There you go thinking you can speak for what I think. I guess you are God. /end sarcasm. If someone gave the order to those troops they should be punished also. But I should not be in the position of explaining that I care or what I think (I won’t be defensive to folks like you after a few attempts anymore). I’ll listen to you when you change your awful pattern. Bye-

PCD: “Dennis doesn’t know what torture really is. He confuses humiliation with physical torture.”

Baklava: “Some conservatives even pointed out that what American soldiers are being punished for wasn’t much worse then hazing when ships cross the equator or college fraternity stunts. It is the sense of perspective that liberals like yourself seem to be lacking that astonishes us.”

I make my apology here – I got drowned in the flood of words and somehow overlooked that Baklava wasn’t necessarily agreeing with his fellow conservatives cited in the above quote (although it surely sounded like it on the first reading, especially after he had just said, “Again. No we don’t care.”)

There’s no hate, Baklava, but the problem as I see it is that you want to limit the liability for atrocities to the rank and file troops who were punished and make an end of it. You seem very reluctant to contemplate that such things might have been Bush policy, and accuse “[me] and the left” of trying to pin the accountability there.

You finally ask, “What would finally make you happy about this situation?” To which I would respond, exactly what has happened in the Senate, for starters. Then I’d like the House to pass what I’m calling the no-torture amendment as well. And then for Mr. Bush to concede that yes, this would really be in America’s best interest.

If he does not, and continues to object to the amendment, I can only conclude it is (and was) policy of the Bush White House to defy The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which the US is a signatory, and the Convention Against Torture, negotiated by the Reagan administration and ratified by the US Senate – and they are willing to advertise that fact to the whole world. And indictments for war crimes should proceed up the chain of command right into the White House.

Sometimes the only way to excise a cancer is by surgery, and if this is the only way to come clean before the world, I believe it would be worth the trauma.

Baklava, I apologize for misreading your position earlier – it wasn’t intentional. Would you likewise consider rescinding your accusation of hatred (used multiple times now)?

Ciao d

False allegation after false allegation. It’s funny that you think we actually believe something we don’t. You’ll learn one day it’s not helpful to discussions.

Bye

Let the Evidence Speak

America is setting an example by punishing those responsible.

Why no serious discussion of the torture issue, which you try to dismiss as a non-issue? How about the Senate vote on the no-torture amendment to the defense bill? Is Senator McCain “full of manure” also? What about Bush’s veto threat? How about Al Gore’s esential decency, digging into his own pocket to help hurricane evacuees while you insult his intelligence? Who’s filled with hate here? Talk about “moonbatistan”…

You have attributed ideas and motivations to me I do not recognize; meanwhile completely evade the larger issues which began this thread. Who said anything at all about impeachment? PCD, you issue blanket accusations against whole groups of people – anyone who would resort to such generalizations is in no position to accuse anyone else of dishonesty. You’d rather play word games and find insulting things to say than have an actual discourse on topic. Thanks, you’ve helped enlighten me in ways you never intended.

Have a nice weekend – d

Dennis wrote the following question, “read the transcript of Al Gore’s recent speech, or would consider at least giving him the credit of being a thoroughly decent human being” I’ve read that transcript and plenty others. I’ve never stated that Al Gore is or isn’t a decent human being. I address what he says as being incorrect or not the truth or without perspective. I can’t know what’s in Al Gore’s head or if he’s good or not. In your question is an insinuation of a false allegation that I say he isn’t a decent human being. Your pattern continues (false allegations)

Dennis wrote, “I’ve expressed honest opinions on this blog” Your opinions have been one false allegation after another and you can’t back up what you think is in someone else’s head because it’s impossible. You can only state whether or not you disagree or agree with policy I have stated where I disagree with Bush’s policy in the past. It’s easy. It’s not hard. It takes compassion not hate. It takes looking at the policy or direction or proposal and seeing if you like the solution or not and debating on that level. You refuse.

Dennis wrote, “Nor have I indulged the presumption of attacking the characters of either of you”. Let’s go with the implied attacks of the following paragraph that Dennis wrote:
“Does Dennis care that Dennis has neighbors, and Christianity compels Dennis to love our neighbor as ourselves? Does Dennis stop to think that the treatment of our enemies in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib sets an example to the world as to how they might be justified in treating us? Does Dennis care that both in ancient Israel’s (Old Testament) economy and under the New Covenant, Christians are required to provide for the “least” among us?” Oh my I used his paragraph with his name substituted as my point is made even more clearly. The first sentence Dennis was implying that we don’t care or love our neighbor. The second sentence Dennis was implying that we don’t stop to think about the treatment of prisoners. The third sentence was implying that we aren’t compelled to care for the least of us.

You haven’t apologized or changed your position on your VIEW of US one bit. You continue with your attacks without possibly being able to know what we think about, care about, stop to think about, or not. This conversation is going round and round because your hatred only allows you to analyze what you think we care and feel as opposed to the policies, direction and solutions that we propose.

It is rude to view us that way and not expect us to wonder why you hate us so much without ever actually having a debate on ideas and solutions.

I can apologize for saying that you are making false allegations (lying) or being hypocratical if you LIFT all of your previous false allegations and debate ideas and solutions as opposed to what Bush, PCD, or I think about, care about, feel.

Otherwise, what would I be apologizing for. You are characterizing US FALSELY and we know us better than you.

The shoe fits. Wear it. Again this isn’t all about you as you try to make it out, but your false assertions. We all notice the throw away charges you made and never returned to when challenged. You added a few things that must have come from your past. Too bad you, like most liberals, are dishonest at your base.

Baklava and PCD, you both characterize the torture issue as no big deal – on the order of college fraternity pranks, mere insults, etc. I think Senator John McCain, a former prisoner of war, knows more about what constitutes torture than any of us do, and he seems to share my concern on this. You apparently dismiss the many first-hand accounts that confirm torture was routine in Iraq and Afghanistan (not to mention the practice of extraordinary rendition), but the Senate took the issue seriously enough to vote 90-9 in favor of the amendment to the appropriations bill outlawing “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.”

There was no partisan split on this one. Joining McCain were Sens. John Warner of Virginia (Republican chairman of the Armed Services Committee) and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, former military lawyer and also a Republican, and two dozen retired senior military officers, including two former chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. And now Mr. Bush wants to veto the bill, because of that amendment. Do you think he’s threatening that just so he can retain the right to pull college hazing pranks on detainees?

We have wandered far off the original topic here, but once again I find myself wondering if you’ve even thoughtfully read the transcript of Al Gore’s recent speech, or would consider at least giving him the credit of being a thoroughly decent human being. I can only guess the answer.

I’ve expressed honest opinions on this blog and backed them by attribution. There is endless corroboration for these things, and to dismiss my links as being from liberal sources doesn’t wash. If any article I cited is unreliable, show me specifics. Of course you cannot. As I said before, much of the material for my position is from the mouths of evangelical leaders themselves, as well as conservative sources. All that matters is truth and verifiable accuracy – the politics of the writer should be irelevant.

Finally, you have characterized me as being a hater, a liar, full of manure, a wannabe dictator, a hypocrite, a mental basket case and yet again full of hate. You have changed the subject and twisted my words into meanings that originate only in your own minds.

Baklava: “It displays Dennis’s hate and lack of perspective. He sees things his way and nobody elses way. He will think a person is evil period….to jump to the bad motive bandwagon on so many issues shows Dennis as a hater.”

Really? In spite of your above words, I haven’t been so rude as to call either of you haters, liars, hypocrites or any other such names. Nor have I indulged the presumption of attacking the characters of either of you, about whom I know nothing beyond your posting on this site. Such tactics, besides being despicable, are symptomatic of weak logic and even weaker evidence with which to back your positions.

Whether or not you believe me isn’t important – what is important is bearing witness to some semblance of truth, as best it may be found. What you do, say or believe about anything at all is ultimately your own responsibility.

Thank you for the exchange – it has been fascinating. d

If I’ve looked behind the curtain and read the text you provided Dennis. Can you now finally admit that it is possible to have a different perspective about what the transcript shows? Or does it have to be your way that Bush would find it appealing to be dictator even though that isn’t what Bush said in the transcript itself?

Do I still have to catch up? Does everyone have to catch up to your level of hate and disgust and amount of weeping and trembling? Or… can there actually be another perspective out there that is legitimate and more on target and with much better perspective and respect for the English language and vocabulary?

As far as Evangelicals setting up a kingdom in this country, I just don’t see that happening. I listen to alot of Evangelical leaders, Dobson especially, and not a single one is saying “Tear up the Constitution, and let’s make Dubya King.” What they would like is the Constitution followed as the Founders desired it to be, thus the Supremacy clause in the Constitution. Which means everytime Steven Breyer looks outside of the temporal bounds of this country for a ruling he is not doing his job properly. It is his job to interpret the Constitution not amend it, that is left to the People. This is one of the things that have stirred up us evangelicals. I find it interesting that You as a believer are not.

I also find it interesting that for a “joke”, you think we should impeach the President. I have to wonder what it would take for you to believe that a Democrat President should be impeached, or Libertarian or whatever.

Also, When Jesus was talking about the “least of these”, He was not talking to Governments. He was telling His followers to care for the “least of these”. Which means that We the People are to care, not we the Welfare agency. Don’t be confused about what exactly Jesus said. He could of really cared less about Governments, which really is the heart of what he was saying to Pilate when he said “My Kingdom is not of this world.” What He really cared about is people and how His followers would be able to care and spread the Good News that He Came and died for all of us.

Lastly Dennis. When Jesus does return, which is apart of your belief system and mine. He would be setting up a Monarchy over His Kingdom. It is mentioned at the end of the Book, where it tells us that we won, and that the world will once again be the paradise God intended it to be. Or at least that is how I read it. But I could always be wrong I reckon’.

Always – Lorica – Knight of the Lord Jesus, waiting for His soon return in hopeful expectation.

It displays Dennis’s hate and lack of perspective. He sees things his way and nobody elses way. He will think a person is evil period. I disagree with Bush myself a considerable amount on many issues but to jump to the bad motive bandwagon on so many issues shows Dennis as a hater. Thus the condesension.

And I’ll repeat. I’m not sure what he wants for us to apologize on Bush’s behalf for thinking that it would be easier to be a dictator and the FALSE insinuation that Bush would find that appealing…..

If we don’t agree with Dennis’s perspective he gets appalled at us and weeps for his country (oh yeah… and trembles too:roll.

I picture him a weeping trembling mass about ready to do harm to himself or others because of his LACK of PERSPECTIVE. It is a mental disease. I’ve only seen this kind of behavior and know what is in a conservative’s head kind of mentality from liberals. True libertarians I talk to are logical and have good core beliefs that stem from the constitution and a realization that this country’s government has more than quadrupled in the size and expenditures than it should’ve.

My centrist/conservativism has been formed years after my libertarianism due to the realism that has set in that you can’t cut the government 80% without huge economic impacts that might bring this country down. Reducing government spending from 2.2 trillion per year to 400 billion per year would temporarily stop purchasing goods and services of 1.8 trillion which would adversely affect our economy. If that many goods and services aren’t purchased any more companies wouldn’t need to produce that many goods and services because there would be much less demand. That would cause deflation and lay offs and a deep recession.

A more centrist/conservative type approach would be to stop increases in spending for a period of ten years while we reprioritize what is spent on.

The Republicans are to the left of center because they aren’t voting on those lines. Democrats are even more to the left of center. For instance, Bush was the first president to offer federal spending for stem cell research including remaining lines of embryonic stem cells. While it is a noble goal to find cures with research, Democrats wanted more spending (called it a ban) and my approach would be to have ZERO federal spending on stem cell research because PRIVATE spending on stem cell research has found over 40 uses for umbilical cord stem cells and zero uses for embryonic stem cells but not for lack of trying. Private investment in this research is done to find a SUPPLY for a cure due to the DEMAND for a cure. There is absolutely no reason for:
1) Federal spending on stem cell research
2) Democrat and liberal rhetoric on the issue
3) Mainstream media’s rhetoric about the issue
4) People (like liberals) to act like conservatives don’t care when we do care we just have different solutions – and to have to justify and say we care is demeaning and it doesn’t help the debate when people like Dennis gets all condescending about whether we care or not or whether people like Bush would actually find it appealing to be a dictator.

PCD, I’d say that Dennis wants it his way and he’d find it appealing to be a dictator. Then he wouldn’t have to a mental basket case trembling and weeping for his country.

Again, I DO NOT believe you are a Christian, Dennis. You just masquerade as one for moral cover for your antagonistic viewpoints.

Also, as I said before, condesension by you is not a trump card in a debate.

“You don’t get everything you want. A dictatorship would be a lot easier.” Describing what it’s like to be governor of Texas, Governing Magazine, July 1998

http://www.governing.com/archive/1998/jul/bush.txt

“I told all four that there are going to be some times where we don’t agree with each other, but that’s OK. If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I’m the dictator,” Bush joked. — December 18, 2000, the president-elect’s first day in Washington

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec00/trans_12-18.htm

Associated Press — President Bush conceded yesterday he’s had his struggles with Congress and is bound to have more, joking that “a dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier.” July 27, 2001

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/32902_bush27.shtml

As for the Falwell letter and the thousands of emails that followed, who do you think was directing that effort? But whether it’s Falwell, Dobson or lesser-known ministers like Robert Upton, my point stands. This administration takes cues and forms major policies on the counsel and apocalyptic scenarios of evangelical leaders who seek increasing political influence and power.

Leaving aside the suspect theological beliefs of the dispensationalists who are drawing the political picture for Mr. Bush, it is the power-seeking nature of this religious movement that concerns me the most. Jesus said (I repeat) “My kingdom is not of this world.” Why are his followers so anxious to have a kingdom of this world?

Here’s a little snippet from a May, 2004 article by Rick Perlstein in the Village Voice (link is at bottom):

Most of all, apparently, we’re not supposed to know the National Security Council’s top Middle East aide consults with apocalyptic Christians eager to ensure American policy on Israel conforms with their sectarian doomsday scenarios.

But now we know.

“Everything that you’re discussing is information you’re not supposed to have,” barked Pentecostal minister Robert G. Upton when asked about the off-the-record briefing his delegation received on March 25. Details of that meeting appear in a confidential memo signed by Upton and obtained by the Voice.

The e-mailed meeting summary reveals NSC Near East and North African Affairs director Elliott Abrams sitting down with the Apostolic Congress and massaging their theological concerns. Claiming to be “the Christian Voice in the Nation’s Capital,” the members vociferously oppose the idea of a Palestinian state. They fear an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza might enable just that, and they object on the grounds that all of Old Testament Israel belongs to the Jews. Until Israel is intact and Solomon’s temple rebuilt, they believe, Christ won’t come back to earth.

Abrams attempted to assuage their concerns by stating that “the Gaza Strip had no significant Biblical influence such as Joseph’s tomb or Rachel’s tomb and therefore is a piece of land that can be sacrificed for the cause of peace.”

Three weeks after the confab, President George W. Bush reversed long-standing U.S. policy, endorsing Israeli sovereignty over parts of the West Bank in exchange for Israel’s disengagement from the Gaza Strip.

http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0420/perlstein.php

There is a vast amount of corroborating material out there for everything I’ve said here, but a limit to how much can be posted here. Much of it is from the mouths of evangelical leaders themselves.

Yes, I offered a link at the bottom of my previous post for an article written over twenty years ago on this same topic. If you actually took time to read it, you might see that all I feared then is being fulfilled today. I didn’t just start studying these issues yesterday, and would respectfully submit that you both, sincere as you may be, have some curtains you need to look behind and some catching up to do to grasp what is really happening in America today. There is a reason I weep and tremble for my country.

What a dialog.

Notice how Dennis makes charges, runs away from proving his charges, then makes new false charges? That’s a typical liberal tactic when they have nothing that stands up to scrutiny. Final piece of dog do-do from Dennis, hh points to a URL that glorifies himself.

What a colossal flame out, Dennis.