CIA's Prison Article
The thought of torture is a repelling one. That being said after reading this article about this so called Salt Prison, it is appalling to find out that these torture techniques were used on these people. Even though they are probably guilty of heinous crimes, was it worth the money and cost to keep prisoners who weren't giving any information up to these interrogators. The answer is NO! This was a complete failure in the sense that we never got really in new and useful information. All we got was information that was already known or that wasn't useful to our knowledge of the terrorist groups. Don't get me wrong, I am all for finding whoever is responsible for these heinous crimes and locking them up for good. But, there has to be a better and more morally right way to do this. They were treated as sub-human and I believe that was wrong. No matter how bad of a person they are or were, no matter how much pain they caused. I do not believe that that they needed to be tortured in such a gruesome way. Let alone let the CIA just hide the information about these from the public.
Two Docs paid 80 million
To start off this is a complete waste of 80,000,000 dollars. These doctors had "developed" new techniques that have already been in use for hundreds of years. This money could have gone to developing a charity or doing something productive. But nope, it went paying 2 doctors to develop ways to torture someone physically and mentally. That is almost hypocritical in the fact that as America it is our self-assigned job to protect other people. This money could have gone to cancer treatment but nope it was wasted on something as pointless as developing "new" torture techniques.
LA Times "Salt Pit" article
This article highlighted the torture used by the CIA agents and the sheer amount of cruelness they treated the prisoners with. Whether it was sheering music or being chained to a bar for 23 hours, these men were treated absolutely awful. Sure they all did awful things to many people but is this the answer. I don't believe it is. No matter how awful the person, inflicting pain on them will not teach them anything or get them to give up valuable information. All it will do is break a person down to being uncooperable. This is just unacceptable.
La times article: http://www.latimes.com/world/afghanistan-pakistan/la-fg-torture-salt-pit-20141210-story.html
2 doc article: http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/two-docs-got-dollar80-million-to-develop-torture-tactics/ar-BBgBe3V
CIA Prison Article: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/at-cias-salt-pit-prison-torture-reigned-with-little-oversight/ar-BBgAaEW
Friday, December 12, 2014
Thursday, December 4, 2014
Muckrakers
Our assignment was to find an example on a Muckraking articles. After looking I found one that especially intrigued me. This article was called The Real Story of Thanksgiving. In this blog I will explain why this happens to be a muckraking article and what it was about.
The article starts off telling us about how we know Thanksgiving. We know the history as the Pilgrims had a bountiful harvest so in celebration they had a feast. And it was all good between the Pilgrims and the Native Americans. Well, this article defies and goes against by what we know by depicting the Pilgrims as "Lazy" and "Thieves". The men who were healthy wouldn't work and the men who were weak who would work in the fields. This lead to famine and widespread starving throughout the colonies. To put it simply, they didn't do much other than sit around and watch others do their work.
The main focus of this article is that the Pilgrims used an early form of socialism. This lead to laziness because they didn't have to work, which lead to widespread famine because no crops were being produced in the fields. Which in turn, lead to the demise of nearly 90% of Jamestown's population. What this article is saying is that Socialism lead to the decline of productivity in the colonies. But the leader of the colony, Mr. William Bardford, found an answer to these questions of how to survive. The colony's market or political views changed from Socialism to Free Market. And just like that, famine stopped, people worked harder, and they produced as much crop as they have ever had in most years beforehand.
Each family got a parcel of land and basically could keep all crops on it or trade the land away for a sum of money. It was a genius thought and basically saved the colony from complete obliteration. So yes, in a way there was time for celebration between the years of 1623-1624. They had so much spare food, they could export it make a profit. In a way they did celebrate Thanksgiving but it was way less glorified than what it has been hyped up to be. The question behind the statement that changing to a free market economy saved the colony from certain demise. I believe it did. The evidence shown proved that because of this change the colony was saved. The statement said that the Pilgrims were lazy may have been true. If these comments said by the mayor Bardford were valid, it defies everything we ever learned about the pilgrims saying that they were hard-working settlers with good work ethic. The man did live there and was a citizen of the colony so we have every right to believe the man. But then again, it may also be his personal opinion.
There is no way we will ever truly no for sure if any of the things said about the pilgrims and their laziness and the change from a socialistic to a free market view are totally true. But we can get an idea by looking into these muckraker articles that maybe these do have truth to them. The only way to find out is to look into these accounts written by these settlers and to form an opinion. That's all these arguments on the history of the settlers turn into is opinions. No one will ever truly no the answer because we never experienced it first hand. I think that we should look past the negative in this article and take Thanksgiving for what it is, a time for thanks. This article was extremely interesting in the fact that it opened up a whole new view for me. But then again, isn't that what a Muckraker article is supposed to do. Its job is to inform you and tell about what isn't normally talked about and exposes the stuff that doesn't get shown in mainstream articles.
These muckraking articles are at times a very good thing to have. It exposes what we don't know and mostly tells the truth in the article. Anyways, the reason they investigated this was to show that everything in history isn't always as glorified as we make it out to be. This article was written recently I believe because of the main purpose of showing everyone today on the internet that this wasn't all joy back in the 1600's. There was death and very much famine.
In conclusion, I have stated why I believe this article would fit in with the Muckraking category. It exposes truth behind a topic that was normally thought to be a peaceful, joyful subject. I believe though that we will never truly know if the Pilgrims were actually lazy or if the free market economy saved the colony. The only way to find out is to look at the real truths in actually realizing that it wasn't the way we picture it nowadays with the table and peacefulness but actually realize that back then there wasn't enough time to do this except for maybe 1 or 2 years. The article Real Story of Thanksgiving did a very detailed job explaining this.
Source: http://mccluresmagazine.com/_featured-2/real-story-thanksgiving
Our assignment was to find an example on a Muckraking articles. After looking I found one that especially intrigued me. This article was called The Real Story of Thanksgiving. In this blog I will explain why this happens to be a muckraking article and what it was about.
The article starts off telling us about how we know Thanksgiving. We know the history as the Pilgrims had a bountiful harvest so in celebration they had a feast. And it was all good between the Pilgrims and the Native Americans. Well, this article defies and goes against by what we know by depicting the Pilgrims as "Lazy" and "Thieves". The men who were healthy wouldn't work and the men who were weak who would work in the fields. This lead to famine and widespread starving throughout the colonies. To put it simply, they didn't do much other than sit around and watch others do their work.
The main focus of this article is that the Pilgrims used an early form of socialism. This lead to laziness because they didn't have to work, which lead to widespread famine because no crops were being produced in the fields. Which in turn, lead to the demise of nearly 90% of Jamestown's population. What this article is saying is that Socialism lead to the decline of productivity in the colonies. But the leader of the colony, Mr. William Bardford, found an answer to these questions of how to survive. The colony's market or political views changed from Socialism to Free Market. And just like that, famine stopped, people worked harder, and they produced as much crop as they have ever had in most years beforehand.
Each family got a parcel of land and basically could keep all crops on it or trade the land away for a sum of money. It was a genius thought and basically saved the colony from complete obliteration. So yes, in a way there was time for celebration between the years of 1623-1624. They had so much spare food, they could export it make a profit. In a way they did celebrate Thanksgiving but it was way less glorified than what it has been hyped up to be. The question behind the statement that changing to a free market economy saved the colony from certain demise. I believe it did. The evidence shown proved that because of this change the colony was saved. The statement said that the Pilgrims were lazy may have been true. If these comments said by the mayor Bardford were valid, it defies everything we ever learned about the pilgrims saying that they were hard-working settlers with good work ethic. The man did live there and was a citizen of the colony so we have every right to believe the man. But then again, it may also be his personal opinion.
There is no way we will ever truly no for sure if any of the things said about the pilgrims and their laziness and the change from a socialistic to a free market view are totally true. But we can get an idea by looking into these muckraker articles that maybe these do have truth to them. The only way to find out is to look into these accounts written by these settlers and to form an opinion. That's all these arguments on the history of the settlers turn into is opinions. No one will ever truly no the answer because we never experienced it first hand. I think that we should look past the negative in this article and take Thanksgiving for what it is, a time for thanks. This article was extremely interesting in the fact that it opened up a whole new view for me. But then again, isn't that what a Muckraker article is supposed to do. Its job is to inform you and tell about what isn't normally talked about and exposes the stuff that doesn't get shown in mainstream articles.
These muckraking articles are at times a very good thing to have. It exposes what we don't know and mostly tells the truth in the article. Anyways, the reason they investigated this was to show that everything in history isn't always as glorified as we make it out to be. This article was written recently I believe because of the main purpose of showing everyone today on the internet that this wasn't all joy back in the 1600's. There was death and very much famine.
In conclusion, I have stated why I believe this article would fit in with the Muckraking category. It exposes truth behind a topic that was normally thought to be a peaceful, joyful subject. I believe though that we will never truly know if the Pilgrims were actually lazy or if the free market economy saved the colony. The only way to find out is to look at the real truths in actually realizing that it wasn't the way we picture it nowadays with the table and peacefulness but actually realize that back then there wasn't enough time to do this except for maybe 1 or 2 years. The article Real Story of Thanksgiving did a very detailed job explaining this.
Source: http://mccluresmagazine.com/_featured-2/real-story-thanksgiving
Tuesday, December 2, 2014
The lessons I learned from watching the movie Taking Chance is that respect for our fallen soldiers is an absolute must. These men like PFC Chance Phelps gave their life to defend this country of ours so the least we can do is show the proper respect like the citizens in the film. Knowing that this is a true story and that these people truly did all these things makes me proud knowing that there are a few people that truly respect the fallen soldiers.
One scene that I liked the most is the scene where he was in Minneapolis at the airport and as the body was at the leaving the cargo plane, Stobl saluted and all the workers put their hands to their heart and saluted him that way. The pilot of the plane was also a veteran of the war and he saluted Phelps also. This was an emotional scene that I thought really made this film.
One reason this movie did so well in recreating this is that they kept up the authenticity of the real life thing by showing how people reacted to how they saw Phelps and Stobl traveling home. I also learned that as a proper respect you don't pass a car carrying a KIA soldier. The scene where all the people are following closely behind is a good scene and also very interesting. It was very cool that all the people knew the proper respect for this KIA and followed these unwritten rules.
Our soldiers make many sacrifices, some pay the ultimate price. Like Mr.. Phelps. He was a young man who still had a full life to live. These people respecting him in the way he deserves a homecoming. He was respected as an individual after death and was also very well liked. It was very good to see that. Strobl was a very good man for doing this with Phelps.
One scene that I liked the most is the scene where he was in Minneapolis at the airport and as the body was at the leaving the cargo plane, Stobl saluted and all the workers put their hands to their heart and saluted him that way. The pilot of the plane was also a veteran of the war and he saluted Phelps also. This was an emotional scene that I thought really made this film.
One reason this movie did so well in recreating this is that they kept up the authenticity of the real life thing by showing how people reacted to how they saw Phelps and Stobl traveling home. I also learned that as a proper respect you don't pass a car carrying a KIA soldier. The scene where all the people are following closely behind is a good scene and also very interesting. It was very cool that all the people knew the proper respect for this KIA and followed these unwritten rules.
Our soldiers make many sacrifices, some pay the ultimate price. Like Mr.. Phelps. He was a young man who still had a full life to live. These people respecting him in the way he deserves a homecoming. He was respected as an individual after death and was also very well liked. It was very good to see that. Strobl was a very good man for doing this with Phelps.
Tuesday, September 30, 2014
Gun Control and the Media
In the aftermath of something tragic, we always look for something to blame for the awful act. In the aftermath of 9/11, we blamed our airport security for the attacks on the Towers, the Pentagon, and the downed plane in Shanksville, PN. So, can you guess what was blamed after the tragic attacks on Columbine High School? According the media, the reasons these attacks took place was anything from bullying to slack gun laws. There is always a scapegoat to a tragedy and in this case it's Gun Control and the Media.
Gun Rights
In 1889, the Bill of Rights was drawn up and along with it the first Thirteen Amendments. Among these amendments was the famous, often ridiculed 2nd Amendment. This Amendment stated "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed". What it is saying is that along as we are a united and free country we will always have the right to own a weapon. The conflict with this is as modernized over the course of some 200 years, our technology changed drastically. This led to more people owning firearms in the United States. In 2009, there was 307 million people living in the US. And of those 307 million people there was nearly 300 million guns in American households. There is almost as much guns in the US as people; that can cause very many problems. As seen in the documentary, all Moore needed to do to get a rifle was to open a bank account. That is way too easy! I believe we have a right to own firearms, but we need to change the policy and make it more difficult to get a gun in the first place, if you have had a record of violence in the past. Also, with that we need to have more guns made in the US because then we can regulate the flow of guns and keep better track of where and when they arrive at the store or retailer. I think that in the future laws will be enacted which limits the use of rifles and the availability of handguns even more so then now. In order for this to happen we have to cooperate and be willing to give up some things. If one of these happens to be a handgun, so be it. Our amendments are over 200 years old. If we need change and it will help lower crime rate and death in the States, we will need to update the 2nd amendment. We need to put stricter laws on handguns and even stricter laws on the selling of assault rifles. We do this, and hopefully the crime rates and tragedies will subside.
The Media
The media does a very good job of reporting on stuff that we want to hear and does an even better job reporting on tragic and frightening news. It happens everyday if you pay attention. There will be scandals and news about the Middle East filling up almost the whole time slot with very little room to spare for informative and educational information. Those news companies thrive on the income of people tuning in to hear the info about the newest virus and the newest attack in another country. In our documentary, we found out that Canada reports very normal and respectful news. I think that reflects on their culture. As we found out, their crime rates say it. They see good on the news and they will tend to do good. Hopefully, our media will focus on the good aspects of our "gun-toting" society. They should report on the rising hunting numbers not the amount of deaths associated to those numbers. The moral is that the more good that is reported, the more positive the impact on our society.
Its impossible to completely resolve conflict, it always has been. But, with a little bit stricter gun laws and a more positive media, maybe we can do more good for the world instead of always bringing each other and it down with tragedies caused by the use of a full-auto gun. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. The person pulls the trigger not the gun. So, although I believe in stricter laws on handguns and assault rifles. I do think we should not take out the 2nd amendment but update it. We have already taken one step closer to a stricter gun law society when Mr. Obama enacted his 23 laws associated with gun rights. In these laws, he stated that he wanted better background checks, and he is giving schools grant money to help with defense of the school. There is a downside to these though. They will need to know everything about us and what we have done. A complete background check basically. I think this is wrong and could be avoided. This disrupts our privacy and needs to be changed.
Sources:
In the aftermath of something tragic, we always look for something to blame for the awful act. In the aftermath of 9/11, we blamed our airport security for the attacks on the Towers, the Pentagon, and the downed plane in Shanksville, PN. So, can you guess what was blamed after the tragic attacks on Columbine High School? According the media, the reasons these attacks took place was anything from bullying to slack gun laws. There is always a scapegoat to a tragedy and in this case it's Gun Control and the Media.
Gun Rights
In 1889, the Bill of Rights was drawn up and along with it the first Thirteen Amendments. Among these amendments was the famous, often ridiculed 2nd Amendment. This Amendment stated "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed". What it is saying is that along as we are a united and free country we will always have the right to own a weapon. The conflict with this is as modernized over the course of some 200 years, our technology changed drastically. This led to more people owning firearms in the United States. In 2009, there was 307 million people living in the US. And of those 307 million people there was nearly 300 million guns in American households. There is almost as much guns in the US as people; that can cause very many problems. As seen in the documentary, all Moore needed to do to get a rifle was to open a bank account. That is way too easy! I believe we have a right to own firearms, but we need to change the policy and make it more difficult to get a gun in the first place, if you have had a record of violence in the past. Also, with that we need to have more guns made in the US because then we can regulate the flow of guns and keep better track of where and when they arrive at the store or retailer. I think that in the future laws will be enacted which limits the use of rifles and the availability of handguns even more so then now. In order for this to happen we have to cooperate and be willing to give up some things. If one of these happens to be a handgun, so be it. Our amendments are over 200 years old. If we need change and it will help lower crime rate and death in the States, we will need to update the 2nd amendment. We need to put stricter laws on handguns and even stricter laws on the selling of assault rifles. We do this, and hopefully the crime rates and tragedies will subside.
The Media
The media does a very good job of reporting on stuff that we want to hear and does an even better job reporting on tragic and frightening news. It happens everyday if you pay attention. There will be scandals and news about the Middle East filling up almost the whole time slot with very little room to spare for informative and educational information. Those news companies thrive on the income of people tuning in to hear the info about the newest virus and the newest attack in another country. In our documentary, we found out that Canada reports very normal and respectful news. I think that reflects on their culture. As we found out, their crime rates say it. They see good on the news and they will tend to do good. Hopefully, our media will focus on the good aspects of our "gun-toting" society. They should report on the rising hunting numbers not the amount of deaths associated to those numbers. The moral is that the more good that is reported, the more positive the impact on our society.
Its impossible to completely resolve conflict, it always has been. But, with a little bit stricter gun laws and a more positive media, maybe we can do more good for the world instead of always bringing each other and it down with tragedies caused by the use of a full-auto gun. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. The person pulls the trigger not the gun. So, although I believe in stricter laws on handguns and assault rifles. I do think we should not take out the 2nd amendment but update it. We have already taken one step closer to a stricter gun law society when Mr. Obama enacted his 23 laws associated with gun rights. In these laws, he stated that he wanted better background checks, and he is giving schools grant money to help with defense of the school. There is a downside to these though. They will need to know everything about us and what we have done. A complete background check basically. I think this is wrong and could be avoided. This disrupts our privacy and needs to be changed.
Sources:
http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp
Obamas 23 laws
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/national-international/NATL-Obama-to-Unveil-Gun-Violence-Measures--187077641.html
Obamas 23 laws
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/national-international/NATL-Obama-to-Unveil-Gun-Violence-Measures--187077641.html
Monday, September 15, 2014
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)