Heads should roll on this horrendous issue
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
I think it's more insidious than that. We have a President who is much more sympathetic to Islam - probably due to his upbringing - than he is any other religion. |
Anonymous
And again, show me where Bush actively prosecuted anyone in conjunction with one of these sex crimes against children. |
Anonymous
You mean Rev. Wright? |
Anonymous
Don't argue with the morally bankrupt. It's not worth your time. |
Anonymous
Lemme fix that for ya, "Obama's a secret Kenyan born Muslim Communist" Dude, don't go halfway on teabagger moron, just cut to the chase and go for the TRIFECTA! We already know ya wanna! |
Anonymous
LMAO! You guys can't make up your minds as to whether he's a Muslim or a follower of radical Christian preacher Jeremiah Wright, or if he's a God-hating heathen - or, for that matter, if he's a Marxist who's in bed with Wall Street - and somehow all of that jumbled, self-contradicting mess of talking point babble just swirls around in your heads with not one whit of critical thinking or logic ever applied to bring you to the realization that those things are in direct conflict. Complete cognitive dissonance. And, you don't even realize just how bad it is. It's really quite comical to those of us who actually possess the ability to do logical thinking. Here's a little insight for you on what's going on in that noggin of yours: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect |
Anonymous
Get lost with that "morally bankrupt" bullshit. Not a single poster here has condoned child rape. Not one. That is not even open for debate, and it is grotesquely insulting, offensive and highly immoral that, in your partisan zeal to malign and slander, you repeatedly insisted on lying about that earlier. The ONLY thing left here for debate is whether or not it was policy that came all the way from the top. And the only way that will be ever be proven and established is by having someone produce the order. Unless you can do so, and until you can do so, you are doing nothing but talking out of your ass. |
Anonymous
Oh FFS shut up you ninny. |
Anonymous
Are you referring to David Miscavige and his Sea Org? |
Anonymous
In what imaginary world are you getting that people are reacting like it doesn't matter? The chip on your shoulder is so big it's blocking your vision. |
Anonymous
|
A NY Times comment on the editorial dated 9-22-15 provided a link to an unclassified document:
https://info.publicintelligence.net/HTT-PashtunSexuality.pdf http://thefederalist.com/2015/09/21/flashback-in-2007-nyt-published-op-ed-saying-afghan-child-rape-was-no-big-deal/ Napier on suttee ""Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs." |
Anonymous
+100 The PP can't seem to make one post without falling back on maligning and slandering other posters by claiming they condone child rape. PP seems to be a pathological liar - and with some paranoid delusions to boot. |
jsteele
Site Admin Offline
Site Admin Offline
I think that if there were one issue on which we might be able to find broad agreement among all the posters here, it would be child rape. Nobody here condones it. Yet, rather than seeking such agreement, you chose to exploit the issue as one more partisan issue with which to attack Obama. You put partisanship ahead of morality on this issue. In a conflict with very few good choices and lots of bad ones, our leaders have frequently been forced to choose among various bad options. As a result, we have crossed moral thresholds on things like torture and domestic surveillance that diverge significantly from the values Americans have traditionally held dear. Some, including me, would argue that such moral compromises are reasons to avoid such conflicts in the first place. The situation with child rape in Afghanistan is simply one more instance of morality being sacrificed for expediency. Our leaders have prioritized wining the military and political struggles above the protection of children from sexual abuse. I think all of us, Republicans, Libertarians, Democrats, Socialists, and none-of-the-aboves, should give thought to the various moral compromises that are made in the name of war. Individuals from different political views have been able to work together to push back on some compromises such as domestic surveillance. We should equally be able to put aside our differences in order to stand united against child rape. But, that can't happen if the goal of attacking Obama is placed above the goal of combatting the sexual abuse of children. |
Anonymous
| ^ Bravo, well said, Jeff! |
Anonymous
All the above is true and to think war is prosecuted without some compromise is to put on rose colored glasses. However, just as we would not tolerate prosecuting a whistleblower on Abu Graibh type torture/misconduct why would we tolerate the internal persecution of this green beret who took a stand on child abuse? The question I have for our President is why he isn't picking up the phone on this case and letting his discontent be known to whomever is running the circus trial? |