Skip to comments.The Horrors Really Are Your America, Mr Bush (Another conservative turncoat jumps the shark)
Posted on 06/03/2006 5:50:22 PM PDT by quidnunc
"This is not America." Those words were President George W Bushs attempt to explain the horrors of Abu Ghraib prison on the Arabic-language network Alhurra in 2004. He spoke the words as if they were an empirical matter, but a cognitive dissonance could be sensed through them.
If the men and women who tortured and abused and murdered at Abu Ghraib did not represent America, what did they represent? They wore the uniforms of the United States military. They were under the command of the American military. In the grotesque, grinning photographs they clearly seemed to believe that what they were doing was routine and approved.
And we now know from the official record that Donald Rumsfeld, the defence secretary, had personally authorised the use of unmuzzled dogs to terrify detainees long before Abu Ghraib occurred, exactly as we saw in those photos. Does the secretary of defence not represent America?
Almost two years after the torture story broke Congress finally roused itself and passed an amendment to a defence appropriations bill by John McCain that forbade the use of any "cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment" of detainees by any American official anywhere in the world. It was passed by veto-proof margins and Bush signed it. But he appended a "signing statement" insisting that, as commander-in-chief, he retained the right to order torture if he saw fit.
And so on May 18 the nominee for CIA director, Michael Hayden, was asked directly by Senator Dianne Feinstein whether he regarded "waterboarding" as a legitimate interrogation technique. Hayden replied: "Let me defer that to closed session, and I would be happy to discuss it in some detail."
Huh? Why a closed session? Isnt the law crystal clear? Isnt strapping a person to a board, tilting him so that his head is below his feet, and pouring water through a cloth into his mouth to simulate drowning a form of "cruel, inhuman and degrading" treatment? And isnt that illegal? In America? Or is that not America either?
That cat's a lousy commie, that's for sure.
Murdered? What happened at Abu Ghraib under the command of U.S. forces wasn't much more in the way of torture than a college sorority hazing incident. The liberal slimes in the media are beyond help, their overwhelming hate of the U.S. military, and the Bush administration in particular, is off any scale remotely close to normalcy.
By international law, the detainees are spies -- or worse. Summary execution is the most humane possible outcome. Felons are a domestic matter.
Ha ha, maybe he should marry that Huffington woman, she's an expert.
"...the use of unmuzzled dogs to terrify detainees long before Abu Ghraib occurred..." NOT TORTURE!
He hasnt been a "conservative" since '03. He does like to advertise for male sex partners (tops, specifically) on the internet, though, in case anyone cares.
Huh?!? Sez who? We have admitted that many of the detainees were innocents picked up in dragnets, or turned in by unscrupulous informants (rival clans, etc.)!
Andy Andy Andy. What a shame that you have to insist on blaming a whole country for the actions a few. Could you possibly have an agenda?
How does he qualify as a conservative?
More British bullsh*t. Did I miss anything?
P.S. info. My primary is over, but because of legal and ethical problems, the incumbent may withdraw/be forced out. He is also losing in the latest poll (5/28) to the Democrat challenger. I seek to be the replacement nominee. For more information see my website. I still need your help.
Sez the Geneva Conventions and the Rules of War.
Not an atrocity bump!
Replacement nominee bump!
If the men and women who tortured and abused and murdered at Abu Ghraib
NO murder occurred at Abu Ghraib...no one ever said they murdered anyone...and actions there did not constitute "torture" in the sense of what occurred there under Saddam Hussein. Abu Ghraib was bad, BUT not torture.
actually, Andrew's ticked that W jumped into the homosexual marriage issue, so decided to attack him on Abu Gharib
With Andrew Sullivan around, you really need someone protecting your backside.
Good point. Sullivan probably disliked Clinton for his "Don't ask, don't tell" policy.
Sullivan's been out of his freakin' mind for years now. This comes as no suprise.
I do not this jerks reputation. I do know from what I read here that he is full of sheite.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.