Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
BEHOLD THE TORTURE APOLOGISTS
3 views
Skip to first unread message
AbelM...@webtv.net
May 17, 2004, 5:56:44 AM5/17/04
to
BEHOLD THE TORTURE APOLOGISTS
Wed May 12, 2004
Republicans Oppose Basic American Values
NEW YORK--"If American life and values change radically because of the
attacks," ABC's Sam Donaldson wrote, ten days after 9/11, "the
terrorists will have won."
Well.
As photo after photo confirms story after story of systemic torture,
rape and murder by American servicemen, CIA goons and mercenary
rent-a-cops in U.S. concentration camps from Abu Ghraib prison in
Baghdad to Bagram Air Base near Kabul to Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, a
legion of right-wing fifth columnists is finally revealing themselves as
a band of wannabe fascists.
Incredible as it seems, these "Americans" actually approve of torture.
Talk radio king Rush Limbaugh, comparing the SS-style siccing of vicious
German shepherds on Iraqi POWs to a fraternity initiation prank, led the
charge of the torture apologists: "Sounds to me in the context of war
this is pretty good intimidation--and especially if you put a woman in
front of them and then spread those pictures around the Arab world." If
cruelty is carefully calibrated to cultural mores, who cares whether
it's wrong?
Besides, argues El Rushbaugh, the torturers were just funnin': "You ever
heard of emotional release? You heard of need to blow some steam off?"
Boys (and girls) will be (psycho) boys.
Days after articles of impeachment were introduced against him in the
House of Representatives, the indefatigable Don Rumsfeld told a Senate
committee that even now, even after Abu Ghraib, denying POWs sleep,
starving them, subjecting them to painful "stress positions" and other
forms of torture are still being inflicted upon inmates--guilty or
innocent and always uncharged--throughout his Defense Department gulags.
His reception was a friendly one.
"I'm probably not the only one up at this table that is more outraged by
the outrage than we are by the treatment [of Iraqi POWs]," spat Senator
James Inhofe of Oklahoma, a card-holding member of the Party of Lincoln,
to fellow members of the Armed Services Committee. "You know, they're
not there for traffic violations. They're murderers, they're terrorists,
they're insurgents."
Actually, according to the Red Cross report on Abu Ghraib, 90 percent of
the detainees had been "arrested by mistake."
Inhofe's rant continued: "I have to say when we talk about the treatment
of these prisoners that I would guess that these prisoners wake up every
morning thanking Allah that Saddam Hussein is not in charge of these
prisons." Yup, that's no doubt the expression on their faces:
gratitude.
Liberals don't have a monopoly on moral relativism.
You have to go down a long way to get to the darkest cellars of
immorality. As Bush Administration apologists point out, there are
worse fates-- far worse fates--than being stripped, beaten, bitten or
even anally raped. A worse fate befell Nick Berg, the cellular phone
entrepreneur who was beheaded by Iraqi insurgents. So what's the point?
Dishonest attempts to reduce the moral baseline merely reiterate one's
own ethical inferiority. The fact that other human beings can conceive
of miseries even crueler and more painful to inflict cannot exculpate us
for the sins we commit. Is the robber less guilty because he can look
down on the kidnapper? Shall we forgive Hitler for killing six million
Jews if someone else kills seven?
Other leading lights of conservatism are handling the prison torture
scandal by ignoring it. In a TV appearance columnist and Fox News
regular Ann Coulter blamed Abu Ghraib on "girl soldiers," but her column
has been conspicuously silent about the biggest story since the end of
the Democratic primaries. Coulter's last two missives focused on the
hot topics of airport security and the need for tighter immigration.
Maybe she's playing ostrich to avoid criticizing the Republican conduct
of the Iraq war--a conflict so poorly conceived that no one even
bothered to name it. Either that, or she approves of torture. In any
case, her refusal to condemn American atrocities makes her a torture
apologist too.
In a way, so is General Antonio Taguba, author of the famous Abu Ghraib
report. He blames the prisoner abuse scandal on "failure in leadership
from the brigade commander on down, lack of discipline, no training
whatsoever, and no supervision." Yet anyone with half a brain knows
that shoving a flashlight up a man's anus as he howls in agony is
torture. You shouldn't need instruction in the intricacies of the
Geneva Conventions to figure that out.
(Ted Rall is the author of "Wake Up, You're Liberal!: How We Can Take
America Back From the Right," out now. Ordering information is available
at amazon.com.)
Wed May 12, 2004
Republicans Oppose Basic American Values
NEW YORK--"If American life and values change radically because of the
attacks," ABC's Sam Donaldson wrote, ten days after 9/11, "the
terrorists will have won."
Well.
As photo after photo confirms story after story of systemic torture,
rape and murder by American servicemen, CIA goons and mercenary
rent-a-cops in U.S. concentration camps from Abu Ghraib prison in
Baghdad to Bagram Air Base near Kabul to Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, a
legion of right-wing fifth columnists is finally revealing themselves as
a band of wannabe fascists.
Incredible as it seems, these "Americans" actually approve of torture.
Talk radio king Rush Limbaugh, comparing the SS-style siccing of vicious
German shepherds on Iraqi POWs to a fraternity initiation prank, led the
charge of the torture apologists: "Sounds to me in the context of war
this is pretty good intimidation--and especially if you put a woman in
front of them and then spread those pictures around the Arab world." If
cruelty is carefully calibrated to cultural mores, who cares whether
it's wrong?
Besides, argues El Rushbaugh, the torturers were just funnin': "You ever
heard of emotional release? You heard of need to blow some steam off?"
Boys (and girls) will be (psycho) boys.
Days after articles of impeachment were introduced against him in the
House of Representatives, the indefatigable Don Rumsfeld told a Senate
committee that even now, even after Abu Ghraib, denying POWs sleep,
starving them, subjecting them to painful "stress positions" and other
forms of torture are still being inflicted upon inmates--guilty or
innocent and always uncharged--throughout his Defense Department gulags.
His reception was a friendly one.
"I'm probably not the only one up at this table that is more outraged by
the outrage than we are by the treatment [of Iraqi POWs]," spat Senator
James Inhofe of Oklahoma, a card-holding member of the Party of Lincoln,
to fellow members of the Armed Services Committee. "You know, they're
not there for traffic violations. They're murderers, they're terrorists,
they're insurgents."
Actually, according to the Red Cross report on Abu Ghraib, 90 percent of
the detainees had been "arrested by mistake."
Inhofe's rant continued: "I have to say when we talk about the treatment
of these prisoners that I would guess that these prisoners wake up every
morning thanking Allah that Saddam Hussein is not in charge of these
prisons." Yup, that's no doubt the expression on their faces:
gratitude.
Liberals don't have a monopoly on moral relativism.
You have to go down a long way to get to the darkest cellars of
immorality. As Bush Administration apologists point out, there are
worse fates-- far worse fates--than being stripped, beaten, bitten or
even anally raped. A worse fate befell Nick Berg, the cellular phone
entrepreneur who was beheaded by Iraqi insurgents. So what's the point?
Dishonest attempts to reduce the moral baseline merely reiterate one's
own ethical inferiority. The fact that other human beings can conceive
of miseries even crueler and more painful to inflict cannot exculpate us
for the sins we commit. Is the robber less guilty because he can look
down on the kidnapper? Shall we forgive Hitler for killing six million
Jews if someone else kills seven?
Other leading lights of conservatism are handling the prison torture
scandal by ignoring it. In a TV appearance columnist and Fox News
regular Ann Coulter blamed Abu Ghraib on "girl soldiers," but her column
has been conspicuously silent about the biggest story since the end of
the Democratic primaries. Coulter's last two missives focused on the
hot topics of airport security and the need for tighter immigration.
Maybe she's playing ostrich to avoid criticizing the Republican conduct
of the Iraq war--a conflict so poorly conceived that no one even
bothered to name it. Either that, or she approves of torture. In any
case, her refusal to condemn American atrocities makes her a torture
apologist too.
In a way, so is General Antonio Taguba, author of the famous Abu Ghraib
report. He blames the prisoner abuse scandal on "failure in leadership
from the brigade commander on down, lack of discipline, no training
whatsoever, and no supervision." Yet anyone with half a brain knows
that shoving a flashlight up a man's anus as he howls in agony is
torture. You shouldn't need instruction in the intricacies of the
Geneva Conventions to figure that out.
(Ted Rall is the author of "Wake Up, You're Liberal!: How We Can Take
America Back From the Right," out now. Ordering information is available
at amazon.com.)
John#8
May 17, 2004, 9:55:48 AM5/17/04
to
Hi Abel: Please excuse the top post. Just a short comment. Your
post was intelligent, covered all the bases, & contained *truth,*
a word the far right fear. They frequent the newsgroups, & dominate
the media in America. A drug addict, Rush Limbaugh has more
influence over the minds of the average American because he
feeds their Nazi like beliefs without rebuttal. If FDR was Duh-bya,
he would have declared war on China because of the Pearl Harbor
disaster. <G>
post was intelligent, covered all the bases, & contained *truth,*
a word the far right fear. They frequent the newsgroups, & dominate
the media in America. A drug addict, Rush Limbaugh has more
influence over the minds of the average American because he
feeds their Nazi like beliefs without rebuttal. If FDR was Duh-bya,
he would have declared war on China because of the Pearl Harbor
disaster. <G>
I'm sorry for a guy like you who, with good intentions, post up
*truth*. The morons on the right will hate you for it & in newsgroup
talk they are the majority. Nice try though. You are one of the few
good guys. It's a shame in America your common sense is a minority
view.
Cheers,
#8
<AbelM...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:10558-40A...@storefull-3134.bay.webtv.net...
marvin
May 17, 2004, 3:42:01 PM5/17/04
to
Ok, now if we are through patting each other on the fanny, lets look
at the facts.
at the facts.
Fact 1- We did apologise for abu ghraib even though I believe it was
not warranted. Where's our
friggin apology for Berg? Terror hits on our boys? Blackwater
employees
mutilated in Fallujah? Sarin gas attacks? ETC......
Fact 2- We needed very badly to have large airbases in the heart of
the Middle East. That will happen soon,within months. Now state
sponsors of terror will think twice. We can handle the others.
Fact 3- Kerry is finished.
John#8
May 17, 2004, 8:37:15 PM5/17/04
to
"marvin" <marvin...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8b25cfe7.0405...@posting.google.com...
Hi "marvin". I notice you the word *we* in your post often.;-)
Stick with the far right's hero, Tim McVeay & Btw Pull my finger.
# 8
marvin
May 18, 2004, 9:35:18 AM5/18/04
to
Awwww, did 'we' stwike a wittle nerve? Blow me tree-hugger
0 new messages