It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Crossing Moral Boundaries on ATS : Promoting and Excusing Murder, Torture and War Crimes

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 01:17 AM
Ok, I'm going to make this quick. There is a thread out right now concerning a 10 year old girl who was fatally shot by accident in Iraq. She was hiding for cover while the mother signalled for help. Firing a warning shot (in the mothers direction...) the bullet kills the 10 year old.

As should be expected, the majority of ATS posters display sorrow for the childs passing, outrage at the situation which caused the shooting, and we head into a general Iraq tangent. This is all expected.

What I did not expect was to see members defend the manslaughter of a 10 year old child. Not just excuse of the murder, but statements to the effect that she deserved to die for being where she was. Or that she 'Looked suspicious' Or even that the war itself is enough excuse for the murder of children....

What I do not expect to see in certain threads, is the defense of torture against innocent, untried prisoners. But I have seen that as well. We all have. Such sentiments are almost wallpapered in our threads on ATS by the same members again and again...

Basically, I do not expect to see things like murder and torture being promoted and excused on ATS. Likewise, I am certain the moderators and staff don't like to see this either...

If I remember correctly there are Terms and Conditions within this site that prohibit the talk of illegal activity? Mods, is this correct?

In that case, what should we make of a situation where people are excusing and even promoting the murder and torture of innocent people? This is not just a political issue... I think we can all agree that politics has severely perverted the moral measuring stick of this society... but this is not a political issue. It's not even a moral issue. It's the LAW.

It is illegal to murder and torture innocent people or civillians. War crimes constitute illegal activity. If you are excusing or promoting war crimes, you are breaching site contracts.

Or am I wrong?

Thanks for any clarification... and I'd like to know what other ATS members think about this.

[edit on 14-3-2008 by NewWorldOver]

posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 01:46 AM
I think this doesn't really belong as a seperate thread here.

It really isn't board business, or a question, just appears to be a venting of anger from a thread.

posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 01:48 AM

Originally posted by Holygamer
It really isn't board business, or a question, just appears to be a venting of anger from a thread.

No, it's board business. And the thread was just one example... you know that.

Promoting murder or war crimes makes ATS look bad and it's going on in almost ALL of our political news threads concerning Iraq, Torture etc.

The policy is that illegal discussion is not allowed. Promotion of war crimes and murder should constitute illegal discussion.

[edit on 14-3-2008 by NewWorldOver]

posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 01:50 AM
They aren't running out and saying

"lets go murder babies"

They are saying that they feel that the situation, as horrendous as it was, is accidental. Thus not a "war crime."

as for other threads promoting murder. I haven't seen any. feel like sharing some links?

posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 02:07 AM
reply to post by NewWorldOver

Is saying that murder should be legal the same thing as promoting the commission of a crime? Because I think murder should be legal.
I don't see how the promotion of any act of violence could make ATS look worse ( since it is supposed to be a forum devoted to the free exchange of ideas, since " to the sincere student every day is fortunate ", since there is no such thing as a stupid question, since every falsehood is actually the marvelous approximate provisional truth that has brought one alive to this point, since, as Oprah says, " Everybody is just doing the best thing that they know how ") than your seeming advocacy of censorship. Bad ideas suffer from exposure, or are people too stupid to tell, and in that case, why are you talking?
Furthermore, and this is just my bias, I think your use of the word "moral" assumes facts not in evidence.
Show me the God who established these morals.
Or maybe I missed the meeting where all the right-thinking people established the basis of morality in five easy steps. ( The golden rule not accepted here ).
It seems to me that the whole concept of hate crime, thought crime, forbidden ideas, punishable an act of violence against all individual minds , comparable to the violence involved in all human murders to date.
But that's hardly quantifiable, it's just a question of taste.

posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 02:42 AM
reply to post by Holygamer

I definitely think it is Board Business.

Ironically, for the past few weeks, I've been thinking along the same lines. But my concern is closer to home than Iraq.

Recently, I've seen several posts where members have called for the use of violence, the carrying of arms to protests, and more. And for the most part, these posts go unchalleged by the mods. I don't remember ATS being so lenient in the past.

To be sure, these posts I speak of are usually a reaction to some real or perceived government wrong. Still, that doesn't make them right, imo.

If I were a CT, I would say that these posts were being allowed to live because they work towards an end. They help to fulfill an agenda.

I may be paranoid, but prying eyes might interpret these calls for armed violence as a haven for wild-eyed anarchists. And the attention they may attract is not the kind you want.

Just my .02

posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 03:13 AM

Originally posted by NewWorldOver
It is illegal to murder and torture innocent people or civillians. War crimes constitute illegal activity. If you are excusing or promoting war crimes, you are breaching site contracts.

It seems that what you are saying here basically is that you'd like to see an end to threads that you personally find unpalatable, and in order to attempt to reach that goal you're trying to use the T&C to justify it.

In the case you refer to about the Iraqi girl, quite simply no one apart from the people on the ground at the time know the full circumstances of the incident. There are conflicting reports about what happened - as there always will be in a combat zone where both sides are heavily involved in a propaganda exercise.

No criminal charges have been bought in that case yet as I'm aware. Despite how strongly you may feel about it, its possible that what happened was a tragic accident. Its also possible that it wasn't.

But to get to your point about the T&C, there is a huge difference between discussing an issue, promoting it and carrying it out.

And, if you think about it, the very essence of conspiracy involves illegality or subterfuge that may be classed as illegality - be it the US Governments actions in Iraq, the New York Mayor using prostitutes, Police misuse of tasers, the US Government potentially agreeing to the clandestine abduction of citizens by aliens, the British Queen mother allegedly being a lizard and eating captured children.... you get the point I'm sure.

Discussion of those issues is the lifeblood of ATS. Are you suggesting that discussion of those issues is promotion of them and therefore we shouldn't talk about anything?

Sorry but I don't buy that idea.

You have to remember that there is a "War on terror" going on with two idealogical sides, and both sides are going to have distinctly differing views on the issues to hand. Some people can't see past their own viewpoint initially. The only way to counter that is to discuss, educate, review, discuss some more and eventually, hopefully with civilised discussion a consensus will be reached.

I will say that there is a massive difference between discussion and overt glorification of the issues to which you refer. Such issues may break the T&C as trolling/deliberate flaming of the thread, being off topic and possibly ill-mannered. But even then I say may, because there are issues of context that need to be taken into account, and every case is dealt with on its individual merits after deliberation.

Hope that helps

[edit on 14/0308/08 by neformore]

[edit on 14/0308/08 by neformore]

posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 05:35 AM
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.

posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 06:20 AM
first, I don't know the full story of the girls death....but if they just fired a warning shot and she happened to be in the isn't murder!!!

second, I kind of agree with you on the idea that some of the posts on here do promote torture, murder, ect....but it is good that these things are discussed, since it might alert others that it is going on. unfortunately, one sided discussions are not realistic discussion, nor interesting ones. you seem to want to silence one side of the discussion. I think if we just present both sides, well, most people are intelligent enough to be able to make up their own minds as far as what is right, and what is wrong. by silencing one side, you may just silence the other side too...then the awareness will not be generated.

posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 06:24 AM
There is nothing wrong with that thread, just because you think it is a war crime does not mean it constitutes one.

I've seen threads on ATS that have promoted murder [SkepticOverlord and Springer will give examples if needed], the NWO section (which I am the FSME for) had a thread once calling for assassination of NWO agents.

Heck, I remember one person posting we should shoot feds too

Those examples did break T&C

And, I like to point out, if someone does not agree with you then that poster is not "brainwashed"

posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 06:44 AM

And how is all of this fact or the truth? It sounds like you are the one who is pissed off for some reason. Guess what, I am an American soldier, I have served in Iraq and have had friends die there. It's important to have an open mind about things, this just sounds like narrow minded ranting to me. I take great pride in serving my country. I did'nt join the Army to mindlessly kill people, I joined to serve my country. I've helped out Iraqi children when I was there. Having friends and family send things like food, clothes and candy to give to them. I do, however respect that you have your own opinion. It's a freedom you have. Soldiers put their lives on the line so others don't have to.

[edit on 14-3-2008 by Freqzer0]

posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 06:59 AM
In response to the OP:

I don't like what those who disagree with me have to say so, they shouldn't be allowed to say it.

Fancy dress, but that's the argument.

[edit on 14-3-2008 by SlightlyAbovePar]

posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 07:32 AM
Here is an example where the poster was warned, yet the post was allowed to remain...Should the post be deleted in this situation?

Rove thread

Well, props to the two students, too bad the rest of the room didn't come to their aid! I guess solving this peacefully by performing "a citizens' arrest" isn't going to work people. It's time to shoot to kill....start the revolt people!!! F U Bush and cronies, you Nazi scum.

MOD-Edit. Please review this link:

General Discussion Etiquette

We´ve received complaints about this post. Please refrain from death threats towards other citizens while posting on ATS.

[edit on 11-3-2008 by Skyfloating]

posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 07:37 AM
All I can say is that its very difficult and delicate to balance between everyones right to free speech while remaining civil and legal. But the discussion of what constitutes free speech, civility, legality is one of the most important topics of our time.

posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 07:43 AM
The question for me is one of morality, rather than the T&C.

I've read the thread in question, and refrained from posting because I would have been in danger of contravening the T&C if I had got into a discussion with someone who thought that this incident was justified in any way, shape or form.

That was my choice, and I'm glad I made the (for me) right one.

I didn't see anything against the T&C in the thread, even though I found some of the points of view a little disturbing - again, that's my choice, and is a question of personal morality or ethics.

We all know that war's a dirty business and things happen that shouldn't, BUT in my opinion, calling for the T&C to be used to silence those who have an opposing moral or ethical view is against everything that ATS stands for.

It comes down to a simple choice IMO - if you don't like what someone posts, or feel strongly enough about what someone has said, that you may be in danger of breaking the rules, make a choice - to post or not to post. And if you feel it contravenes the T&C, use the alert button - that's what it's there for.

Just don't contravene them yourself - remember we're all responsible for our own posts.

Seeing that someone may have (in your view) a rather bloodthirsty way of looking at things is no reason to let yourself down and get a warn.

There's other options - if the blood starts to boil, take a break. Walk away and calm down then use reason rather than emotion, a far better option IMO.

We don't all look at things the same way - if we did, ATS would be a pretty boring place.

posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 07:45 AM
edit redundancy

[edit on 14-3-2008 by Skyfloating]

posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 07:47 AM
Another factor that needs to be taken into account is the majority of posters who call for murder or crimes against elected officials are idiots. I and probably the mods/members take no notice of them. A simple warn and that's it.

Anyone who calls people nazi scum and calls for shoot to kill is nothing but an immature poster who we should all just ignore them.

posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 07:49 AM
reply to post by Skyfloating

I agree with you completely. It is for that reason alone that I remembered this post and have watched to see what would happen to it. Free speech is something we must protect with our lives. We cannot let it go the way of the "started with the seatbelt law" black hole that has stripped our rights in the name of taking care of our personal safety. My personal safety is my business not any governments. The day we passed that law the water in the pot in which the frog sat began to boil. This post, however, well.....therein lies the line. Which side of that line it is on is the question. It could indeed go either way....just one I've been watching...tough job the mods have really.


posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 07:51 AM
Yes...where´s the line. Thats a tough one. And I dont have the final answer to that. Thats one of the things ATS as a whole explores, imo.

posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 08:04 AM
Humm, I am afraid that I have seen a lot of trends going on in ATS as it gets bigger and its popularity bring all kinds of views and minds to it.

But like somebody said already this call freedom of speech and this what this board is all about.

Now jsobecky what you posted is part of our constitutional rights in this nation so don't even get me started

And for the particular thread that brought this issue into this forum, I for one read the tittle I knew exactly were it was going.

If is sympathy what people want you will get it, but at the end is unavoidable that all sort of views and opinions will take over the thread.

That is why I stay away from it.

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in