Right Wing Nut House

Now I feel ashamed…

I’ve reduced a grown man to tears. Well, not me specifically. Dick Durbin doesn’t know me from Bugs Bunny. But the way he was trying to wiggle out from underneath his slanderous comments about the military, one would think he had some familiarity with another Loony Toons character.

Perhaps the skunk Pepe Le Pew.

“Some may believe that my remarks crossed the line,” the Illinois Democrat said. “To them I extend my heartfelt apologies.”

His voice quaking and tears welling in his eyes, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate also apologized to any soldiers who felt insulted by his remarks.

“They’re the best. I never, ever intended any disrespect for them,” he said.

Now why would anyone think that comparing our interrogators at Guantanamo to the minions of the most murderous trio of cutthroats in history would somehow “cross the line?” We know that SS interrogators routinely blasted polka music to torture our Glenn Miller loving GI’s. And who could forget the insidious torture invented by Stalin himself? The devilish “drink it or wear it” water torture. It must have driven Stalin’s opponents insane.

It turns out that Mayor Daley may have been the catalyst for Durbin’s mea culpa.

On Tuesday, Chicago Mayor Richard Daley — a fellow Democrat — added his voice to the chorus of criticism, saying, “I think it’s a disgrace to say that any man or woman in the military would act like that.”

Durbin said in his apology: “I made reference to Nazis, to Soviets, and other repressive regimes. Mr. President, I’ve come to understand that’s a very poor choice of words.

I would have loved being a fly on the wall in Daley’s office when that telephone conversation was going on. His Honor does not suffer fools gladly. I imagine Daley did most of the talking and Durbin did most of the crying.

I’m glad Senator Durbin’s education about what is and isn’t a “poor choice of words” has been completed. Now perhaps we can get on with winning the war in Iraq without any more foolishness from this empty headed galoot of a Senator who brought shame to my home state with his calumnious charges.

UPDATE

Predictably, the right side of the Shadow Media is not satisfied with Dicky’s tearful “non-apology” apology:

The Captain:

Color me unimpressed. His fellow party members will now ask us all to move along. I’ll consider doing that if they now will admit that Durbin’s original statement slandered the military and debased the memories of those millions of victims that truly experienced what genocidal maniacs do with their innocent captives. If not, then they are just playing word games until they discover the right combination to climb out of the box in which Durbin has put them.

Don’t hold your breath, Ed.

Ace of Spades:

A genuine apology would disavow the Nazi-Khmer Rouge-Soviet comparisons. A genuine apology would distinguish between those hellish regimes and our own. A genuine apology would actually confess true error, not just in clumsy phraseology (an error of happenstance). A genuine apology would confess that his words were intentionally grandstanding and slanderous, and that these words were deliberately chosen for effect, not blundered into by some sloppy draftsmanship.

Ace hit the nail on the head. The remarks were not accidental. They have been part of a Democratic strategy on the Hill in the last couple of weeks to tar the military and bring them down in the eyes of the American people. Charlie Rangel comparing what’s going on in Iraq with the Holocaust was well as other remarks by Maxine Waters and Nancy Pelosi lead one to come to the conclusion that this is a grand political strategy.

Guess they better be looking for a new tack. How about supporting the President?

Well…it could happen.

The Political Teen has the video.

LaShawn Barber is thinking Dr. Suess instead of Bugs Bunny.

This post is also available at Blogger News Network.

What is it about Senator Dick Durbin’s remarks that is so difficult to understand? Did 8 years of having a President parse even the word “is” so inure us to not taking words at face value that, like living a nightmare existence in a world created by Jacques Derridia, all meaning in language has been lost?

One more time. Here’s what the Senator said:

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.

Does “This was the action of Americans…” mean something other than what was said immediately prior to this phrase was “action of Americans.” What am I missing here?

This is deliberate self-delusion on the part of the left to try and claim that Durbin was saying anything other than our soldiers act like Nazis. Even Durbin himself is now trying to get out from under the mess by saying that “Americans” didn’t necessarily mean soldiers…it meant civilian contractors:

I called Senator Dick Durbin’s office this morning at (202) 224-2152 and, after being on hold for a while, laid out the reasons why I think Durbin should resign from the Senate. His staffer told me that as of this morning, he is standing by his statement comparing American soldiers to the Nazis, the Communists and the Khmer Rouge. There was one caveat, however: the staffer told me that Durbin never actually said “American soldiers,” and that there are also contract interrogators at Guantanamo Bay. I asked whether Durbin was trying to claim that everything bad about Gitmo was the fault of civilians, and the army has nothing to do with it. She backtracked quickly and denied that this was Durbin’s theory–it would, of course, be an absurd claim since the military runs Guantanamo Bay and sets the policies there. Her evasion shows, though, how deeply dishonest Durbin’s position is.

Just to show the “civilian contractor” theme was not an isolated remark by some idiot staffer, another Powerline reader also called the Senator’s office and got a similar response:

My husband, who is Jewish, lost family members in the Holocaust. We have a niece now serving in Iraq with the US Air Force and a nephew soon to be deployed to Iraq with the US Army. I phoned Senator Durbin’s office today to tell him, in light of this background, how deeply offended I was by his comments equating Guantanamo with Nazi death camps and US troops with Nazi thugs. The staffer with whom I spoke claimed that the Senator wasn’t REALLY maligning US troops … the problems at Gitmo are all the fault of civilian contractors. Like you, I asked whether that means the Senator believes civilians - as opposed to the US military - are in charge of Guantanamo. Quick backtracking and dissembling for the remainder of the call. The Senator has backed himself into a corner. But will there be consequences? Will he lose his leadership position or be censured? Not likely, IMHO.

This referencing civilian contractors is no accident. On Tuesday evening, PBS will broadcast a Frontline Special that will absolutely savage the military, the Pentagon, the Bush Administration, and the private security companies employed by the military and others in Iraq. Entitled “Private Warriors,” the synopsis is sure to raise the hearts and spirits of lefties everywhere:

FRONTLINE returns to Iraq, this time to embed with Halliburton/KBR, and to take a hard look at private contractors like Blackwater, Aegis and Erinys, who play an increasingly critical role in running U.S. military supply lines, providing armed protection, and operating U.S. military bases. These private warriors are targeted by insurgents and in turn have been criticized for their rough treatment of Iraqi civilians. Their dramatic story illuminates the Pentagon’s new reliance on corporate outsourcing and raises tough questions about where they fit in the chain of command and the price we are paying for their role in the war.

Haliburton! Corporate Outsourcing! What isn’t there to gladden the soul of the anti-American left. And cannily, Durbin is tapping into this support as you can be sure the program will be the talk of the lefty Shadow Media on Wednesday.

And you can always tell when the left is starting to lose an argument; they suddenly switch tactics and take the moral high ground:

Remember, this is not an ideological issue. Liberals are always against torture (and were consistently against Saddam’s torture when the US was financing him). Conservatives are against torture as well. Remember, it was one of their justifications for this war.

What we have are not conservative trying to justify the torture — or even celebrate it — it’s blowhard partisans.

Meanwhile, Kevin Drum (whose hilarious “8 Questions for Conservatives About the Iraq War” was his earnest attempt to understand conservatives) has once again challenged conservatives to come up with an analogy other than Nazi Germany to describe what’s going on at Gitmo. Is he kidding?

The Commissar:

Kevin asks for Conservative input on what to compare the abuses at Guantanamo to? He specifies “which evil regime,” and if phrased that way, his otherwise legitimate question turns into choosing your poison. “Would you rather we compare Gitmo to Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Torquemada, Genghis Khan, etc.?”

How about these comparisons? To a Cook County jail. To a Mossad interrogation center? How about to Connecticut’s infamous Newgate Prison, where we kept British POWs during the American Revolution (and not a very pleasant place)?

Perhaps those seem minor and small-scale, lacking the news impact of comparison to Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia? Well, yes, and that is exactly the point of this response. On any reasonable scale of atrocities and brutality, the problems at Gitmo are “minor and small-scale.” Just because al Jazeera and Dick Durbin liken them to Auschwitz does not make it so.

This is the real difference between the left and right. How is it possible to confuse turning off the air conditioning with dunking captured pilots into ice water to see how long it would take them to die? Or turning up the heat compared to putting 6 million people in gas chambers? The left’s complaint is that there “is not enough difference” between us and the Nazis hence calling the US murderous thugs on par with Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot is perfectly rational.

With that kind of stupidity, I see no hope for dialogue. Therefore, the Durbin issue not only won’t die, it will grow in intensity as Durbin and his apologists seek to find some way to justify their outrageous statements.

It will be interesting to see if more Republican Senators actually start calling for Durbin’s resignation from his leadership post as Trent Lott was forced to after his ill concieved remarks praising former Dixiecrat Strom Thurmond’s run for the Presidency in 1948 on a segregationist platform.

The difference, I imagine, is that Republicans saw that what Mr. Lott said was wrong. Liberals see nothing wrong with comparing their country to the most murderous regimes in history. Nor do they see anything wrong in those words giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

So much for the “Reality Based Community.”

The next time someone spouts off about a National Health Care plan, refer them to this article by Mark Steyn: (HT: Polipundit)

As [Canada’s] chief justice, Beverley McLachlin, put it, “Access to a waiting list is not access to health care” — and in Canada you wait for everything. North of the 49th parallel, we accept that if you get something mildly semi-serious it drags on while you wait to be seen, wait to be diagnosed, wait to be treated. Meanwhile, you’re working under par, and I doubt any economic impact accrued thereby is factored into those global health-care-as-a-proportion-of-GDP tables. The default mode of any government system is to “control health-care costs” by providing less health care. Once it becomes natural to wait six months for an MRI, it’s not difficult to persuade you that it’s natural to wait ten months, or fifteen. Acceptance of the initial concept of “waiting” is what matters.

True, they’ve not yet reached the stage of a ten-month waiting list for the maternity ward, but consider the experience of Debrah Cornthwaite, who last year gave birth to twin boys at the Royal Alexandra Hospital in Edmonton. That’s in Alberta. Mrs. Cornthwaite had begun the big day by going to her local maternity ward at Langley Memorial Hospital. That’s in British Columbia.

They told her, yes, your contractions are coming every four minutes, but sorry, we don’t have any beds. And, after they’d checked with the bed-availability helpline “BC Bedline,” they brought her the further good news that there was not a hospital anywhere in the province in which she could deliver her babies. There followed seven hours of red tape and paperwork. Then, late in the evening, she was driven to the airport and put on a chartered twin-prop to Edmonton. In the course of the flight, the contractions increased to every two-and-a-half minutes — and most Lamaze classes don’t teach timing your breathing to the turbulence over the Rockies.

Would you want to do that on your delivery day? You pack your bag and head to your local hospital in Oakland, and they say not to worry, we’ve got a bed for you in Denver.

This waiting phenomena is true for every single country that “enjoys” government financed health care. It’s the way government keeps costs down. By rationing health care, the government can determine where and when and who as it relates to your health.

Helluva deal, eh?

The group “Take Back the Memorial” will hold a rally today at Ground Zero to publicize the hijacking of this sacred ground by zealots who wish to turn the memorial into a “Blame America Pavilion” rather than a tribute to those who died. (HT: Little Green Footballs)

For three long years we have played by the rules as set forth by Governor Pataki, Mayor Bloomberg and the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation. It got us nowhere.

We want a proper, fitting and respectful September 11th Memorial for the 3,000 innocent souls who perished that day. Not “a history lesson about tolerance.”

The planners of the World Trade Center Memorial have been put on notice that we are going over their heads to make our case to the American people. Please join us for a press conference to kick off our national campaign to enlist the American people in a Fight for Ground Zero. Our loved ones deserve no less.

The planners of the memorial include some pretty powerful movers and shakers. The Lower Manhattan Development Corporation, which is responsible for all aspects of the Memorial at Ground Zero, has a list of Board Members that reads like a Who’s Who of Wall Street and government. The professional staff is large and the entire enterprise is funded with both private donations (mostly from Foundations and other not for profit groups) and grants from the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Therein lies the problem with any effort to stop plans for this travesty. This is a huge undertaking. The LMDC is not only rebuilding Ground Zero, they’re changing the face of the entire lower part of the island. Their list of projects is awesome. They’ve integrated the rebuilding efforts into a revitalization program for neighborhoods. They’ve got plans to promote business development throughout lower Manhattan. And they’ve been charged with restoring transportation infrastructure in the area.

In short, Ground Zero hasn’t just been hijacked by the moonbats. The entire effort has also been hijacked by a bunch of blue bloods who are feeding at the government trough by piggybacking plans for the Memorial on top of a massive effort by local and state government to rebuild this devastated part of New York city.

I have no doubt that much of what the LMDC is doing is necessary, especially as their mission relates to neighborhoods destroyed by the after effects of the collapse of the towers and transportation issues like rebuilding infrastructure. Like most urban renewal projects, it is promising much. What remains to be seen is whether or not it can deliver.

The real question is why the heck the Ground Zero Memorial is under the direction of this crew in the first place. Why not set up something totally independent of the rebuilding effort?

The answer lies in the second rule of government spending (The first being “Why build one when you can build two at twice the price?”): “Wherever possible, bring politicians along for the ride.”

Every New York politician of note is connected to the rebuilding effort and the Memorial lends a patina of respectability to the endeavor. Instead of the usual grasping for contracts and the tug of war between competing interests, the Memorial is a symbol of altruism that cleanses the motives of the politicians, bankers, business people, and other moneymen that are all digging in and feeding on the federal largess.

While we should all support the efforts of “Take Back the Memorial,” I’m not very optimistic about getting anything changed at this point. The momentum behind the project is awesome. They’ve been dithering for months over a design for the Memorial and now that its almost finalized it will take a herculean effort to stop it.

It’s going to be up to the families of victims themselves to stop this monstrosity. Only their efforts, along with the efforts of the rest of us who support them, will be able to stop the rolling tide of money and power that threatens to overwhelm what should have been a simple, dignified place of remembrance for those who lost their lives that tragic day,

Should Senator Durbin be censured for his outrageous comments comparing American soldiers to Nazi, Soviet, and Pol Pot’s murderous thugs?

Newt Gingrich thinks so. The former Speaker sent a letter to all Senators:

By his statements equating American treatment of suspected terrorists at Guantanamo Bay with the behavior of the evil regimes of Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, and Pol Pot’s Cambodia, Senator Richard Durbin has dishonored the United States and the entire U.S. Senate. Only by a vote to censure Senator Durbin for his conduct can the U.S. Senate restore its dignity and defend American honor.

Senator Durbin’s statement of “regret” on Friday has only compounded the need for the Senate to act. In it, Senator Durbin said that “I have learned from my statement that historical parallels can be misused and misunderstood. I sincerely regret if what I said caused anyone to misunderstand my true feelings…” Incredibly, Senator Durbin is sticking to his original assertion that there is indeed, in his own words, an “historic parallel” between U.S. soldiers at Guantanamo Bay and the killers under Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot. In other words, his only regret is that Americans don’t understand his misreading of history and that he has caused us to misunderstand him. Offering no apology for the original slanderous statement itself, Senator Durbin has chosen instead to actually defend his comparisons. This defense makes his original speech all the more revolting.

There is historic precedent for censuring Senators whose words bring dishonor and disrepute on the Senate and impair its dignity; Senator Durbin’s words fit that precedent.

In this case, expressing outrage is not enough. It is time for the Senate to act. Senator Durbin must be censured now.

Gingrich claims to be something of an historian. If this is true, he didn’t research the subject of censure very diligently. In fact, in the entire history of the Senate, only one Senator has been censured for what he said in a floor debate. .

If Durbin had an ounce of decency, he’d resign. Since decency in the Democratic party lately can be measured in milligrams rather than ounces, it seems improbable that anyone could shame my home state Senator into doing the decent thing. But censure?

The closest historical precedent for censure goes all the way back to 1811 and Thomas Pickering. Pickering served in the second Washington Administration as both Secretary of War and Secretary of State. He was elected to the Senate in a special election in 1803. In 1811, Pickering read confidential documents in open Senate session before the ban on secrecy was removed. He was the first of 9 Senators to be censured. The last was Minnesota’s Dave Durenberger who was censured for unethical conduct.

Pickering is the only Senator to be censured for anything he said in open debate. Every other case of censure involved some kind of personal malfeasance on the part of the Senator who was censured. And while Durbin’s remarks were despicable, they probably don’t rise to the level that would require Senate action.

Besides, the internal dynamics of the Senate make censure problematic. They don’t call it “The Club” for nothing. Notice that even many Republican Senators have refused to comment on Durbin’s disgusting remarks. These people have to work together on a daily basis. And while the intense partisanship of late has damaged the traditional camaraderie in the Senate, the fact is that there are many unwritten rules of conduct in that august institution. One of those rules is: “Do not speak ill of thy colleague lest the shoe be on the other foot someday.”

So despite the former Speaker Gingrich’s claim, there is no historical precedent for censuring a Senator whose words bring “dishonor and disrepute” to the Senate. But that doesn’t solve the problem of what’s to be done with this jackass of a Senator who, when given the opportunity, turned his chance at an apology into another partisan attack on the Administration.

Do you recall the impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton? Senators were so desperate to rid themselves of the task that they were grasping at all sorts of straws to find a solution short of an impeachment trial. One of the straws that they latched onto for a brief time - until shot down by a confident White House - was the idea of a letter of reprimand signed by Senators from both parties.

Could such a letter, signed by the leadership of both parties, be issued to Senator Blabbermouth? Yes it would be informal and not really part of the record. But it would certainly be given enough publicity. And it would put both parties on the public record as condemning these ridiculous and increasingly harmful comparisons to Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, and any other thug of the week that the Democrats seem willing to equate with George Bush and the Republican party.

As creatures of precedent, Senators are extremely unlikely to push for censure of a colleague whose remarks, even though they gave aid and comfort to our enemies, were said in open debate on the Senate floor. However, a strongly worded letter of reprimand, signed by the leadership of both parties and a majority of Senators, could accomplish pretty much the same goal of undoing some of the damage done to both the Senate and the image of the United States around the world.

UPDATE

For once, John Cole and I agree on something. As usual, Mr. Cole, in his understated and gentle manner, makes his case:

Put down the kool-aid for a second. Do ill-received remarks really rise to the level of censure?

And just in case you are wondering- if anyone had suggested that any of the Republicans above be censured for their remarks, I would be just as pissed.

I disagree that Durbin wasn’t saying our troops are Nazis. He may have misspoke. He may have let his mouth run away from his brain. But he said what he said. And his “apology” was crap. He had the opportunity to clarify his remarks and ended up defending his “historical analogy.”

Censure? No. But when the #2 Democrat casually posits the notion that American soldiers can be compared to murderous thugs, some recognition by his fellow Senators of this is necessary. Hence, the idea for a reprimand.

Cross Posted at Blogger News Network

Senator Dick “I have no regrets” Durbin issued a statement on his website apologizing for the fact that he didn’t realize comparing American soldiers to Nazi thugs could be “misused and misunderstood.” By who he doesn’t say. Since I doubt very much that he’s apologizing to me or any other person who took offense at his slanderous assertions - and since not one lefty blogger or Democratic Senator has come out and criticized his remarks - one can only assume he’s apologizing to al Jazeera and other terrorist media outlets for “misunderstanding” his true feelings.

His munificence evidently knows no bounds.

Here’s the statement in its entirety:

“More than 1700 American soldiers have been killed in Iraq and our country’s standing in the world community has been badly damaged by the prison abuses at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo. My statement in the Senate was critical of the policies of this Administration which add to the risk our soldiers face.”

“I will continue to speak out when I disagree with this Administration.”

“I have learned from my statement that historical parallels can be misused and misunderstood. I sincerely regret if what I said caused anyone to misunderstand my true feelings: our soldiers around the world and their families at home deserve our respect, admiration and total support.”

What does the fact that 1700 Americans being killed in Iraq have to do with a statement explaining remarks about the Guantanamo detention facility? And, as Powerline points out, which policies of the Administration led to the abuses at Abu Ghraib? The ones that directed soldiers to take pictures of inmates with hoods being threatened by dogs? Lyndie England as enforcer of Administration policy? Senator Turban couldn’t resist the urge to attack the Administration even while making a statement of…what should we call it? Apology? Regret? Explanation?

Calling that statement anything other than a self-serving, ass-covering, piece of horse manure in which the Senator is trying to make people forget what he said and substitute what he tells us he really meant does a travesty to the truth.

Here are Durbin’s exact words:

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.

I can see no room in that statement for misinterpretation. The Senator is saying that “the actions of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners” are reminiscent (”you would most certainly believe”) of Nazis, Soviets, and Pol Pot.

As I’ve said in the past, the Senator’s statement is perfectly consistent with the idea that it’s not important what we think Democrats mean when they say something, the only reality, the only context to understand their language is something they make up as they go along.

Convenient albeit a little confusing. Maybe they could tell us when they really mean what they say. Conversely, maybe they could give us a heads up when they want to say something they don’t really mean but we should ask them what they’re really trying to say? That should make things a little easier, don’t you think?

I think the liberals took elocution lessons from Jacque Derridia.

Here’s some additional reaction to Senator al Durbin’s statement.

Captain Ed:

This, of course, is the classic example of the non-apology apology. Note that he doesn’t retract a word of what he said. He says that he regrets if others misunderstood his “true feelings”, not that what he said was wrong and historically inept. Basically, this is the translation one is meant to hear:

If this is the best that Durbin can do after comparing the men and women of our armed forces to Nazis and Stalin’s goons, as well as comparing Islamofascist terrorists to Japanese-American victims of WWII detention centers, then he’s a bigger idiot than I thought

“Idiot” seems to be the word of the day. Here’s the aforementioned Powerline take:

This is idiotic. First, Durbin notes that more than 1,700 soldiers have been killed. This is a good reason to interrogate enemy combatants, hardly an argument to the contrary. But Durbin leads with it to create the illusion that this is somehow his concern. Next he says that his statement was “critical of the policies of this Administration.” But saying that American soldiers are indistinguishable from Nazis and Communists isn’t being “critical of the policies of this administration.” This administration has not, in fact, condoned torture of detainees; as we have pointed out over and over, the administration’s policies have been humane to a degree that is probably unprecedented in world history during wartime. When abuses have occurred, as at Abu Ghraib (which Durbin irrelevantly drags into his “apology”), they have been in clear violation of the administration’s policies.

Finally, Durbin tells us that he has just now learned that comparing our soldiers to Nazis, Communists, and Pol Pot-type crazies “can be misused and misunderstood.” Misused? What does that mean? By whom? Presumably Durbin means that al Jazeera et al. can “misuse” his statements to trumpet the claim that high-ranking American officials have conceded that the U.S. is just as bad as Nazi Germany. I’m not sure that’s a “misuse”–it is what Durbin said–but if he has just now figured out that his statements can be used as propaganda by the enemy, he is much too stupid to be a United States Senator.

In the immortal words of Forrest Gump, “Stupid is as stupid does.”

Hugh Hewitt:

The first cartoonist, other than the genius Muir, weighs in on the Durbin debacle. The outrage continues, and the FreeRepublic’s Military Father post sums it up: Dick Durbin is a disgrace, a low, dishonorable weasel, and the country knows it. He is also the Dems’ #2 in the Senate. He can issue new statement after new statement, but the verdict is in: Durbin is no friend of the American military. Durbin has harmed the country and the military, greatly. He should resign. Democrats should call on him to do so. They will not. Political advantage means more than standing up for the troops.

Here’s a link to Bloggers for Censure. They’re looking for content so if you’ve written something, send him a link.

Strata-Sphere:

This is not going to undo the damage this man has done. I have posted on this before, but it bears repeating. Dick Durbin did more for the terrorists’ cause and recruitment drives than any BS story about Koran flushes or GITMO AC levels:

AJ has a link to an Islamist website that claims Durbin broke “significant new ground” in his accusations. Since they’re not here, on behalf of absent terrorists and their sympathizers everywhere, I’d like to thank you Dicky for the service you’ve rendered their cause.

Dick Durbin has had a rough day.

It began with an interview on WGN Radio’s Spike O’Dell show this morning where, doing his best imitation of a pretzel, Dirty Dick twisted and twisted and twisted until he had himself so tied up in knots trying to minimize his Gitmo interrogators-are-worse-than-Nazis charge that he resembled a piece of uncooked rotini:

Q. I guess one of the reasons people are having such a hard time with this one, is when comparisons are made and you use names like Nazis and Soviet gulags, when you are talking Nazis there were what, 9 million people killed in the camps there. The gulags had about 3 million and so forth. And I know Gitmo is not the Holiday Inn down there, but I don’t think anyone has died down there, have they?

Durbin: No, that’s true. In all fairness, they did not. But I don’t believe we were dealing with deaths at Abu Ghraib either. We were dealing with a situation where when people saw the digital camera photographs, they said “My God! Americans should not be involved in that kind of conducrt.” Now I will not demean or diminish the terrible atrocities that were commtted by the Soviets and the Nazis. The points I was, the point I was trying to make there was, if I just read this to you and say “What kind of country, what kind of governemtn would do that,” and you’d think of some of the most repressive regimes in history. Sadly this FBI report says its being done by our government. I don’t know who in our government. But it should stop….

(HT: Hugh Hewitt)

Notice how Senator Potato Head swears he’s not diminishing the atrocities at death camps and gulags where millions died…and then proceeds to do so by recognizing that there have been no deaths at Gitmo. This is a typical liberal tactic where the words that come out of their mouths don’t matter. It’s what they say they mean that counts.

The Senator had a brief respite when the Chicago Tribune rode to his rescue:

With his unassuming Midwestern demeanor and genial bearing, Dick Durbin is no one’s vision of a political street fighter.

Yet Illinois’ senior senator–who is growing in stature as a national Democratic voice and a font of strategic and communications advice for a party eager to regain its footing–found himself on the receiving end of Republican outrage this week.
In the face of an organized Republican brouhaha over his remarks, Durbin refused to back down. He maintained that the Bush administration bears responsibility for creating the conditions that led to the mistreatment of prisoners at Guantanamo by saying they were not subject to the Geneva Conventions.

Returning to the Senate floor Thursday night, Durbin reread his original statement, saying he wanted his colleagues to understand the context of his remarks. “It has been nothing short of amazing,” he said of the reaction.

“Was I trying to say, `Isn’t this the kind of thing we see from repressive regimes?’ Yes. This is the kind of thing we expect from repressive regimes and not from the United States,” Durbin said in response to hostile questioning from Republican Sens. John Warner of Virginia and Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. Warner called Durbin’s comparisons “a grievous error in judgment.”

(HT: New Editor)

Good ‘ole cornpone Dick! He’s just an “unassuming” sort, the kind you might want to invite over to supper after church on Sunday. Just don’t get him started on Gitmo - he’ll spoil your appetite.

Rush Limbaugh, of course, has been in his element with Durbin saying “Al Jazeera loves you, Sen. Durbin, probably more than the people that voted for you in Illinois could ever love you.” Limbaugh was referring to a piece on the arab propoganda organ that praised Durbin so much they even forgot to report what was in the FBI email about the specifics of the “torture.”

And that’s the nub of the matter here. Durbin and the Democrats are upset that we didn’t read these terrorists their rights and immediately get them lawyers from the ACLU or some other communist-front moonbat legal organization that would have made sure that each and every one of these bloodthirsty galoots would have walked out of our custody as free men. Why? Because the evidence against these men has been gleaned from sources and methods that are among the most closely guarded secrets in government. To reveal them would severely hamper our efforts to protect ourselves from their brothers who at this moment are planning to kill as many of us with one blow as they possibly can.

The fact that a United States Senator - the number two Democrat in all the Senate - doesn’t realize this and continues to criticize the US for not abiding by the Geneva Convention (which doesn’t recognize these cutthroats as soldiers in the first place) is proof positive that the Democratic party is not ready to lead this country. Until these fools get serious about the threat we face, a majority of Americans - not a large majority but just barely enough - will refuse to hand them the keys to the kingdom.

Here’s more of what poor Senator Lickspittle has had to put up with today:

Van Helsing:

I can’t explain the surreal hyperbole surrounding the supposed abuse of terrorists, other than to say it’s a matter of psychopathology as much as politics. At least some of the irresponsible fools in the chorus Durbin has joined must be aware that they are not only insulting and demoralizing both our troops and our country; they are not only providing critical propaganda support to al Qaeda and impeding the Government’s ability to prevent the next 9/11; they are also trivializing the horrors that the profoundly evil ideologies of communism and fascism have inflicted on millions of innocent victims. What sort of sickness makes them want to do that?

It’s the sickness of withdrawal. They were in power for so long and now, being out of power, are unable to adjust to their status as minority party. They have no idea what “loyal opposition” means. If you read floor debates held during the civil war, you get an eerie feeling of deja vu. The Dems had been in power for 30 years prior to that war and acted pretty much the same way - they sought to regain power even if it meant splitting the union.

Stephen Green:

Equating anything and everything thus far reported from Guantanamo with “torture” is nonsense on stilts. Air conditioning changes, intimidation, sleep deprivation and having your personal space invaded by a woman? Hell, I put up with worse stuff that that at summer camp. What will they threaten these thugs with next, the comfy chair?

Sorry Steve, beat you to the comfy chair theme days ago.

Jay Tea at Wizbang:

There’s an old aphorism that says “as well be hanged for a sheep as a lamb.” Since we’re already being punished for “torturing” these detainees, why don’t we go ahead and do it already?

We already know beyond a shadow of a doubt that some of these detainees have extensive knowledge and experience as terrorists. It’s time to take the handcuffs off our interrogators and let them do whatever they believe is necessary to get the information we need out of them. Let’s use pain, discomfort, drugs, deception, anything we can on these terrorists. Since we’re already suffering the consequences of using torture, it only makes sense to me that we gain the benefits of such. Let’s show the world just what good old American ingenuity, inventiveness, and resources can achieve.

Don’t worry…Jay Tea points out the drawbacks of that strategy in the rest of the post.

Joe Braue writes a letter to Senator Sniveler:

Your comments on Gitmo are way, way over the top, Dick. You need to resign, right now, and save yourself the disgrace of being recalled by your voters. I’d insult you if you had any worth, any integrity or dignity or even decency to shame, but clearly you don’t. And one more thing I won’t do – give you the respect of being called Senator, ever again. The more Americans willing to disrespect you the way you have disrespected us, the better, Dick.

We both know your little tizzy was a publicity gimmick, but if you really want to display your deep concern for human rights, you might look into the cesspit your buddy’s running at the Cook County jail – it makes Gitmo look like Club Med. On second thought, probably not enough media attention in it for you. And there would be actual, real atrocities to point to, in your state, on your watch. But please, keep the great quotes coming, Dick. The Republicans won’t even need to campaign in your state this year.

Not just the jail. I pointed this out in a post a few days ago:

When one consider’s what this terrorist had to endure – extreme heat, extreme cold, loud rap music – perhaps Senator Moonbat should take a walk down Lawrence Avenue in Chicago in the middle of the Summer (or Winter). Every year, several hundred Chicagoan’s die as a result of no air conditioning during the Summer or heat during the Winter. And the overbearing presence of loud rap music is part of the “color” of some of those neighborhoods. And yet, we strangely have never heard the Senator get up on the floor of the Senate and lambast his good buddy Mayor Daley for allowing such things to occurr.

It would seem the Senator has more sympathy for people who want to blow us to kingdom come than he has for his own constituents.

Here’s a very serious (well, mostly) Jeff Goldstein:

You see? All Senator Dick was really doing was showing his love of country! And—dissent being the highest form of patriotism—it follows that the more vicious and speculative the dissent, the more fervent and geniune the patriotism. Which means that Durbin’s comparing Gitmo soldiers to the murderers of a combined 30 some-odd million civilians? One of the single greatest expressions of patriotism EVER!

Jeff’s takedown of Pandagon’s Jesse Taylor is classic Goldstein. The left’s current defense is that it’s patriotic to give aid and comfort to the enemy during wartime. Of course, they don’t quite put it that way. As I said earlier, it’s not what they say, it’s what they say they mean that counts.

We have yet to hear one word of condemnation from Senator Wanker’s colleagues. Until we do - until we see Dick Durbin in the well of the Senate Chamber abjectly apologizing for his sickening slander, the drumbeat will continue.

The boys at Powerline have taken a stab at a little political prognostication with regards to the Presidential race in 2008. This is always fun, of course although at this stage pretty much an exercise in futility.

But, okay…let’s play!

First, Paul has a surprising possibility:

As much as I hate to admit it, my sense is that the country, and probably even the Republican party, will have a serious case of Bush fatigue as 2008 approaches. It is normal for such fatigue to set in toward the end of a president’s second term. Moreover, President Bush’s policies — a war, daring legislative initiatives — and his bruising battles with Senate Democrats are especially likely to tire the country.

This means that the most likely nominee is a Republican governor or Rudy Giuliani. Within this group, the prize most likely will go to the candidate who appeals to conservatives without scaring moderates. Like the George Bush of 2000. Romney may fit that description.

First, I think that Paul is spot on with his belief that the people will be ready for a “return to normalcy.” In fact, I wrote about it for the American Thinker. Whoever the nominee from either party will have to make the War on Terror a secondary issue.

That said, I don’t think either Romney or Guiliani have a chance. The Republican Party hasn’t nominated a northeastern Governor since Tom Dewey in 1948. And while Eisenhower listed Pennsylvania as his home state (he maintained a home in Gettysburg), the old General could hardly be associated with the “Eastern Liberal Establishment” that conservatives rebelled against in 1964.

In fact, 1964 was the last time anyone from a northeastern state appeared on the Republican ticket. New York Congressman Bill Miller was Goldwater’s running mate. And while George Bush 41 had ties to the eastern establishment (and was successfully painted as such by Reagan in 1980) he made his political bones in Texas. I think the chances of a Republican from the northeast winning the nomination are about as good as a conservative Democrat from the South has of winning that parties top spot.

Here are John’s thoughts:

I agree that Bush fatigue will probably be a dominant theme of the 2008 campaign. It’s sad, but President Bush’s success will be the main reason why most people will be yearning for a change. I read somewhere that at the end of a meeting just after the September 11 attacks, Bush turned to Attorney General John Ashcroft and said: “John, don’t let it happen again.” To their eternal credit, Ashcroft, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and the rest carried out that mandate. But if we get through the next two or three years without a major attack, most Americans will be more than ready to “move on.” To move back, really, to the days when everything seemed to be fine.

2008 is a long way off, of course, and don’t forget that I’m the guy who predicted a year before the 2004 election that whoever the Democrats nominated would defeat President Bush. I hope I’m wrong again, and large events are likely to intervene. But for what it’s worth, that’s how it looks now. It is infuriating that the Democrats should be rewarded for their reprehensible tactics, but rewarded, I think, they are likely to be.

A rather too pessimistic outlook, I’m afraid. What John is not taking into account is the endless capacity of the Democrats to shoot themselves in the foot with regards to Presidential nominees. If, for instance, the Democrats had nominated Joe Leiberman instead of John Kerry, I daresay we’d be looking at our President spending his summers on the eastern shore rather than Crawford, TX. Leiberman could have won the election going away, probably taking both Ohio and Florida away from Bush in the process. Kerry’s only hope was horrible economic and war news - news that never quite materialized.

So whither the Democrats in ‘08? CW says Hillary. I say follow the money. If you look at President Bush’s enormous fundraising advantage leading up to the primaries of 2000, you can see the value of raising cash early. Hillary will be able to do this with ease. Her liberal/Hollywood base is ready to give early and often. She and her husband (if Bill is still in the picture) will suck the air out of any other candidate, especially John Kerry and John Edwards.

Is there a chance for anyone else? No. Only if some shocking revelation regarding Hillary (not Bill) is brought to the forefront can she possibly lose. The feminists, the hard left, the anti-war crowd, George Soros and his money machine are all backing her. She’ll spend the next 2 1/2 years honing her message, massaging her image, and practicing her public speaking. She will win the nomination in a walk.

Here’s Deacon’s take:

I agree that ‘08 is likely to be a tough year for us. I’ve also recently come around to the view that Giuliani can be nominated despite his views on social issues. However, it would be premature to conclude even tentatively that we can only win with Giuliani or someone further to the left. And I tend to think Romney could survive a religion-based assault, although I don’t yet have a clear sense of this. If Romney can’t, there are other potentially attractive governors out there.

Mark my words; if the Republican party nominates a pro-choice candidate they will lose by at least 6 points. And while the electoral college will once again be close, in a race against Hillary, the Republicans would lose not only Florida, but potentially Virginia, Ohio, and Colorado as well. All of those states (except Ohio) have fast changing demographics trending toward the Democrats. Do not underestimate the excitement that a Hillary Clinton candidacy would generate. It would cross party lines and affect even the so-called “security moms” who were instrumental in Bush’s election win last year. She’d be tough to beat.

If Republicans thought the white evangelical vote last year was important it will be even more so in 2008. Only the nomination of a true blue, dyed in the wool, social conservative has a chance of beating Hillary. That’s why even though he’s an incompetent fool, Bill Frist may be the party’s first choice in “08. Senator Frist’s problem will be the fact that he’s a Senator and the Majority Leader. Could it be possible that Frist would resign his seat and pursue the White House after the mid term elections in ‘06? It’s not impossible, but I don’t see Frist as the gambling type.

So whither the Republicans in ‘08? Their only chance may be to nominate someone who would be able to generate almost as much excitement as Hillary. A social conservative but someone who wouldn’t scare the beejeebees out of the great middle of the road voter that’s the key to winning any election in this country.

How about a young, attractive Hispanic? Or a charismatic black female? Senator Mel Martinez and Secretary of State Condi Rice would both have many pluses and minuses. Either could run a strong, nationwide campaign against Hillary. They would generate a huge amount of excitement in the Hispanic and Black communities. Both have inspirational personal stories. And while Martinez is a one term Senator, he has Executive Branch experience as HUD Secretary.

The bottom line is that, historically speaking, Republicans tend to be much more pragmatic in their selection of Presidential nominees. An argument can be made that this is why they win so often. In 2008, it remains to be seen whether the Republican party has the discipline and foresight to nominate someone for what promises to be the most exciting Presidential election in a very long time.

Most of us who follow politics know that both the House and Senate chambers are usually quiet, staid places full of dignified representatives going about the people’s business with a combination of monotony and boredom.

But it wasn’t always so. A little more than 150 years ago, those two bodies were full of quarreling, angry men, many of whom came to the floor armed with pistols. There was a daily potential for real violence and Southern representatives were especially cognizant of any slight, any slander directed at their state or their “peculiar institution.” Fistfights on the House floor were not uncommon over the issue of slavery. In fact, it could fairly be said that the first blows in the American Civil War were struck between the people’s representatives in the lead up to the formal break in 1860.

The Senate was a little different. The high-born Senators were much less likely to engage in the rough and tumble of politics. They were expected to maintain a level of decorum in their debates according to long standing rules and traditions.

But even the Senate was not immune from the whirlwind that the issue of Kansas created. Should Kansas be admitted to the Union as a slave state or a free state? The issue held the attention of the nation during the spring of 1856 as Massachussetts Senator Charles Sumner rose and began to speak about slavery.

Politicians back then were something like the celebrities of today. In a time when politics was theater, politicans were expected to be entertainers, giving stemwinding speeches designed to rouse the passions of the listener.

Sumner didn’t disappoint. His speech alluded to slavery in the crudest, most sexually suggestive terms. This was no accident. One of the most horrifying aspects of slavery to the puritan-like citizens of New England was the “freedom of the slave quarters” granted to southern masters (and their house guests). Sumners words were designed to recall that horror and in the process condemn not only the institution of slavery, but those who practiced it:

But, before entering upon the argument, I must say something of a general character, particularly in response to what has fallen from Senators who have raised themselves to eminence on this floor in championship of human wrongs. I mean the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Butler), and the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Douglas), who, though unlike as Don Quixote and Sancho Panza, yet, like this couple, sally forth together in the same adventure. I regret much to miss the elder Senator from his seat; but the cause, against which he has run a tilt, with such activity of animosity, demands that the opportunity of exposing him should not be lost; and it is for the cause that I speak. The Senator from South Carolina has read many books of chivalry, and believes himself a chivalrous knight, with sentimcuts of honor and courage. Of course he has chosen a mistress to whom he has made his vows, and who, though ugly to others, is always lovely to him; though polluted in the sight of the world, is chaste in his sight I mean the harlot, Slavery. For her, his tongue is always profuse in words. Let her be impeached in character, or any proposition made to shut her out from the extension of her wantonness, and no extravagance of manner or hardihood of assertion is then too great for this Senator. The frenzy of Don Quixote, in behalf of his wench, Dulcinea del Toboso, is all surpassed.

By insulting Senator Andrew Butler, Sumner had opened a hornets nest. One of Butler’s kinsman from South Carolina, Preston Brooks, took offense at the Senator’s slander. Here’s the official Senate history of the incident that followed:

Representative Preston Brooks was Butler’s South Carolina kinsman. If he had believed Sumner to be a gentleman, he might have challenged him to a duel. Instead, he chose a light cane of the type used to discipline unruly dogs. Shortly after the Senate had adjourned for the day, Brooks entered the old chamber, where he found Sumner busily attaching his postal frank to copies of his “Crime Against Kansas” speech.

Moving quickly, Brooks slammed his metal-topped cane onto the unsuspecting Sumner’s head. As Brooks struck again and again, Sumner rose and lurched blindly about the chamber, futilely attempting to protect himself. After a very long minute, it ended.

Bleeding profusely, Sumner was carried away. Brooks walked calmly out of the chamber without being detained by the stunned onlookers. Overnight, both men became heroes in their respective regions.

The aftermath was shocking. Sumner (who never fully recovered his faculties after the beating) was lauded as a man who told it like it was. Brooks, in the meantime, became a hero throughout the south. People sent him canes by the score, some of them inscribed with “Hit Him Again.”

Brooks attacked Sumner for his blood libel against a kinsman. And now we have a similar blood libel made by my home state Senator Dick Durbin whose stupidity and arrogance I’ve written about here and here. Durbin’s libel was much more serious than a slap at someone’s family honor. His words comparing American interrogators to Nazi’s and the detention center at Guantanamo to death camps debase the government and people of the United States.

What’s worse, instead of apologizing, this embarassment to my home state has called on the United States to apologize for abandoning the Geneva Convention. It seems to have escaped this clueless moonbat that the Geneva protocols were written to protect soldiers in uniform. Since the only identifying feature of an al Qaeda foot soldier is the number of dead innocents left in his wake, the protocols would seem not to apply in his case.

This hasn’t stopped not only Durbin, but the jubilant Kossaks who now feel they have the President and his Iraq policy on the run. They are fairly bursting with hope that at last, they can do what they’ve been dreaming of for two years; repeat the success of their ideological ancestors of the 1960’s and cause the people of United States to lose faith in both the eventual victory in Iraq and the righteousness of our cause. It’s sickening.

Durbin has gotten what amounts to a caning in the last few days from the Shadow Media. I’ve detailed extensive reaction to the intial comments of the Senator here. Some additional thoughts follow.

Michelle Malkin:

What America needs is for President Bush himself to directly challenge Durbin on his treachery.

What President Bush should do is to call on Durbin to retract his remarks (not just apologize) and ask forgiveness from our troops and the American people.

Palmetto Pundit:

Oh, the humanity! It looks as if Sen. Durbin has joined the ranks of congressmen who are stuck on stupid. He either a) has no knowledge of history or b) he is making these sick comparisons out of hatred for the Bush Administration, or c) a combination of the two. Frankly, I couldn’t care less which one it is. All three are equally pitiful in my opinion.

Captian Ed:

It seems that the Democrats have, for the past four decades, ever been ready to smear the American military during a time of war — particularly with analogies to Nazis — to bolster their political fortunes at the nation’s expense. This hysterical and self-righteous namecalling turned out to be almost completely false in Viet Nam, but we learned that well after we ran out on our erstwhile allies in the South. They are even more ludicrous today, when the Durbins, Kerrys, and others have gotten so desperate for political attention that they now feel the need to toss out genocidal equivalences three at a time for what amounts to nothing more than humiliation techniques, invoking Nazis, Stalinists, and most egregiously the Khmer Rouge that their propaganda allowed to take power in the 1970s.

The Veterans of Foreign Wars:

“The senator was totally out of line for even thinking such thoughts, and we demand he apologize to every man and woman who has ever worn the uniform of our country, and to their families,” said John Furgess, the VFW’s commander-in-chief.
“Our soldiers put the needs of others first, just like generations of Americans before them,” said Furgess, a Vietnam veteran who retired as a colonel in the Tennessee Army National Guard.

“They answered the call to create our country, to save our Union, and to help free the world from tyranny. And in return, all they ever asked for was to be appreciated for who they are and what they do, and for the country to care for their minds and bodies if broken or care for their families should they die,” he said

Froggy Ruminations:

I want Durbin’s job, and I want it now. I’ll be damned if a US Senator is going to get away with comparing my comrades to the Gestapo, or Stalin’s thugs. To the people of the Great State of Illinois, none of you have a hair on you’re a$$ if you do not demand a recall of this piece of trash. This guy isn’t some benchwarmer nutjob either, he is in the Democratic leadership and as such he speaks for the rest of the 44 Senators in his caucus. If you are a Democrat US Senator and you do not have a statement of categorical disavowal of Durbin’s remarks and a plea for him to recant and apologize for them released to the press by close of business today, you are wrong.

That sounds like a great idea. Here’s Durbin’s email address and phone number:

Phone: (202) 224-2152 or (312) 353-4952

E-mail: dick@durbin.senate.gov

Let’s get busy.

There’s an old Scottish prayer that goes:

From Ghoulies and Ghosties
and long legged beasties
and things that go bump in the night,
Oh Lord! Deliver us.

I’d like to make an addition to that collection of phantasms and include Markos Moulitsas Zuniga, AKA “Kos” and all his minions and hangers-on who emerge occasionally from the nether reaches of planet earth to spew the most vile and corrupt conceits against the United States and its military while giving aid and comfort to those who would destroy us.

They are despicable.

Defending Senator Durbin’s remarks equating American soldiers with Nazis and Pol Pot is one thing. That kind of political mud wrestling is part of the game. But to then turn the response to Senator Durbin’s baseless and hysterical charges into a countercharge alleging that people who criticize the Senator are supporting torture is so beyond the pale as to make it unrecognizable as political discourse.

This is too much:

To the pea brains on the Right, incapable of reading the English language in its most basic, unuanced form, they claim Durbin is calling our troops Nazis. The Wingnutosphere is making that claim. Rush is making that claim. Hannity is making that claim. Drudge is making that claim. Look to Fox News to jump on the bandwagon tomorrow.

Of course, what Durbin is saying is that such torture — undisputed, by the way, and read from an FBI report — is more at home in a place like Soviet Russia or Nazi Germany than in a modern Democracy.

Only an idiot would call the interrogation techniques used on that murderous thug torture. Only a fool would say this:

And these cowards — these people who will neither serve the cause they claim is so vital, nor urge others to serve it — now rush to defend behavior that is indefensible?

WHAT IS SO INDEFENSIBLE? MAKING A TERRORIST UNCOMFORTABLE? MAKING HIM SWEAT? MAKING HIM SHIVER? MAKING HIM LISTEN TO RAP MUSIC?

The FBI report is full of “torture” techniques like this. Let’s not forget “the finger in the chest” routine. Ach! That’s Medieval! What’s next, the rack? Or how about the technique our ogreish interrogators came up with all on their own; the infamous “Drink Water or Wear it” torture where the poor, innocent beheader of women was splashed with water.

Powerline had the perfect response to this nonsense:

By the way, there is a serious point to be made here. No one thinks that playing Christina Aguilera music, shaving a guy’s beard off, and putting him in the same room with a woman are the most effective ways to extract information from a detainee. The reason why these unorthodox methods were used, obviously, is that the more effective, but less humane, techniques that have been used since time immemorial were banned by our civilian authorities, and the American military took seriously the restrictions under which they were operating. The mildness with which terrorist detainees have been treated stands as an imperishable monument to the greatness of the American spirit and the moderation of the Bush administration.

I’ve said many times since 9/11 that my eyes have been opened to the perfidy and faithlessness of the left. I no longer feel constrained to voice the thought that they are collectively a traitorous lot with no more regard for this country (NOT the President. The United States of America) than my pet cat.

I’m sick to death of them excusing their giving aid and comfort to enemies who wish to kill us all as nothing more than some kind of patriotism recognized as such only by them . It’s not working anymore, not when our enemies are the only ones cheering them on. When al Jazeera isn’t talking about torture but how people like the Kossaks are condemning their own country for stress techniques that wouldn’t injure anyone - much less a hardened terrorist - then you can be sure that your advocacy for the comfort of the murderous beheaders is not going unnoticed.

Congratulations. You should be right proud of yourselves. Too bad this isn’t 1945 instead of 2005. Your advocacy would place you where you belong; in jail right along side the beneficiaries of your munificence.