Time to put up or shut up; Upd: Coverup Continues

I believe that Cycloptichorn has a loop of videos of every hostage that was beheaded by terrorists running in his living room so he can now the truth.

His lust for gore is intrigueing, but not really sane.

0 Replies

McG, where is the connection between terrorists beheading hostages and American soldiers torturing 12 year olds?

0 Replies

It's the lust for gore, oe. The need to see more of what was done because someone in east bumphuck may not have seen the original pictures or heard about what was done.

0 Replies

Okay, the lust for gore. What you are propagating is: Don't show any more videos of hostages being beheaded, because it won't serve any purpose except inciting hate against all Muslims.

We don't need to see more of what the terrorists are capable of doing, because we've heard it so many times before. Showing it over and over again, and more and more of it - that's just lust for gore.

Nice avatar, by the way, McGentrix.

0 Replies

You are right. Seeing Daniel Pearl being beheaded from a different angle will not change the facts, just as seeing pictures of past abuse at Abu Ghraib, by people already punished for their crimes, will not change the facts.

If it was new, or different, that might be newsworthy, but it's not. It's picking the scap off an old wound to see it bleed again.

0 Replies

As far as I know, there are a few new things about it. For example, that children were/are being held/tortured, not only in Abu Ghraib, but in other US prisons as well.
Is it therefore newsworthy, McG?

0 Replies

the pictures being discussed are from Abu Ghraib taken by Darby.

0 Replies

You are talking about the (possible) source, McGentrix. What you are saying is that we have already seen it all. We already know everything that has happened. I don't think so.

Quote:

"The American public needs to understand, we're talking about rape and murder here. We're not just talking about giving people a humiliating experience; we're talking about rape and murder and some very serious charges."

Do you think it is okay to cover this up? Do you think a democratically elected government can decide these things, whether or not they want the public to see what has happened?

0 Replies

They DO think it is okay to cover it up.

And when someone wants to find out the truth, wants the truth to be exposed, they attack them; ie, the 'lust for gore' comments.

Quote:

I believe that Cycloptichorn has a loop of videos of every hostage that was beheaded by terrorists running in his living room so he can now the truth.

His lust for gore is intrigueing, but not really sane.

Have you stopped beating your wife yet, McG?

I mean, seriously

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

You are right. Seeing Daniel Pearl being beheaded from a different angle will not change the facts, just as seeing pictures of past abuse at Abu Ghraib, by people already punished for their crimes, will not change the facts.

If it was new, or different, that might be newsworthy, but it's not. It's picking the scap off an old wound to see it bleed again.

I especially dislike this comment by McGentrix. He makes us see 9/11 more than 9,500 times here on this board, and at the same time says things like "It's picking the scap off an old wound to see it bleed again."

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

I believe that Cycloptichorn has a loop of videos of every hostage that was beheaded by terrorists running in his living room so he can now the truth.

I believe that if monkeys could fly out of your ass, you could earn a few extra bucks on the carnival circuit.

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

They DO think it is okay to cover it up.

And when someone wants to find out the truth, wants the truth to be exposed, they attack them; ie, the 'lust for gore' comments.

Quote:
I believe that Cycloptichorn has a loop of videos of every hostage that was beheaded by terrorists running in his living room so he can now the truth.

His lust for gore is intrigueing, but not really sane.

Have you stopped beating your wife yet, McG?

I mean, seriously

Cycloptichorn

Do you know what self flagellation is Cy?

0 Replies

PDiddie wrote:

Americans responsible for the prisoners at Abu Ghraib have been sodomizing children.

I suppose, in the name of freedom and democracy.

This is all the Democratic Party's fault, according to Lash.

I honestly didn't think we could hear/read anything worse than we have already. While all that was bad, this is just too disgusting to even put into words.

What are we protecting with covering this sick shameful stuff up? What's left to protect? Who in the military is responsible for the actions of those under them? Are they just allowed to run wild?

0 Replies

revel, I admire the measured words you always find for topics like this one. It's exactly what people elsewhere wonder about. How can anyone defend these actions? How can anyone argue against investigating these events?

0 Replies

If some one had several hundred pictures of your mom being raped, would you need to see more than one to understand the gravity of what happened? Would anyone? Those guilty of the crimes in Abu ghraib have been investigated and charged and punished.

0 Replies

If you had a murder trial, and there were various pieces of evidence, what would you prefer:

a) present just one piece of evidence, and proclaim that the rest is just alike
b) present all the pieces of evidence available

0 Replies

I am sure those on trial had full exposure to the material. The general population does need exposure to all the evidence. Evidence gets censored all the time from public exposure.

0 Replies

What do you mean by "those on trial"? Who was on trial?

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

And you think, torture etc could happen if not published?

Do you think it can't be investigated and prosecuted without publishing pictures of it?

I never looked at the pictures of beheadings. I didn't look at pictures of the dead Hussein brothers, until they were on a thread here or somewhere. I wouldn't look at Daniel Pearl's murder--these things are inhumane, as is torture.

I don't understand people who want to see these things--but much moreso those who want this type of picure broadcast, when they know people will be killed as a result.

None of you have supported why it is appropriate. You have tried and failed to equate releasing the pictures with an investigation.

Why don't you tell the truth about why you want them released?

0 Replies

Quote:

In issuing his order, U.S. District Court Judge Alvin Hellerstein of New York City gave the government until June 30 to get the photos ready by removing information in the pictures that might identify the victims. The judge said the photographs "are the best evidence the public can have of what occurred" at Abu Ghraib.

So Lash, are you saying that a government should have the right to ignore orders issued by a court, because it deems those orders inappropriate?

0 Replies

Time to put up or shut up; Upd: Coverup Continues

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know