Thread: Court marshall or not?

Originally Posted by hardblues

Back when it was a better world, things were Black & White or certainly more Black & White than they are now.

Well, back in the things were really black and white, women, kids and colored people were property and you could do with them as you saw fit.

I know you didn't mean it like that, but we have a way of romanticising the past even though the past was no better, nobler or more upstanding than our present.

Originally Posted by hardblues

There are some things that should not be public knowledge and remain confidential; these types of things the average citizen cannot reason from their living room, patio, teachers break room, employee's lounge, car pool on their way to work, or during a power-walk...they don't get it...never will. If we were told about all the terror schemes in the making, you wouldn't sleep at night...you couldn't process it and really couldn't be expected to...it's out of your league.

Sorry but this is just not true. You talk as if people are best left in the dark and should defer to the good sense of those in power. Should the rodney king incident been swept under the rug? Iran contra? Watergate? The WMD lies? Abu graib? If that was allowed, how would people in power ever been held accountable? What you describe is the north lorean or soviet approach.

As soon as those in power start suppressing information and facts, that is when you start losing control of the government itself. And honestly... you underestimate people. The english, Israelis, and many others have lived with decades of actual terrorism and dealt with the reality of the situation.

Originally Posted by Bruno

The english, Israelis, and many others have lived with decades of actual terrorism and dealt with the reality of the situation.

Overall, you make some good points, but there would be many who would take issue with how the English and the Israelis "lived" with terrorism. Those nations took action also. Sometimes they messed up and sometimes they didn't.

Jordan

Agreed, but I meant the population at large, not how governments responded.

1 day after the bombings on public transportation in the UK, people were taking the buses and subways again as if nothing had happened. When asked about why they didn't find alternate solutions, the general concensus was 'What, and let the terrorists win?'

People got on with their lives despite the bombings and the knowledge that it might happen again.

Bruno,

I would like to thank you for illustrating my point by taking a partial quote from my post and then putting your own retort to it to argue your point as follows:

Originally Posted by hardblues Back when it was a better world, things were Black & White or certainly more Black & White than they are now. >>

"Well, back in the things were really black and white, women, kids and colored people were property and you could do with them as you saw fit."

What you did is exactly what I was referring to throughout the entirety of my post...and that is the problem. We now have the world holding court. With knowledge that for the most part is comprised of:

1. Suspected Terrorist.
2. Several Navy SEALS.
3. Some Marines.
4. Punched in the stomach.
5. False statements.

You know, using historical reference of inequality towards women, children and minorities is all very stirring, but, has nothing to do with the topic at hand. The reference of Black & White was towards a period when we were taught to recognize, then acknowledge and act according to what was right and wrong. A day when a "white-lie" wasn't a justifiable lie, it was just a lie...period...no qualifications, no pontification. There is an intentional graying of the truth these days, and that is because as long as we are examining the problem/issue, we can saying we're doing something while in reality, we're doing nothing at all...only appearing to. That it what my period of Black and White referred to. You'll note one other thing, that I posted my thoughts without referencing anyone else or without taking pieces of what they said and interjecting them inbetween my hyperbole.

In reference to my opinion about confidentiality...public knowledge; you offer that my position simply isn't true, which, is fine, as that is your opinion, but, once again...you then go on to reference Watergate, Iran Contra, Abu Graib and suggest that my position would have resulted in all these high profile incidents being swept under the rug; closing by saying that what I describe is the Soviet or North Korean approach. There is a great deal of difference between "sweeping" something under the rug, (your words, not mine pal), an active effort to hide an event so that nothing will result from the event and not making everything Public Knowledge...a big difference between the two.

You know Bruno, I don't know where you live, but, It's a good bet that within a 500 mile radius of where you live, someone was murdered, raped, robbed, etc., that you haven't heard a whisper of. Heard about anyone getting their head cut off lately...nope, but, you know it is still going on. I'm certain a few soldier have been maimed or killed in terrorist ambushes...that being talked about on CNN, MSNBC every frigging night...Nope! But, a SEAL alledgedly punching a terrorist in the stomach...keep talking baby...that's NEWS!

Surpress...an interesting word, with often bad connotations...Then you go onto say that the English and Israelis have lived for years with the reality of terrorism...what are saying...are you suggesting that Israeli and British governments make everything they know public knowledge? I see!

Bruno, we probably are not too far apart in opinion...hard to believe, but, true. It is the finer parts that have us a world apart. I'm certain you are a well meaning and fine person, however, if you want to retort what I've written here, I'll ask only this, don't cherry pick my words and then offer your suggestion of what I meant. I spent a career protecting people from others and sometimes themselves, often at my expense and for that reason, I had a little problem with a couple of your references. You may write whatever you will though, as I will not respond again to this thread...I think it is a dead horse. Wish you well, no hard feelings. Scott

I think my point was perhaps not clear.
I don't give a whit about the fact that someone got punched in the mouth.
As far as I am concerned it is not even news. In fact, I am annoyed that things like Tiger woods' affairs are even mentioned. Imo there are bigger things to worry about.

I also don't think highly of the people who buy tabloids and enable the ambulance chasing paperazzi. I really would prefer if people focused on more important matters.

Let me repeat that again: I am really not dumping on this soldier. I don't know what happened. My first posts in this thread were to indicate that I don't agree with the people who think the US attorney should let things slide because 'they are the good ones'.

Then , my replies to you were to indicate that nothing should be kept secret. Unfortunately, as history has well proven, secret courts, secret accusations and secret decisions are the first thing to take away freedom of the populace, and it puts the door wide open for both governmental and personal abuse. And once you allow some things to be dealt with in secret without recourse, then there is really no way to ever check if those doing the dealing actually abide by the rules.

I can't remember which Terry Prattchet novel it comes from (I think it was either Small Gods or the Truth) but if truth needs to be sheltered and kept only for the inner circle, then how should people know it is the truth, or that the truth exists at all? If the truth is really strong, it burns like a flame and should be seen in public to withstand all scrutiny and it doesn't need protection.

And the preamble to my previous post was just to indicate that the olden days were really not that much better than the present day. We just selectively remember it.

I hope that clarifies what I was trying to say.

I said I wouldn't post again, but, I thought it important to say your points are all points well taken.

Regards,

Scott

Thanks. It's not always easy to understand each other when communicating in text only, taking turns to say something, rather than discuss things over a beer with all the richness of verbal and non verbal communication and immediate clarification in case of ambiguity.
Even though I try to explain what I really mean, I admit that my message does not always comes across the way I meant it to.

Originally Posted by Bruno

I hope that clarifies what I was trying to say.

I believe it does - well-said!

Robin
I am glad you took the time to clarify and I am really glad I wasn't the only one who took what you said the wrong way.

It is impossible to read tone or inflection into a forum post and I am guilty of thinking the worst.

V/R,
Rob

this shouldnt even be a case..the terroist should be glad to be alive still....dead bodies are easier to search.(because if they are just wounded we have to provide care and treat them.we should play by thier rules;no mrecy and no quater)....this country has done gone soft....need some leaders up top that are not scared to get old school and start handling buisness