Detainees tortured to death by US military

[dezhen2001]

hey marc - where did you get your new avatar? looks rad

dawood

[Xebsball]

That is Subcomandante Marcos of the Zapatistas.
I was looking around then i had a *click* "Hey! My name is Marcos!" So i put him as my avatar
And the pseudo-ninja guerrilla-ninja style is so damn cool!!

[dezhen2001]

yeah - kinda "urban warrior" style

dawood

[NYerRoman]

Clap clap Merry. You almost sound cool when you write BUT I will not comment on your spelling mistakes and grammar slips as well.
B overall but you too a D-.
Ain’t that simple to do now? The throwing out the grades thing…

Now, I do apologize since I am bilingual and my English tends to be Italianized at times. But I’m sure you worldly kinds can understand that. I’m sure you’re a man of the world and can see outside the US and have met bilingual people and realize that at times, one language will dominate the grammatical formulations of sentences. You know I'm sure.

When did you become the professor and essay authority? I thought listing facts and giving my opinion on a subject was essay writing and making a point. Obviously it’s not up to par with your savoir faire…that’s French…in writing skills and dismissing people b/c they’re not as amazing as you are.

Now, let’s begin Merryman.

I read Le Monde, El Pais, La Repubblica (center left), Corriere della Sera (center right), Guardian, Independent, The Economist, Dagens Nyheter (Swedish center), Espresso, Zmag, Ha’aretz, Al Jazera (censured in Italy at the moment), IPE authors from my school Johns Hopkins U where I got my Masters in International Affairs and Economics, graduating with honors (clearing voice sound and boast) BBC, Radio 4..to name a few. I read Chomsky b/c the first thing you learn in International affairs school is….? Come on…come on…

All right, I’ll tell ya. It’s economics is the driving force of politics and business interests influence to a great deal politics and lobbies influence law and if you’re poor and have no political power, well then your fu(ked.

Your list is undoubtedly accurate. Provide historical context, rather than a laundry list and you've got what we call RESEARCH here in the real world! Funny that. As statiticians put it "correlation is not causation," in other words, the data mean nothing without understanding the context behind the data.

Do you not read the contents of the vetoes? The vetoes are to either not legitimize the PLO, or to recognize Palestinian rights, or a condemnation of atrocities by Israel, or atrocities by the US. Pick one. They all seem straight forward to me. Everything has a context, yes. But the amount and content of the vetoes is shocking, no? The UN doesn't try to pass idiotic resolutions that just need to be vetoed by the US. They are attempts to rectify inconsistencies with one country and international law. But don’t offend the biggest power in the world with your trifling whines of the US being at par with other countries in the world….no no no.

Chomsky brings up points that penetrate the core of issues. I read him, research and investigate, then I start to recognize a patter that Dr. Chomsky writes about. He states facts. I don't take his opinion on things for face value. Rush Limbaugh does the same...but he comes from a limited and at times racist mentality that supports business interests alone. I remember his show and seeing an African man dancing in tribal clothing and Rush saying, "He's happy because his welfare check came in."

Chomsky makes the point that welfare is a miniscule part of the budget. Not even really relevant given the nature of defense and corporate tax breaks, etc. I tend to agree. The US is on a spiral downwards and it is going to take down a lot of others trying to grab hold by force. It’s not working inside due to poverty, the ill treatment of the poor, no social programs that work, no social programs that don’t stigmatize you, health care, education free even through college, gun control laws, racism. Should I continue? Racism is very subtle in the US. It is broadcasted in many ways. We tend to just think of the Klan or the n-word or hicks in the south. No. It’s ingrained in all of us from the start. Our history is. Our present is. Watch the news. Any local or national news.

News is highly controlled in the States. Just refer to Peter Arnett and his oops, comment that supports every expert’s belief and analysis in the field. The point being he was “unpatriotic.”

About your upcoming research into the case I presented and the Princeton student. The book was a bestseller From Time Immortal by Joan Peters (1984). The rave of the intellectual elite. The elite that read your NYTimes. She proved there were no Palestinians and the ones that live there now were recent immigrants. The NYTimes loved it! It was so amazing. This Ph.D. student in Princeton researched the footnotes. They were all wrong. They were made up. He spent an entire summer in NY Public Library. He sent it to the NYTimes. Ignored. He was then blocked from teaching and getting any position in a university b/c the English reviewed it later. This kid sent his findings to them. They trashed the book and its contents. The NYTimes had to then retract their review and called the findings nonsense. Read up about it. Merry research Merry.

That’s what Chomsky states. I looked it up. It was true. I looked at the London Review and the Times Literary Supplement…English book review journals. All panned out.

Ah, see, here's one of your little statements I have problems with. You say that the American press is an instrument of the wealthy elite, and I'm supposed to take that at face value. Tell me WHY. Demonstrate to me how journalists, who are overwhelmingly liberal, are slaves of the conservative elite.

Liberal? Journalists in America are liberal? Why? Because they don’t use racial epithets? How are they liberal? Peter Arnett could argue the case better. Do they ever, ever really criticize the system? What is the media? CBS or NYTimes – who are they really these “journalists”. They are major corporations. They are not “us” as Chomsky upholds…and others…like my professors at JHU SAIS. They say the same thing. Where is the news coming from? Corporate news and papers? If they are a huge money making news organization, they will never do anything to give another point of view that may actually damage their status. Does the media represent every stratus of society? No. I don’t think so. The public is dynamic with differing believes and points of view. Not just a one sided argument over shades of gray.

And liberals are supporters of private power. There is nothing different really between left and right really in the US power structure. Both represent big business and money. Unions certainly don’t get the best deal under democrats and in Congress Dems vote Republican and vice versa.

It’s all reflected in the media to have us believe that there is a debate. On what? Screw the business loopholes, cut defense, health care and education for all AND MOST IMPORTANT give the poor some hope and dignity. That would never be reported or investigated by your “liberals” in the media.

Now…the oil and war. This war is about oil. We know it. I am not debating anything that resembles how evil the man is. He was evil and we armed him, financed him and renewed trade with him from 1979 until 1990 (killed Kurds in 1986). It’s about getting our share. It’s about UNOCAL in the Afghani case. Read the French book I gave you. Read Le Monde. Oh you do. You must have missed that article.

We played Saddam as the block for that--not to protect business interests.

We reflagged Iraqi oil tankers with American flags in the Persian Gulf. Remember that? It was about protecting the oil. Not the civilians. Not against communism. I hardly think Iran under the Ayatollah was flirting with communism. Please give me a break. Oil precedence to the Soviets and not us? Never. Saddam was a great US client.

Merry, quick lesson. Taliban representatives and Mullah Omar’s aids in the White House under Bush and their paid representative in the US was Laila Helms. Ring a bell? It should Mr. “I read the CIA quick guide book.” She is the niece of Richard Helms, CIA director and ex-Ambassador to Iran. They were our pals as we negotiated the pipeline and gas-line throughout the late 90s. The negotiations under Bush went array. The French have done a spectacular job on this one investigating it. Read the book I gave in the other reply.

Actually Michael Moore’s new documentary will deal with the Bush family ties with Osama. Can’t wait for it.

If it’s not oil, then why are we not putting Africa together? Oil is the big part of the equation. It has everything to do with it.

FWIW, the Sandinistas weren't democratically elected. They overthrew the government in 1979. We began supporting the opposition as a counter to that overthrow since the Sandinistas were socialist ideologues. Daniel Ortega held elections in 1990 and lost.

Who did they overthrow? A right wing dictator US client for four decades. It was a mass upheaval. Health care was reinstalled. Social programs. Even a free press. As if they were the big spreaders of communism. We like dictators as long as they’re right wing? There was a rebuilding of the country after the overthrow of Somoza. The US didn’t tolerate that. Alas the ruling of the World Court.

You did see Olly North testify, yes? What did you get out of that? A good looking middle aged man in a uniform? Come on. He told it all to everyone what the US did in Nicuragua.

About Nigeria….is Nigeria opposing the US and making it difficult to get the oil? No. Therefore why start a war with Nigeria. But to be fair to your attempt at a point…
Nigeria is poor and has absolutely no intention of causing problems b/c it needs international money and aid.

Plus I’m sure the foreign oil companies have already or will begin to rape the country soon.

I’m off to bed again.
I lived in DC. May visit next time I’m there. We should get together over a beer and discuss this.

[Christopher M]

Gotta remember Chomsky is an authority on linguistics and philosophy, not politics.

Originally posted by NYerRoman
This war is about oil...

Out of curiosity, what is the specific proposed mechanism for Bush's monetary gain from oil market changes due to the war?

Still curious.

[@PLUGO]

Gotta remember Chomsky is an authority on linguistics and philosophy, not politics.

Well, it seems to me Language is a major factor in alot of what's been going on.

Can anyone tell me where the term "Enemy Combatant" came from?

[Merryprankster]

The fundamental difference between us is that you are a neo-marxist and I am not. You view the world as driven by economic interests. I find that this is not the case. It is driven IN PART by economic concerns, but they don't overwhelm everything else. I think in many cases you'll find "blood is thicker than money." I realize that it does work the other way round as well, but you look at the world through a pair of glasses I find out of focus.

I wasn't trying to get into a ****ing contest with you about "who reads better papers." I was trying to demonstrate that I think what I think without taking the "biased U.S. media's" word for it.

The U.N. list is out of context because we have no idea what the resolution said. We don't know the language, and in some cases lack the historical context. I'd need a case by case review to come to any trend analysis conclusions that were valid.

I don't care who the Sandanistas overthrew. You lumped them in with "democratically elected" -- they weren't. I'm fully aware of the Oliver North trial, I believe the Iran-Contra affair was disgraceful and I believe the Reagan administration was up to its eyeballs in it, from the top down.

I'm glad you agree with your professors, and I'm glad you like Chomsky.

I will agree with you that the distance between left and right in this country is nowhere near as great as that found in Europe.

I copped an attitude because you're a snot. It's clear in your writing that anybody who doesn't agree with you is either willfully obtuse or spectacularly stupid. I find that unconscionable. It's not your politics--it's your demeanor.

At least you're starting to put sentences together in a reasonable way.

You've won this war of attrition. I'm too tired of trying to get an independant thought out of your head rather than a regurgitation of what you learned in class or "what Chomsky says."

I can't argue with conspiracy theories. They're self-perpetuating paradigms. Evidence against it is just an example of how deep the conspiracy runs.

Chris M--they can't. And they can't because on a macro-economic scale there is only one world price for oil, thanks to the oil futures market.

[unrelated]

It is probably a bad idea to get into the middle of this, but it seems that a few points could be made:

Those who argue that this is all about oil are not very coherent. You are probably better off to argue that this is about money. If this is your belief then it appears that you are Materialists (in the philosophical sense). In this case, you would have to accept this premise as true for all the nations involved (US, Britain, France, Germany, Russia, etc)

You might think about reframing your arguments. Perhaps you could start by asking who benefits, and how? (Sort of like Christopher did). By “who” I do not mean a single person or company, but a group of people or companies who share a common interest. Some international relations people call this an “interest group”. It is usually an interest group that people are referring to when they start talking about conspiracy theories.

To answer the question, it would be helpful to know which interest groups benefit and how? E.g. Oil industry, defense contractors, construction firms, publishing, airlines, shipping firms, tourism, toy manufacturers, healthcare, human rights organizations, etc.

Here is a sample method that might provide you with a bit more credibility, using oil as an example:

First begin by asking who benefits under certain prototypical scenarios. For example, 1) who benefits when the price of oil is high (say $30+ per barrel) or 2) who benefits when the price of oil is low (say $15 per barrel) or 3) who benefits under either scenario? And so forth…

Next ask if any of the interest groups that benefit under the various scenarios have any power to make those scenarios a reality. Most people are probably comfortable with the methodology up to this point -- after all it is basic business strategy. It is this step is where things get tricky. Most people’s reactions break down along philosophical lines.

It is helpful to understand a little about how the market for oil works and what is involved. Some would argue that the futures market does not control the price of oil (or any commodity) but merely reflects the expected price of the commodity at a given time. That is, the causal relationship is reversed from what most people think. Thus prices may go up if there is a fear that the supply of oil will be interrupted for one reason or another (e.g. a cut in OPEC production targets). They may also go up if there is a belief that demand will increase without a corresponding increase in supply (e.g. a sudden cold weather snap.)

If you believe conventional economic theory, then prices are set based on the supply and demand of the product. In the case of oil, prices consist of 1) the value of the underlying commodity 2) the extraction costs 3) the refining costs 4) transportation costs 5) storage costs 6) financing costs 7) taxes and 8) profits.

To simplify the analysis for oil, lump the costs together as a single item – cost to bring it to market. Thus the price of a barrel of oil consists of:
1) the underlying value of the oil -- say $1
2) the costs to bring it to market -- depends on the country
3) profit – depends on the amount of oil available relative to the demand for oil

Some oil producing countries are high cost producers, some are low cost, and some are in between. Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern countries are low cost producers. North Sea Oil is high cost. I don’t have exact cost information available, so I’ll continue the example with a heuristic. Assume:
1) Middle East is Low Cost, say $9
2) North Sea and US Gulf are High Cost, say $27
3) Others are Middle Cost, say $19

What happens when we look at the various oil producers under the scenarios created? We see that the Middle East can make money under any of the scenarios we have mentioned thus far. Similarly, consider the relative size of the reserves and the rate of extraction. The Middle East is the clear leader here. Having a price and capacity advantage provides an interest group, such as the OPEC cartel, the possibility to influence the price of oil. (Cartels influence prices by adjusting output. DeBeers is an example of another cartel.) This in turn, affects their profit. Though there is the possibility of cheating, being the low cost producer enables them to enforce their production targets.

Now that you have this information, you can begin to answer the original, rephrased, question: “If this is all about money then who benefits?”
1) Its unlikely it is about the oil, as the oil is only worth a few dollars per barrel
2) Maybe it is about the profits, as they can range from a few dollars to many dollars
3) Maybe it is about the dollars spent to bring the oil to market.

Done? No. Now consider the other interest groups again. Break them down by industry and political alliances. For example, the “Oil Industry” is not ****genous. Some groups within the industry may be in favor of one scenario or the other. French oil may have interests opposed to US oil. US oil firms may have interests opposed to each other. What do the airlines want to see in the price of oil? Do groups from different industries/countries have similar interests?

After this, then look at the relationships between business interests and the government interests (yes, governments have interest groups too). Are there alignments between interest groups, ideologies, components of the government administration, and, most importantly, actions? Describe in detail, not general terms, what actions were taken and how they benefit each interest group. What counter actions were taken by interest groups opposed? And so on…

At this point, then you can begin to formulate a reasonable argument, supported with reasonable analysis. However, it is unlikely that you will ever find the type of source information that you need to “prove” your point.

[NYerRoman]

Merry,
What? You're the only one who can show your diversified list? My list is just to impress you?
Love the cliché words you use. Neo-Marxist? Have you any idea what IPE theorists are or about? Conspiracy Theorist? That's a key word used a a put down.

Do I believe everything I hear? No. Do I believe anything Chomsky states or my professors for that matter? No.
I have mulled and distorted and beat myself over the head with all this stuff for years. What comes out after living here for such a long time is a different perspective and the obvious intransigence of the American mentality.

But since I share many beliefs as my profs and Noam, and since YOU have insisted to know where my thoughts have come from as a source to back it up b/c your essay critiques warrented them, I listed them. Then you derail me for mentioning them. I have an independent mind sir.

We Americans don't want to really admit that things are really bad, not the way we were taught in school, or God forbid not working. You try to see the US from the outside in an international context and see what is happening and being said and felt about America by diverse people, political scientists and gov'ts of the world. I can't just stand by and keep quiet. Things have to change on the int'l spectrum immediately.

I, a snot?....love that one. Whaddeva.

And oil prices have an elasticity effect. Change price Quantity changes immensely. The prices are thanks to not markets but the cartel OPEC I believe, no?

[Merryprankster]

Neo-Marxist in the classical sense, as unrelated relayed--a materialist. A person who believes that economic forces are THE driving forces in history. Not a pinko commie *******, in the McCarthian sense.

My "list," was in direct response to your assertion that people in the U.S. are U.S. media led sheep. I'm well aware of your international credentials. You keep taking such great pains to list them.

We Americans don't want to really admit that things are really bad, not the way we were taught in school, or God forbid not working. You try to see the US from the outside in an international context and see what is happening and being said and felt about America by diverse people, political scientists and gov'ts of the world. I can't just stand by and keep quiet. Things have to change on the int'l spectrum immediately.

Maybe YOU don't want to admit they're as bad as they are. I think they're pretty awful in many places. I also think they're a hell of a lot better than they were in the past thanks to human progression. I think blaming the United States and global capitalism for every single thing that happens that you don't agree with is indefensible, and ignores several hundred years of history in many cases. Arguing that we "have the power to change/fix things," is just the flip side to the argument that "the war is all about U.S. oil-government collective interests."

Glad you're an activist. Good for you.

I, a snot?....love that one. Whaddeva.

Yes, you, a snot. A pretentious elitist. It's pretty simple. You keep hammering home the same messages:

1. The United States and it's corporate interests are responsible for everything that ever was wrong with the entire planet, or ever will be.

2. If you don't agree with the above, then I need to educate you. What? STILL don't agree with me--oh, well, you either need to "open your eyes," to the truth or you're just not very smart.

It's a case of fundamental true-believerism if I ever saw one. Kinda like arguing with a Jehovah's Witness. Not too useful and it only convinces the Witness that you're going to hell, but hey, HE sees the light and is saved.

RE: OPEC--you're stuck in a 20 year old paradigm. Several oil-producing nations don't march in lock step to OPEC's will and the oil futures market was created to reduce cartel influence on prices. I admit they continue to wield a good chunk of power, but it's nowhere near what it once was. They literally had the world by it's balls years ago, but things are not so cut and dry now.

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Christopher M
Out of curiosity, what is the specific proposed mechanism for Bush's monetary gain from oil market changes due to the war?

Anyone... Bueller...?

[NYerRoman]

Ah Merry.
No need for name calling. I understood exactly what you meant the first time. But other IPE theorist claim the modern poli-eco developments on the same without having to label everything Marxist, you ********.

Just kidding. I hit the * key many times.

Yes, you, a snot. A pretentious elitist. It's pretty simple. You keep hammering home the same messages:

Cheers. Yes, b/c I believe it. I listen to other opinions. I know what happens in the world. I know the mecchanisms. But the base formula is exactly what I sustain.

Evils of the world:
- Poverty
- Environmental distruction
- War

Let's see...hmmm....what could cause these if not capitalistic ventures? Attenzione: Economic gain is the main cause of war.

Sorry to be so snotty. Just thinking about the world b/c it's getting really late for it.

baci

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by NYerRoman
Evils of the world:
- Poverty
- Environmental distruction
- War

Not having money is worse than illness, psychosis, loneliness, suicide, neglect, murder, torture, rape, child abuse, misery, lack of freedom, etc?

Originally posted by NYerRoman
Let's see...hmmm....what could cause these if not capitalistic ventures?

So people spending money is a greater cause of suffering than arrogance, ignorance, hatred, egotism, tribal thinking, prejudice, etc?

You seem to care an awful lot about money.

[red5angel]

hehe, haven't been to KFO in a week or two. Looks like I am missing all the fun.

NYRoman, you have to step back and take a deep look at your arguments, in style and substance. I think people are understanding your points, the problem is that you are making a lot of claims about yourself that just aren't being seen. For example, you claim to be listening to others opinions, however you have been extremely narrow minded in your approach and so vehement in your expression of your beliefs that I have a hard time feeling you can see beyond them at all. You're full of Anti-American sentiments, not because you oppose the war but because you make sweeping, broad, and ignorant statements about "americans" in general. I know a lot of different kinds of americans and I would think that being italian and from NYC you would understand that this country is huge melting pot of all different sorts of people. America is a big place and even from one end to the other things can change quickly, now throw in all the people not from here or whose parents aren't from here. Makes your sweeping generalizations look a little small doesn't it? am I to believe you are the only "enlightened" individual within our borders? I got news for you son, there is a lot you still get to learn. I say get because there is a lot you need to learn, a lot you will learn and a lot you going to get to learn, from all sorts of varied sources in and outside of the US. I would be thankful if I were you, not everyone gets those oppurtunities.
I've got news for you NYRoman, you may not like it either. You're an American. not only that but your the "American" you are so dusgusted by, except in my opinion, sort of a negative or opposite. You think you have America and it's needs and desires so nailed down and thoroughly understood that you now can't see past your own vision of the world. It's a tight noose you are weaving for yourself, do you really want to go down that road?

I think it's funny some people, including you NYRoman want to throw around their education as if that makes you more of something then someone else. You're education realy means nothing. Not if you haven't made something from it. I know plenty of college grads who are more dumb then a box of rocks. college education, so what. It's a question of how much you learned and how much you have expnaded your own mind, not what your paper says. You're as close minded and potentially as ignorant as the masses of Americans you claim can barely comprehend you viewpoint much less follow it. I say go ahead and grow up, open your own eyes and take a look around you. Take off the viewpoints you have solidified in your own mind and really take a look around you, at the people struggling to make a living. At the people trying to better themselves in some way, and the people who don't bother.

And before you get the urge to retort, let me get most of the basics out of the way. You'll claim to have done plenty of research so that your understanding of your beliefs is full and almost (because a smart man is always humble right?) foolproof since you have the education and read media sources outside of the US.
You'll also probably claim that your non US heritage really opens or has opened your eyes to american ignorance and close mindedness. Of course I have done a little travelling myself and funny thing that. Doesn't really seem to be a predominantly American trait.
Oh yeah, you might also claim, because they always do, that your sources are credible, most likely because you have done all sorts of research and establisjed their credibility. Of course what's credibility? Probably just an opinion...

Did I cover all the basics? Let's see, Education - not worth what you might think it is - check! Background and Heritage - everyone in the world has one, what makes yours better or different? - check! Intelligent, thoughtful seeking of credible sources - how do you define that again? Really? - Check!
Ok, go ahead, let em rip NYRoman Let's see what sort of man you really are now. I am not fighting facts, or sources or education, I am just challenging you to take a closer look at the way you view the world.

[NYerRoman]

You know, I hardly throw my education around. Forget it. I give a background regarding where I'm coming from. If I didn't say that, you'd attack me regardless for, I dunno, not being learned enough. You know something...you don't need a Masters to read and do research.

I don't generalize Americans. I generalize the structure and system which is the same.
Sure, ok. You claim I'm self-loathing b/c I don't agree with anything being shot out of the government mouthpiece. Many people don't. Not just me. Many people are getting frustrated. Not just me.

I have a point of view to defend. We are killing people right now. Do you not undestand that?

http://www.repubblica.it/gallerie/on...lla/index.html
http://www.repubblica.it/gallerie/on...ass/index.html
http://www.repubblica.it/gallerie/on...ass/index.html
http://www.repubblica.it/gallerie/on...ore/index.html
http://www.repubblica.it/gallerie/on...ato/index.html
http://www.repubblica.it/gallerie/on...sra/index.html

Take a freaking peek. This is war pal. Nah, it's about a dictator. Sure. We're going to help these people.

You know, fine. The War is cool. America has done **** but who cares, we can do what we want without worrying about the consequences. Sept. 11th, just idiots jealous of our wealth. Blah blah blah. I'm gonna just not question and challenge b/c I'm a good American who doesn't like to make waves.
OK. Thanks for showing me the light.

And Christopher M.
Those are societal problems. I agree with you on the list. I listed world-global problems.
So just make points with your pals and wave flags.
close. I'm done.