Picture of the Week

Trackback URL: 
http://amyproctor.squarespace.com/blog/trackback/692511

Comments

[Gayle]

That cartoon really does put it in perspective, doesn't it?

I saw your comment over at Karen's, and want to tell you that you did a good job. I can't for the life of me understand people like the one that jumped all over her for her post. They stick their heads in the sand and refuse to see the truth!

[Silke]

Apparently the President approves of them too. He said this on Thursday:

“I'm pleased to say that this agreement preserves the most single -- most potent tool we have in protecting America and foiling terrorist attacks, and that is the CIA program to question the world's most dangerous terrorists and to get their secrets.”

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/09/20060921-3.html

Also, National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley said, "The bill will provide rules for interrogators to detain, question and bring to justice terrorists. It is good news and a good day for the American people."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,215040,00.html

[pappy]

Looks like club gitmo to me

[Leticia]

As they say, "A picture is worth a million words." Or something like that.

It really does put things into "perspective."

[Amy Proctor]

Silke, I could be wrong but I think Senate Dems and the 3 Republicans, Warner, McCain and Graham, gave the President what he wanted. (also, this cartoon is a few days old!) The standard in the cartoon is still going on, if you look at the article I posted before by Richard Miniter called A Deadly Kindness

http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/a_deadly_kindness_opedcolumnists_richard_miniter.htm

[Amy Proctor]

The problem with the Geneva Convention is that Common Article 3 is extremely vague. The whole point was that President Bush (a practicing Christian, by the way) wanted to provide for <b>specific</b> guidelines so US interrogators know exactly what they can and cannot do. <a href="http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/WebART/375-590006?OpenDocument">Article 3 </a>reads like this:

ARTICLE 3
In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:

(1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed ' hors de combat ' by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.
To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

(a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;

(b) taking of hostages;

<b>(c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment;</b>

(d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

(2) The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.

An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict.
The Parties to the conflict should further endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present Convention.
The application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal status of the Parties to the conflict.


As you can see, the US military rules already supports article 3 but letter "C" was ambiguous. "Ourtages upon personal dignity? Humiliating? Degrading?" These terrorists we're dealing with are sissies in interrogations and cry for their personal lawyers if they have to skip a meal. The intent of "C" is probably rape, nudity, etc.

So you can talk about "obligations" all day long, but when the Geneva Convention is that vague, how is the military to carry out interrogations?

Here's a list from the article in Time Magazine called "Inside the Interrogation of Dentainee 063":

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1071284,00.html

Here are some of the hideous ways terrorist detainees are being torture through interrogation:

<b>-MPs (military police) wrestled thrashing, spitting detainee to the ground after he head butted an MP.
-Detainee was told no one loved, cared for or remembered him.
smiley-face mask made from MRE box was placed over detainees face for few moments after telling detainee how ungrateful and grumpy he was.
-interrogators made puppet show satirizing detainee’s involvement with Al-Qaeda.
-waking detainee with Christina Aguilera music
-making him stand for the playing of American national anthem

If these heinous acts of violence against an innocent terrorist weren’t enough, Donald Rumsfeld approved 16 stronger interrogation methods due to the “resilience under pressure” by Detainee 063. Some of these drastic new measures included allowed for:

-standing for prolonged periods
-isolation for up to 30 days
-removal of clothing
-forced shaving of facial hair
-playing on “individual phobias” (such as dogs)
-”mild, non-injurious physical contact” such as grabbing, poking in the check with finger, light pushing.
-use of wet towel or dripping water to induce misperception of suffocation.
-longer interrogation sessions.
-dripping water over head to arouse from sleep.

Holy Cow, how do they stand it?

[Silke]

Amy, using dogs is specifically prohibited, so is making the subject feel like they are suffocating.

Here’s how the Army defines impermissible coercion.

“Certain prohibited physical coercion may be obvious, such as physically abusing the subject of the screening or interrogation. Other forms of impermissible coercion may be more subtle, and may include threats to turn the individual over to others to be abused; subjecting the individual to impermissible humiliating or degrading treatment; implying harm to the individual or his property. Other prohibited actions include implying a deprivation of applicable protections guaranteed by law because of a failure to cooperate; threatening to separate parents from their children; or forcing a protected person to guide US forces in a dangerous area.” (p. 5-22 FM 2-22.3)

http://www.army.mil/references/FM2-22.3.pdf

[Stevina (Tim's Wife)]

All I know is that handcuffing the military this way won't make anyone any safer. Terrorists are not protected by the Geneva Convention, and if they have to get rought to get vital information that will save me and my family, then by all means do it.

[Cpt Tom]

Of course, this whole talk of Geneva Convention protection for the terrorists is based on a misapplication of those conventions. Terrorists are illegal combatants..they don't wear a uniform or identifying marks, and they don't carry arms openly, they don't belong to any country, and they aren't signers of the Convention, nor do they follow the conventions or the laws of war. Therefore, no protections. This is what I learned in my Law of Warfare classes, and what John McCane and Colon Powell certainly were taught. That said, we are the Good Guys. We shouldn't torture (breaking bones, electrical shocks, hanging by thumbs, etc.)...but roughing them up or making them "uncomfortable" is definitely within the realm of possiblities. These aren't petty criminals, nor are they a displined army, They are people who wanted and still want to kill us, and they DEFINITELY don't follow the rules of war. Unless blowing up innocent civilians for no good reason except for the terror effect has suddenly become a legitimate mode of warfare.

[Dim Bulb]

Deasr Ms. Proctor,

We are incensed to see that a blogger of your caliber would stoop so low as to misrepresent the Senate approved guidelines as to how the poor unfortunate detainees in our Nations custody are treated.

We draw your attention, Madame, to the unicolered jumpsuit that our nations guest is wearing and, specifically, to the word DETAINEE emblazoned across the chest. If this doesn't suggest the yellow star of David from Hitler's Germany it does, at the very least, suggest that these freedom fighting men are to be placed on the same level as common criminals in American jails.

There are no unicolered jumpsuits at Gitmo Bay Madame! Still less is there any clothing which reads DETAINEE. These men are considered-and hence are called-political guests, and nothing less.

Sincerely,

Sen. John McCain
Sen. Lindsey Graham

[Dim Bulb]

Oops! That post should have been signed Dim Bulb and Sick Puppy.

[Dim Bulb, Sick Puppy]

Crap! I did it again! Sick is such a baby.

[Mwalimu Daudi]

I noticed that in the picture the 72 virgins as clearly required by the Geneva Convention were not present (don't actually go looking it up, you neocon lovers - just trust me). Another attempt to torture innocent Muslims for oil.

Impeach Bush now!

[Old Soldier]

If I am not mistaken, non-uniformed combatants are considered spies and qualify for a summary execution. Because of our morals and ethics, we don't summarily execute them, we detain them as if they were legitimate combatants. Perhaps that is our mistake. By the laws of warfare, we could interrogate them and then execute them for spying and be within the law.

It is time for the people of the US to accept that we are at war with ruthless barbarians who have no compunction for following international law relative to warfare. Since Islamofascists chose to wage war in the manner they do, they must also accept the consequences that their actions bear.

[Cobra]

Interesting article from Eric Margolis...a must read for all you fans of torturing people.

>>>"The Lubyanka Prison’s heavy oak main door swung open. I went in, the first western journalist to enter the KGB’s notorious Moscow headquarters, a place so dreaded Russians dared not utter its name. When they referred to it at all, they called it `Detsky Mir,’ after a nearby toy store.

After interviewing two senior KGB generals, I explored the fascinating museum of Soviet intelligence and was briefed on special poisons and assassination weapons that left no traces. I sat transfixed at the desk used by all the directors of Stalin’s secret police, on which the orders were signed to murder 30 million people.

Descending dimly lit stairs, I saw some of the KGB’s execution and torture cellars, and special `cold rooms’ where naked prisoners were beaten, then doused with ice water and slowly frozen.

Other favored Lubyanka tortures: psychological terror, psychotropic drugs, prolonged sleep deprivation, dazzling lights, intense noise, days in pitch blackness, isolation, humiliation, constant threats, savage beatings, attacks by guard dogs, near drowning.

Nightmares from the past….but the past has returned.

According to report just leaked to the `NY Times,’ the Swiss-based International Red Cross has accused the Bush Administration for a second time of employing systematic, medically supervised torture against suspects at its Devil’s Island at Guantanamo, and at US-run prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The second Red Cross report was delivered to the White House last summer while it was trying to dismiss the Abu Ghraib prison torture horrors in Iraq as the crimes of a few rogue jailers.

Many tortures perfected by the Cheka ( Soviet secret police), notably beating, freezing, sensory disorientation, and sleep deprivation, are now routinely being used by US interrogators on Muslim suspects.

The Chekisti, however, did not usually inflict sexual humiliations. That technique, and hooding, were developed by Israeli psychologists to break resistance of Palestinian prisoners.
Photos of sexual humiliation were used by Israeli security, and then by US interrogators at Abu Ghraib, to blackmail Muslim prisoners into becoming informers."

http://www.ericmargolis.com/archives/2004/12/torture_usa.php

You understand what the Bush Administration is turning America into via reputation? I get the racism angle some of the posters seem to have...the "these suspects aren't like me, don't look like me, don't share my religeon, so who cares what happens to them". I really do. As an African-American I've seen that kind of attitude all of my life.
You don't understand what this provision Bush wants to do entails. They not only want to torture, but use coerced testimony and IMMUNIZE themselves from any PAST torture activities. If that doesn't sound like the old Soviet Union, I don't know what other examples you need to see.
Second, if ALL the detainees are "brown skinned terrorists evil-doers", how come so many are being RELEASED?

--Cobra

[Tim]

"You understand what the Bush Administration is turning America into via reputation? I get the racism angle some of the posters seem to have...the "these suspects aren't like me, don't look like me, don't share my religeon, so who cares what happens to them". I really do."

Point to the statements made that would support this obersvation of yours. Or are you just making stuff up again? I also get your "they bomb and kill little children in the name of Allah, so lets not offend them" angle of yours. I really do.

"As an African-American I've seen that kind of attitude all of my life."

*sob* A single tear rolls down my cheek for the prejudice and persecution you must have faced all your life. Oh, wait, this is 2006.

[Gayle]

The bottom line here is that we should not be honoring the Geneva Convention. It was not written to cover the treatment of murderous, maniacal thugs such as terrorists. They are in no way related to a genuine Army. They wear no uniforms. They honor no rules; not one single rule of decency! They murder at random innocent people going about their daily lives minding their own business. If people like Cobra wish to take pity on them, then I hope he takes up residence in Iran.

[Cobra]

Tim,

You want support for my statements? Sure.

Capt. Tom writes:

>>>"but roughing them up or making them "uncomfortable" is definitely within the realm of possiblities. These aren't petty criminals, nor are they a displined army, They are people who wanted and still want to kill us, and they DEFINITELY don't follow the rules of war. Unless blowing up innocent civilians for no good reason except for the terror effect has suddenly become a legitimate mode of warfare."

Here's a good example. I'm sure Capt. Tom means well, but let's look a report based on available government information as to exactly who these "detainees" are at Gitmo:

>>>"1. Fifty-five percent (55%) of the detainees are not determined to have committed any hostile acts against the United States or its coalition allies.

2. Only 8% of the detainees were characterized as al Qaeda fighters. Of the remaining detainees, 40% have no definitive connection with al Qaeda at all and 18% are have no definitive affiliation with either al Qaeda or the Taliban.

3. The Government has detained numerous persons based on mere affiliations with a large number of groups that in fact, are not on the Department of Homeland Security terrorist watchlist. Moreover, the nexus between such a detainee and such organizations varies considerably. Eight percent are detained because they are deemed “fighters for;” 30% considered “members of;” a large majority – 60% -- are detained merely because they are “associated with” a group or groups the Government asserts are terrorist organizations. For 2% of the prisoners their nexus to any terrorist group is unidentified.

4. Only 5% of the detainees were captured by United States forces. 86% of the detainees were arrested by either Pakistan or the Northern Alliance and turned over to United States custody. This 86% of the detainees captured by Pakistan or the Northern Alliance were handed over to the United States at a time in which the United States OFFERED LARGE BOUNTIES for capture of suspected enemies.

5. Finally, the population of persons deemed not to be enemy combatants – mostly Uighers – are in fact accused of more serious allegations than a great many persons still deemed to be enemy combatants."

http://law.shu.edu/news/guantanamo_report_final_2_08_06.pdf

Hello? These are the people you want to torture? And what happens when you release the ones that OBVIOUSLY had NOTHING to do with terrorism? They're going to go back to their countries as living eye-witness testimony to everything the Islamic jihadist claim the United States to be.

Here's another example of hate and misunderstanding:

Daudi writes:

>>>"I noticed that in the picture the 72 virgins as clearly required by the Geneva Convention were not present (don't actually go looking it up, you neocon lovers - just trust me). Another attempt to torture innocent Muslims for oil."

If some of the detainees were simply "sold" to the US to collect a bounty, what possible good would come out of torturing them, despite your disparaging remarks about their religious beliefs?

Old Soldier writes:

>>>"If I am not mistaken, non-uniformed combatants are considered spies and qualify for a summary execution. Because of our morals and ethics, we don't summarily execute them, we detain them as if they were legitimate combatants. Perhaps that is our mistake. By the laws of warfare, we could interrogate them and then execute them for spying and be within the law."

Again, how would that apply to many of the detainees at Gitmo I've hilighted? And would you apply that to ALL spies? Including Johnathan Pollard and Richard Smyth? (look them up)

Amy writes:

>>>"If these heinous acts of violence against an innocent terrorist weren’t enough, Donald Rumsfeld approved 16 stronger interrogation methods due to the “resilience under pressure” by Detainee 063. Some of these drastic new measures included allowed for:

-standing for prolonged periods
-isolation for up to 30 days
-removal of clothing
-forced shaving of facial hair
-playing on “individual phobias” (such as dogs)
-”mild, non-injurious physical contact” such as grabbing, poking in the check with finger, light pushing.
-use of wet towel or dripping water to induce misperception of suffocation.
-longer interrogation sessions.
-dripping water over head to arouse from sleep."

So you would apply all these measures to some people who did nothing but be in the wrong place at the wrong time?
Remember, according to the GOVERNMENT REPORTS, only FIVE PERCENT of the detainees were captured by US forces, which means we don't know the whole story about 95% of those we have in custody. But hey, they don't look like you, or worship the same god, so strip them naked, violate their religious customs and beat on them, right Amy?

Sheesh. At least the KGB had no pretense about their torturous behaviors.

--Cobra

[Mavic]

Its 2006, and you can still come out as a closet white supremacist. Free speech is after all a coveted right in America isn't it?

Cobra, keep in mind that only a caucasian fellow can truly understand the experiences of racial inequalities that blacks endure. If you are ever confused about the problem racial inequality in America, or need some advice, people like Tim are available to share their grievances with you!

[Tim]

"You want support for my statements? Sure."

Okay, so when do I get those? You made a statement that is was a racist angle, and have yet to post a statement made by anyone here that would validate the observation. But nice try though, with the attempt to steer the discussion elsewhere.

"Cobra, keep in mind that only a caucasian fellow can truly understand the experiences of racial inequalities that blacks endure."

Yeah, they experience so much pain and agony. That's why many of them our running our country from the White House and Capital Hill. Stick to Canada Mavic. You have enough problems of your own.

[Stevina (Tim's Wife)]

Maybe in Canada blacks are still oppressed Mavic (I've seen about 3 of them in the last 2 years) but not in America.

[Amy Proctor]

"So you would apply all these measures to some people who did nothing but be in the wrong place at the wrong time?"-Cobra

Right, Cobra, all the detainees at Gitmo are innocent victims who just HAPPENED to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Denial is curable.

[Amy Proctor]

Gayle is 100% right.

Stevina, prepare to be called a racist!

Cobra, America does NOT torture. Ask John McCain what torture is and I can guaran-damn-tee you that is NOT what's going on at Gitmo. Your attempt to make al-Qaeda a moral equivilent to US Soldiers or Pres. Bush is erroneous at its premis.

[CalPatriot]

Does everyone know that Ted Kennedy doesn’t dream of 72 virgins, but he fanaticizes often about 72 bloody Mary’s.

[Silke]

Amy, do you consider "waterboarding" (where the subject is made to feel as if they are drowning) torture?

[Stevina (Tim's Wife)]

I've been called worse Amy.

[Trent]

This is an outrage!! Where's this man's TiVo? Why must he be subjected to such inhumane conditions?!

[J Rob]

If we are talking real torture: flaying, bamboo under the nails, rape, taking the victim to just short of the point of death, that sort of thing. Hell yes I'm against that. A great deal of what I have seen called "torture" since Abu Graibh would make war criminals out of the average fraternity rush committee.

[bernie]

As soon as al-Qaeda signs onto the Geneva Convention, and demands that all its fighters respect those guidelines and swears off bombing innocent civilians, we should then treat them as we would want our prisoners treated.

Until then, I see no problem with having female bosoms rub against their cheeks.

And liberal idiots, please spare me "Oh the inhumanity!"

For those who do not know what a liberal idiot looks like, please see http://plancksconstant.org/blog1/2006/09/10000_year_old_remai.html

[Silke]

Bernie, what do liberals have to do with this? It was several Senater republicans who disagreed with the President.

[Cobra]

COMMENT HAS BEEN DELTED FOR SECURITY REASONS.

[Silke]

Cobra,

What happened at Abu Ghraib was not in the context of interrogating detainees (they weren’t being questioned). These were clear acts of misconduct and the soldiers responsible are being punished for it. In addition, safeguards have been put in place to ensure that this does not happen again. The Army’s Field Manual for Human Intelligence Collector Operations (FM 2-22.3) outlines the responsibilities of all soldiers who deal with detainees and standards of conduct and treatment at all levels are clearly stated.

http://www.army.mil/references/FM2-22.3.pdf

[Tim]

"Bernie, what do liberals have to do with this? It was several Senater republicans who disagreed with the President."

Not to nit-pick Silke but "republican" doesn't really mean "conservative" these days.

"Well folks, first of all, if the CIA and the President has come out and endorsed "SECRET PRISONS", how the hell do you know WHAT's going on in them?"

How do you for that matter? Usuallly proof is required when making accusations Cobra.

" But no, go ahead and blindly trust President Bush."

And you go ahead and blindly accuse him because he's on the other side of your political fence.

"And you know this how? What's your opinion on redlining, racial profiling, hiring discrimination, wage discrimination, and housing discrimination? Do you feel that NONE of these things exist in 2006? Give me proof with statistical facts."

Ha! That's rich! YOU are the one accusing this site and apparently America of racism and discrimination without providing the evidence. Why don't YOU back up your claims instead of asking us to prove your theory for you?

"Um...when did President Bush become a black man? Senate Majority Leader? Speaker of the House? Hello? Maybe you need to check the prescription of your bifocals Timmy."

No, they're just the Secretary of State, (two blacks in a row under the supposedly racist Bush)not to mention those in Congress. But you're right, what lowly work that is? *plays violin for Cobra*

[Silke]

Tim said: “Not to nit-pick Silke but "republican" doesn't really mean "conservative" these days.”

Graham, Warner and McCain aren’t exactly “liberal.”

[Tim]

"Graham, Warner and McCain aren’t exactly “liberal.”

McCain sure as hell isn't conservative.

[Amy Proctor]

Well, McCain is NOT conservative, at least not socially. I don't think economically he is, either. And let me tell you about Graham. He's from SC where I currently live. When I went to the "support illegal immigration" rally months ago, GUESS WHO appeared at the State House with all the illegals, supporting their anmesty? LINDSEY GRAHAM. He is NOT a conservative. Warner has been moderate on some issues, but I don't have the time to do the research on him.

[Amy Proctor]

Cobra, stop and think: Who's in the President's cabinet? Condi Rice, for example? Remember Colin Powell? At least Bush picks African Americans who are qualified. Or I suppose you consider the last Dem. Pres. to BE a black American. He certainly did.

[Silke]

Amy,

Regarding illegal immigrants, Graham supports the President's plan.

Also, do you consider "waterboarding" (making a person feel as if they are about to suffocate) torture?

[Amy Proctor]

He supports the Pres.' plan... and then some. I don't recall ever seeing Pres. Bush attend a rally that was blatantly pro-illegal immigration. The Democratic party showed up with voter registration.. I'm not kidding.

[Tim]

"Or I suppose you consider the last Dem. Pres. to BE a black American. He certainly did."

*smiling ear to ear*

[Silke]

Amy, what about "waterboarding?"

[CalPatriot]

Your (linked - )report aimed to get democrats fired up to side with submission to Allah, says that many detainees allegedly ,and regularly assaulted MPs constantly in Iraq - so these Iraqi or terrorists suspects were actually torturing our men and women. So are you for torture of American service people, eh. Cobra. You seemed to leave this part out.

Also. Cobra, why didn’t former President Clinton ever have one black person in his first tiered cabinet –like President Bush has? I think one of the lowest ranking cabinet members in his administration had a suspicious death; his name was Ron Brown, who was about to blow the lid-off of job-procurement of U.S. business people connected to the Chinese Military all set up by Clinton for his communist buddies here and afar.

[Amy Proctor]

CalPatriot, you forgot to mention the EVER successful Joceyln Elders! Oh, remember her???? This is the sort of African American quality Clinton could come up with. Meanwhile, Bush comes up with Condi Rice. Another reason why affirmative action doesn't work.

[Amy Proctor]

Silke, I personally would never want to go through waterboarding. I think it falls short of torture, but I'd not want to endure it myself. However.... I'd never blow up US servicemen, US cities or US buildings, so I guess I have nothing to worry about.

See how that works?

[Amy Proctor]

CalPatriot, you're missing the point... BLAME AMERICA FIRST! Who cares if American soldiers are tortured? I'm sure they deserved it.

[Silke]

Yes, Amy. I see exactly how that works. When I see good people such as yourself rationalizing cruel treatment I think that our country has lost some of the values it claims to defend and promote. And it makes me truly sad. We are better than this.

[Amy Proctor]

Silke, I hear what you're saying, but do YOU hear what you're saying? "rationalizing cruel treatment" You CLEARLY do not understand, nor do you overestimate, the cruelty of our enemy.

Waterboarding is FAR more humane than, say, cutting off a man's penis and shoving it down his throat, causing him to suffocate while he dies from loss of blood wounds after being truly tortured. This happened to the 2 101st soldiers abducted at the checkpoint earlier in the year in Iraq. I'll provide the link if you want it.

That's right, we're talking about not being nice to terrorist. Who the frig cares? These are animals. Iraqis begged my husband in Baghdad, "Don't arrest them, SHOOT THEM! They are animals!" But no, we the humane west, actually treat and save terrorists who've just minutes earlier blown up our soldiers..... it could have been YOUR husband.

I have no symapthy for waking a terrorist out of his 8 hour sleep, after giving him a glass of water and a Big Mac, then allowing him to pee on me and deciding he needs some 'waterboarding' to take this seriously.

Your compassion is misplaced, Silke. Even God drowned thousands (if not more) of people outside of Noah's Ark while they begged to be let in. Nope, they were evil, so they drowned. Consider the first waterboarding the flood.

[Tim]

Silke: What makes us better is that we are willing to do WHATEVER it takes to protect innocent lives. Terrorists are willing to do whatever it takes to end them.

[Silke]

Amy,

I’m not sure your analogy of waterboarding to the “flood” holds true. It seems presumptuous to compare God’s judgment to our own. I understand the need for revenge, however I believe this is a shortsighted and ultimately self-defeating viewpoint. I have no illusions about the kind of enemy we face, but we cannot win this war if in the process we lose part of who we are.

[Cobra]

Your husband Tim writes:

>>>"That's why many of them (blacks) our running our country from the White House and Capital Hill."

AGAIN, are you saying that Condi Rice is running this country? Last time I checked, the Secretary of State does NOT run the country "from the White House and Capital Hill".

Amy writes:

>>>"Another reason why affirmative action doesn't work."

Really? You think that Condi Rice was the MOST QUALIFIED for the job of National Security Advisor and subsequently Secretary of State? Please tell me what in her resume made her MORE QUALIFIED than any WHITE MAN in America. That IS the problem you conservatives have with Affirmative Action, right? That WHITE MEN are being passed over for positions for less qualified minorities, right?

Silke writes:

>>>"What happened at Abu Ghraib was not in the context of interrogating detainees (they weren’t being questioned). These were clear acts of misconduct and the soldiers responsible are being punished for it. In addition, safeguards have been put in place to ensure that this does not happen again. The Army’s Field Manual for Human Intelligence Collector Operations (FM 2-22.3) outlines the responsibilities of all soldiers who deal with detainees and standards of conduct and treatment at all levels are clearly stated."

First of all, you seem to be a rational person. Do you believe that the US government would've acted on their own to investigate Abu Ghraib had they NOT been outed by Sy Hersh's investigative scoop and the subsequent leak of photographs of the torture? Second, your statement about not interrogating detainees doesn't match the reportage of the scandal:

>>>"According to interviews with several past and present American intelligence officials, the Pentagon’s operation, known inside the intelligence community by several code words, including Copper Green, encouraged physical coercion and sexual humiliation of Iraqi prisoners in an effort to generate more intelligence about the growing insurgency in Iraq. A senior C.I.A. official, in confirming the details of this account last week, said that the operation stemmed from Rumsfeld’s long-standing desire to wrest control of America’s clandestine and paramilitary operations from the C.I.A....
...By contrast, according to the military report, the American and Coalition forces knew little about the insurgency: “Human intelligence is poor or lacking . . . due to the dearth of competence and expertise. . . . The intelligence effort is not coördinated since either too many groups are involved in gathering intelligence or the final product does not get to the troops in the field in a timely manner.” The success of the war was at risk; something had to be done to change the dynamic.

The solution, endorsed by Rumsfeld and carried out by Stephen Cambone, was to get tough with those Iraqis in the Army prison system who were suspected of being insurgents. A key player was Major General Geoffrey Miller, the commander of the detention and interrogation center at Guantánamo, who had been summoned to Baghdad in late August to review prison interrogation procedures. The internal Army report on the abuse charges, written by Major General Antonio Taguba in February, revealed that Miller urged that the commanders in Baghdad change policy and place military intelligence in charge of the prison. The report quoted Miller as recommending that “detention operations must act as an enabler for interrogation.”

Miller’s concept, as it emerged in recent Senate hearings, was to “Gitmoize” the prison system in Iraq—to make it more focussed on interrogation. He also briefed military commanders in Iraq on the interrogation methods used in Cuba—methods that could, with special approval, include sleep deprivation, exposure to extremes of cold and heat, and placing prisoners in “stress positions” for agonizing lengths of time. (The Bush Administration had unilaterally declared Al Qaeda and other captured members of international terrorist networks to be illegal combatants, and not eligible for the protection of the Geneva Conventions.)

Rumsfeld and Cambone went a step further, however: they expanded the scope of the sap, bringing its unconventional methods to Abu Ghraib. The commandos were to operate in Iraq as they had in Afghanistan. The male prisoners could be treated roughly, and exposed to sexual humiliation."

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040524fa_fact

Obviously, the people who designed and ordered this activity have NOT been "punished", while those who carried out the orders have been offered up as fall guys. But I WHOLEHEARTEDLY agree with your post here:

>>>"Yes, Amy. I see exactly how that works. When I see good people such as yourself rationalizing cruel treatment I think that our country has lost some of the values it claims to defend and promote. And it makes me truly sad. We are better than this."

CalPatriot writes:

>>>"Also. Cobra, why didn’t former President Clinton ever have one black person in his first tiered cabinet –like President Bush has? I think one of the lowest ranking cabinet members in his administration had a suspicious death; his name was Ron Brown, who was about to blow the lid-off of job-procurement of U.S. business people connected to the Chinese Military all set up by Clinton for his communist buddies here and afar."

Let's review this for a for a second. You must have me mistaken for somebody else. I criticize "Professional Black Conservatives" all the time because they, IMHO, are acting for their interest bearing accounts and not the best interests of either African-Americans, or America as a whole.
http://www.thecobraslair.com/images/RIGHT-WINGED-BLACKS-STREAM.gif
Mercenary tokenism, is NOT progress, and why on earth would any conscious African-American welcome a stab in the back from another African-American over a caring embrace from a white American? The answer of course, is most wouldn't. Otherwise Cal, do you want me to walk you through American history in regards to white conservatives and civil rights?

Second, Ron Brown died in an AIRPLANE CRASH. Hello?

>>>"The Air Force on Friday blamed its own commanders, pilot error and outdated navigation equipment for the plane crash that killed Commerce Secretary Ron Brown and 34 others on a rugged hillside in Croatia.

"The investigation uncovered a chain of events and decisions which, if broken, would have prevented this tragedy," said Air Force Secretary Sheila Widnall...
...Although the bulk of the errors were attributed to the plane's crew, the Air Force declined to lay the blame on them alone, saying instead that the crash was caused by a combination of factors.

Among the links in the chain: "A failure of command, air crew error, and an improperly designed instrument approach procedure," all of which were necessary for the accident to occur, the report said.

Poor weather in Croatia did not contribute to the fatal crash, the Air Force said, nor was the crew pressured to fly by Brown as some have suggested"

http://www.cnn.com/US/9606/07/brown.crash/

So the pilots committed suicide and killed 34 other people just to take out one black guy? C'mon Cal. Turn Rush Limbaugh off, and come back to the real world, ummkay?

This blog gets more hilarious by the day!

--Cobra