Let’s time, from this moment, how long it takes to find an article where the Downing Street Memo is referred to as “Downingate.”
PAD
Let’s time, from this moment, how long it takes to find an article where the Downing Street Memo is referred to as “Downingate.”
PAD
• 
Absolutely. Did you read what Senator Durbin actually said? Do you seriously think that the behavior described by the FBI agent is acceptable? If you answered “yes” to both questions, then you are undeniably pro-torture, and in my opinion, that makes you unAmerican to the extreme.
No Straw Man involved in this. It’s a simple matter of whether or not you have any human decency at all. Anyone criticizing Durbin who actually paid enough attention to Durbin to understand what he said is clearly pro-torture.
Wow, now to disagree with Mr Durbin is also to be unAmerican. I thought it was the right wingers who were supposed to be tossing out that one for dissent. Well, there are crazies on both sides.
Of course, I DON’T agree that the behavior described by the FBI agent is acceptable, so I guess my citezenship is safe for one day more. Whew.
Here’s what Ive been saying. Listen. By overstating the case people are making it a whole lot easier to ignore the actual abuses that have occured.
You can agree, you can disagree (as Bobb does, but at least he’s smart enough to know just what it is he’s disagreeing with!). But please spare me the outrage–if you think that it’s ok for politicians to throw around comparisons to Nazi’s and gulags and genocides, hey, that’s your choice. But it’s hard to take seriusly anyone who believes that to think otherwise makes them an UnAmerican lover of torture. Such rhetoric may wow them at 5th period lunch but it’s not appropriate for grown up talk.
So, for arguments’ sake, what circumstances and evidence of “immenent threat” to the United States would be necessary to allow interogators to seek information from detainees? Say if we had thousands and thousands of troops abroad that were under constant threat from terrorists? And if the government comes across such evidence, should the government immediately release it and its exact plans on how it intends to use it, thereby ensuring that our enemies can plan ahead, make sure the tea is hot, etc., for our troops when they get there?
And with Jason’s latest entry, you have the poster child for the ‘Straw Man’ argument.
“But please spare me the outrage“
Sorry, no. Outrage is EXACTLY what is called for right now. People are being tortured in my name as an American. You better dámņ well bet I am outraged. It makes me ill to think that these atrocities are being committed in the name of freedom, when torture doesn’t do anything at all positive.
If you aren’t outraged, you are not paying attention.
Torture is as unAmerican as it gets. I choose to call a spade a spade. Apparently you want to wait until Bush actually does set up a death camp before criticizing him.
Jason, taking you literally, you’re saying that by getting information from detainees that have been in prison for up to three years, we’re going to be making our deployed troops more safe.
I’ll give you some examples: there’s a nuclear bomb somewhere in the US. It’s going to detonate in 3 hours. Or 2 days. Heck, make it a week, or a month, even. I’d say that the imminent and real threat to millions of lives justifies a lot.
Or, there’s a plan to hijack some planes, and fly them into skyscrapers. The plan’s supposed to happen next week. That’s pretty imminent.
Where do I suggest we do something that would put our troops are greater risk? If we’re going to use torture, then there better be a compelling reason more specific than “national safety.” And at the very least, there’d better be some results….we don’t need to know about the plots they uncover and are in the process of stopping…but we should have some plots we’ve stopped that we can be told about now. And absent those kinds of results, there’s nothing to support the imminent nature of any danger we face that would even come close to justifying the use of extreme measures.
Yeah, so the worst part about sharing an office with someone of a different political persuasion, they make you look up things when you disagree.
From the Geneva Conventions as posted at:
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/lawofwar/geneva03.htm
“PART III
CAPTIVITY
SECTION I BEGINNING OF CAPTIVITY
ARTICLE 17
Every prisoner of war, when questioned on the subject, is bound to give only his surname, first names and rank, date of birth, and army, regimental, personal or serial number, or failing this, equivalent information.
If he wilfully infringes this rule, he may render himself liable to a restriction of the privileges accorded to his rank or status.
Each Party to a conflict is required to furnish the persons under its jurisdiction who are liable to become prisoners of war, with an identity card showing the owner’s surname, first names, rank, army, regimental, personal or serial number or equivalent information, and date of birth. The identity card may, furthermore, bear the signature or the fingerprints, or both, of the owner, and may bear, as well, any other information the Party to the conflict may wish to add concerning persons belonging to its armed forces. As far as possible the card shall measure 6.5 x 10 cm. and shall be issued in duplicate. The identity card shall be shown by the prisoner of war upon demand, but may in no case be taken away from him.
No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever. Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind. Prisoners of war who, owing to their physical or mental condition, are unable to state their identity, shall be handed over to the medical service. The identity of such prisoners shall be established by all possible means, subject to the provisions of the preceding paragraph.
The questioning of prisoners of war shall be carried out in a language which they understand.”
Yeah, so I’ll just be enjoying this nice meal of crow over here now…
Knuckles wrote: “His reaction is one of disbelief. A reaction that says “This shouldn’t happen in America. This doesn’t happen in America. This happens in places like Saddam’s Iraq, the former Soviet Union, Nazi Germany. Not America.” And now we are learning that the reality is something different. I don’t think he was out of line at all.”
As I pointed out, nearly 100 members of Congress have been to GITMO already, so when Durbin got this e-mail, why the hëll didn’t he just do the responsible thing and hop on a plane to GITMO and do his own investigating to find out if it was true? Instead, he went public without any investigation, which tells me this whole thing was a planned political move of some kind. And, as usual, as the political chess game unfolds, it’s the U.S. military en masse — people who are just trying to do their jobs under extraordinary conditions and scrutiny — who get smeared.
That sounds like Amnesty International blather.
Yeah, instantly dismiss a reputable source because Bush wants to piss on them like our soldiers have pìššëd on copies of the Koran – without giving a dámņ about the consequences.
I’ll give you some examples: there’s a nuclear bomb somewhere in the US. It’s going to detonate in 3 hours. Or 2 days. Heck, make it a week, or a month, even. I’d say that the imminent and real threat to millions of lives justifies a lot.
So what do we do? We torture the people we’ve had locked up for 3 years, without trial, and see if they know anything.
Yeah, that’ll help prevent another 9/11!
R., you’re right there. As we’ve seen, the only people that are going to suffer from this (other than the detainees themselves) are the poor enlisted folks that are only following orders. Rumsfeld signs the orders describing just what techniques are allowed…and some of those have resulted in the publicized abuses…yet he’s almost as insulated as his boss.
Things like this won’t stop until we make a change at the top.
You’re right. Because it would be so easy for a member of Congress to fly down to a military installation in Cuba and just catch them in the act. Just like it was a piece of cake for all those members of Congress that toured Abu Ghraib prior to the leaking of the prisoner abuse images. “Curses! A member of Congress has infiltrated one of the most secure military installations in the world and discovered all of our secrets! We would have been fine, if it hadn’t been for those meddling kids!”
Sorry, that doesn’t strike me as much of a solution at all. Any truth in a situation like that is going to come from whistleblowers ala Abu Ghraib.
Bobb:
All together now (well, except X-ray, I guess..)
BUSH SUCKS!!!
😉
“Bobb:
All together now (well, except X-ray, I guess..)
BUSH SUCKS!!!
;-)”
Well, yeah, I thought it was kinda assumed that all my posts ended with that…I just leave it off to save key strokes.
Saves a wee bit of bandwidth as well…
The great thing about sharing an office with a person of the opposite political persuasion is the ability to get them to look up information when you disagree, and you’re too lazy to do it yourself. And its even more fun when you’re right, and they get to eat crow.
And, yeah. Bush Sucks.
Nice of you to make your own opportunity to minimize extremism on the right, Bill.
Knuckles wrote: “You’re right. Because it would be so easy for a member of Congress to fly down to a military installation in Cuba and just catch them in the act. Just like it was a piece of cake for all those members of Congress that toured Abu Ghraib prior to the leaking of the prisoner abuse images. “
There were Congressional visits to Abu Ghraib prison prior to the events that led to the scandal? That’s news to me. When were they?
GITMO, by contrast, is under a microscope. Nearly 100 members of Congress have visited; as have 1,000 media. The Red Cross has free run of the place, plus there’s a ton on military scrutiny going on. And you obviously do not understand the power a member of Congress wields in a visitation situation.
And your inferences that the U.S. military guards are just sitting around waiting to torture people when the coast is clear is just plain insulting to military members in general.
R. Maheras:
According to many news sources (NY Times, BBC, ect.) the Red Cross HAS concluded (at the end of last year) that the U.S. has been intentionally using psychological and sometimes physical coercion “tantamount to torture” on prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.
“16 May, 1918
The U.S. Sedition Act”
And the point is….? “
My point has nothing to do with the legitimacy of Gitmo, but rather the legitimacy of Durbin. If there are problems with Gitmo-fine. If there is improper behavior-fine. But having a US Senator package legitimate qualms inside sensationalistic soundbytes does more to hurt and hinder than help.
Though the Sedition act was repealed, or allowed to expire, it’s tenet of subversion and incitment rings true here.
Don’t you people understand that AQ is taught to cry fowl at things that are considered minor at best just so Amnesty International and Time/Newsweek/whoever can fuel the anti-US machine? All Durbin is doing is playing into that. Regardless of what has occured prior, our enemies are watching us and our leaders must exercise restraint and intelligence in their actions. That’s not censorship, that’s not rejection, that’s called “time and place.”
“And your inferences that the U.S. military guards are just sitting around waiting to torture people when the coast is clear is just plain insulting to military members in general.”
I’ll be sure to tell my brother that (E-8, US Army). And I’m not inferring anything of the sort. What I am saying is that if a member of Congress is going to inspect anything, whether it be a US military installation or freaking Jonestown, they aren’t going to be able to keep it a secret. And if they aren’t going to be able to keep it a secret, that gives people time to clean things up.
Hëll, if Durbin had gone down there and come back with a report of abuses, would you have believed him? I truly doubt it. Do I think that members of the US Military spend their every waking moment looking for the precise time to torture someone? No, I don’t. And I inferred nothing of the sort. Do I think torture occurs at the hands of US personnel (both military AND civilian) in installations such as Guantanamo? Yes, I do. Some of it is deliberate, and I’d wager most of it is due to lack of training and overwork. However, that doesn’t make it any less wrong.
BBayliss wrote: “According to many news sources (NY Times, BBC, ect.) the Red Cross HAS concluded (at the end of last year) that the U.S. has been intentionally using psychological and sometimes physical coercion “tantamount to torture” on prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.”
And therein lies the rub. What constitutes torture? Smarter people than you or I wrestle with that argument every single day.
You, perhaps, might say that showing suggestive photos to a GITMO prisoner is torture because of the prisoner’s religious beliefs. Yet, if someone suggested to you that it was torture for the government to force a pious pharmacist in the U.S. to dispense an abortion pill to a customer, would you feel the same way?
Food for thought.
RE: Posted by BBayliss at June 17, 2005 12:35 PM
“Stalin’s “gulag” of harsh and inhumane conditions did not occur overnight. The American “gulag” is only in its infancy. Only time will determine if the numbers between the two gulags are comparable in harshness and being inhumane. “
From churchforsanctuary.com
Also, from your own quote, it took 13 years for Stalin to amass those numbers. Bush has only been at it a little over 2 years.
—————–
As far as your bully argument goes, let’s not ever forget who was first attacked here. We have every right to defend ourselves, and to take prudent steps to ensure we are not attacked again.
Yes, let’s not forget who attacked. And it WASN’T Iraq, where an increasing number of detainees are coming from.
Don’t you people understand that AQ is taught to cry fowl at things that are considered minor at best just so Amnesty International and Time/Newsweek/whoever can fuel the anti-US machine?
If the people claiming they were tortured are doing so because they are Al-Queda members (trained to ‘disassemble’), why were they released?
“Though the Sedition act was repealed, or allowed to expire, it’s tenet of subversion and incitment rings true here.”
You know what’s more likely to incite acts against our government? When our government condones and orders the abuse of prisoners in violation of international law and basic human rights.
Those tenants of the Sedition/Espionage act that limit free speech are viewed as some of the biggest violations of First Amendment rights ever ennacted by the government. Even during times of war, maybe especially during times of war, the public and elected officials of this country must be allowed to make statements like this, to question the acts our government takes. Especially now, when the only check on the morality of our actions is ourselves.
“Though the Sedition act was repealed, or allowed to expire,”
It was repealed, but only after sanity started to resurface.
>Yet, if someone suggested to you that it was torture for the government to force a pious pharmacist in the U.S. to dispense an abortion pill to a customer, would you feel the same way?
My parents are both pharmacists. What right do they have to inflict THEIR opinions on their customers?? NONE. And I’d argue that they’d back me up on that opinion. If a “pious” pharmacist has a problem dispensing a certain pill, I’d suggest it’s time for that Pharmacist to start looking for another line of work.
Posted by: Michael Brunner at June 17, 2005 04:38 PM
Hey, Mikey, are you arguing AGAINST me? Cuz it sure seems like you are arguing my point for me. Thanks!
R. Maheras: My apologies about the Congressional visits to Abu Ghraib. I had them confused with visits from the Red Cross. My argument had to take a backseat to coding.
Jesus … It is not WHAT is being said, but how.
“Even during times of war, maybe especially during times of war, the public and elected officials of this country must be allowed to make statements like this, to question the acts our government takes. Especially now, when the only check on the morality of our actions is ourselves.”
Agreed. But there is a clear and present difference between “making statements” and “going for shock”. What good has any of this done? Instead of bringing to light problems he used fear mongering via erroneous comparisons to get a soundbyte. For what? So people can get pìššëd øff and we can get another round of useless, divisive bantering? In this case the bell was rattled through seditious speak; it was neither productive nor peacefully received. People are pìššëd øff and skirting the real issue, hence … seditious language.
And …
“If the people claiming they were tortured are doing so because they are Al-Queda members (trained to ‘disassemble’), why were they released?”
Gee, I don’t know, why don’t you ask Amnesty International. In lieu of that, though, knowing full well that reports of “torture” (which in this, as in MOST cases amount to non-violent means that would make frat. hazings laugh) are coached, accusations of more “abuse” should be handled a little more intelligently.
“going for shock”.
“And then Durbin said this: “If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime–Pol Pot or others–that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.”
HOW in the HÊLL can you justify in your mind in saying the he is going for shock??
If I own a business, don’t I have the right to sell what I want to sell (as long as it is legal), and not sell what I don’t want to sell, for whatever reason?
If someone wishes to purchase something I don’t sell, they can certainly go to one of my competitors.
Is there really a requirement for pharmacists to sell any and every available medicine? It seems to me that such a requirement might make an undue burden on some smaller pharmacies that don’t have the warehouses to stock every conceivable medicine known to man (or woman).
A pious pharmacist would have the exact same right to inflict their opinions on the customer, as does a pious bookseller.
Comic bookstores don’t have to sell Manga. (or anything of PAD’s, if they’re so disinclined. They might lose my business if they made that decision, but that’s their decision.)
Computer stores can refuse to sell PCs, or refuse to sell Macs. They don’t have to sell both.
And the list goes on.
“But please spare me the outrage”
Sorry, no. Outrage is EXACTLY what is called for right now. People are being tortured in my name as an American. You better dámņ well bet I am outraged. It makes me ill to think that these atrocities are being committed in the name of freedom, when torture doesn’t do anything at all positive.
If you aren’t outraged, you are not paying attention.
Torture is as unAmerican as it gets. I choose to call a spade a spade. Apparently you want to wait until Bush actually does set up a death camp before criticizing him.
Every time you come close to making a valid point you have to take it 10 steps too far and blow it. No wonder Durbin seems like such a moderate guy to you.
No, Laura, I’ve already critisized Bush on a number of issues, with nary a “death camp” in sight. The “outrage” I referred to was your feigned offense at my supposed support for terrorism, when what I have been saying, in words a marsupial could decipher, is that extremist over the top language like Durbins hurts the cause he espouses. You are free to disagree and if you could muster up the character to do so without resorting to calling your opponents unamerican supporters of torture you might even come out ahead. But if you prefer to substitute anger for logic, hey, it’s a free country (and there, I gave you a nice setup–feel free to chime in with a pithy bon mot like “Yeah, until Bush declares martial law” or “Not it’s not!” or “Right, that’s what you pro-torture fascists WANT us to think!” or something).
Mike says:
Anyone criticizing Durbin who actually paid enough attention to Durbin to understand what he said is clearly pro-torture.
Wow, now to disagree with Mr Durbin is also to be unAmerican.
Nice of you to make your own opportunity to minimize extremism on the right, Bill.
Er…sorry, I’m missing your point. Actually, my comment about “now to disagree with Mr Durbin is also to be unAmerican.” was in response to Laura’s comment where she tossed out the phrase. Laura believes that to critisize Mr Durbin is to be absolutely pro-torture. She didn’t pussyfoot around the sunbject, to her credit. I think that’s a crazy position, as crazy as anyone saying to critisize the president is to be anti-american, pro-terrorist, whatever. Don’t know how you got anything about extremism on the right out of this–we have no idea who the alleged torturer was or what his political affiliation was.
Personally, I think there should be a great deal of oversite on the conditions of Gitmo and torture should not be a part of our arsenal. Of course, we will disagree with the definition of torture–rap music, gimme a break. In some ways we have invited trouble–forcing guards to wear gloves when handling the Koran because our gentle captives think them unclean is practically an invitation for trouble (especially when these same guards witness some captives using the pages of their sacred text to stuff up the toilet).
None of which had anything to do with the fact that–in my opinion–Durbin has come across as an ášš and because the Democrats can never do what the Republicans did to Trent Lott, he will continue to be a bleeding wound. Which is too bad because in this acse there was a valid issue. Too bad the wrong guy became the poster boy.
But at least the Republicans will get to have some fun, like at http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2005/06/from_the_desk_o.html
Mr. Hector Gutierrez
Gutierrez Bros. Landscaping
Arlington, VA
Dear Mr. Gutierrez:
Nothing could have prepared me for the shock that awaited as I exited the front door of my home early Wednesday morning, where I discovered that your lawn crew had cut a swath of environmental destruction across my yard so horrifying that it only can be compared to the Rape of Nanking. I can scarcely bring myself to describe the killing fields that are my North azalea beds and the brutal degradation and torture suffered by the bluegrass around the locust tree by the rear patio. I am writing to inform you that I have contacted the US Department of Interior to conduct a full independent investigation into Gutierrez Brothers’ actions in this matter. Please be advised that you may be subpoenaed for records pertaining to mower height, pruning shear maintenance, and leaf blower emissions. I would also advise your crewmen to heed the lessons of the Judgement At Nurenburg: although they may be spared the justice due their superiors, “I was only following orders” is not an excuse.
Sincerely,
Senator Richard J. Durbin
Washington, DC
Wait…they played rap music at Soviet Gulags?
BBayliss wrote: “My parents are both pharmacists. What right do they have to inflict THEIR opinions on their customers?? NONE. And I’d argue that they’d back me up on that opinion. If a “pious” pharmacist has a problem dispensing a certain pill, I’d suggest it’s time for that Pharmacist to start looking for another line of work.”
Various methods of psychological “torture” affect different people in different ways, and some, not at all. Thus, only an individual can really decide what is torture to them — the opinion of your parents doesn’t matter, except in their own individual cases.
And one could just as easily argue that the customer can go elsewhere to buy their pill, and that there is no reason to “torture” the pharmacist by forcing them to either comply with dispensing or lose their livelihood over a pill that did not exist when they entered their career field.
“HOW in the HÊLL can you justify in your mind in saying the he is going for shock??”
Quite easily, actually. Have you, gee I don’t know, looked at some of these comments, listened to the radio, or read a newspaper about this today? He made a sensationalistic statement, which by nature is intended to shock for the purpose of getting attention. I expect this kind of conduct from Michael Moore, not a US Senator.
Posted by John at June 17, 2005 05:17 PM
If I own a business, don’t I have the right to sell what I want to sell (as long as it is legal), and not sell what I don’t want to sell, for whatever reason?
You are viewing pharmacists as owners. Pharmacists are very rarely (in today’s corporate world) the owners of the pharmacy.
As an owner, you are right, you DO have every right to sell/not sell whatever you want (within the law.)
As an EMPLOYEE (as most pharmacists are) you have NO RIGHT to dispense morality.
“I expect this kind of conduct from Michael Moore, not a US Senator.”
!!! HAve you actually paid attention to senators lately? The only surprise..and not much of one…is that it’s a sensationalistic statement coming from a Democrat rather than a Republican.
“Wait…they played rap music at Soviet Gulags?”
Just so long as they didn’t play the Scorpions. Talk about violating the Geneva Convention…
Scavenger: That’s because if the sensationalism comes from a Democrat, they are anti-American and helping the terrorists. If it comes from a Republican, they simply mis-spoke.
Here I am!
Rock you like a hurricane!
“Just so long as they didn’t play the Scorpions.”
I love Winds of Change, thank you very much.
But perhaps the gulag isn’t the best place to rock like a huricane.
Of interest to the topic, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart did an expose’ last night on the very topic of referencing Hitler and Nazis.
Quite easily, actually. Have you, gee I don’t know, looked at some of these comments, listened to the radio, or read a newspaper about this today? He made a sensationalistic statement, which by nature is intended to shock for the purpose of getting attention. I expect this kind of conduct from Michael Moore, not a US Senator.
Man, I can’t even BEGIN to discuss your point with you.
me: “How can you say he said it for shock value?”
you: “He said it for shock value because I say he said it for shock value.”
That’s your OPINION, not to be confused with the facts.
Or maybe, just maybe, he said it because he was frickin’ shocked himself.
Just thinking outside the box.
Knuckles: Gotcha…
Ok to sum up: Torturing prisoners – not Nazi-like.
Letting Terri Schavo die—Nazi-Like.
Knowing is half the battle.
Knuckles wrote: “If it comes from a Republican, they simply mis-spoke.”
Not in my opinion. These days, it seems there are “dumb waves” emanating from far too many members of Congress on both sides of the aisle.
Now you’ve got it, Scavenger.
We fight for freedom (wherever there’s trouble), you know. Unless we’re being seditious, of course.
Posted by Scavenger at June 17, 2005 05:45 PM
Knuckles: Gotcha…
Ok to sum up: Torturing prisoners – not Nazi-like.
Letting Terri Schavo die—Nazi-Like.
Knowing is half the battle.
What in the hëll are you talking about?
R: I won’t argue with that. This time, I was purposefully engaging in the word of the day: hyperbole.
“Wait…they played rap music at Soviet Gulags?”
Yeah, Ice Cube just did a cover of Smelo, tovaritshi v’ nogu Slavnoe More, Sviashchennyj Baikal (“With Duty And Perseverance We will Increase Our Tractor Output”).
He was referring to this post:
“Scavenger: That’s because if the sensationalism comes from a Democrat, they are anti-American and helping the terrorists. If it comes from a Republican, they simply mis-spoke.”
and then paraphrasing some of the exchange between Laura and whomever it was that got all uppity about the “outrageous” language of Sen. Durbin.
Hey, he got Hannity all pìššëd øff about it, so Durbin can’t be ALL bad.
“These days, it seems there are “dumb waves” emanating from far too many members of Congress on both sides of the aisle.”
Won’t get an argument from me on that…I just find saying “Torturing people is nazi like” is more acceptable than saying “You’re a traitor if you don’t think we should invade other countries”