Durka-Durka-Muhammed-Jihad!!
Just one last mention of the 'gulag' in Gitmo - I promise.
Here's a stark comparison between the gulags of the Soviet Union and the Camp X-Ray in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba:
AMNESTY'S IDIOCYOkay....I think that just about settles that bag of cricket crap.
May 27, 2005 -- CAN it be? Did Amnesty International, which purports to be the world's leading independent monitor of human rights abuses, describe the U.S. facility at Guantanamo Bay as "the gulag of our times"?
Yes, it did. So let's do a few comparisons between Gitmo and the Gulag — the network of Soviet prison camps set up by Stalin in the 1920s.
Number of prisoners at Gitmo: approximately 600.
Number of prisoners in the Gulag: as many as 25 million, according to the peerless Gulag historian Anne Applebaum.
Number of camps at Gitmo: 1
Number of camps in the Gulag: At least 476, according to Applebaum.
Political purpose of Gulag: The suppression of internal dissent inside a totalitarian state.
Political purpose of Gitmo: The suppression of an international terrorist group that had attacked the United States, killing 3,000 people while attempting to decapitate the national government through the hijack of airplanes.
Financial purpose of Gulag: Providing totalitarian economy with millions of slave laborers.
Financial purpose of Gitmo: None.
Seizure of Gulag prisoners: From apartments, homes, street corners inside the Soviet Union.
Seizure of Gitmo prisoners: From battlefield sites in Afghanistan in the midst of war.
Oh wait - there IS one more mention: Fellow Cal Bear League member Rusty Shackleford at My Pet Jawa has a great in-depth comparison between Gitmo and the Soviet 'gulags'. Go check it out.
"All of this hubub could be solved by sticking to rule of law, something we tried our best to do
Read more in The FINAL Comparison on Gitmo
scroff said:
(I do more posting here than at my own site... what's up with that?)
You have some good p
Read more in The FINAL Comparison on Gitmo
Mad Mikey said:
They're not going to vote Democratic anyway and maybe if people "in the center" or "undecided"
Read more in The FINAL Comparison on Gitmo
scroff said:
Well, all of this hubbub could be solved by simply not taking prisoners
All of thi
Read more in The FINAL Comparison on Gitmo
Yogimus said:
Well, all of this hubbub could be solved by simply not taking prisoners.
Read more in The FINAL Comparison on Gitmoruthie: my intent for this (and other) posts about the Amnesia Int'l *cough* report was to point
Read more in The FINAL Comparison on Gitmo
Comments on The FINAL Comparison on Gitmo
Quite the credible organization. Here’s a short list of where some of there funds are funneled.
Truth be damned!
ARRIAGA, MARIA A, WASHINGTON,DC 20007
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL/DIRECTOR 7/29/2004
$1,000 to Kerry, John
ARRIAGA, MARIA A, WASHINGTON,DC 20007
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL/DIRECTOR 8/9/2004
$1,000 to Kerry, John
ARRIAGA, MARIA A, WASHINGTON,DC 20007
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL/DIRECTOR , 2/4/2004
$250 to Quigley, Lisa
BENESCH, SUSAN, WASHINGTON,DC 20009
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL 7/3/2004
$1,000, Kerry, John
BENESCH, SUSAN, WASHINGTON,DC 20009
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL/HUMAN RIGHTS, 10/26/2004
$750 Next PAC
BENESCH, SUSAN, WASHINGTON,DC 20009
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL/HUMAN RIGHTS, 9/16/2004
$500, Moveon.org
BENESCH, SUSAN, WASHINGTON,DC 20009
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL/HUMAN RIGHTS, 10/26/2004
$500 Next PAC
BENESCH, SUSAN, WASHINGTON,DC 20009
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL/REFUGEE 8/5/2004
$225 Moveon.org
BOTHNE, NANCY, CHICAGO,IL 60626
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL/MANAGEMENT 7/20/2004
$250 Kerry, John
DIXON, HUBERT E MR III BOWIE,MD 20715
AMNESTY INTERNATIONA/CENTER OF COMM 9/29/2004
$225 DNC Services Corp
Rosenthal, Mila Mrs New York,NY 10011
AMNESTY INT. USA 8/6/2004
$333 Kerry, John
Schneider, Karen Bethesda,MD 20817
Amnesty International 7/11/2004
$300 Kerry, John
SCHULTZ, WILLIAM F HALESITE,NY 11743
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL 3/28/2003
$250 Leahy, Patrick
SCHULZ, WILLIAM HUNTINGTON,NY 11743
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL/CHAIRMAN 5/27/2004
$2,000 Kerry, John
SCHULZ, WILLIAM F HUNTINGTON,NY 11743
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL 5/2/2004
$1,000 Kennedy, Edward M
SHULTZ, WILLIAM HALESITE,NY 11743
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL USA 9/13/2004
$250 Democratic Senatorial Campaign Cmte
SHUTTZ, WILLIAM HUNTINGDON BAY,NY 11743
|| Posted by Gordon the Magnificent, June 2, 2005 07:58 PM ||AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL 10/21/2004
$200 Democratic Senatorial Campaign Cmte
Uh huh. You'd expect people who have concern about human rights to donate money to the Bush Cartel? Right. That post was like saying "Look! An organization that cares about people is donating to the leftys!" Another one for the no-shit hall of fame.
As far as the report, it said "of our times", not of the 1920's. Interesting how you guys have to go all the way back to the 1920's to find something worse. I would have thought Hitler's concentration camps would have done it.
The Supreme Court, the same one that you all loved when it selected Bush in 2000, became 'activist judges' in June 2004 when they ruled that U.S. Courts had jurisdiction to hear cases in gitmo and that those held by the US must be afforded an opportunity to contest their detention. Of course Rumsfeld came back with the CSRT to assess whether or not each detainee is indeed an 'enemy combatant'. What do you suppose that means? It means that, aside from some assholes opinion, we don't know who is or who isn't an 'enemy combatant'. The CSRT has no basis in any law and is being used by the Bush Cartel to hold onto people that should have been released at the end of hostilities between the US and the Taliban in 2002. Or they should be brought up on formal charges. But fuck it, the law doesn't count for shit anymore in what used to be known as America.
|| Posted by scroff, June 3, 2005 08:27 PM ||Funny how everyone is ready to talk shit about amnesty Intl., yet rumsfeld was sure busy quoting their findings when it served his purpose. jeez.
|| Posted by ruthie, June 3, 2005 11:20 PM ||ruthie: my intent for this (and other) posts about the Amnesia Int'l *cough* report was to point out that in issuing this report and asserting the 'gulag' comparison that they've now rendered themselves a clown organization....much like the UN.
In their quest for a huge headline, they missed the point of why they issue such reports.
Now no one will give them much ado about anything and it'll be interesting to see how their fundraising is affected in the next few months....
|| Posted by Mad Mikey, June 4, 2005 02:18 PM ||Well, all of this hubbub could be solved by simply not taking prisoners.
|| Posted by Yogimus, June 4, 2005 05:32 PM ||Well, all of this hubbub could be solved by simply not taking prisoners
All of this hubub could be solved by sticking to rule of law, something we tried our best to do for many decades.
I don't think the people who will be offended by Amnesty Int's comments are the same ones who will be donating to them, anyway. Personally, I understood the analogy, and was able to get that they didn't mean gulag as in Soviet gulag. It would be like me saying my 64 corvette really flies and some right winger saying "What an idiot! He thinks he can fly!" No more than I've come to expect, mind you.
Makes me think about watching Dean the other day when Wolf asked him about his I hate Republicans statement. If I was him I would have said "You're damn right I hate republicans." and then gone on about how fucked up some prominent republicans, the religious right and conservative christian agenda are. I mean who cares if republicans get pissed off? They're not going to vote Democratic anyway and maybe if people "in the center" or "undecided" see someone with some balls they might be persuaded to listen.
|| Posted by scroff, June 5, 2005 01:24 AM ||They're not going to vote Democratic anyway and maybe if people "in the center" or "undecided" see someone with some balls they might be persuaded to listen.
And that will be the next set of nails in the coffin of the Dems in 2006 and 2008.
Even with a massive voter turn out Kerry wasn't elected (let's not talk about the voting machines cause IMO it's a dead issue) and I don't think there will be 4 million new voters by that time and if there were, they're not all gonna vote Democratic.
You're right: Dean's stupid comments - and there's a LOT of them lately - aren't going to sway center voters. But it WILL piss off some Democrats that actually try to view Republicans as merely a different voting block and not rich white men that push old ladies down stairs to steal their walkers.
Just seems to me....that if you're in the business of swaying voters to vote for your candidate (whomever they might be) that instead of merely castigating about what 'morons' Republicans are that you might actually try to show why your candidate is better - not why the Republicans are worse.
But in all let Dean chomp on his feet for a while....2006 will show that more and more (IMHO) people will grown tired of his crap and put more Republicans into Congress....
|| Posted by Mad Mikey, June 5, 2005 09:34 AM ||(I do more posting here than at my own site... what's up with that?)
You have some good points, but IMNSHO, people are going to get tired of hearing about Republicans wanting to ban books and provocative cheerleading and the whole christian conservative agenda and vote democrat... if the dems can show they have some backbone to do what they think is right. That is if the liberal media would report on this stuff rather than Deans comments. What's interesting is that what you said about "merely castigating about what 'morons' [Democrats] are that you might actually try to show why your candidate is better - not why the [Democrats] are worse" is exactly how the republicans got elected.
|| Posted by scroff, June 5, 2005 01:01 PM ||"All of this hubub could be solved by sticking to rule of law, something we tried our best to do for many decades."
Rule of law states that any individual fighting out of uniform is to be shot. Which is what I propose.
As for the republican vs democrat politician debate:
One wants to legislate how you speak, the other wants to legislate how you fuck. BOTH should be chased into the seas. Indian style.
It is truly sad that 99% of the people share 99% political views, and our politicians live to generate animosity over that 1%, because they can't or DON'T want to solve the 99% of issues affecting EVERYONE.
|| Posted by Yogimus, June 5, 2005 07:29 PM ||