong to any of the categories enumerated in Article 4, such persons shall enjoy the protection of the present Convention until such time as their status has been determined by a competent tribunal. Article 6 In addition to the agreements expressly provided for in Articles 10, 23, 28, 33, 60, 65, 66, 67, 72, 73, 75, 109, 110, 118, 119, 122 and 132, the High Contracting Parties may conclude other special agreements for all matters concerning which they may deem it suitable to make separate provision. No special agreement shall adversely affect the situation of prisoners of war, as defined by the present Convention, nor restrict the rights which it confers upon them. Prisoners of war shall continue to have the benefit of such agreements as long as the Convention is applicable to them, except where express provisions to the contrary are contained in the aforesaid or in subsequent agreements, or where more favourable measures have been taken with regard to them by one or other of the Parties to the conflict. Article 7 Prisoners of war may in no circumstances renounce in part or in entirety the rights secured to them by the present Convention, and by the special agreements referred to in the foregoing Article, if such there be. Article 8 The present Convention shall be applied with the cooperation and under the scrutiny of the Protecting Powers whose duty it is to safeguard the interests of the Parties to the conflict. For this purpose, the Protecting Powers may appoint, apart from their diplomatic or consular staff, delegates from amongst their own nationals or the nationals of other neutral Powers. The said delegates shall be subject to the approval of the Power with which they are to carry out their duties. The Parties to the conflict shall facilitate to the greatest extent possible the task of the representatives or delegates of the Protecting Powers. The representatives or delegates of the Protecting Powers shall not in any case exceed their mission under the present Convention. They shall, in particular, take account of the imperative necessities of security of the State wherein they carry out their duties. Article 9 The provisions of the present Convention constitute no obstacle to the humanitarian activities which the International Committee of the Red Cross or any other impartial humanitarian organization may, subject to the consent of the Parties to the conflict concerned, undertake for the protection of prisoners of war and for their relief. Article 10 The High Contracting Parties may at any time agree to entrust to an organization which offers all guarantees of impartiality and efficacy the duties incumbent on the Protecting Powers by virtue of the present Convention. When prisoners of war do not benefit or cease to benefit, no matter for what reason, by the activities of a Protecting Power or of an organization provided for in the first paragraph above, the Detaining Power shall request a neutral State, or such an organization, to undertake the functions performed under the present Convention by a Protecting Power designated by the Parties to a conflict. If protection cannot be arranged accordingly, the Detaining Power shall request or shall accept, subject to the provisions of this Article, the offer of the services of a humanitarian organization, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, to assume the humanitarian functions performed by Protecting Powers under the present Convention. Any neutral Power or any organization invited by the Power concerned or offering itself for these purposes, shall be required to act with a sense of res... |
| opensecrets.org -> www.opensecrets.org/ Basics Big Picture Who Gives Who Gets News Get Local! Money in Politics Basics New Contribution Limits Look Up an Individual Donor Search 2004 Cycle: Go! Index Custom Data Search the Site Sign Up for OpenSecrets Data Updates The White House The White House o 2004 Presidential Race o George W Bush o The Administration o Embassy Row Search for administration officials: Go! Capitol Hill o Members of Congress o Committees o Congressional Races o Political Parties Capitol Hill Who's My Rep? Go! Find a Politician: Go! Get Local! Get Local! Pick a State: GO o Enter a Zip Code: Go! Sen. Larry Makinson (Center for Responsive Politics, 2003)) Speaking Freely, 2003 Ed. Hidden links: 56. |
| moveon.org -> www.moveon.org/front/ The Movie the White House Doesn't Want You to See On Memorial Day weekend, Hollywood is releasing a summer blockbuster movie that's making the Bush administration very nervous. Because it's a disaster movie about a potential climate crisis. While "The Day After Tomorrow" is more science fiction than science fact, everyone will be talking about it -- and asking "Could it really happen?" This is an unprecedented opportunity to talk to millions of Americans about the real dangers of global warming and expose President Bush's foot-dragging on the issue. Responding to Torture Reports and photographs of Iraqi prisoners being tortured and abused by US and British troops have shocked the world. We've got to support an immediate, independent, impartial and public investigation into all allegations of torture. To be credible, the investigation should be done by an international body, including representatives of Arab nations. We've got to get to the bottom of this, and we've got to do it now. Censure Bush for Misleading Us In an attempt to evade responsibility for the misleading statements that pushed the nation into war, Bush has announced plans to form an independent inquiry to look into what went wrong. An inquiry would serve the Bush administration well: it would envelop the issue in a fog of uncertainty, deflect blame onto the intelligence services, and delay any political damage until 2005, after the upcoming election. Despite repeated warnings from the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency, President Bush and his administration hyped and distorted the threat that Iraq posed. And now that reality is setting in, the President wants to pin the blame on someone else. Congress has the power to censure the President -- to formally reprimand him for betraying the nation's trust. MoveOn's 50 Ways to Love Your Country How to Find Your Political Voice and Become a Catalyst for Change Written by MoveOn members across the country, from Hawaii to Maine, from political figures to teachers, this collection of essays shares compelling personal stories and action items with resources for taking inspiration a step further. Simple ideas are illuminated, such as "His Last Vote," about a dying man's wish to cast a ballot, as are more dynamic actions, such as "Start a Petition," which chronicles a couple's quest to protect wolves from trappers in Alaska. MoveOn's 50 Ways to Love Your Country answers the question that more and more citizens are asking: "What can I do?" Protect our Kids from Mercury Pollution Under energy industry pressure, President Bushs EPA plans to defer controls on mercury emissions by power plants for at least a decade. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimate that 49 million women of childbearing age in the US -- that's 8 percent -- have unsafe levels of mercury in their blood. The people hit hardest will be new-born infants -- every year over 630,000 infants are born with levels of mercury in their blood so high they can cause brain damage. We have just a few weeks to get public comments to the EPA on this plan to defer mercury controls. It's time to tell the EPA and the White House that our kids come first. Al Gore Speaks on Global Warming and the Environment Beacon Theater, New York January 15, 2004, Noon In this, his third major speech sponsored by MoveOn, Mr Gore issued an indictment of the Bush administration's inaction on global warming, linking the issue to national security. He showed that global warming is not a future threat -- it is happening now. And yet, the President is choosing to help his coal- and oil-company supporters rather than advance modern technologies that can affordably solve this critical problem. Support Kerry's call to fire Rumsfeld May 7, 2004 In the wake of revelations of torture and abuse of Iraqi prisoners, John Kerry has launched an important petition calling for President Bush to fire Donald Rumsfeld. Getting rid of Secretary Rumsfeld would be a huge step forward for all of us who oppose the Bush war policy, and Kerry needs to hear our support. Help win the election this Saturday May 3, 2004 This Saturday, we're joining other grassroots groups in the largest day of voter mobilization in American history. MoveOn members will gather at parties across the country to make over 100,000 phone calls in one afternoon to swing state voters. In an election that could be won or lost with a handful of votes, we'll work to turn out every last progressive voter and send George Bush packing. |