From 'Gook' to 'Raghead'

[Fantasea]

The physics involved in striking a civilian with a bottle from a moving Humvee. Perhaps you just glanced at the post, or chose to ignore it, but the argument that it's nearly impossible for that part of the story to be true is very compelling.

Funny how you'd choose to believe one account without reservation, but question anyone who would take the story with a grain of salt.

So you think it's impossible to throw an object such as a Coke bottle from a moving vehicle and hit a person. Well I hate to tell you this but having been a parole officer for some 16 years I can tell you that I've had a number of young people on my case load that have been convicted of throwing items at people walking down the street from moving vehicles. On two separate occasions the reasons they were convicted of the crime was they video taped the event as it occurred. Granted neither of these video taped incidents involved Coke bottled and neither occurred in Iraq. But throwing a bottle from a moving vehicle most certainly is possible. As is hitting someone with it and causing major injuries.

I read it. I just found it to be nonsense.[/QUOTE]No matter how you slice it; Coke bottles don't shatter when they come in contact with a head in the manner described. That was, of course, the contention of the tale teller.

His story being phony in that respect, why should other parts merit belief?

 

[Fantasea]

So now your main problem is that the bottles were breaking?

Here's a direct quote, "according to Mr. Delgado, is routinely inflicted by American soldiers on ordinary Iraqis. He said: "Guys in my unit, particularly the younger guys, would drive by in their Humvee and shatter bottles over the heads of Iraqi civilians passing by. They'd keep a bunch of empty Coke bottles in the Humvee to break over people's heads."

One who embellishes a story with details that are physical impossibilities should be wary lest a sharp eye poke a hole in it causing the hot air to escape.

 

[Pacridge]

Here's a direct quote, "according to Mr. Delgado, is routinely inflicted by American soldiers on ordinary Iraqis. He said: "Guys in my unit, particularly the younger guys, would drive by in their Humvee and shatter bottles over the heads of Iraqi civilians passing by. They'd keep a bunch of empty Coke bottles in the Humvee to break over people's heads."

One who embellishes a story with details that are physical impossibilities should be wary lest a sharp eye poke a hole in it causing the hot air to escape.

Yep and when you read the story it says "over the heads" not on their heads. Perhaps he's saying the bottles are breaking on something other then their heads?

 

[Fantasea]

Yep and when you read the story it says "over the heads" not on their heads. Perhaps he's saying the bottles are breaking on something other then their heads?

Quite a 's t r e t c h'. What else, if not their heads, might the soldiers have been breaking the bottles upon which would cause the glass to shatter?

 

[Kevin Johnson]

Pacridge, I don't know what you do for a living, but if it doesn't involve dancing you're selling yourself short.

I've never seen anyone sidestep, dance around, step over, or just outright ignore so many points in one thread. Your ability to dance around posts and points that blow your theories out of the water is impressive, but don't serve to help you. Maybe it's time you quit dancing and faced reality.

 

[Pacridge]

Pacridge, I don't know what you do for a living, but if it doesn't involve dancing you're selling yourself short.

I've never seen anyone sidestep, dance around, step over, or just outright ignore so many points in one thread. Your ability to dance around posts and points that blow your theories out of the water is impressive, but don't serve to help you. Maybe it's time you quit dancing and faced reality.

I’m not dancing or selling anything. I’m simply pointing out what’s being said doesn’t add up. First it’s said that it can’t be bottles because “Coke that is packaged for overseas destinations is put up in glass bottles. In fact, not very much Coke in glass bottles is distributed in the US. Glass bottles are more expensive to produce than cans or plastic containers” I pointed out that doesn’t make any sense since the military would most likely be buying the Coke products from a closer supplier then one in the US and experience tells me that bottles are plentiful in other parts of the world. It was also said that that the soldiers couldn’t hit a pedestrian from a moving Humvee because “is a matter of simple physics. Are these soldiers in the Humvees standing? Sitting? If they are sitting, they would be unable to strike a person on the head unless the person was standing within a foot of the passing vehicle with his head bent down. Is this reasonable? No. Is the soldier standing? If so, we still have the problem of a person standing within a foot of the passing vehicle” and, as you put it “The physics involved in striking a civilian with a bottle from a moving Humvee. Perhaps you just glanced at the post, or chose to ignore it, but the argument that it's nearly impossible for that part of the story to be true is very compelling.”I pointed out that didn’t make any sense either as people throw things from moving vehicles and hit people all the time and are charged with crimes for it. I’ve had several on my case load for this very action. Two of these persons were convicted because they not only managed to hit the pedestrians they managed to video tape the event as well. You then said “I never said it was impossible to throw a bottle and hit a person, but that's not what the accuser claims happened. Note the wording in his story:” Aren’t you then pointing out that the story never actually states the Coke bottles hit the pedestrian? I see this and agree this may in fact be true. I have no idea, and no way of finding out. Just putting forth an idea.



So let me see if I understand this. First it can’t be Bottles. I point out it certainly can be. Then it’s said that they couldn’t hit the person with the bottles. I point out people do that all the time, sometimes they even video tape the event. Now because the bottles are reported to be breaking and I agree with what you said, I’m and expert dancer? Ok if you say so.

 

[RightinNYC]

I’m not dancing or selling anything. I’m simply pointing out what’s being said doesn’t add up. First it’s said that it can’t be bottles because “Coke that is packaged for overseas destinations is put up in glass bottles. In fact, not very much Coke in glass bottles is distributed in the US. Glass bottles are more expensive to produce than cans or plastic containers” I pointed out that doesn’t make any sense since the military would most likely be buying the Coke products from a closer supplier then one in the US and experience tells me that bottles are plentiful in other parts of the world. It was also said that that the soldiers couldn’t hit a pedestrian from a moving Humvee because “is a matter of simple physics. Are these soldiers in the Humvees standing? Sitting? If they are sitting, they would be unable to strike a person on the head unless the person was standing within a foot of the passing vehicle with his head bent down. Is this reasonable? No. Is the soldier standing? If so, we still have the problem of a person standing within a foot of the passing vehicle” and, as you put it “The physics involved in striking a civilian with a bottle from a moving Humvee. Perhaps you just glanced at the post, or chose to ignore it, but the argument that it's nearly impossible for that part of the story to be true is very compelling.”I pointed out that didn’t make any sense either as people throw things from moving vehicles and hit people all the time and are charged with crimes for it. I’ve had several on my case load for this very action. Two of these persons were convicted because they not only managed to hit the pedestrians they managed to video tape the event as well. You then said “I never said it was impossible to throw a bottle and hit a person, but that's not what the accuser claims happened. Note the wording in his story:” Aren’t you then pointing out that the story never actually states the Coke bottles hit the pedestrian? I see this and agree this may in fact be true. I have no idea, and no way of finding out. Just putting forth an idea.



So let me see if I understand this. First it can’t be Bottles. I point out it certainly can be. Then it’s said that they couldn’t hit the person with the bottles. I point out people do that all the time, sometimes they even video tape the event. Now because the bottles are reported to be breaking and I agree with what you said, I’m and expert dancer? Ok if you say so.

Teach me to waltz, please?

 

[shuamort]

Teach me to waltz, please?

If you believe his summation to be incorrect, point out the inaccuracies. This is a debate.

 

[RightinNYC]

If you believe his summation to be incorrect, point out the inaccuracies. This is a debate.

Oh, no.

I completely agreed with everything he said.

It's just that I heard a rumor that he's a good dancer, and I've always wanted to learn....
:lol:

 

[26 X World Champs]

Are you ready to concede that the "Coke" bottle shattering incident was fabricated because it is an economic, logistic, and physical impossibility?

Oh really? How ridiculous you are, again....The Coke bottles come from HALIBURTON, they're the ones bringing food and beverage to the GIs....Whether or not Coke has a bottling plant in Iraq is moot....

 

[26 X World Champs]

Does that also pertain to John Kerry who admitted to it? This is the same anti-war propaganda folks heard about Viet-Nam. Some of it was true but most of it was exaggerated and blown out of proportion. What purpose does it serve? Does it help out soldiers in the field or at home? Would that be 20,000 innocent Iraqi's?

I can't believe your reply is John Kerry! That's the best you can come up with?

Weak, really, really weak....

 

[26 X World Champs]

The coke bottle incident seemed far fetched the minute I read the op-ed.

Any soldier who wants to leave a war zone will say whatever they can in order to get out/make waves.

Funny how you know more than Bob Herbert of the NY Times? Hmmm..

 

[RightinNYC]

Funny how you know more than Bob Herbert of the NY Times? Hmmm..

No, it's funny how you will believe any story that any soldier tells any columnist, as long as he's liberal.

You neglect to mention that it was in the soldier's vital interest to exaggerate the story so he could get of the army, that it was then in Herbert's vital interest to exaggerate the story to sell papers, and that it's now in your interest to make it seem like an even bigger issue.

You'd think that if this was such an epidemic, the news would be broken elsewhere than a column in the NYT.

I'm not saying that things like this couldn't happen in Iraq, I'm simply taking issue with both your and Herbert's presentation of it like "OMG look what ONE soldier said happened, this means it happens all the time and hlysht we need to leave Iraq!1111"

It's disingenuous at best.

 

[RightinNYC]

Funny how you know more than Bob Herbert of the NY Times? Hmmm..

You also said:

For any of you who think this is some sort of sick liberal bias I suggest that you check out the credentials of all involved.

WHAT credentials?

The ENTIRE column is simply a series of anecdotes told by ONE person with an unabashed liberal and anti-war bias. How you can swallow this as fact is beyond me.

 

[26 X World Champs]

I've copied the paragraph dealing with the coke bottles.

The officer's comment was a harbinger of the gratuitous violence that, according to Mr. Delgado, is routinely inflicted by American soldiers on ordinary Iraqis. He said: "Guys in my unit, particularly the younger guys, would drive by in their Humvee and shatter bottles over the heads of Iraqi civilians passing by. They'd keep a bunch of empty Coke bottles in the Humvee to break over people's heads."

I think there are two reasons why this tale is a tale. A fable. An untruth.

First, I don't believe that Coke that is packaged for overseas destinations is put up in glass bottles. In fact, not very much Coke in glass bottles is distributed in the US. Glass bottles are more expensive to produce than cans or plastic containers. For a given capacity, glass it is considerably heavier than an aluminum can or plastic containers. Glass bottles, because of their shape and thickness, occupy more transport space. Glass bottles are highly subject to breakage in the rough handling involved in intercontinental shipping and local distribution by military trucks over bad roads.

Statistically it's hard to comprehend how one person can be wrong so often, it defies all laws of mathematics.

I've traveled an average of 150 days a year outside of the USA for more than 15 years. In many, many countries Coke is ONLY sold in cans or GLASS bottles. The exception would be plastic! I've been to the UAE lots of time, and every single bottle is GLASS. You're entire supposition is 100% WRONG! Yikes!

Maybe you need to learn about the world outside of your State from real life, not from a 1980s TV show? :good_job:

 

[Fantasea]

I’m not dancing or selling anything. I’m simply pointing out what’s being said doesn’t add up. First it’s said that it can’t be bottles because “Coke that is packaged for overseas destinations is put up in glass bottles. In fact, not very much Coke in glass bottles is distributed in the US. Glass bottles are more expensive to produce than cans or plastic containers” I pointed out that doesn’t make any sense since the military would most likely be buying the Coke products from a closer supplier then one in the US and experience tells me that bottles are plentiful in other parts of the world. It was also said that that the soldiers couldn’t hit a pedestrian from a moving Humvee because “is a matter of simple physics. Are these soldiers in the Humvees standing? Sitting? If they are sitting, they would be unable to strike a person on the head unless the person was standing within a foot of the passing vehicle with his head bent down. Is this reasonable? No. Is the soldier standing? If so, we still have the problem of a person standing within a foot of the passing vehicle” and, as you put it “The physics involved in striking a civilian with a bottle from a moving Humvee. Perhaps you just glanced at the post, or chose to ignore it, but the argument that it's nearly impossible for that part of the story to be true is very compelling.”I pointed out that didn’t make any sense either as people throw things from moving vehicles and hit people all the time and are charged with crimes for it. I’ve had several on my case load for this very action. Two of these persons were convicted because they not only managed to hit the pedestrians they managed to video tape the event as well. You then said “I never said it was impossible to throw a bottle and hit a person, but that's not what the accuser claims happened. Note the wording in his story:” Aren’t you then pointing out that the story never actually states the Coke bottles hit the pedestrian? I see this and agree this may in fact be true. I have no idea, and no way of finding out. Just putting forth an idea.



So let me see if I understand this. First it can’t be Bottles. I point out it certainly can be. Then it’s said that they couldn’t hit the person with the bottles. I point out people do that all the time, sometimes they even video tape the event. Now because the bottles are reported to be breaking and I agree with what you said, I’m and expert dancer? Ok if you say so.

Somehow, in the midst of all this jitterbugging, you lost sight of the crux of the matter. That is, of course, found in the following paragraph of the story.

"Guys in my unit, particularly the younger guys, would drive by in their Humvee and shatter bottles over the heads of Iraqi civilians passing by. They'd keep a bunch of empty Coke bottles in the Humvee to break over people's heads."

I maintain that it's a physical impossibility to shatter a Coke bottle on a human head, especially one which is most likely inside a turban.

The next time you're in the local supermarket or 7-11, pick up a glass bottle of Coke. Hold it as if to strike a blow. You'll quickly see that your hand covers so much of the area of the bottle that not much is left to strike a head. You'll also note that the thickness of the glass is such that it would not "shatter" against a human head.

The tale told is a fable.

 

[26 X World Champs]

I maintain that it's a physical impossibility to shatter a Coke bottle on a human head, especially one which is most likely inside a turban.

The tale told is a fable.

So, as always, you've slithered away from your "no glass bottles in Iraq" statement without comment? Remember when you so confidently wrote:

First, I don't believe that Coke that is packaged for overseas destinations is put up in glass bottles. In fact, not very much Coke in glass bottles is distributed in the US. Glass bottles are more expensive to produce than cans or plastic containers. For a given capacity, glass it is considerably heavier than an aluminum can or plastic containers. Glass bottles, because of their shape and thickness, occupy more transport space. Glass bottles are highly subject to breakage in the rough handling involved in intercontinental shipping and local distribution by military trucks over bad roads.

Hmmm....no glass bottles in Iraq because they would break too easily...yet now you say that they can't be used to hit someone because they're indestructible.

So which time were you wrong? No glass bottles because they don't have them in Iraq and they would break too easily OR is it physically "impossible" to break a bottle on someone's head?

What's really incredible is that you're wrong BOTH times! There are glass bottles in Iraq, they didn't break in transit, AND you most definitely can break them over someone's head. To prove it, please allow us to use your head as a test subject?

:Oopsie

 

[Pacridge]

Somehow, in the midst of all this jitterbugging, you lost sight of the crux of the matter. That is, of course, found in the following paragraph of the story.

"Guys in my unit, particularly the younger guys, would drive by in their Humvee and shatter bottles over the heads of Iraqi civilians passing by. They'd keep a bunch of empty Coke bottles in the Humvee to break over people's heads."

I maintain that it's a physical impossibility to shatter a Coke bottle on a human head, especially one which is most likely inside a turban.

The next time you're in the local supermarket or 7-11, pick up a glass bottle of Coke. Hold it as if to strike a blow. You'll quickly see that your hand covers so much of the area of the bottle that not much is left to strike a head. You'll also note that the thickness of the glass is such that it would not "shatter" against a human head.

The tale told is a fable.

I saw this earlier and decided not to comment on it due to the completely absurd logic of your argument. But since you’re bringing it up again. Here’s a site that offers photos from Iraq. http://story.news.yahoo.com/photos/ss/events/iraq/082701iraqplane

There’s a total of 205 photos in all. You have to view each photo one by one I viewed the first 40. Know how many turbans I saw Iraqis wearing? None. Know why? Because most Iraqi’s don’t wear turbans. Have you ever seen news footage of Iraq and there are a bunch of Iraqis with turbans? I haven’t. Think back to the famous pulling down of the Saddam Statute, how many of those guys were wearing turbans? None. Maybe they couldn't get hit with the bottle because they would all be riding camels too.



As for whether or not the Coke bottle would break if it hit their head or not. Again, does the story say the bottles break on their heads or over their heads? And just because the bottles you buy at your local 7-11 have thick glass doesn’t mean the glass produced in third world countries are the same. But as for your explanations of they can’t have Coke bottles, if they did have bottles they can’t hit them with the bottles and if they did hit them with bottles the bottles wouldn’t break because of all the turbans- it’s all non-sense. Your argument makes no sense.

 

[Fantasea]

So which time were you wrong? No glass bottles because they don't have them in Iraq and they would break too easily OR is it physically "impossible" to break a bottle on someone's head?

Off on another rant, I see.

Both statements are correct. What soldier prefers six ounces of Coke in a bottle to twelve ounces of Coke in a can?

 

[Pacridge]

Off on another rant, I see.

Both statements are correct. What soldier prefers six ounces of Coke in a bottle to twelve ounces of Coke in a can?

The soldier that only has the option to buy to the 6oz. bottle or go thirsty?

 

[26 X World Champs]

Off on another rant, I see.

Both statements are correct. What soldier prefers six ounces of Coke in a bottle to twelve ounces of Coke in a can?

What does this incoherent non-denial denial mean? Neither statement is close to correct, but since when are you able to discern fact from Fantasea?

BTW - I thought the bottles were too fragile to make it to Iraq? BTW - The average international Coke glass bottle is not 6 ounces, its .6 of one liter, about 16 ounces.....the bottle is tall and thin....perfect for head bashing....but of course there aren't any glass bottles in Iraq...and even if they were everyone knows Iraqi's heads are protected by TURBANS.....

:rock

 

[Pacridge]

What does this incoherent non-denial denial mean? Neither statement is close to correct, but since when are you able to discern fact from Fantasea?

BTW - I thought the bottles were too fragile to make it to Iraq? BTW - The average international Coke glass bottle is not 6 ounces, its .6 of one liter, about 16 ounces.....the bottle is tall and thin....perfect for head bashing....but of course there aren't any glass bottles in Iraq...and even if they were everyone knows Iraqi's heads are protected by TURBANS.....

:rock

Yes, but you can't hit them from a moving vehicle. You know physics will tell you that's impossible.

 

[26 X World Champs]

Here's a followup column from today's NY Times. I can hardly wait to read the denials regarding the photos mentioned. Is it really OK to glorify and revel in the killing of anyone?

Op-Ed Columnist
Lifting the Censor's Veil on the Shame of Iraq

By BOB HERBERT
Published: May 5, 2005

"Nobody wants to come forward about this," said Aidan Delgado. "I didn't want to come forward about this."

One of the distinctive things about the war in Iraq is the extraordinary proliferation of photos taken by G.I.'s that document the extreme horrors of warfare and, in many instances, the degrading treatment of Iraqi civilians by American troops.

When Mr. Delgado returned to Florida last year from a tour of Iraq that included a traumatic stint with a military police unit at Abu Ghraib prison, he thought he could pretty easily resume the ordinary life of a college student and leave his troubling war experiences behind.

But people kept asking him about Iraq. And he had many photos, some of them extremely difficult to look at, that were permanent reminders of events that are likely to stay with him for a lifetime.

There are pictures of children who were wounded and barely clinging to life, and some who appeared to be dead. There was a close-up of a soldier who was holding someone's severed leg. There were photos of Iraqis with the deathlike stare of shock, stunned by the fact that something previously unimaginable had just happened to them. There were photos of G.I.'s happily posing with the bodies of dead Iraqis.

This is what happens in war. It's the sickening reality that is seldom seen in the censored, sanitized version of the conflict that Americans typically get from the government and the media.

Americans' attitude toward war in general and this war in particular would change drastically if the censor's veil were lifted and the public got a sustained, close look at the agonizing bloodshed and other horrors that continue unabated in Iraq. If that happened, support for any war that wasn't an absolute necessity would plummet.

Mr. Delgado, 23, is a former Army reservist who was repelled by the violence and dehumanization of the war. He completed his tour in Iraq. But he sought and received conscientious objector status and was honorably discharged last January.

Some of the most disturbing photos in his possession were taken after G.I.'s at Abu Ghraib opened fire on detainees who had been throwing rocks at guards during a large protest. Four detainees were killed. The photos show American soldiers posing and goofing around with the bodies of the detainees.

In one shot a body bag has been opened to show the gruesome head wound of the corpse. In another, a G.I. is leaning over the top of the body bag with a spoon in his right hand, as if he is about to scoop up a portion of the dead man's wounded flesh.

"These pictures were circulated like trophies," Mr. Delgado said.

Some were posted in command headquarters. He said it seemed to him that the shooting of the prisoners and the circulation of the photos were viewed by enlisted personnel and at least some officers as acceptable - even admirable - behavior.

Mr. Delgado said that when his unit was first assigned to Abu Ghraib, he believed, like most of his fellow soldiers, that the prisoners were among the most dangerous individuals in Iraq.

He said: "Most of the guys thought, 'Well, they're out to kill us. These are the ones killing our buddies.' "

But while at work in a headquarters office, he said, he learned that most of the detainees at Abu Ghraib had committed only very minor nonviolent offenses, or no offenses at all. (Several investigations would subsequently reveal that vast numbers of completely innocent Iraqis were seized and detained by coalition forces.)

Several months ago Mr. Delgado gave a talk and presented a slide show at his school, New College of Florida in Sarasota. To his amazement, 400 people showed up. He has given a number of talks since then in various parts of the country.

His goal, he said, is to convince his listeners that the abuse of innocent Iraqis by the American military is not limited to "a few bad apples," as the military would like the public to believe. "At what point," he asked, "does a series of 'isolated incidents' become a pattern of intolerable behavior?"

The public at large and especially the many soldiers who have behaved honorably in Iraq deserve an honest answer to that question. It took many long years for the military to repair its reputation after Vietnam. Mr. Delgado's complaints and the entire conduct of this wretched war should be thoroughly investigated.

E-mail: bobherb@nytimes.com

 

[Pacridge]

Here's a followup column from today's NY Times. I can hardly wait to read the denials regarding the photos mentioned. Is it really OK to glorify and revel in the killing of anyone?

This isn't even possible. First the US military wouldn't have cameras in Iraq and if they did the film would certainly be destroyed in the long transit. It would be stored in damp containers on ocean going ships. It would get wet. It just wouldn't work even if it did make it to Iraq. Second the physic involved in taking the photos would never work. The gravitational pull on that side of the earth messes with the f-stop on the cameras, so they wouldn't work either. So there's no way you could ever have any such photos. This is all a fable. When will you ever learn?

 

[Squawker]

Two against one is a bit lopsided don't ya think? The question I have for you is why do you care what happens to the Iraqi people now? You didn't care when Saddam was murdering, torturing, raping or poisoning them, so why now? The NY Times prints these stories just to make the Administration look bad and pander to the left wing hate of the war. It only hurts our men and women in the service. You don't know for a fact what happened, how often it happened, or the circumstances under which it happened.