Warning: Very Very Graphic

[WilliamPitt]

No one excuses the executioners of Paul Johnson. The murder of a helpless human being is barbaric by any definition, and no God I could ever give credence to would order such a monstrous act, either directly or by inference in a holy text.



But if you find the photos of Johnson's body horrifying...



Understand that you have seen but one picture of death.



Understand that the barbarism done to him...



Pales incomparison to what our country has done.



No one can excuse the murder of Paul Johnson...



But if 9/11 has taught us anything...





It teaches us that actions...



Have consequences.

These are not even close to the worst pictures documenting what we have done.

No one excuses the killers of Paul Johnson. But if the fact that he was killed surprises you, I suggest you have been made comfortable by the thousands of miles that separate you from the brutality your government has visited upon other innocents.

Brutality begets brutality. Murder begets murder.

[redqueen]

1. Thank you

:cry:

[Insider]

2. murder begets murder

exactly. and all lives are precious.

[LynzM]

3. Wow, Will.

Awful, and I'm sure by no means the worst of what's (captured on film) out there... The actions we perpetuate, as humans, against each other, are truly horrific.

[seemslikeadream]

4. BUSH'S PLAN FOR PEACE IS THE PEACE OF THE COMMON GRAVE

EVERY DEATH CREATES NEW ENEMIES
MORE TERRORISTS
MORE DANGER
MORE DEATH
AND REMEMBER...

HE IS JUST GETTING STARTED...

BUSH'S PLAN FOR PEACE
IS THE PEACE OF THE COMMON GRAVE

http://www.bushflash.com/pax.html WATCH THIS VIDEO


Wumpscut
Totmacher

sie ahnten nichts von mir
von meiner wilden gier
doch als du kamst zu mir
da wurde ich ein tier
kein gedanke an danach
als ich dir die knochen brach

tot tot tot ich mache dich tot
tot tot tot von blut alles rot

tot

fuer mein naechstes leben
schoepfe ich neue kraft
ich bin dem toeten ergeben
in der einzelhaft

tot tot tot ich mache dich tot
tot tot tot von blut alles rot
tot tot tot ich mache dich tot
tot tot tot von blut alles rot

ein dahinsichen
von gottes hand
ich kann dich riechen
und das denken verschwand

tot tot tot tot tot tot tot ich mache dich tot
tot tot tot von blut alles rot tot tot tot tot

ich mache dich tot ich mache dich tot
ich mache dich tot ich mache dich tot

sag mir was du willst
dass du meine sehnsucht stillst
ich mache dich tot fuer immerdar
von blut alles rot auf gottes altar

tot tot tot ich mache dich tot
tot tot tot von blut alles rot

ich mache dich tot fuer immerdar
ich mache dich tot glaub mir es ist wahr
ich mache dich tot fuer immerdar
ich mache dich tot auf gottes altar


TRANSLATION

Wumpscut - Deadmaker

They didn't expect me
never expected my wild lust
I turned into an animal
No thought about afterwards
When I broke your bones

Dead, dead, dead I make you dead
Dead, dead, dead stained from blood so red

Dead

For my next life (life after death in the religious sense)
I get the power I need
I’m a slave to the killing
In solitary confinement

("einzelhaft" (solitary confinment) has become part of the german vocabulary after the terrorist attacks of the Red Army Fraction during the 70's. It's used for people in prison, who are put into complete isolation not just from other people, but from all kinds of information. It's what might be known in the US as "sensual deprivation", a kind of torture-technique to destroy people's self.)

Dead, dead, dead I make you dead
Dead, dead, dead stained from blood so red
Dead, dead, dead I make you dead
Dead, dead, dead stained from blood so red

Wasting away
By God’s hand
I can smell you
And my thought disappeared

Dead, dead, dead I make you dead
Dead, dead, dead stained from blood so red
Dead, dead, dead, dead

I make you dead I make you dead
I make you dead I make you dead

Tell me what you want
That you fill my longing (that you satisfy my desire)
I make you dead for evermore
God’s altar stained from blood so red

Dead, dead, dead I make you dead
Dead, dead, dead stained from blood so red

I make you dead for evermore
I make you dead believe me its true
I make you dead for evermore
I make you dead on God’s altar

[LifeDuringWartime]

106. havent heard that band in awhile

and i didnt know what the words meant! thanks!

[stevedeshazer]

5. We gotta get out of this mess.

We gotta.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

6. exactly,.when one lives in the domain of reaction then every action cause

an equal and opposite action...one rock hit another and the other one moves

[Beetwasher]

7. Be Prepared For

"Well, they killed 3,000 of us on 9/11!!!" :eyes:

There, I pre-empted all the idiots who will say that, and the answer to that idiocy:

And we invaded Afghanistan for that one...What did Iraq have to do w/ it?

[qb]

8. Images like this need to be shown

whenever some idiot asks, "Why do they hate us?"

[RebelOne]

91. Well, they sure won't be shown in the media.

[montanacowboy]

9. If only our media could

run this on the 6:00 pm news - if only America could see this -

My head is spinning off to to Pluto

[tnlefty]

10. Thanks for putting these images together. Lynne Cheney will have some-

one sent to visit you soon.;-)

[donhakman]

13. One small correction

The first photo was photoshopped.
The original photo shows the girl's right foot intact.

I know because I researched that photo and wrote a verse to it
that eventually got me banned from an art website caled renderosity.com

[WilliamPitt]

23. Do you have a link to corroborate this?

[ThirdWheelLegend]

38. Will don't you understand?

All those killings, maimings... just propagandistic journalism.

Most of those pictures had the flowers and chocolate candies photo shopped out of them..!

TWL

[bpilgrim]

35. gotta link?

i saw the picture when it first came out and have NEVER seen that claim made before.

btw: there PLENTY MORE where that came from.

peace

[Media_Lies_Daily]

72. If I remember correctly, there were two photos of girls who appeared....

...to be about the same age and looked very similar. One had her foot pretty well blown off as depicted in the photo Will linked, and one did not.

I don't recall any reference to either photo being digitally altered. That doesn't mean it wasn't done...it just means that I don't recall any reference to it.

[RapidCreek]

105. BULLSHIT

Robert Fisk took the photo...and no it was not photoshoped.

RC

[outinforce]

11. "Murder Begets Murder"?

Where is this written?

This sounds like what those who would attempt to justify capital punishment might say.

Murder begets lots of things -- sorrow, pain, grief, rage.

But murder is not the result of murder.

Lots of people every day lose their loved ones to acts of murder.

But they do not go out and murder others.

Perhaps I have mis-interpreted what you have said here, but it does rather appear to me as though you are badly mistaken when you suggest that murder begets murder.

It does no such thing.

[WilliamPitt]

15. I'm through trying to explain very simple things to you

Except to say this: The people who justify capital punishment NEVER argue that murder begets murder. People against capital punishment say that.

Look at Israel and Palestine for a very basic tutorial on how murder begets murder, death begets death, vengeance begets vengeance, and the cycle never stops.

[outinforce]

27. Gee.

I'm Sorry.

It appears I have brought into question some of your deeply-held beliefs.

For that, my most sincere apologies.

My point about capital punishment was that peopkle against capital punishment often say that murder by an individual begets murder by the state -- and that that is barbaric.

And I think that opponents of capital punishment also say that the murder by the state begets more murders by individuals.

But perhaps I have this all wrong.

In any event, my apologies once again for not agreeing with everything you said. I realize just how wrong it was of me to do that.

[WilliamPitt]

29. Right. That's it.

"An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind." - Ghandi

[Just Me]

43. Some don't want to "see",...sadly. n/t

[outinforce]

51. And Just Who

might you be meaning there?

[Just Me]

55. What is your vision of humanity? n/t

[outinforce]

65. My Vision Of Humanity??

I'd like to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony.

Love makes the world go round.

I'm afraid you'll have to be more specific if you want more than that.

[Just Me]

75. So, you haven't defined your own vision of humanity.

Is that what you are saying?

You have to have someone else do it for you?

Is that what you mean?

Seriously, you really have NO vision of humanity,...really?

[outinforce]

92. No.

It's just that one's (or at least my) vision of humanity is rather big.

And I'm not quite sure what you mean when you use that term.

Do you mean "Where do you think humanity is headed?"

Do you mean "Where would you like to dream that humanity is headed?"

Do you mean "What do you consider the basic, unchangable characteristics of humanity to be?"

Do you mean "Where do you see humanity's place in the universe"?

The answers to each of those questions would be rather long.

I just would like some clue as to what it is that you mean when you ask the question.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[outinforce]

36. I Am So Sorry

That I have offended you, oh my sovereign.

I will try to get over myself.

My queen.

[redqueen]

44. deleted

what's the use?

[outinforce]

47. No, No, No

my Queen.

My only desire is not to offend you.

(Well, not my only desire. There are others here who I desire not to offend).

But you have demanded of me, My Royal Queen, that I "get over myself".

And so I shall endeavor.

My Queen

((bowing and scraping and backing up))

[smirkymonkey]

62. Well, at least it seems that you've learned

your place, at last.

[outinforce]

66. Yes.

I am mere scum.

Bilous, fetid, putrid scum.

I dare challenge the deeply-held views of some, and I am told by the Queen to get over myself.

I am still working on that.

Please excuse me.

[seemslikeadream]

70. redqueen

:toast:

[Shakespeare]

25. Let me recommend a book to you.

Rene Girard's Violence and the Sacred. It's an excellent examination of the cycle of violence throughout history. It might temper your opinion that murder does not beget murder. Murder does not have to beget murder, but it can and frequently does.

[outinforce]

33. Without Reading This Book,

perhaps you could explain something to me.

If person "A" murders person "B", who is related to person "C",

and then if person "C", enraged by person "B's" murder, murders person "A",

who is responsible for person "A's" murder?

Is the murder of person "B" responsible for person "A's" murder?

[Just Me]

46. Since they have all lost either their life or freedom, who cares?

Will we learn from their weaknesses,...or die figuring who is right in such ill-begotten, worthless battles?

[outinforce]

50. What About

person "C".

S/he is still around and free.

[Just Me]

54. NO. S/He is a murderer. Therefore, s/he has lost freedom, yes? n/t

[Shakespeare]

53. I think you just got tangled up in your own argument.

Let's not be obtuse.

Person A = Bush

Person B = innocent Iraqis/Arabs/miscellaneous victims

Person C = Saudi terrorists

You've left out the necessary "D," which would be all of us who constitute America, on whose behalf Bush presumes to act.

So, the accurate anology would be person A kills person B; person C, who is "related" (perhaps "affiliated" would be a better word?) to B, is outraged and kills D, who is "related" to A.

Looking at the causal relationships, person A is partially at fault for instigating the cycle. Which brings us back to Will's original point.

So, I'm afraid I don't understand your confusion.

[Hutzpa]

59. Bravo Bravo Bravo

very well explained.

:thumbsup:

[Just Me]

61. *LOL* I do believe you understand that confusion better than,...

,..the confiscator of confusion *LOL*.

:bounce:

Hilarious!!!

[outinforce]

63. I Pose A Hypothetical

and you jump to a conclusion.

My hypothetical about persons "A", "B", and "C" was just that -- a hypothetical.

It was nothing more than to see what the book you were recommending I read had to say about murder begetting murder.

You assumed, erroneously, that my question had to do with the situation concerning the Middle East.

I have, I think, refrained from ever using the word "snarky".

Until now.

I think your reply was snarky.

I do not doubt that the book you are recommending says that "A" bears some responsibility.

But I notice you do not comment on "C" at all.

"C" is, in my hypothetical, a free agent.

S/he can either act on her/his emotions which result from the murder of "B" or not. And, if "C" chooses to act upon those emotions, there are a number of way in which s/he can act. Murder of "A" is but one such action.

The "confusion", as you choose to call it, that I have is that, for me, the phrase "Murder begets murder" implies a certain inevitabliity to murder -- that murder in and of itself causes others to lose their control. "C" murders "A" because s/he has no other choice -- murder begets murder.

It also implies, to me, that any murder is the result of some other murder. Or that "A" must have murdered because some unknown person murdered someone close to "A". "A's" murderous actions must, if murder begets murder, have been caused by some other murder.

In all of this, the m oral agency of the murderers gets swallowed up in "murders begetting murders".

PEOPLE commit murders. People are free to commit murder or not. There is, to my way of thinking, nothing inevitable about one murder causing another.

That is my point.

But I apologize, since it seems as this point challenges the deeply-held beliefs of many who have posted to, and initiated, this thread.

[Shakespeare]

68. Snarky? I don't dislike that. However....

...you can make non sequitur hypotheticals all day long, but we both know what this thread is about, and your own snarkiness is duly noted.

No one is excusing the man's executioners or suggesting that they're not responsible, but to ignore causes that go back beyond the events of the last few days is arrogant folly on our part. This did not happen in a vacuum.

[Just Me]

77. US commercials tie small-time pot-smokers to killers *LOL*!!!

[Beetwasher]

96. Oh The Tangled Webs You Weave! LOL!!

"It also implies, to me, that any murder is the result of some other murder. Or that "A" must have murdered because some unknown person murdered someone close to "A". "A's" murderous actions must, if murder begets murder, have been caused by some other murder."

You do realize of course, that the US's murder of the people of Iraq was UNINSTIGATED. There was NO "some other murder" to get it started. We instigate the "some other murder". We had already invaded Afghanistan to "avenge" 9/11 and Iraq was NOT connected and the had NO WMD's. They were INNOCENT. That's where your little analogy breaks down.

We murdered first. It begot more and worse. And so on.

You initial premise is totally flawed. Because something nonsensical is implied to you, all the rest must follow. There certainly CAN be and often IS a "first" murder, as it were.

[JohnLocke]

84. One more clarification.

Person A = Neoconservitive Leadership
Person B = Iraqi/Arab/miscellaneous victims
Person C = Terrorists
Person D = Americans

1. C kills D
2. A kills B
3. C plus B (who becomes C) kills D

And so on...

[Bjornsdotter]

78. I know the Answer!!!!

Hi,


The answer is Clinton, because he's to blame for everything!

Kim

[outinforce]

90. Blaming

Clinton for everything makes about as much sense as blaming * for everything.

Nothing is quite that simple, I'm afraid.

[Bjornsdotter]

93. No...

No, it's always simple to blame someone....it's a lot harder to prove it.

Kim

[Media_Lies_Daily]

74. IMHO, you're the one that's sadly mistaken. I'm beginning to believe....

...that you live in an isolated wilderness of some sort where one is not exposed to the messy intrusions of reality.

[LibertyorDeath]

104. outinforce You ever been to Northern Ireland

You know what sectarian violence is.

"murder begets murder It does no such thing"

You know any history at all

What the fuck are you talking about "It does no such thing"

Does the concept of Revenge escape you.

Are all of your posts this fucking obtuse

"It does no such thing"

Are you touched or what????????

[Macadian]

12. Excellent points, but................

No doubt we reaping what we have sown.

But I think its important to remember a significant difference.

Where possible, our soldiers try NOT to inflict harm on innocents such as you show above. I know that our soldiers feel horrible that children are harmed and make every attempt to not harm them.

Our soldiers take no joy when innocents are harmed.

Contrast this with the purposeful joy that Paul Johnsons killers take in beheading him. They intentionally killed and mutilated him. None of the people graphically pictured above were intentionally killed or mutilated.

Even so, I do thank you for posting those pics. Its important to remember that war is an ugly thing.

[WilliamPitt]

16. I never said they did

But it happens.

[Nadienne]

24. I have no doubt that our soldiers would not deliberately

harm children... at least for the most part. (I suppose it is possible that there are a few who would willing do it, maybe a few who would eagerly do it.)

But, geez, how can they live with themselves after doing such a thing?

I imagine they don't sleep well at night...

[redqueen]

41. "I imagine they don't sleep well at night... "

They probably don't, no...

"I Killed Innocent People... I had to say something"

[mzmolly]

31. Abu Ghraib ...

is an example of our soldiers taking pleasure in the abuse/torture and even murder of innocents.

War does ugly things to people. Even people who started out *good*.

These people will live with what we have done for decades, and so will we.

[redqueen]

48. Someone said

I don't remember where I heard it... I think it was some call-in show... but the comment struck me. He said in regards to the Abu Ghraib torture scandal, 'We're making monsters over there, and they have to come back home.' I wonder how it will go for them, trying to live a normal life again.

[mzmolly]

49. I fear it will go much like Vietnam. They'll be tomorrows forgotten

veterans. :(

[joe_sixpack]

86. Abu Ghraib....

is an example of a few, sick twisted members of our military who engaged in unacceptable behavior that the rest of us in the military would never condone. By no means do they represent the majority of those who serve.

[markses]

56. Cold comfort, and probably false in many cases

"Our soldiers do not intend to harm innocents..."

This is a load of shit, on at least two levels.

1) Supposing it is strictly speaking true with respect to each US soldier - In this case, the question of an individual's intentions may very well be beside the point. Our government knows going in that many innocent people will die, regardless of any and all careful calculations to prevent it. They know that innocent death is a necessity. Military and government know this in advance, and proceed with the action anyway. Whether any particualr death was "intended"{ is a distinction without a difference, then, since the intended action carries innocent deaths as a necessary consequence.

2) We do not know if this is true in all cases - Why does this matter? If it was untrue in 3 cases (just three!), we would have the murder of Daniel Pearl, Nick Berg, and Paul Johnson on the other side. Three cases. Now, it is of course a wonderfully self-serving ideological exercise to pretend that our troops are golden and innocent, at the same time that they're brutal killers of our enemies (no quarter, hoo-ahh), but it is an ideological operation from start to finish. If anything, we know that some (existential quantifier) of our soldier in fact did take joy in the deaths of prisoner. We even have photos of triumphant smiling joy. So the nonsense about "intention" is wrong both in principle and in fact.

That the people murdered and mutliated in WillPitt's pictures were not "intentionally" killed or mutilated 1) cannot be shown, but only speculated on (i.e., you don't know whether a soldier, Marine or airman decided to show the Haji's a little firepower, and laughed about it afterward) and 2) doesn't matter in any case, since the war planners knew this would be a necessary result of their intended actions, and continued on - even showing joy. Besides, to say that many millions of Americans weren't joyful at the site of shock and awe is false. You know it and I know it. People cheered the falling bombs. How are they different, these sportsbar murderers. Because they don't have to smell the burning flesh and feel the blood spatters? One could easily argue that these people are far worse than those who murder with their own hands, and at least own their savage joy.

[smirkymonkey]

64. Ummm... Did you by any chance see the Abu Ghraib

photographs?? Just wondering.

[JohnLocke]

85. Not all of the soldiers are like that.

That is mostly the administration's fault.

[smirkymonkey]

87. I agree. I also think war brings out

the sickness in people that might otherwise not become manifest.

I guess I am reacting to the "we are all good/they are all bad" dichotomy. Human beings are complex, regardless of their race or nationality.

[JohnLocke]

89. Agreed.

People are complex.

[Tosca]

79. Load of poopie doo

/Contrast this with the purposeful joy that Paul Johnsons
/killers take in beheading him. They intentionally killed
/and mutilated him. None of the people graphically pictured
/above were intentionally killed or mutilated.

Who the fuck cares if they were intentionly or nonintentionly killed?
THEY'RE DEAD. THAT IS WAR. Get it through your head.

If you're burnt to death or beheaded, it's really the same thing.

You're dead.

[Eric J in MN]

80. After the US killed 40 people who attended a wedding

After the US killed 40 people who attended a wedding, there was no apology.

Not even an admission of the truth.

Just the continued insistence in spite of witness and video testimony that there was no wedding, and there may have been a party, but "bad people have parties, too."

If the US is sorry about killing 40 innocent people, why the lies?

[Karenina]

82. I do understand how invested you are

in the "WE GOOD/ THEY BAD" myth. However it IS a myth. There is no contrast, nor is there any need for comparison.

"...our soldiers try NOT to inflict harm on innocents such as you show above."

That is a LIE according to accounts from Iraqi neighbors. It's SIMPLY A LIE. A DISGUSTING, FETID, PUTRID LIE.

The reason there are so many returning to the U.S. completely unable to function anymore is that their parents raised them right and they CANNOT square their experiences in Iraq with their core values. However the "volunteer army" is heavily populated with those who were, by their economic status, denied opportunity. They grew up in surroundings where "beaners, niggers and slants" were the ones who stood in the way of their advancement. Put them in an authoritarian environment, brainwash them to kill, pipe in a little Rush 24/7 and you get a VERY NASTY brew. I daresay that when the BRITISH Royal Command starts complaining about racist behaviour, there is indeed a SERIOUS PROBLEM.

"Our soldiers take no joy when innocents are harmed."

Have you not seen the "torture photos?" If not, I suggest you take a look at the "thumbs up" of a few "bad apples."

YES, ALL OF THOSE PICTURED ABOVE WERE INTENTIONALLY MUTILATED AND MURDERED to provide America its OIL fix and establish "facts on the ground."

But an "innocent American" was beheaded in SAUDI ARABIA! I feel your pain. This happened in SAUDI ARABIA so it must be time to kill some more Iraqis. They MUST HAVE HAD something to do with it! I know! it was Al-WHATEVER! The TIE that binds them all!

[LibertyorDeath]

103. "Our soldiers take no joy when innocents are harmed"

Would you bet on that

The Marine's tale: 'We killed 30 civilians in six weeks. I felt we were committing genocide'
By Natasha Saulnier

23 May 2004

During 12 years in the US Marines, including three years putting new recruits through boot camp, Staff Sergeant Jimmy Massey hardly questioned his role. But what he saw in Iraq changed that.

"In a month and a half my platoon and I killed more than 30 civilians," Mr Massey said. He saw bodies being desecrated and robbed, and wounded civilians being dumped by the roadside without medical treatment. After he told his commanding officer that he felt "we were committing genocide", he was called a "wimp".

Mr Massey, who was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress and depression, left the Marines in November. Back home in the Smoky Mountains of North Carolina, he says the cause of the uprising in Iraq is that "we killed a lot of innocent people".

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=523992

[buff2]

14. OMG.......

This is awful. I didn't think I could hate bu$h anymore than I already have,but now I'm finding it's even stronger than before. That horrible evil SOB has GOT TO GO!

[Tosca]

17. No words.

[G_j]

18. it is a shame people need reminding, but thank you n/t

[donhakman]

20. Cudos William Pitt

as you say, it happens

[Malva Zebrina]

19. I never have been comfortable with it at all

I have been in a severe angst every since the first bomb fell.

In Rockland Maine, the very snooty Farnsworth Museum, is featuring Barbara Bush on one day in this month--she will grace Rockland Maine, a halfway tourist and halfway working coastal town, at the Farnsworth Museum, to promote the Barbara Bush reading damn thing or whatever the hell it is that carries her name and promotes her as a lover of children.

I wrote to the curator of that veddy veddy high class museum, voicing objection to having this woman, this mother of a monster now in our house in Washingtonl, read to children there.

I quoted the Barbara Bush snotty and supercilious utterance on Morning America about her "beautiful mind"

The curator replied and said he or she (name was Chris) did not know if that quote was correct and I immediately wrote back citing the Michael Moore Palme D'OR winner documentary, which featured the hag in that quote and even suggested they show the Cannes winner in their museum.

Then I sent them the pictures of the suffering children that her son either killed or maimed for no good reason, and repeated the quote.

I sent them those pictures.

If I were more organized I would organize a protest against this despicable mother of a despicable devil named George, whose beautiful mind cannot be bothered with the images of the flag draped caskets of American soldiers returning at last, to their families and to their home after her son sent them on lies to their death.

She has the nerve to appear before little children, and read to them, and touting herself as a lover of children or their reading capabilities while her beloved, evil son is killing children and has killed children at the rate of a true despicable and evil leader.

[donhakman]

39. good for you Marianne

n/t

[Walt Starr]

21. and some DARE to call it "collateral damage"

Fucking burns me up!

[merh]

an eye for an eye...

Thank you for the reminder.:cry:

[Misunderestimator]

22. Thank you.

[Screaming Lord Byron]

26. Well done, Will. A good insight into the heart of darkness.

All this violence is grotesque. Those responsible will pay.

[kcwayne]

52. Those responsible don't pay, those NOT responsible will pay

and therein lies the great injustice. What will Bush's payment be? How about Al Queda? The barbarians act with impunity, and the innocent die on their behalf.

[Screaming Lord Byron]

98. True. My words were of hope for ultimate justice.

Your scenario is much more likely.

[Nadienne]

28. That first girl

looks a little bit like my niece.

Someone will miss her very, very much.

[BlueEyedSon]

30. Damn f'ing right.

[mopaul]

32. thank you..........n/t

[Just Me]

37. *cry*,...I know,...I know,...

,...violence never ever works.

:cry:

[lovedems]

40. I am not surprised, I am sad.

As a mother, you don't know how seeing those pictures touched a nerve.

If it was one of my children or my friends children or friends of my children, etc. I would hate the occupier with every ounce of my being and I would fight and I would die to protect those around me from the atrocities that I see above.

I will never understand how this war can be supported. NEVER.

[OKNancy]

42. Here is my take on it

On a purely political view....that it is not only that Bush and Co. caused the climate, it is that, as Wes Clark and others have said, that by going to Iraq and wasting our efforts and blood there, we are not devoting ourselves to the true "enemy"...Al Queda.

Once again the Saudi's murder someone, and the idiots are saying
"nuke Iraq".

[LittleApple81]

45. Daily, Iraqis die. And it does not even cause a ripple on the press.

Thanks for giving us a sense of proportion. ALL DEATHS involved in a war like this are horrible.

[Amaya]

57. Freedom and democracy American style

What madness :(

[latebloomer]

58. That beautiful child

All Americans should see what is being done in our name.

[Magleetis]

60. Hate cannot

kill hate. Only love can kill hate.

[Darth_Kitten]

67. This is NEVER any excuse to kill.......

no innocent human being deserves to die......I am shocked and disgusted that he was killed, but the murderers are just vicious thugs.....they don't need many "reasons" to choose to take a life.

[WilliamPitt]

69. "Thugs"

This is the word the media uses. Perhaps it is appropriate, but are you comfortable applying that word to the people who caused what I have posted above?

If not, why not?

[spanone]

71. It's a sad, cruel, sick, fucked up world and mr. bush* has brought out the

worse in man.

[bleedingheart]

73. Funny how Bush keeps forgetting the words of Jesus

"You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you." (Matthew 5:38-42, NIV) But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you"

http://www.fact-index.com/t/tu/turn_the_other_cheek.html

Now I am not advocating that the people who killed Mr. Johnson should not be punished but we have to realize that this is not just a simple act as some on this board appear to think. Mr Johnson was working for Lockheed Martin in Saudi Arabia. He was an American in a country that is hostile to Western culture and ideas. Unfortunately Mr. Johnson was also in a country where a number of people are angry about the US war in Iraq and they resent the US and its policies.

I feel bad for Mr. Johnson and I send my condolences to his family but let us not forget that...

1. The US has allowed the Saudi Royal family to leech its country's oil wealth into its coffers and those of the Bush family...
2. The US has stood by as the Saudis have played both sides of the fence (Wahhabism vs Appeasing US interests) mostly to aid the oil interests in Saudi Arabia...
3. Mr. Bush started an unnecessary war with Iraq igniting the smoldering hatred of many who have harbored ill will towards us for a long time. In fact the WTC disaster was Bin Laden's well thought out plan to hit the US back for the original Iraq war and the US presence in Saudi Arabia...so by starting a war with Iraq it wasn't so much an eye for an eye as it was a leg and an arm for an eye.

So sadly Mr. Johnson is now dead because of this malignant situation and there will unfortunately be many many more...

[seabeyond]

76. powerful, thank you for sharing

yes

[Eric J in MN]

81. What is the second photo of? nt

nt

[WilliamPitt]

83. .

[Pobeka]

88. A picture is worth a thousand words.

We (u.s.a. neoconimaniacs) can't even tell our citizens honestly the abstraction of just how many innocent Iraqi's have died for Bush's lie.

They're scared to death to show in pictures even a small fraction of those innocents -- my god, they're humans!

Thanks for the 9000 words.

[AngryWhiteLiberal]

94. Bush deserves his own lower level of Hell. n/t

JB

[onecitizen]

95. I was a trauma nurse for years.........

and have seen it all. But THIS, even got to ME. We act like everything we do is so righteous, please forgive us.

[Rebellious Republican]

97. Hey Will did'nt I post those on another thread of yours sometime

back?
:toast:

[RapidCreek]

108. I did....

a few of the ones appearing here and some others....in response to a similar thread of Wills asking "Would this happen under a Kerry Administration?".

Oddly, a few of Willy's fan club suggested that I was taking terrible advantage of peoples visceral reaction to violent depictions. They compared me with the Anti-Abortion crowd. That same fan club is now extolling the virtues of this post.

In fact one of them complained and had my thread locked.

Sycophants are so damned disgusting.

RC

[Rebellious Republican]

111. Yes, that was the same thread that I posted several of those....

they must be a compilation of both ours. Whats even odder, I did not get a single reply.
:shrug:

[newsguyatl]

99. an ironically beautiful post will.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

100. now that's what i call a PERSPECTIVE!

[FemaleDemfromMass]

101. Thank you

for showing these photos, I cry for the innocent ones who suffer or have died because of Bush.

[WilliamPitt]

102. .

[RapidCreek]

107. My oh my....what an original post Will!

Gotta wonder where the outrage is from your fan club.


RC

[Andy_Stephenson]

109. Peace Brother

peace.

[Disturbed]

110. Beheading

Are people outraged because this man was beheaded?

Saudi Arabia beheads people as a matter of course. It is their policy.
No one has protested this policy before that I recall. I am not excusing this murder just pointing out that this manner of execution is not unusual in Saudi Arabia. GW Bush and others saying that it is barbaric now in disenginous because as an ally to the US, Saudis have been practicing this method of execution for many years and most people in Govt. are aware of that.

A book I recommend highly: War is a Force That Gives Us Meaning

Chris Hedges has been a war reporter for the past 15 years, most recently for The New York Times. His book, War is a Force That Gives Us Meaning, is one of the most striking analyses and critiques of what happens to people and societies as they go to war to be published in many years. Writing with a clarity and tone reminiscent of Albert Camus, Hedges unravels the myths and dysfunctional nationalism that grip nations heading to war; the intoxicating effect of these causes and rhetoric; and the terrible costs that soldiers, victims and societies pay -- when the realities of war -- not the rhetoric -- are experienced. He spoke to TomPaine.com's Steven Rosenfeld.

TomPaine.com: When a country prepares for war and goes to war, there are changes in that country’s politics and culture. You write that a myth emerges -- a seductive myth as leaders spin out a cause. You write that a patriotism, a "thinly veiled form of self-worship appears." What do you mean by this myth, this cause, this patriotism and what you then say is an intoxicating result?

Chris Hedges: Well myth is always part of the way we understand war within a society. It’s always there. But I think in a peacetime society we are at least open to other ways of looking at war. Just as patriotism is always part of the society. In wartime, the myth becomes ascendant. Patriotism, national self-glorification infects everything, including culture. That’s why you would go to symphony events and people wave flags and play the "Star Spangled Banner." In essence, it’s the destruction of culture, which is always a prerequisite in wartime. Wartime always begins with the destruction of your own culture. Once you enter a conflict, or at the inception of a conflict, you are given a language by which you speak. The state gives you a language to speak and you can’t speak outside that language or it becomes very difficult. There is no communication outside of the clichés and the jingos, "The War on Terror," "Showdown With Iraq," "The Axis of Evil," all of this stuff. So that whatever disquiet we feel, we no longer have the words in which to express it. The myth predominates. The myth, which is a lie, of course, built around glory, heroism, heroic self-sacrifice, the nobility of the nation. And it is a kind of intoxication. People lose individual conscience for this huge communal enterprise.

TP.c: You write there are different war myths -- myths that fuel conflicts. What type of myth do you see animating the discussion today in the United States as it looks at Iraq?

Hedges: Well I think the myth is remarkably similar from war zone to war zone. At least, as it pertains to how the nation that prosecutes a war looks at itself. We become the embodiment of light and goodness. We become the defenders of civilization, of all that is decent. We are more noble than others. We are braver than others. We are kinder and more compassionate than others -- that the enemy at our gate is perfidious, dark, somewhat inhuman. We turn them into two-dimensional figures. I think that’s part of the process of linguistically dehumanizing them. And in wartime, we always turn the other into an object, and often, quite literally, in the form of a corpse.

TP.c: Where are we in the United States, now, in this progression?

Hedges: Well, we’ve come frightenly far in this process. And this has been a long progression. It began at the end of the Vietnam war. The defeat in Vietnam made us a better nation and a better people. We were forced to step outside our own borders and see how other people saw us. We were forced to accept very unpleasant truths about ourselves -- our own capacity for evil. I think that that process, especially during the Reagan years, or at least that state, began to disintegrate. War once again became fun: Grenada; Panama, culminating in the Persian Gulf War. So that we’re now at a process -- Freud argues that all of life, both for the individual and within human society, is a battle between Eros, or love, and Thanatos, or the death instinct. And that one of these instincts is always ascendant, at one time or another. I think after the Vietnam war, because of the terrible costs that we paid, because of the tragedy that Vietnam was, Eros was ascendant. I think after the Persian Gulf war, where we fell in love with war -- and what is war, war is death -- Thanatos is ascendant. It will, unfortunately, take that grim harvest of dead, that ultimately those that are intoxicated with war must always swallow, for us to wake up again.

TP.c: When you say the rush to war is like a drug, how is it addictive? What void does it fill? What needs are fulfilled by this kind of rhetoric and this kind of myth-making, and this kind of political discourse, that are not otherwise accomplished in a peacetime political environment?

Hedges: Well, I think war is probably the supreme drug. War -- first of all, it is a narcotic. You can easily become addicted to it. And that’s why it’s often so hard for people who spend prolonged times in combat to return to peacetime society. There’s a huge alienation, a huge disconnection, often a longing to go back to the subculture of war. War has a very dark beauty, a kind of fascination with the grotesque. The Bible called it "the lust of the eye" and warned believers against it. War has a rush. It has a hallucinogenic quality. It has that sort of stoned-out sense of -- that zombie-like quality that comes with not enough sleep, sort of being shelled too long. I think, in many ways, there is no drug, or there are no combination of drugs that are as potent as war, and one could argue as addictive. It certainly is as addictive as any narcotic.

TomPaine.com: For people who haven’t read your reports in The New York Times, or don’t know what actually goes behind the reporting that’s gone into them, where have you been that has brought you on this course to write about this topic?

Chris Hedges: Well, I went to Seminary -- I didn’t go to journalism school. So this stretches way back to my own education, my own theological education, my study of ethics. I went to war, not because I was a gun nut, or wanted adventure, although to be honest, that was part of it. I did have a longing for that kind of epic battle that could define my life. I grew up reading everything on the Holocaust and on the Spanish Civil War, but I went as an idealist. I went to Latin America in the early ‘80s when most of these countries were ruled by pretty heinous military dictatorships. And I thought this was as close as I was going to come in my lifetime to fighting fascism. I wanted that. Unfortunately, I didn’t understand what war was. And I got caught up in the subculture, and to be honest, the addiction that war was. And I ended up over the next 15 years traveling from war zone to war zone to war zone with that fraternity of dysfunctional war correspondents who became my friends -- some of whom were killed, including my closest friend who was killed in Sierra Leone in May of 2000. So I got sucked into the kind of whirlpool that war is -- into the death instinct.

TP.c: For people here, in the states, who have never been in a war zone, can you just talk about some of the situations you put yourself into and what you saw about war that is completely counterpoint to the rhetoric about the cause.

Hedges: Well, the cause is... is always a lie. If people understood, or individuals or societies understood in sensory way what war was, they’d never do it. War is organized industrial slaughter. The good example is the Vietnam War. It began as a mythic war against communism and this kind of stuff, and -- especially when the middle class began finding their sons coming home in body bags -- people began to look at war in a very different light. It no longer was mythic. It became sensory war, i.e. we began to see war without that film, that mythic film that I think colors our vision of all violent conflicts. And then the war became impossible to prosecute. So the cause, the myth, the notion of glory -- those are lies. They’re always lies. And nations need them. Emperiums need them especially in order to get a populace to support a war. But they’re untrue.

TP.c: So, you’d be sent into the field to cover different conflicts, what would you see that would be fundamentally at odds with this -- what you’re describing as the lie?

Hedges: Well, it takes anyone in combat about 30 seconds to realize that they’ve been lied to. War, combat is nothing like it’s presented -- not only by the entertainment industry, by Hollywood, but by the press, by writers such as Cornelius Ryan or Stephen Ambrose, who just died. These are myth-makers.The press is guilty of this. The press in wartime is always part of the problem. But when you get into combat, it’s venal. It’s dirty. It’s confusing. It’s humiliating, because you feel powerless. The noise is deafening. But, most importantly, you feel fear in a way that you’ve probably never felt fear before. And anyone who spends a lot of time in combat struggles always with this terrible, terrible fear -- this deep, instinctual desire for self-preservation. And there are always times when fear rules you. In wartime, you learn you’re not the person you want to be -- or think you were. You don’t dash out under fire to save your wounded comrade. Occasionally, this happens, but most of the time you’re terrified. And that’s very, very sobering. And it’s a huge wake-up call. It shows you that the images that you’ve been fed, both about war, and that you have created for yourself, are wrong.

TP.c: Well, what do you think reporters can or should be doing that’s different?

Hedges: Well, I think the big thing is you can’t accept the language the state gives you. I mean, this is not a war in any conventional sense -- I’m talking about the "War on Terror" -- nor is it a war on terror. I think we have to dissect the clichés. Clichés are the enemy of bad writing, but also the enemy of clear thought, as George Orwell wrote. I think that’s the first thing, we have to not speak in the language in which the state gives us. Secondly, I think we have to ask the hard questions. And I think The New York Times hasn’t been bad on this. I think the Times has been pretty good, by looking at "what is it?" There was an editorial, I think in yesterday’s Times, that said, "You know, there is no hard intelligence that he has anything that he’s going to use against us, and before we go to war you have to show us." That is the proper response, and I laud the paper for printing that editorial.

TP.c: What’s so interesting is, it doesn’t get much stronger than that. Yet, on the other hand, what you write about in the book, is that a lot of people in the country who aren’t privy to details at that level, or aren’t as politically tuned in -- they want to believe that this cause is good. They trust what the president says. And there’s an appeal, as you say, in society’s march toward war that fills certain needs.

Hedges: Well, I think that’s the problem. There’s a lot that we just don’t really feel like seeing because we’re having too much fun exulting in our own military prowess and our ability to mold and shape the world in ways that we want. There is a kind of suspension of self-criticism, both as a nation and as a person that takes place in wartime. And that’s part of what removes the anxiety of normal daily living. We’re no longer required to make moral choice. Moral choice has been made for us by the state. And to question the decisions of the state is to be branded, not only a traitor, but to be pushed outside that kind of communal entity within a society that war always creates. And that’s a very difficult, lonely and painful experience. So most people, not necessarily because they’re bad people in any way, but most people find it emotionally far more convenient, but also far more pleasurable just to go along. The problem is, under poor leadership, or wandering into a war where we shouldn’t be, we can find ourselves in heaps of trouble.

http://www.tompaine.com/feature.cfm/ID/6657