Letters to the Editor
-
@kitt
sorry, was not trying to pass judgement on any posters or GG; i was refering to previous threads where my defense of certain posters right to post (and the issues involved there), which has proven hugely unpopular. and i should add in several cases the posts i was defending came back to bite my ass mid post.
regards
-
Re: Glenn's banning and moderating policies
When he first began blogging at the old UT, Glenn was hellbent on never deleting, much less banning, anyone. I opined he would come to change his mind, as I had seen happen at several blogs of consequence, because various individuals -- and ideology was frequently not the primary issue -- ruin and overtake every single thread with their myriad fixations.
This is privately owned space. If I have a dinner party in my home and the date an acquaintance brings along starts repeatedly and shrilly ranting about the stupidity of everyone there, and how the space aliens/Communists/libertarians/Democrats/blacks or whomever are taking over the world to nefarious ends, and the dinner conversation cannot continue comfortably due to this one obsessed individual, I will be asking him/her to leave.
That is the sensible reasoning behind Glenn's very light-handed moderation policies.
-
Bebop-o
We are all humans. That;s what we are to Be! Be human. okay.
Garry Owen is a big boy too- I see hurt too- Tone in DC-?- very rancid? I believe, very so!
War strips humans down to beneath the skin. Nerves are exposed and society as a whole will not comprehend, much less understand the real pain and cost to themselves.
War happens to the other guy.
-
there is no right to post here
it's a privilege
-
@mona
i don't disagree with your dinner party reference. i find myself defending unpopular and prolific posters (owen & sugarman), based on their right to say their say. i am not a proponent of free expression to the right of said date to be disruptive, but maybe he/she does have something to say.
-
Actually, Mona....
It's the Unholy Triple Alliance: space aliens, libertarians, and Democrats in league together, one of the lesser-known signs of the approaching Apocalypse.
Seriously, Glenn's tolerance has been of great value to me personally, even though I occasionally find myself grinding my teeth at the sheer amount of neediness out there. You're right that Glenn doesn't have to put up with -- and shouldn't have to put up with -- anything that he finds offensive, but some of what he's tolerated has turned out to offer insights -- at least for me -- which would have been hard to find anywhere else. I'm glad he's not seen fit to be as dismissive as others might have been, and commend him for it, even though I have no criticism to make of his actions when he does send someone packing.
-
enemy combatants
because prisoners of war are not people who have committed crimes, they are "enemy combatants" who may be held for the duration of the conflict and then be repatriated.
The way I've understood this is that the US created a 3rd category, ie., not POW, not criminal, but "enemy combatant." Is "enemy combatant" actually the term used in the Geneva conventions? So Bush creates tribunals to comply with the letter of Geneva's requirements that there must be some process to determine if they're POWs - but wait, they're actually terrorists that fall into a category not otherwise accounted for?
It always seemed to me, w/o knowing anything, that Bush (and cronies) carefully danced between treating our actions as "war" vs. "other" military action to avoid the letter of laws, international or domestic, they wished to ignore. Internationally, we're engaged in a war on terror and not against a state (though still not a legally declared war). Therefore those held shouldn't be treated criminally and they're not POWs. Domestically we're in a real war so Constitutionally the Prez has all these powers.
You mention Padilla, but how can Taliban fighters be held at Gitmo since our attack on Afganistan was a pretty traditional war, even if not for traditional reasons?
Clearly I'm reaching the extent of my limited reach.
Does Geneva cover acts of war that are not declared wars, like the Vietnam war which is described as a UN "Police Action?"
-
Yes Mona! - I have this problem at dinner party in Alabama!
This is privately owned space. If I have a dinner party in my home and the date an acquaintance brings along starts repeatedly and shrilly ranting... and the dinner conversation cannot continue comfortably due to this one obsessed individual, I will be asking him/her to leave.
-- -Mona-
Now is big lawsuit!
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/1023071borat1.html
They must be execute!
-
Truer words...
You can rail and rant and vent and shake your fists at Yahweh all you like. It's a bunch of self publishing scribblers complaining to another bunch of self publishing scribblers. If you devoted 5% of the energy to marching in front of 1600 Pennsylvania as you did complaining about how the cops there make it inconvenient to do so, we wouldn't have a war. But where would the blogerati be? Won't someone think of them???
I'm glad Rep Ellison stood up for what he did but don't for a moment confuse yourselves with him. He is not you. You didn't do anything. -- Nulla Sallus
Exactly right. You can forget about convincing them though Sallus. They have too much invested in the belief that they are actually doing something. It is fun to watch their heads explode though. They bring up the US Attorney scandal as evidence of them sticking it to the man.
Even if their assessment is correct and they played a the definitive roll in bringing it to light, what has it accomplished? Where are we today? Where is Gonzo today? On a speaking tour, that's where.
It's all well and good to expose evil but if, after having done that, you sit back and give yourself a big pat on the back while the evil goes on about its day almost completely unaffected -- you have accomplished precisely nothing. In truth, I don't have a big problem with people like Greenwald, Digby, etc. They have chosen to sit on the sidelines and document the horror. That is fine. We do need that after all. They could be more but I believe they have made their choice. So be it.
My last remaining hope is that the thousands of folks that read but choose not to comment at blogs like UT are doing so because they have bigger fish to fry than being "a regular" at a "lefty" blog.