To those of us on the right who still vigorously support the President in the War on Terror, the Hamdan ruling presents us with a golden opportunity to start repairing the damage our detainee policy at Guantanamo has inflicted upon our constitutional principles as well as our image abroad.
To those on the left who, despite the unambiguous ruling by the Supreme Court in Hamdan that we are indeed in a shooting war with al-Qaeda, but still insist that the War on Terror is some kind of gigantic Rovian plot to win elections, the decision is a godsend. It gives liberals a second chance to prove they are serious about protecting America from her enemies by joining with the President and Republicans in Congress in resolving the legal status of detainees in such a way that satisfies both the demands of justice and our national security.
Camp Delta has become an iconic symbol worldwide of American hypocrisy in the War on Terror. The name “Guantanamo” will go down in history with other notorious prisons such as the French nightmare penitentiary on Devil’s Island and the North Vietnamese disreputable POW camp known as “The Hanoi Hilton.”
Regardless of whether or not Guantanamo matched those two facilities in sheer brutality and horror, the fact remains that the narrative supplied by western media to describe Guantanamo to the rest of the world has made it so. And in propaganda, perception is everything. There are no starving skeletons or daily beatings as there were on Devil’s Island and the Hanoi Hilton. But the brutality that has been confirmed by independent observers, including our own military and the FBI, is real enough and has brought shame to the United States and damaged our reputation as a champion of justice and human rights among friend and foe alike.
These are simply the facts. It does no good to argue that what goes on at Guantanamo doesn’t rise to the level of torture. Not anymore. One of the main findings in Hamdan was that the detainees at Guantanamo – no matter how bloodthirsty and heinous their crimes – are entitled to the protections of the Geneva Convention. This includes being protected against “[o]utrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment.” This means that many of the relatively mild “stress techniques” of interrogation well documented elsewhere were and are illegal.
And that’s only the half of it. The Hamdan decision also knocked the chocks from underneath the government’s position that it could try Guantanamo detainees using the rubric of military tribunals. While sympathetic to the reasons given by the government for using the tribunals – namely that trying terrorists in open court could endanger the innocent – the Supremes nevertheless firmly ruled that such tribunals violated the Geneva Convention and hence, U.S. law.
The bottom line is that the Supreme Court ruled that the United States government acted illegally and unconstitutionally in the way it has treated detainees at Guantanamo. So the question is no longer one of right or wrong but rather what to do about the mess we have made in Guantanamo.
This mess includes the fact that our government lied to us when they informed the American people that the prisoners at Guantanamo were “the worst of the worst.” The facts contained in the military’s own records simply do not bear that out. And it is clear, at least to this observer, that one of the main reasons the government insists on holding many of these detainees is not the fear that if released they would commit heinous acts of terror but rather because by releasing them now it would prove that the military made many, many tragic mistakes in capturing, interrogating, and holding dozens of innocent men and boys.
An exhaustive examination of the military’s “Combatant Status Review Tribunals” by two National Journal reporters last February revealed this shocking conclusion:
Many of them are not accused of hostilities against the United States or its allies. Most, when captured, were innocent of any terrorist activity, were Taliban foot soldiers at worst, and were often far less than that. And some, perhaps many, are guilty only of being foreigners in Afghanistan or Pakistan at the wrong time. And much of the evidence—even the classified evidence—gathered by the Defense Department against these men is flimsy, second-, third-, fourth- or 12th-hand. It’s based largely on admissions by the detainees themselves or on coerced, or worse, interrogations of their fellow inmates, some of whom have been proved to be liars.
Perhaps most shocking of all is that despite repeated assurances from Administration officials that the Guantanamo detainees were captured “on the battlefield” in Afghanistan, the facts contained in the military’s own records do not support that contention. In fact, it appears that many of the detainees were captured in Pakistan and were handed over to the Americans by:
“...reward-seeking Pakistanis and Afghan warlords and by villagers of highly doubtful reliability. These locals had strong incentives to tar as terrorists any and all Arabs they could get their hands on… including noncombatant teachers and humanitarian workers. And the Bush administration has apparently made very little effort to corroborate the plausible claims of innocence detailed by many of the men who were handed over….”
How little effort has been made to establish claims of innocence? The Guardian features a story today about one Abdullah Mujahid who the government claims was plotting against the United States. Two years ago, the military invited Mr. Mujahid to prove his innocence by calling witnesses in his defense before a tribunal.
A few months later, the government informed Mujahid that the witnesses could not be found which meant that his incarceration would continue indefinitely. The newspaper however, found three of the witnesses within three days. One was working for President Karzai, advising him on tribal affairs. Another teaches at the National Defense University in Washington, D.C.
The Guantanamo records are replete with examples of such incompetence or deliberate malfeasance, depending on your point of view. And herein lies the root of the quagmire at Guantanamo; our inability to admit we were wrong about some of these people and work to redress the injustice.
Clearly, there are many detainees at Guantanamo who should never see the outside of prison bars again. And now that the Supreme Court has offered guidance on what to do with these terrorists – specifically asking the President to go to Congress to get the legal authority to try them – those of us who are interested in both justice and our nation’s security should wholeheartedly support this effort.
But what can we do to determine the status of hundreds of others whose incarceration is a blot on American jurisprudence and shames our constitution and our most cherished values? Clearly there must be procedures using our civilian courts to weed out the innocent from the dangerous. And Congress can also intervene here by developing guidelines in concert with the Justice Department and the Department of Defense to insure that justice is done and our national security is protected.
One of the major stumbling blocks is the fact that much of the evidence gathered against detainees is of a classified nature. And evidence gathered as a result of interrogation of other prisoners, if released in open court, could endanger the person who supplied that information. For this reason, detainees cannot enjoy all the rights afforded American citizens in similar circumstances. But they should have the right to an attorney, the right to a speedy review of their case, the right to an examination of the evidence by an impartial judge, and perhaps a limited right to face their accuser if possible.
At the very least, the above gives us a basis for action. Congress has been dithering about this issue for more than three years, passing the buck to the Department of Justice and the Defense Department. Now that the Supreme Court has cleared up some of the issues surrounding detainees at Guantanamo, Congress could indeed clear up most of the others by dealing with detainee rights in a forthright manner that could begin to repair some of the damage done to our reputation as a champion of human rights and the rule of law.
We will be at war with International jihadism for many years. Besides winning on the battlefield, it is absolutely essential that we also win the hearts and minds of the hundreds of millions of Muslims who reject the violence and nihilism of the extremists and really do wish to rid themselves of the terrorists. This won’t happen as long as some of our policies reveal us to be hypocrites and worse, little better than the governments that oppress them on a daily basis.
We simply must stand for something better, something that we can be proud of. But as long as our detainee policy continues to show us at our worst, it will be impossible for many to see us at our best.
8:53 am
No serious person on the left suggests that the war on terror is a Rovian plot. Americans died on 9/11. People of every State in this nation, from every politcal, racial, and socioeconomic background are fighting and dying in this war. (of course, less than .5% of the Nation is actively engaged, becuase the Republicans refused to drastically increase the size of our armed forces after 9/11). It is very real,and everyone knows it.
What they say, and the what is true, is that Rove has used it in such a way as to divide this country and take power at the expense of the law, and our rights. He has used it for politics, and they have made such a mess of it, that now everyone is scrambling to try and come up with a way to repair the damage. We were more together as Americans after 9/11 than anytime in our lives… and now look at us. Look at where they have taken us.
As your comments suggest, these guys have done a ton of damage to the US image and law. Repair is going to take decades. our very Constitution is continually threatened. The freedom of the press is being squashed. Right wing talk radio hosts publically calling for the murder of Newspaper editors. Fox news journalists are advocating for gov control of the media. Is this really the America that serious conservatives want to live in? I doubt it. This is what pushing the envelpoe on every wedge issue has done. Brought out the worst in our society. “The Decider” is not a uniter folks. Nor are the Republicans being conservative with money. They are spending like drunken sailors. I cannot think of a single thing these jokers have done right.
9:01 am
You are so full of sh*t I will not take the time or make the effort to debunk the numerous idicocies in your comment.
I will say that while “Rovian plot” is an obvious exaggeration (that anyone with half a brain could see) the fact is that the left refuses to believe we are at war.
Here’s Digby (a liberal blogger) today:
“I’m skeptical that the threat of Islamic terrorism can be properly categorized as a war but if it is, one of the big battles being fought is for the integrity of the American system, and the battle is internal, not external…”
Sounds like the idiot doesn’t think we’re at war to me.
9:15 am
ESCAPING THE LEGAL AND MORAL QUAGMIRE OF GUANTANAMO
Right Wing Nut HouseTo those of us on the right who still vigorously support the President in the War on Terror, the Hamdan ruling presents us with a golden opportunity to start repairing the damage our detainee policy at Guantanamo has inflicted upon …
9:17 am
Digby….lol…please. Why not just quote Jesus General… Maybe I can find some far right web site to back up a claim that Republicans are … WHATEVER?? Ridiculous. The quote is arguing nuance over language….
The fact is, Republicans have people in the main stream media out there advocating ridiculous poison. You all have a POTUS that puts signing statements on laws banning the USA use of torture… yes, torture. That is, a fact. Think that helps us in this war…serves our image…our way of life. Defend it then. Splain it to me?
You say I am full of it. Everything I said, you say, only with a nicer spin. So, this Congress is not spending like drunken sailors then? So, Gitomo was not a stupid move then? So, we should not be projecting a larger armed force to the middle east? Our military is the right size… for a regional war? You have nothing but spin on your side my man,no facts, and it shows.
9:18 am
It would be fine by me if we just shot all terrorists where we found them. Do they still get their 72 virgins. Read that only 4% of Palestinians are AGAINST terror. Pig turds be upon the terrorist. I thought the mutant guards putting panties on heads and using fake mesntrual blood were convicted. I love the moral equivalency that their misdeeds equal the sawing off of heads. And why no complaining about Egyptian “wall” to keep the Palis out? And funny how the “leaders” have no desire for early deaths.
12:12 pm
Yo PC - for one who says “You have nothing but spin on your side my man, no facts, and it shows.” I would like to ask of you the following – Practise what you f*ucking preach! Lets see if you can put anything but slogans out there – back up your following comments:
“The freedom of the press is being squashed.”
“The fact is, Republicans have people in the main stream media out there advocating ridiculous poison.”
“So, we should not be projecting a larger armed force to the middle east?”
“Our military is the right size… for a regional war.”
Go ahead and ‘spain it to me! Back up your statements. Show me the links. Try putting some meat in your comments, backing up your “claims” with some evidence. Or are you just another f*cking left wing troll who only spouts slogans and rhetoric but doesn’t have anything to back it up? Well? Show us what you got?
3:04 pm
“I’m skeptical that the threat of Islamic terrorism can be properly categorized as a war but if it is, one of the big battles being fought is for the integrity of the American system, and the battle is internal, not external…â€
Respectfully, I think you miss Digby’s point. Regardless of how one defines war, the second half of that sentence almost exactly makes your point, that as you said here: “This won’t happen as long as some of our policies reveal us to be hypocrites and worse,”.
4:29 pm
[...] And on a basic level, about what goes on at the base at Guantanamo: “These are simply the facts. It does no good to argue that what goes on at Guantanamo doesn’t rise to the level of torture. Not anymore. One of the main findings in Hamdan was that the detainees at Guantanamo – no matter how bloodthirsty and heinous their crimes – are entitled to the protections of the Geneva Convention.” [...]
4:32 pm
“. . .absolutely essential that we also win the hearts and minds of the hundreds of millions of Muslims who reject the violence and nihilism of the extremists and really do wish to rid themselves of the terrorists.”
Totally agree with that.
So the challenge is there. Whether we have the heart and soul to win the hearts and minds will require more than the will of the few.
4:58 pm
PC
I agree with you that the size of the armed forces should have been expanded after 911 and the Republicans have spent money like drunken sailors. You are also correct to point out that the damage done by Gitmo will take time to repair and we made mistakes here. I think these are valid critcisms. Had the Democrats stuck to themes, such as this, during the 2004 eletion cycle they likely would have control the House, the Senate, and the white House now. Where your creditbility is damaged is whne you accuse the Republicans of trying to quash the freedom of the press and using the war on terror as a plot to win elections. Please understand by the “left” I’m not saying this is you. It seems to me the left has done more to divide the country by refusing to acknowledge we are at war and to accuse the Administration of lying and things of that nature. Also, by blowing things out of proportion and not providing the context has served to divide us and to damage our image abroad. Then the left has the chutzpah to blame the administration. The admimistration has made a contribution here but the primary blame for dividing us should go to the left.
Bottom line: Mistakes were made at Gitmo. Some people need to be there. Others should be released and never should have been there. Innocent people were subjected to treatment that would rise to the level of torture. Restitution needs to be made. What a country!! We are able to make course corrections. Again, I’m not saying this is you, but there are at least a substantial minority on the left who do not think we are war. These people have substantial influence. We will need to work together to move forward. Until these people recognize that we are at war for our survival it will be hard to bridge this gap and move forward. Also, while it is true that the kinds of torture that go on at Gitmo are far less than what goes on in places like North Korea, it does not matter. We are far better than that and we need to do better than we have. I hope and pray we get this right this time!!
7:12 pm
To clarify my point made earlier. When I say we are able to make course corrections, what I mean is we have an open system and we have an opportunity to improve and get better. Countries that do not have a free press or an open system do not get this opportunity. Also the checks and balances in the American system minimize the abiltiy of someone from doing to much damage. It seems the president and his advisors, for various reasons, assumed to much power and the Supreme Court has acted to check the executive branch. Again, what a ountry, we have a chance to get this right!! Lets pray that we do.
11:26 pm
I quite agree Gitmo should be closed. It gives us the opportunity to exercise our rights under Article IV of the Geneva Convention immediately rather than have to give the jihaddies a pass to the Magic Kingdom as the Supreme Black Robbed Five of Kelo fame seems to think is required.
Let the executions begin, per the Geneva Convention.
12:12 am
For those advocating increasing manpower in the armed forces, it is not as easy as it sounds. We simply don’t have the money to pay for new weapon systems and increase the size of the force at the same time. The average active duty military person costs the government $112,000 each year just in pay and benefits. We spend $94 billion dollars just to keep our active duty military on active duty. The guard and reserve are much cheaper until you activate them, which is quite common today, so that figure is probably well over $100 billion. That’s over 20% of the total defense budget. That money doesn’t buy any equipment or training, much less funds for actual operations. Just for comparison, $94 billion is more than any other country’s total military budget. In fact, it’s 50% more than our nearest spending competitor – China.
So, to double the size of the military will add almost $100 billion to the defense budget right off the bat. Add in the equipment, training and operating expenses they’ll need and you’re looking at increasing the defense budget by at least 50% or over $250 billion a year. In short, there is no way to pay for the increase. In fact, we are now cutting personnel to pay for equipment recapitalization. The Air Force is cutting almost 60,000 personnel in the next year to pay for the F-22 and JSF. The $7 billion those cut personnel will save will buy about 20 F-22’s at their current price of about $345 million a pop. It’s obviously legitimate to question the tradeoff of those personnel for equipment, especially the F-22 which will be the most expensive military acquisition program in the history of this planet.
But there are other reasons the force cannot simply be increased, even if we had the money. Assuming the needed personnel could be voluntarily recruited, they will still start at the bottom rung in terms of seniority and experience. It frankly takes time to build the size of the force, because you can’t instantly buy or recruit the necessary leadership for all the newly recruited troops. You have to make those leaders and build that experience over time. A good mid-level NCO - the core leadership element in the US military – takes anywhere from 5-10 years to get the training and experience. Field grade officers take a minimum of a decade if they’re fast-burners. Therefore, a significant increase in the force will take at least a decade to implement. Cutting the force is easy and quick, building it is not.
So for all those reasons and more our military will not be getting bigger anytime soon.
12:25 am
BTW, great article Rick, I agree with pretty much everything you said.
One thing I do find ironic and humorous about some conservatives, especially with this Administration – they insist that judicial appointees be “strict constructionists” when interpreting laws, but they don’t apply such standards to interpreting law as it pertains to themselves or the executive branch. On one hand the Administration argues that broad laws like the civil rights act, clean water act, ADA, etc. must be interpreted according to the letter of the law, but then it turns around and interprets the use of force resolution and our treaty obligations in the widest manner conceivable.
3:44 am
Andy
The additional information you provided on how much it costs to operate the military clarifies things as to why it is not so easy to increase the size of the military. We could free up some money for this if we scaled back the quasi welfare state we are trying run, all while fighting a war. To do this though would require the Administration and and the American government to ask the American people to make a sacrifice. To date they do not seem to have done this.
Also, I’ve noticed what you noticed as well. When they want to they interpret things in the widest manner possible. How ever it suits them. Just like typical politicians.
8:14 am
We could,and should have increased our armed forces after 9/11.
“The average active duty military person costs the government $112,000 each year just in pay and benefits”...uh… where on earth did you get that stat. Average pay for new enlistments E-1 to E-5 (normally, the firtst six years of service) is only about 25,000-30,000 dollars a year including housing and special pays.
8:39 am
“The fact is, Republicans have people in the main stream media out there advocating ridiculous poison.â€
Statments made on National TV from RW Blog Lunes…
TALK SHOW HOST MELANIE MORGAN SAYS “ANY NEWSPAPER EDITOR” WHO PUBLISHES CLASSIFIED INFO SHOULD BE “LOCKED IN A STEEL CAGE,” MURDERED BY FAMILY MEMBERS OF SLAIN TROOPS, AND SENT TO “HOTTEST CORNER OF HELL.”
ANN COULTER HAS CALLED FOR THE BOMBING OF THE TIMES BUILDING.
I could go on and on, including rep Peter King advocating for charges of treason on MSNBC. Memmbers of Fox news advocating for an office in the gov that monitors the press….. and clears what it can print.. Hell, Congress just wasted our time and money…AGAIN… on a “non binding” resolution condemning the NYT…which republicans voted for.
“So, we should not be projecting a larger armed force to the middle east?â€
As far as more troops…there is a long list of regional experts who agree with me on that, and it is widely known…so… let me just say..it includes men like Ret Generals Ralph Odem, NSA for Reagan…Zinnie, Batiste… I could go on and on.
And the courts…well…the Republicans have done nothing but Demonize judges as well. The very subject of this post, Gonzo has come out against the supremes saying they have hurt the war on terror with their Decision…SO SORRY THAT THE LAW IS HAMPERING YOUR EFFORTS. We should have been following the conventions from the beggining. It is what seperates us from these scumbags.
What pisses me off is you all say the Democrats have the problem because some on the far left are not taking it seriously enough. THAT IS THE FAR LEFT. The Republicans have lead us into this ill prepared, and done more damage than good. They put us into a war under false pretense, without the needed force structure to achieve the stated objectives of nation building. The Republicans came out with the insane policies on torture and detention that have made us more hated. The Republicans have burned bridges with our allies. The Republicans have spent money foolishly. The Republicans have failed to change course when needed.
Democsts are running men like Jim Webb in VA, who are serious about this issue, and not just hyping spin. We are where we are today, with both sides looking for “an honorable exit from Iraq” because the Republicans in charge did not project the force needed to nantion build,and rather than governing and attempting to solve the problem, they alientate everyone around them. Bush never stopped campaigning. The NRO has an outstanding article on this. These men are not governing. It is all hype, spin,and misdirection being used to cover the simple truth that we have not raised an army large enough to meet the threat.
8:48 am
“We simply must stand for something better, something that we can be proud of. But as long as our detainee policy continues to show us at our worst, it will be impossible for many to see us at our best.”
Last comment. Obviously, I agree with you on this. Any odds on if the Republicans in the Congress will use statements from the Administration to keep this policy going, by attmepting to pass a law.. just so they can attempt to paint the dems as “weak on terror” while supporting this disasterous mess?
10:11 am
PC:
You can read the latest issue of Foreign Affairs for the numbers and a good article on the military manpower crisis here:
http://www.aei.org/publications/filter.all,pubID.24584/pub_detail.asp
That number is an average, so obviously some troops are cheaper and others more expensive. Base pay is only one aspect of military compensation. There are housing costs, medical care, life insurance, special pays, etc. that all add up and are not always tied to rank.
11:43 am
Andy- I included BAH BAS in my numbers, as well as special pays .. Base pay would average about 18K as year…... even with your numbers, which no doubt include Officers and Retiree pay, if people do 20 and live to 90, and if we keep the Enlisted to Officer ration the same as it is today (which we do not have to, by the way). Even with your numbers….which are way over the top….. the Military is 1.4 Million AD… 1,400,000 X 112,000= 156,800,000,000. That is 156.8 Billion a year…. to put a million men on the ground in Iraq… worth it,if we are serious about winning this war… also while saving billions that we are spending on private companies who are making a profit, doing more and more of traditionally military jobs. We should have had a massive recrutiing drive for Seabees, Army Corps of Eng, MP’s and Marines. We do not need a larger fleet, although I would argue that the 20% reduction in the fleet we have seen under Bush has been counter productive…. everyone yells about Iran cutting off our oil… hell, we should be shutting them down ourselves right now. They have a single market economy…. we have the largest fleet in the world…do the math. We should have enough men on the ground to secure Iraqs oil, and be pumping it to pay for their reconstruction. (another huge savings under my plan). Bottom line… my formula saves money and lives, becuase my formula dominates the region, the current one, does not. Also, using my formula…WE WIN.
12:05 pm
“What this decision has done is, it’s hampered our ability to move forward with a tool which we had hoped would be available to the president of the United States in dealing with terrorists,” Attorney General Alberto Gonzales told CNN.
...”We are currently evaluating the writings of the Supreme Court,” Gonzales said, and “we are going to be working closely with Congress to look at legislation.”
Here we go again. So much for the the RW Nuthouse desire to move past this. The Republicans have a better idea, play politics with it and pass a law that goes against the Geneva Conventions…GOOD CALL!
1:54 pm
Neither Ann Coulter nor Melanie Morgan have any real power within the Republican party. They are juts pundits. For that matter I think some pundits have called for the assaination of President Bush. Pundits on either side should not make such claims. They are unhelpful. I think Rep. King is right people who leak classified information should be charged.
It seems the Attorney General wants to work with Congress to craft legislation so we can move forward. I hope both parties can work together on this.
2:03 pm
What does seem clear is both parties should have recognized we needed a larger military very soon after 911. We have not spent that time working on it. We still could get started now. It would take some time. We need to understand that if we win we do it together or if we lose we do it together.
2:54 pm
If there had never been a Gitmo the Islamic world would not have thought any better of the U.S.
The idea that the Supreme Court’s majority ruling was some kind of open door invitation to the congress to set things right is a joke.
11:17 am
PC:
Is that the best you can do? Your proof consists of:
Comments made by right wing advocates is “proof” that Republicans are behind their remarks?
Your “proof” we need more troops is comments from retired generals, not one of which commanded troops in the field in either Iraq or Afghanistan?
And now you jump on the author of this post for disagreeing with the Supremes? What color is the kettle in your world? How ‘bout the pot?
You and the author of this post, and myself for that matter, are very much alike. Each of us have opinions – and assholes. The fact that the author’s opinion differs from yours or the Supreme Court does not necessarily make him an asshole. But you clearly have established that moniker as your own.
My grandfather once told me never to wrestle with a pig – you get dirty and the pig loves it. PC, comment to your hearts fulfillment, I’m through wrestling with you.
2:58 pm
PC,
“My” numbers on compensation are from the GAO. Read the first page of this report:
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05798.pdf
It’s impossible for you to calculate BAS, BAH, etc. because those benefits are dependent upon duty location, rank and marital status. Special pays are very complicated – there is no way you correctly factored them in. So I’ll take the GAO’s numbers over yours. And yes, they include officers – they are in the military too – but not retiree pay, or even reserve and Guard pay.
Yes, in 2004 it cost about $158 billion to pay for 1.4 million active-duty military. Like I said above, that doesn’t include any equipment, training, or operational costs. You probably need to double that figure at least to account for those factors. Additionally, as I said before, it takes time to build a force – you can’t just toss in a ton of money and expect the Government to instantly squat down and squeeze out a million fully trained and equipped troops.
1:17 am
Submitted for Your Approval
First off… any spambots reading this should immediately go here, here, here, and here. Die spambots, die! And now… here are all the links submitted by members of the Watcher’s Council for this week’s vote. Council li…
2:36 pm
[...] Right Wing Nut House, “Escaping the Legal and Moral Quagmire of Guantanamo†[...]
8:01 pm
cl8jUMVbbJoN VOiDwTucOvT EIvbQpk0xn6wP
1:24 am
The Council Has Spoken!
First off… any spambots reading this should immediately go here, here, here, and here. Die spambots, die! And now… the winning entries in the Watcher’s Council vote for this week are The Wild, Wild West(ern Europe) by…
7:54 am
[...] The Watcher’s Council has announced its picks for the most outstanding posts of the preceding week. The winning Council post was Gates of Vienna’s comparison of crime rate in the United States and Europe, “Wild, Wild West(ern Europe)”. There was a remarkable 5-way tie for second place honors with posts by Right Wing Nut House, Joshuapundit, New World Man, Done With Mirrors, and myself in a dead heat. I think that points less to a division of opinion among Council members than the general excellence of the Council submissions this week. The winning non-Council post was Outside the Beltway’s amusing fisking of the Declaration of Independence. The second place non-Council post was Shape of Days’s post, “Sometimes Even the Good Ones Lose Their Wayâ€, a commentary on Congressman Jack Kingston. [...]
8:44 am
The Council Has Spoken!
This week’s winning Council post was The Wild, Wild West(ern Europe) at Gates of Vienna. There was a 5-way tie for second place between ESCAPING THE LEGAL AND MORAL QUAGMIRE OF GUANTANAMO, Jew hater Bush?!??, Why haven’t we captured Osama
12:44 pm
The ‘war on terra’ is bogus. It is not a war, just a convenient geo-political ploy to enrich the arms industry and their subsidiary industries, which are vast. Our ‘enemy’ is an ideology, which can never be eradicated, ergo a permanent war…isn’t that great?! – unending profits. Any ‘war’ will have the added side-effect of keeping the masses in a paralytical state of fear so that critical dissent is always stifled or muted.
Bush is a lazy frat boy. He has stated that “diplomacy is hard work”...well, duh!
It is much easier to strike out or isolate those with whom you disagree. It requires very little thought or consideration, but the consequences are always a cycle of spiraling responses leading to ever-increasing violence. It is simply stupid and childish, but the current foreign policy of the U.S. is operated on this very childish level. It is not just incompetence. It is incompetence combined with laziness.
I long for a time when adults will be in charge again.