NUKE_CLEVELAND

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Jul 7, 2005 -> 11:01 PM) So they have no rights, people laugh when many released prisoners are released discussing their torture, laugh when the military discusses the extent of the torture as widespread, say that they are inhuman etc. etc. -- and then have to wonder why people would hate us? Please. Your moral throughway is the exact same mentality of the fundamentalists that accesorize with dynamite. Justifying torture and abusing people -- and Nuke a lot of the people in Abu Ghraib etc. are not taken off the battlefield -- Several military intelligence officers have made it known to human rights groups like the Red Cross that in the intelligence officers' opinion "70-90% had been arrested by mistake." But since when are little things like facts going to get in the way of Nuke's endless super-nationalism? Bush had said in March: “I expect them to be treated, the POWs, I expect to be treated humanely, just like we’re treating the prisoners that we have captured humanely." If sodomy with a broomstick is humane, then I shudder to think what the US considers is inhumane. Sodomy with a broomstick is not humane.....I have said as much and so has the military who punished those responsible for it. But with your dumbed down defenition of inhumane treatment I'm surprised you're not pining to get them access to Al Jazeera on TV and conjugal visits. Now that you've lost the rights argument......again.......what does the U.S. consider inhumane? How about be-headings? How about hanging mangled corpses from a bridge? How about the mindless and indiscriminant killing of people trying to shop or go to work?

QUOTE(Faustian Bargain @ Jul 7, 2005 -> 10:52 PM) maybe the media attention on all the OTHER teams will fade if the sox can put together a 4-5 year run. . . .these guys love the braves b/c they have been a power for 10 years - cleveland should've won at least one WS and was great all through the 90s - twinkies have one the division and played post-season ball a lot of times recently, not to mention puckett viola et al. Basically, Ozzie is right on target when he talks about us needing a WS win to get any attention. Probably we need 2 WS wins, or at least 1 and then a long sit atop the division. So no matter how well we do this year, the BBTN people* will probably ignore us to the end. but hey, to BBTN* and Rob Neyer: :finger * BBTN from L-R = boring, fat, annoying and almost dead. That about sums it up.............WELCOME TO SOXTALK!!!

QUOTE(WilliamTell @ Jul 7, 2005 -> 10:49 PM) He probably still thinks the Twins are going to win the division. After all he did pick the Twins and Cubs to play in the World Series. Cubs?!?! LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Every time I hear the Flubbs and the word "playoffs" mentioned in the same paragraph I break out in fits of uncontrolled laughter.

QUOTE(ottawa_sox @ Jul 7, 2005 -> 10:07 PM) As much as baseball is statistics oriented, statistics alone cannot translate the value of Podsednik and his relentless pressure on the opposition's pitching and defense. He is a huge part of our teams's remarkable success. When statistics were examined the last 3 year's, did it make any sense that we came up so short against the Twins? If the American league is in a one run game, look no further than Scotty Po to be the difference maker. As with our team, he will be a huge bullet in the American league's holster. Like I said in an earlier post. Not every contribution a player makes to a team can be quantified in statistics. The intangible contributions that Pods makes to this team are HUGE and its that more than being a bunch of homers that caused Sox fans to come from out of the woodwork and stuff the box for him. If he wasn't such a huge reason why we're winning then people would not have busted their ass to get him in there.

QUOTE(nvxplorer @ Jul 7, 2005 -> 10:35 PM) The Twins are going to make a run for what? Beer? Nope, they're going to be making a run for the golf course in Florida come October so as to get the best tee time possible. LOSERS!!!

Since certain people around here keep on assigning Constitutional rights, Rights under the Geneva Conventions and other assorted documents allow me, for the thousandth time, to walk the leftist masses through why these terrorist assholes have NO rights. The Supreme Courts Quirin Decision of 1942 defines for us what an illegal combatant is. In so doing they denied Constitutional protections to those who are shown to be "illegal combatants" as defined in this decision. http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/f...law/quirin.html Once again Article 4 of the Geneva Convention clearly defines the criterion of who is a "Prisoner of War". Terrorist assholes like those we capture on the battlefields of Iraq or Afghanistan do not meet these criterion When lefties around here try again to assign rights to these people that they do not have I will simply cut and paste this into my reply in order to save me the time of going back and finding this in the SLAP archives.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jul 7, 2005 -> 09:52 PM) Well...we do know that the number of people released from Gitmo without ever having been charged with anything numbers in the hundreds...several hundred. Those people were released because , and I quote, "they were no longer of any intelligence value" not because they were determined to be innocent.

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Jul 7, 2005 -> 09:47 PM) First, allow me to bow to the king of the straw man and the non-sequitor! Fact remains is that the US heralded them as "good soldiers" and let them continue in their jobs with a very minimal punishment. Others heralded them as great Americans and heroes. Nuke, senior members of JAGs have said that Gitmo has been terribly mishandled. Many senior National Security Council and staff & State Department staff believe that Guantanamo and the Defense Department's treatment of detainees has hurt us in the efforts in the "war on terror". Even FOX News commentators have said that Gitmo is not getting us any vital intelligence -- and their sources there have said that there is no vital reason for it to stay open. As Bill Kristol astutely noted, "Why must we hold people outside of US jurisdiction to operate the war on terror?" Why indeed -- why not a US base? As Kristol further noted, it is because different rules would apply and those rules would be perfectly fine for holding terrorists. So, making the Iraqis jump off a bridge was "going out of their way to avoid hurting those who don't deserve it? And as you say they don't target civilians for torture and harassment -- the Army admits that they are just rounding up people and that many of the people detained in Abu Ghraib etc. have actually been innocent and commited no terrorist related activity. So they're targeting civilians as "potential terrorists". And they really went out of their way with their humane and civilized treatment of detainees. Prisoners at Abu Ghraib are protected under the Geneva Convention, a document signed by 47 countries including the United States that outlines the rules of war and occupation. Because of this, the soldiers responsible for the abuse could be charged with war crimes. "Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated. Any unlawful act or omission by the detaining power causing death or seriously endangering the health of a prisoner of war in its custody is prohibited, and will be regarded as a serious breach of the present convention," Article 13 of the convention reads. "In particular, no prisoner of war may be subjected to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the prisoners concerned and carried out in his interest. Abu Ghraib prison "Likewise, prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity," according to the convention. The Uniform Code of Military Justice, the American armed forces' criminal laws, also prohibits the abuse of prisoners in military custody, according to Georgetown University professor and retired Marine Corps Lt. Col. Gary Solis. So Nuke, if they aren't torture under the Geneva Convention -- then its torture under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. It is hilarious to hear you condemn Hussein's torture and abuse of the Iraqis as a reason to invade and then the Americans do the exact same damn thing. I'm just beating my head against the wall here. This is Article 4 of the Geneva Convention which describes what a prisoner of war is and as such serves as a litmus test to who is protected by it. Please tell me where terrorists who hide among the population, who drive car bombs into crowded markets full of innocent people, who engage in kidnappings are protected under this? YOU CAN'T BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT!!! Secondly. Guantanamo is on U.S. soil just the same as Ft. Hood or Ft. Benning or any U.S. embassy overseas. You and Mr. Kristol are right though, since these people have no rights under the Constitution ( The Supreme Court said as much in the Qurinin (sp) decision of 1942 ) and no rights under the Geneva Convention as I have outlined above then the rules of their detention would not change. Your blather about the UCMJ is more hilarious to me than it is to you because that too applies to PRISONERS OF WAR.....which these people are clearly not. Again....slowly for the thick skulled........The Supreme Court in Quirin clearly defined that activities such as those engaged in by the terrorists of today make those caught "ILLEGAL COMBATATANTS" not Prisoners of War. You just continue to assign rights to these people when they DON'T HAVE THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE! Nice backpedal on your third point. You totally changed the subject on the issue of whether we're targeting the innocent or not. Your argument about colleteral damage was horses*** to begin with so now you're changing the subject and trying to say that the policy of the U.S. military is to murder Iraqi citizens as in the case of the bridge incident. That is horses***. Those who perpetrated such acts are tried, convicted and punished in accordance with the UCMJ.

QUOTE(KipWellsFan @ Jul 7, 2005 -> 06:49 PM) http://thedanreport.blogspot.com/ Be the first visitor! Tentatively named the Dan report but I don't like it as it is obviously very self-indulgent. First article is entitled "CNN report on Gitmo confirms ex-CIA informant's impression of inmates?" This blog won't be just a rehashing of other info but what I think is somewhat of an Independent view on current topics. Also if you've always wondered what the Kipper looks like here's your chance to put either your love or hate to a face. Warning, the weird effect I created on the image gives me a god-like supa-pimp quality... you'll see. I'd love to hear some thoughts EDIT: Also, not on purpose the article relates somewhat to the London bombings I'm much more inclined to believe what the government tells me about these people than the word of a dissaffected ex-CIA informant. That's just me though. There may well have been cases where someone was detained after being "sold" by some tribal leader out in the badlands but there's no way to accurately quantify how many actually fall under this circumstance. It could be 2 or 3 guys or 2 or 3 dozen for all anyone really knows.

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Jul 7, 2005 -> 09:04 PM) Well for him to come from such a moralist family and himself promote such a moralist agenda, then yes I would say that it is a bit hypocritical. That was then and this is now. Bush swore off the firewater something like 25 years ago and has been a man of good faith and morals since then. A liberal like you should be a lot less quick to judge someone who has cleaned up his life than a nasty 'ol conservative like me.

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Jul 7, 2005 -> 07:40 PM) Nuke, firstly nice job ignoring the first point I made about the US military getting only very minor slaps on the wrists for their abuses and in one case, manslaughter (forcing people to jump off a bridge) You're very good at ignoring the parts that completely invalidate the point you were making. Secondly, you never told me what essential intelligence gathering these various violations of military codes have accomplished outside of more mindless nationalism and arrogance that only further radicalizes even moderate Muslims against the United States. And Nuke, the US military already blows up trains, refrigeration plants, apartment buildings, buses, markets, etc. -- they just call it "collateral damage". And Nuke your statements of inhumanity -- laughing at abuses that these people have gone through, its on the same moral throughway as the radical fundamentalists parading corpses through the streets. You're no different than the radical fundamentalists. You both believe that your cause is anointed and that the other side is completely inhumane and that torture or blurring the lines of proper conduct means nothing if it advances your cause. As much as you try to diverge yourself and the US military from the fundamentalists, you really do have a lot alike...a lot more than you'd probably like to (or will ever) admit. Nice job with the non sequitor about candy and flowers. I believe these people should be arrested if evidence is there that they have something to do with terrorism. If the United States must engage in abuse and torture to achieve its goals, then it has sacrificed the values of the Constitutional republic that was established -- and then the terrorists have truly won. First of all if you have issues with the sentences that these convicted soldiers recieved then dont cry to me about it. Join the military and attempt to change it from within. Secondly. How do you know what intelligence was gathered from detainees in Abu Ghraib or Gitmo when the government hasn't said what was gathered from such interrogations? Whether they gave up vital information under duress or kept screaming "GOD IS GREAT" the whole time will not be known anytime soon by any of us. To add to this point. If one innocent person was spared getting a car bomb drove up his ass or one U.S. soldier's life was spared by information garnered from these interrogations , and I'll bet you my bottom dollar that a lot more than 1 life was spared this way, then it's all worth it to me. Thirdly. I'm getting really tired of you b****ing about colleteral damage and trying to equate us to terrorists in so doing. I'm also tired of trying to put it through your thick skull that terrorists DELIBERATELY target innocent people while our military has gone far out of its way and to great lengths to avoid hurting those who don't deserve it. You might have had a point back during World War 2 when our military deliberately targeted civillians with this logic but certainly not today. Finally. Your side just loves to keep "dumbing down" the defenition of torture. Pretty soon you are gonna start whining torture when some asshole captured on the battlefield ( which by the way is where most of these clowns come from in the first place ) has his flex-cuffs put on too tight. Save your tears for those in London who were the victims of indiscriminant killing this morning as they actually deserve someones tears.

QUOTE(Cerbaho-WG @ Jul 7, 2005 -> 07:47 PM) Thank God people like you don't write the guidelines when it comes to terrorism. Imagine, and I know this might be a hard thing to do, would you particularly enjoy any of the aforementioned offenses occuring to you if you were held prisoner? I thought one of the points to Operation Whip Out Our Collective Cock And Flop It Around was to be better than the terrorists, not stoop down to their level. Beating them with chairs, sodomizing them, and everything else points straight to idiocy and barbarism, something which the military would like to avoid (they can't avoid having f***ing retards write "rapest" on them. I'm almost comforted that a typical High Schooler can spell better than certain jarheads). The simplistic ideology of "Well these guys killed 3000 civilians so we can s*** all over them" doesn't apply here and never should. As I've stated before, the Geneva Convention does apply here, contrary to what President Bush is being told by his legion of yes men. If the US wants to continue with treating their prisoners like subhumans with and without probable cause, I urge them to go right ahead and prepare for the international look of disbelief that the French received after Algiers. What's ironic here is that the US military just stooped down, and perhaps below with rendition tactics, to the level of French paratroopers during The Battle of Algiers. Must be harsh to realize, Nuke, that you and the inferior French military are now on the same page. First. I should be so lucky t be treated like that if I was to be taken prisoner by Radical Islamists. Anyone they get their hands on gets tortured....I mean real torture not this BS that the leftys like you trump up as torture......and then beheaded and a video of that would be posted on the internet, Al Jazerra and anywhere else they could get an audience. Either that or my mangled corpse would be hung off a bridge in Fallujah or some other s***hole like it. Secondly these people have no rights whatsoever with their status as terrorist mercenaries. If you bothered to read the Geneva Convention you would note that individuals have to meet certain criterion to recieve its protections. Terrorists do not meet these criterion. There was a nice long thread where this was debated at length and I don't feel like re-hashing it here. Go and actually read the Geneva convention and tell me if a terrorist mercenary REALLY falls under its protection.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Jul 7, 2005 -> 06:25 PM) Ask yourself this, Would Podsednik deserve to be in the ASG with his current .289/.363/.337 and 41 SB with the Sox 5 games under .500? No F'n way. You guys are letting the Sox great record cloud your vision. He's 20th out of the 21 qualified LFers in terms of OPS. He's in the middle of the pack in avg, and OBP. -- He's an average at best defensive OFer. Essentially he's a one tool player. He has speed. That's it. That's not an All-Star. Would the Sox have the record they do without Pods in the lineup? They would be good but for the reasons I explained earlier he makes this team better.

QUOTE(Adam G @ Jul 7, 2005 -> 06:18 PM) Heh, that was Jimmy the Greek. My mistake.

QUOTE(chi-guy2 @ Jul 7, 2005 -> 06:08 PM) how can you say that to jimmy piersall, i have actually talked to the guy in person and he is one hell of a guy, everyone has their own opinion, woody paige doesnt want him to go either To borrow a phrase from the immortal Lee Elia................. THEY CAN KISS MY ASS................RIGHT DOWNTOWN................AND PRINT IT!!!!!!!!

QUOTE(Greg Hibbard @ Jul 7, 2005 -> 06:04 PM) I'm new too although I've lurked for a while WELCOME ABOARD DUDE!

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Jul 7, 2005 -> 05:52 PM) I don't think Pods should be going to the ASG. How many times have Sox players who were clearly better been screwed out of an ASG spot because of voting? For that matter, I'm still angry about Thomas getting screwed out of the MVP back in 2000 by roid -freak Giambi. I totally think Pods should be there because while the only stat he has that stands out is his steals he does so much for this team. Between him and Gooch they carried the offense while the sluggers were struggling. He helps other hitters get good counts and better pitches to hit because his presence on the basepaths is a major distraction to the opposing team. Not everything a player does to make a team better gets counted in the stat column. What has Jeter or Matsui done to make their team better?

QUOTE(Queen Prawn @ Jul 7, 2005 -> 12:19 PM) From what I have heard about this, it isn't about pay it is about staffing. Working in a company that is severly understaffed, it sucks. For a hundred grand a year I think they can suck it up. This is bulls***.

QUOTE(Capn12 @ Jul 7, 2005 -> 05:46 PM) He isn't called The Count of 3 and 2 for nothing Nuke. That's another thing that burns my ass about him. He loves to go 0-2 1-2 on a hitter then he almost always starts nibbling and ends up full and walking people.

QUOTE(VAfan @ Jul 6, 2005 -> 10:44 PM) Of course it was nice to see Jose get back on track tonight with a win. "Only" 3 walks and 1 long ball - his two biggest weaknesses. But of course it was against lowly Tampa Bay. Who here thinks that this will start a run of good starts in the second half? Or do you think it is just a blip on his slide to a 5+ ERA? Or something in between? He really needs to quit walking people. If he can get his control back and throw strikes he'll be just fine.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jul 7, 2005 -> 05:37 PM) Well...since this is the internet...and I can always just blame bad sources or totally ignore this post if it doesn't happen... I have read rumors from multiple sources that Chief Justice William Rehnquist may be ready to either make a major speech of some sort or simply outright announce his retirement tomorrow morning. Here is one source. Naturally...since I'm a mere White Sox fan in California, I can't confirm this...but if you like paying attention to random rumors that rapidly circulate through the internet...here's a good one for you. I don't know why he stayed on this long being that he's sick with cancer.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jul 7, 2005 -> 05:33 PM) Are there guys having better seasons that are not going? Yes. Are they as valuable to their team? No But most of all Did he win the "who do you want to see in the All-Star game" fan ballot? Yes Jimmy Piersall? Wasn't he fired for making stupid racist comments on air at one point?

QUOTE(Steff @ Jul 7, 2005 -> 03:31 PM) I'm reading 'it's good for them to be together to be able to lean on and support each other in this time of disaster..' Just me though.. I agree. I think Balta took that statement out of context.

I have added my own insightful judgement of each of these acts of "torture" as I view them. Some are stupid and reprehensible while those I have no issues with got the big WHAAAAAAAAAAA from me to poke fun at the bleeding hearts. a. (S) Punching, slapping, and kicking detainees; jumping on their naked feet; WHAAAAA b. (S) Videotaping and photographing naked male and female detainees; Stupid and pointless c. (S) Forcibly arranging detainees in various sexually explicit positions for photographing; Pointless and stupid d. (S) Forcing detainees to remove their clothing and keeping them naked for several days at a time; Pointless and stupid e. (S) Forcing naked male detainees to wear women’s underwear; Pointless and stupid f. (S) Forcing groups of male detainees to masturbate themselves while being photographed and videotaped; Pointless and stupid g. (S) Arranging naked male detainees in a pile and then jumping on them; Pointless and stupid h. (S) Positioning a naked detainee on a MRE Box, with a sandbag on his head, and attaching wires to his fingers, toes, and penis to simulate electric torture; Pointless and stupid, shoulda cranked up the juice i. (S) Writing “I am a Rapest” (sic) on the leg of a detainee alleged to have forcibly raped a 15-year old fellow detainee, and then photographing him naked; Poetic Justice. I love it. j. (S) Placing a dog chain or strap around a naked detainee’s neck and having a female Soldier pose for a picture; Pointless and stupid k. (S) A male MP guard having sex with a female detainee; What was that moron thinking? l. (S) Using military working dogs (without muzzles) to intimidate and frighten detainees, and in at least one case biting and severely injuring a detainee; WHAAAAAAAAAAAA m. (S) Taking photographs of dead Iraqi detainees. WHAAAAAAAAAAAA --- a. (U) Breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoric liquid on detainees; That stuff is harmless. How do I know? I've had it spilled on me before on accident. b. (U) Threatening detainees with a charged 9mm pistol; WHAAAAAAAAAAAA c. (U) Pouring cold water on naked detainees; WHAAAAAAAAAAAA d. (U) Beating detainees with a broom handle and a chair; WHAAAAAAAAAAAA e. (U) Threatening male detainees with rape; WHAAAAAAAAAAAA f. (U) Allowing a military police guard to stitch the wound of a detainee who was injured after being slammed against the wall in his cell; The medic was probably busy. g. (U) Sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick. Stupid h. (U) Using military working dogs to frighten and intimidate detainees with threats of attack, and in one instance actually biting a detainee. WHAAAAAAAAAAAA While some of this does qualify as abuse it pales in comparison to the activities these people engage in. Again. Those who perpetrated abuses were tried, convicted and sentenced by a jury of their peers or pled guilty in the first place and recieved what the military thought was an appropriate sentence. The killing or planning thereof of innocent civillians in Western countries as well as in Iraq and Afghanistan makes the petty nonsense those few soldiers took part in look like littering. When we start yanking random innocent people out of their cars and be-heading them on live TV, hanging burned corpses off a bridge in Fallujah and sending suicide car-bombers into crowded markets or blowing up commuter trains and busses in Tehran or Damascus then you can come whine to me about how horrible we are. These people are indeed savages and throwing flowers and candy at them like you want to do is not going to do anything of value. Only by finding and exterminating those responsible for terrorism can we hope to stop it.

QUOTE(ChiSoxyGirl @ Jul 7, 2005 -> 06:29 AM) That was kind of classless. Prayers for the people injured and families of the killed. Call it what you want to it's the truth. There are so many spineless bleeding-hearts out there who are sooooooo worried about some terrorist getting sleep deprivation treatment and don't care why we have a need for a Gitmo in the first place. These are REALLY bad people who want to kill us and would not hesitate to kill Americans indiscriminantely to make a point. These people we have down there are savages pure and simple. I'm so sick and tired of hearing people whine and cry about how these people are treated.