• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Only Democrats have agency, apparently.

It’s a doggy dog world.

Just because you believe it, that doesn’t make it true.

“Everybody’s entitled to be an idiot.”

“Cheese and Kraken paired together for the appetizer trial.”

The willow is too close to the house.

If you tweet it in all caps, that makes it true!

You can’t attract Republican voters. You can only out organize them.

Accountability, motherfuckers.

I’ve spoken to my cat about this, but it doesn’t seem to do any good.

Is it negotiation when the other party actually wants to shoot the hostage?

Republicans don’t trust women.

In after Baud. Damn.

Joe Lieberman disappointingly reemerged to remind us that he’s still alive.

I’d like to think you all would remain faithful to me if i ever tried to have some of you killed.

I’m pretty sure there’s only one Jack Smith.

This really is a full service blog.

Come on, man.

Let there be snark.

Today’s GOP: why go just far enough when too far is right there?

Putting aside our relentless self-interest because the moral imperative is crystal clear.

This has so much WTF written all over it that it is hard to comprehend.

I see no possible difficulties whatsoever with this fool-proof plan.

An unpunished coup is a training exercise.

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Foreign Affairs / Military / A Great Day

A Great Day

by John Cole|  October 6, 20059:51 am| 141 Comments

This post is in: Military

FacebookTweetEmail

This is spectacular news:

Defying the White House, the Senate overwhelmingly agreed Wednesday to regulate the detention, interrogation and treatment of prisoners held by the American military.

The measure ignited a fierce debate among many Senate Republicans and the White House, which threatened to veto a $440 billion military spending bill if the detention amendment was tacked on, saying it would bind the president’s hands in wartime. Nonetheless, the measure passed, 90 to 9, with 46 Republicans, including Bill Frist of Tennessee, the majority leader, joining 43 Democrats and one independent in favor.

More than two dozen retired senior military officers, including Colin L. Powell and John M. Shalikashvili, two former chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, endorsed the amendment, which would ban use of “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment” against anyone in United States government custody.

It would also require all American troops to use only interrogation techniques authorized in a new Army field manual. It would not cover techniques used by the Central Intelligence Agency.

That is spectacular news. Our troops should never have been put in this position, and I am still unable to believe that no one has been held accountable for pas transgressions. Well, they did get criminal mastermind Lyddie England.

I will never vote for John McCain for his participation in creating McCain/Feingold, but he deserves the lions share of the credit for this. Thank you, Sen. McCain.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « I Heart Howard Dean
Next Post: Good to Know »

Reader Interactions

141Comments

  1. 1.

    Nikki

    October 6, 2005 at 10:02 am

    Thank you, Sen. McCain

    Yeah, it would’ve helped if you had stood up earlier, Sen. McCain, like perhaps by a symbolic nay vote for Gonzales for Attorney General, but better late than never.

  2. 2.

    SomeCallMeTim

    October 6, 2005 at 10:05 am

    That is spectacular news.

    How sad is that reaction? Or, more properly, how sad is it that such is the appropriate reaction under a Republican government? What say we hold off sucking McCain’s d*ck until (a)the parallel legislation gets passed in the House, (b) the language doesn’t mysteriously get lost in conference, and (c) the President signs it into law, rather than actually deploying his veto power for the first time in his Administration? The Republicans are in charge in all those circumstances, too, so it’s hardly a sure thing.

  3. 3.

    Davebo

    October 6, 2005 at 10:10 am

    Tim,

    Agreed, it’s way to early to start popping champagne corks over this one.

    It will most certainly be watered down in committee. Because apparantly Dubya lost his veto stamp.

  4. 4.

    Slide

    October 6, 2005 at 10:10 am

    I still find it amazing that the administration is threatening to veto this legislation, putting them firmly on the side of torture. You know I was never one that thought having military service a prerequisite for high office, but this bunch of chicken hawks seem to have no concept of what is, or is not, in the best interest of OUR military. No reasonable military man would, I believe, think that the prisoner abuses we have witnessed does anything but hurt our mission, our military and our country. Hats off to the Republicans that are standing up to this very out of touch administration.

  5. 5.

    DougJ

    October 6, 2005 at 10:18 am

    So what? You think this will change anything?

  6. 6.

    John S.

    October 6, 2005 at 10:23 am

    Hats off to the Republicans that are standing up to this very out of touch administration.

    Hats off to those Republican Senators who are scared shitless over their re-election efforts next year, and are desperate to send a message to their constituents that they aren’t “with” Bush even though they are with him.

  7. 7.

    Hippie Doug J

    October 6, 2005 at 10:24 am

    But Sen. Jeff Sessions (news, bio, voting record), R-Ala., called the legislation unnecessary. “We do not have … systematic abuse of prisoners going on by our United States military,” he said.

    Denial is not just a river in Egypt.

  8. 8.

    Geek, Esq.

    October 6, 2005 at 10:26 am

    90-9 is pretty convincing. Let’s see how the House deals with this.

  9. 9.

    Slide

    October 6, 2005 at 10:28 am

    So what? You think this will change anything?

    Hey, I’m as cynical as the next guy, but yes a 90 to 9 Senate vote AGAINST the administration’s wishes will change some things. I think that finally the legislative branch realizes they are not just a rubber stamp for this President. Perhaps they may even realize they are a co-equal branch of government? Perhaps Pentagon white-washes won’t go as unchallenged as they have in the past? Perhaps young military officers will be less intimidated in talking out? Perhaps, just perhaps, we can start realizing what makes America a great country. Yesterday’s vote was a small step in that direction.

  10. 10.

    Jim Allen

    October 6, 2005 at 10:28 am

    Let’s not forget to acknowledge the Pro-Torture Senators:

    Allard (R-CO)
    Bond (R-MO)
    Coburn (R-OK)
    Cochran (R-MS)
    Cornyn (R-TX)
    Inhofe (R-OK)
    Roberts (R-KS)
    Sessions (R-AL)
    Stevens (R-AK)

    And let’s also remember that they are all, indeed, Republicans.

  11. 11.

    John S.

    October 6, 2005 at 10:32 am

    Let’s not forget to acknowledge the Pro-Torture Senators

    Weren’t there even a couple Republicans who were seemingly Pro-Lynching?

  12. 12.

    circlethewagons

    October 6, 2005 at 10:36 am

    Poor Oklahoma.
    They’ve got a full set of boobs representing them.

  13. 13.

    Jim Allen

    October 6, 2005 at 10:49 am

    Re: “Weren’t there even a couple Republicans who were seemingly Pro-Lynching?”

    Perhaps they just considered lynching a subset covered under the pro-torture protocols.

  14. 14.

    David Rossie

    October 6, 2005 at 10:50 am

    The administration is threatening to veto a military spending bill? Does that mean they are against the troops? I mean, that was the allegation when Democrats voted against earlier spending bills with strings attached.

  15. 15.

    Stormy70

    October 6, 2005 at 10:51 am

    I don’t think being against the coddling of prisoners will go against these guys, esp. in OK and Texas. Oklahoma is dealing with a suicide bomber at their Sooner football stadium, so I think the Okies are a might stirred up right now.

  16. 16.

    bs23

    October 6, 2005 at 10:53 am

    slightly off-topic, but will someone explain why mccain-feingold is such a bug up conservatives’ ass? i’d also ask about trial lawyers, but i’m convinced that’s just partisan hysteria (see also: leftists and CEOs), though you’d really think the world was going to end any day now, unless we pass some serious tort reform!!!

  17. 17.

    danelectro

    October 6, 2005 at 10:54 am

    not torturing is now equal to coddling of prisoners.

  18. 18.

    Andrew Reeves

    October 6, 2005 at 10:59 am

    “I will never vote for John McCain for his participation in creating McCain/Feingold…”

    Some perspective here.

    During the Vietnam war, McCain was serving his country as a fighter pilot. He was shot down and spent a hellish period of time as a POW in North Vietnam. Meanwhile, Bush was doing lines and keeping the North Vietnamese Air Force out of the skies of Texas.

    In 1999, when the GOP was discovering its inner Chomsky and railing on about Clinton’s “illegal war” in Kosovo, McCain was one of the few people who strongly advocated fighting the war more aggressively, regardless of what polls said. In the summer of 2004, Bush had most of Al Anbar turned over to Ba’athists so as to have less visible combat and make his re-election easier.

    Since 2001, the Bush administration and it’s allies in Congress have been striving to bankrupt the government. In that same time, McCain has consistently voted against those measures that cause deficits which both put a drain on the economy and allow the Chinese to have us by the short and curlies.

    The Bush cabinet has been carrying out a “look the other way in event of torture” policy. McCain has been strongly advocating that as the good guys maybe we not torture people.

    With all of that borne in mind, even though McCain Feingold is a pretty transparent attempt to muffle GOP donors, it’s something that I would be more than happy to put up with in light of McCain is light years more responsible than Bush in just about every aspect.

  19. 19.

    John S.

    October 6, 2005 at 10:59 am

    not torturing is now equal to coddling of prisoners

    Only in Stormy’s world (and maybe Darrell, DefenseGuy, et al).

  20. 20.

    John S.

    October 6, 2005 at 11:02 am

    David Rossie says:

    The administration is threatening to veto a military spending bill? Does that mean they are against the troops?

    Of course not…the administration was for the spending bill before they were against it.

  21. 21.

    bs23

    October 6, 2005 at 11:05 am

    Andrew Reeves @10:59: “…even though McCain Feingold is a pretty transparent attempt to muffle GOP donors…”

    ah, now I understand. it would seem that the trial lawyer hysteria is the flipside of the same coin — Republican strategy to cut off a source of typically Democratic funds.

  22. 22.

    Lee

    October 6, 2005 at 11:10 am

    The terrorist have won

    /sarcasm off

  23. 23.

    Steve

    October 6, 2005 at 11:11 am

    The House is all up in arms about the high and mighty principle of not attaching this amendment to a spending bill, so the smart money says that it will look completely different when it emerges from conference committee.

    There is a very basic moral test at issue here, and while I respect Stormy as an intelligent conservative, I think she and the 9 no-voters have failed it.

  24. 24.

    Tim F

    October 6, 2005 at 11:16 am

    I don’t think being against the coddling of prisoners will go against these guys

    Wow. When people want to know why we must release the abu Ghraib director’s cut, I give you Stormy.

  25. 25.

    Another Jeff

    October 6, 2005 at 11:16 am

    Re: “Weren’t there even a couple Republicans who were seemingly Pro-Lynching?”

    Perhaps they just considered lynching a subset covered under the pro-torture protocols.

    Oh God, hasn’t that idiotic meme died yet? Somehow, not signing on as a sponsor to a bill that apologizes for something that you had nothing to do with makes someone “pro-lynching”? Give it a fucking rest.

  26. 26.

    Shygetz

    October 6, 2005 at 11:29 am

    Then tell me, Another Jeff, why didn’t they sign on to the bill? What message were they trying to send by abstaining from signing the bill?

  27. 27.

    Halffasthero

    October 6, 2005 at 11:39 am

    This new loaw does seem like window-dressing and too little too late. The damage is already done and they never charged anyone other than privates and noncom’s. Basically it is whitewash legislation.

    And yes, Bush should be painted as against the troops if he vetos this. Not that it will do any good. He is an amoral jack ass.

    Running the clock out waiting for the work bell. 3 day weekend coming. : )

  28. 28.

    Another Jeff

    October 6, 2005 at 11:42 am

    What message were they trying to send by abstaining from signing the bill?

    Maybe that idiotic, feel-good resolutions that accomplish absolutely nothing aren’t worth signing onto?

  29. 29.

    DougJ

    October 6, 2005 at 11:44 am

    The only way anything comes of this is if people get nailed really hard in the Plame probe. Hate to keep dwelling on that, but unless it or something else brings the White House to its knees, Karl Rove will keep on bitch slapping the Senate all over Capitol Hill.

  30. 30.

    Defense Guy

    October 6, 2005 at 11:45 am

    Only in Stormy’s world (and maybe Darrell, DefenseGuy, et al).

    Only, I never said that. Which pretty much just makes you a liar. Get your head out of your ass and stop pretending you can paint everyone with your delusional fantasies.

  31. 31.

    DougJ

    October 6, 2005 at 11:47 am

    Oklahoma is dealing with a suicide bomber at their Sooner football stadium,

    If I lived in Oklahoma, I’d think about suicide too.

    Then again, maybe he just wants to get sent to Gitmo. I would too — if I lived in Oklahoma.

  32. 32.

    Shygetz

    October 6, 2005 at 11:52 am

    DefenseGuy–Now, now, JohnS did say “maybe”

  33. 33.

    Shygetz

    October 6, 2005 at 11:54 am

    AnotherJeff–Given the bad press they got for not signing on to it, it looks like if that’s what they thought, they were wrong. Now if they thought that signing on to that bill would hurt them among some of their more, um, historical constituents, then we will have to wait and see if they were right.

  34. 34.

    DougJ

    October 6, 2005 at 12:03 pm

    Why did Allard vote against it? He’s not from Jesus/trailer park/torture land.

  35. 35.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 12:17 pm

    I think anything that encourages people to act civilly is a good step.

    But people need to understand reality. Statistically speaking, Iraq prisoner abuse has been rare, considerably less prevalent than abuse in our civilian prison system. I don’t understand why otherwise intelligent people like John Cole insist there must be some Vast Conspiracy of Torturers and that anyone in the military who disagrees is part of the conspiracy. We know from studies of human nature in these circumstances that petty, cruel mistreatment of prisoners is the norm; there doesn’t need to be a “criminal mastermind” for it to happen, just insufficient competence and diligence in preventing it.

  36. 36.

    Lines

    October 6, 2005 at 12:21 pm

    Putting someone in a sleeping bag and beating the stuffing out of them until they slip into a coma then die is just considered “petty, cruel mistreatment”.

    Nice to know we should just ignore it from now on. Rush was right, its just a frat prank, they’re blowing off some steam when they beat people to death, break their legs with baseball bats and anally violate them with chemical light sticks.

    Thanks TD, thats all cleared up now.

  37. 37.

    SeesThroughIt

    October 6, 2005 at 12:21 pm

    If I lived in Oklahoma, I’d think about suicide too.

    Reminds me of a comedian’s quip: “So I was just in Tulsa…how can an entire city have Downs syndrome?”

    We already know that the Bush administration is basically pro-torture; are those nine senators really trying to hitch their wagon to that?

  38. 38.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 12:22 pm

    Lines,

    You’re an idiot, thanks for clearing that up.

  39. 39.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 12:25 pm

    It’s amazing how stupid the admin critics are on this. Torture is OK? Just a prank? Blowing off steam? NO ONE IS SAYING THAT EXCEPT YOU, MORONS.

  40. 40.

    Sojourner

    October 6, 2005 at 12:27 pm

    not torturing is now equal to coddling of prisoners.

    Don’t waste your time arguing with Stormy on this issue. She holds this position steadfastly even if it means supporting the rape of women and children.

    Somewhere along the way, she gave up her soul to support this president at all costs. Both sad and scary.

  41. 41.

    DougJ

    October 6, 2005 at 12:35 pm

    she gave up her soul

    What makes you so sure she had one?

    TallDave, actually Rush Limbaugh *did* say torture was a prank.

  42. 42.

    Axien

    October 6, 2005 at 12:42 pm

    TallDave, actually Rush Limbaugh did say torture was a prank.

    DougJ, I’m glad you were the one to say it and not me. What makes it even more strange is that he made the claim in the same thread Stormy said this:

    I don’t think being against the coddling of prisoners will go against these guys

  43. 43.

    Mike

    October 6, 2005 at 12:42 pm

    Well, Sessions really is a boob. It was very funny how he and McCain exchanged barbs yesterday over Fishback.

    BTW funny also how CFR (“McCain-Feingold”) is some sort of last resort in opposing McCain, who plain clearly just isn’t liked by the right wing. And it’s really weird when CFR trumps fiscal sanity, military oversight and pro-environment, when weighing merits.

  44. 44.

    Defense Guy

    October 6, 2005 at 12:42 pm

    DougJ

    The problem is that all instances are folded up into the catchphrase of torture. Some of the incidents do rise to that level, and others do not. Not that we have people who are willing to examine each instance on it’s own merits, not when they have the more fulfilling job of bashing the evil righties or the administration.

  45. 45.

    Defense Guy

    October 6, 2005 at 12:45 pm

    Mike

    Not so weird when you consider that as a rule Americans don’t like restrictions on their speech, especially when that speech is political in nature.

  46. 46.

    DougJ

    October 6, 2005 at 12:49 pm

    Defense Guy, tell me which ones are frat pranks and which ones aren’t? Maybe three examples of each. Just so I know where you stand.

    BTW, I know you don’t think torture is “okay”. I would never suggest that. Same for Tall Dave. But you both need to distinguish yourself from the Stormies and Limbaughs of the world here.

  47. 47.

    DougJ

    October 6, 2005 at 12:51 pm

    I’m not interested in bashing the White House for the original instances of torture. But I will bash them for failing to treat it seriously once it happened. There’s a difference there.

    Demanding accountability is not the same thing as blindly bashing. Not in my book.

  48. 48.

    Kimmitt

    October 6, 2005 at 12:52 pm

    When people want to know why we must release the abu Ghraib director’s cut, I give you Stormy.

    No joke.

    Torture is OK? Just a prank? Blowing off steam? NO ONE IS SAYING THAT EXCEPT YOU, MORONS.

    Okay, this just isn’t true — Limbaugh and O’Reilley are both on record as using this language. Trust me; we would never have come up with it on our own. It’s just not the way we think.

  49. 49.

    DougJ

    October 6, 2005 at 12:54 pm

    When people want to know why we must release the abu Ghraib director’s cut, I give you Stormy.

    That’s a very good point. I’m ambivalent about releasing the new photos. But when you read people saying that this is about “coddling the prisoners”, maybe those people need to see these photos.

  50. 50.

    Lines

    October 6, 2005 at 12:54 pm

    Condoning torture is unforgivable. Understanding that Abu Ghraib is the tip of the iceburg is a beginning. The abuses are systematic and, according to the soldiers themselves, condoned and learned from those above.

    When right wing apologists like TallDave are completely unable to come to grips with the fact that many of the instances were not petty, nor cruel, it just makes you ALL look like apologists. Rush had seen all of the pictures that have been released and made the statement that likened it to a college frat hazing and that the soldiers were just blowing off some steam.

    Now that more and more soldiers are coming forth with stories, how can you continue to condone these abuses? And if you are so willing to condone it, can I borrow your wife for awhile, fly her to Egypt and perform the same types of activities on her? After all, its just a little prank.

    Do you blow off steam by breaking your neighbor’s leg with a baseball bat? Do you smother your house guests inside a sleeping bag? Why not?

  51. 51.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 1:02 pm

    Lines,

    What a load of idiotic, nonsensical BS. Torture isn’t cruel? You know our soldiers are systematically torturing people how, exactly? You don’t. Who is condoning torture? I’ve said repeatedly anyone committing torture should be punished, and the admin has said the same.

    What we don’t need is idiots like you saying there is systematic torture going on when there’s no evidence of that. It demeans our troops and encourages our enemies.

    Next we’ll have John Kerry comparing our soldiers to Ghengis Khan again.

  52. 52.

    KC

    October 6, 2005 at 1:06 pm

    Good for McCain and the great majority of Senators. Despite what TallDave says, they obviously know what has been done is reprehensible. After all, they’ve seen pictures that we have yet to see; they know the real scope of what the problem is. The generals are behind it too, which is even more persuasive evidence of the need for this type of legislation.

  53. 53.

    Lines

    October 6, 2005 at 1:06 pm

    Its you that said it:

    We know from studies of human nature in these circumstances that petty, cruel mistreatment of prisoners is the norm

    And the photos, the stories, the testimonies all point to clear evidence that the torture is known, its condoned, and its systematic.

    I’m sure Al Queda is reading my posts here, so I guess I’ll just sit down and shut up before I encourage them too much more.

  54. 54.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 1:08 pm

    Idiots like Lines are the reason the photos should not be released. These idiots will trumpet them to the world saying “SEE! TORTURE IS OFFICIAL U.S. POLICY! U.S. SOLDIERS ARE ALL MONSTERS, THEY’RE NO BETTER THAN SADDAM HUSSEIN’S THUGS!”

  55. 55.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 1:09 pm

    clear evidence that the torture is known, its condoned, and its systematic.

    That’s a crock of troop-bashing BS. Where’s the evidence anyone condoned it? There isn’t any.

  56. 56.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 1:11 pm

    I guess things haven’t change much in 30 years:

    they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war

    The Left still hates our military and will jump at any chance to call them torturing, murdering thugs.

  57. 57.

    slide

    October 6, 2005 at 1:14 pm

    TallDave:

    Statistically speaking, Iraq prisoner abuse has been rare, considerably less prevalent than abuse in our civilian prison system

    Huh? How do you know how rare it is? By the number of investigations? lol. Actually prisoner abuse seems to be quite widespread and not only in Iraq but in Afghanistan as well. (See below article) And to suggest that prisoner abuse is more prevalent in our civilian prison system is just a ridiculous absurd comment, much on the same par with Brit Hume’s idiot comparison of the homicide rate in LA and the dangers for our troops in Iraq. Is there a special school they sent right wingnuts to make absurd statistical arguments, or does it just come naturally?

    NEW YORK – Soldiers in the Army’s elite 82nd Airborne Division vented their frustration by systematically torturing Iraqi detainees from 2003 into 2004, hitting them with baseball bats and dousing them with chemicals, a U.S. rights group alleges in a new report.

    The soldiers, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the abuse took place almost daily and often came under orders. Anything short of causing an inmate’s death was allowed, they said.

    “These soldiers’ firsthand accounts provide further evidence contradicting claims that abuse of detainees by U.S. forces was isolated or spontaneous,” the report said. “The accounts here suggest that the mistreatment of prisoners by the U.S. military is even more widespread than has been acknowledged to date, including among troops belonging to some of the best trained, most decorated, and highly respected units in the U.S. Army.”

    .

  58. 58.

    Tim F

    October 6, 2005 at 1:16 pm

    The Left still hates our military and will jump at any chance to call them torturing, murdering thugs.

    Patriotism, the last refuge of a doofus losing an argument.

  59. 59.

    Narvy

    October 6, 2005 at 1:17 pm

    A few thoughts about some of the things being said here.

    What message were they trying to send by abstaining from signing the bill?
    …
    Maybe that idiotic, feel-good resolutions that accomplish absolutely nothing aren’t worth signing onto?

    Any vote or abstention on a resolution has symbolic political value. Either these professional politicians are not aware of that, or they don’t care how they’re perceived, or they’re trying to send a message. I doubt that “not worth signing on” was the only consideration.

    insufficient competence and diligence in preventing [torture]

    Yes, and so far no one in a position to have demonstrated that competence and diligence has been called to account for not doing so.

    Who is condoning torture? I’ve said repeatedly anyone committing torture should be punished, and the admin has said the same.

    There’s a difference between condoning and committing. Are you suggesting that only the people who actually commit torture should be punished, and those above them in the chain of command who should have known about it, who could have prevented it, and who did not do so, should not be punished?

    coddling prisoners

    The thing that all the bleeding hearts don’t get is that by providing them with food, water, housing, and in some cases toilet facilities, we ARE coddling them. Stormy and company apparently think they should be penned up outdooors, forced to forage for themselves, and, no doubt, get a job instead of lying about all day.

  60. 60.

    DougJ

    October 6, 2005 at 1:17 pm

    Tall Dave, you fell of the wagon and started spouting bs. Sometimes I think you’re a thoughtful Rovian, like DG, but other times — like now — you sound like a moron like Stormy.

    Get it together. There’s still hope for you.

  61. 61.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 1:19 pm

    Have detainee abuses occurred elsewhere in the war on terror? Of course. But they were “widespread” only if you define that term geographically instead of by frequency. The adjective “systematic” has been similarly misused. Overall, more than 70,000 detainees have passed through U.S. military custody since late 2001. About 500 criminal investigations have been conducted into allegations of related misconduct, many of which were found to be unsubstantiated. But more than 200 people have already been disciplined for actions ranging from failure to report to prisoner abuse itself.

    There have also now been 12 major inquiries–including investigations led by Maj. Gen. George Fay and Vice Adm. Albert Church–into detainee treatment in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay. More than 2,800 interviews have been conducted and 16,000 pages of documents produced. And there have been 31 congressional hearings and 45 staff briefings. Given that track record, we can be quite sure that the latest abuse allegations to surface (from an officer of the 82nd Airborne) will get the thorough hearing they deserve.

    Yeah, it’s all just “condoned” and “systematic.” That’s why we have all these investigations and trials.

    Tim F,

    You wouldn’t know patriotism if it bit you on the ass.

  62. 62.

    Tim F

    October 6, 2005 at 1:20 pm

    I’m more patriotic because I expect my military to behave in a way that represents Americcan values, and you don’t. So there.

  63. 63.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 1:20 pm

    DougJ,

    You’ve never stopped spouting BS.

  64. 64.

    Tim F

    October 6, 2005 at 1:21 pm

    extra ‘c’ due to speed typing.

  65. 65.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 1:21 pm

    Tim F,

    Yeah, you’re so patriotic you want to spit on our troops before the evidence is on. You’re a real credit to the nation.

  66. 66.

    jg

    October 6, 2005 at 1:21 pm

    The administration is threatening to veto a military spending bill? Does that mean they are against the troops? I mean, that was the allegation when Democrats voted against earlier spending bills with strings attached.

    Not the first time he’s threatened to veto a military spending bill.

    I voted for it before I voted against it…..because Bush threatened to veto the first bill we sent up.

    TD, stop saying the left hates the troops. Your entire argument is lost when you leap at that strawman. Its a talking point put out there as a way to deflect the actual issue.

  67. 67.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 1:24 pm

    TD, stop saying the left hates the troops

    I’ll stop saying they hate the troops when they stop calling our troops systematic torturers and condoners of torture on the basis of weak and nonexistent evidence.

    Also, you don’t seem to know what a strawman is.

  68. 68.

    Tim F

    October 6, 2005 at 1:25 pm

    TallDave,

    You’re so patriotic that you cheer on people who disgrace America.

  69. 69.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 1:26 pm

    Tim F,

    You’re not only unpatriotic, you’re stupid too. I’ve repeatedly said anyone who tortured anyone, ordered it, or condoned it should be punished.

  70. 70.

    Tim F

    October 6, 2005 at 1:27 pm

    on the basis of weak and nonexistent evidence.

    Chalk up another winner for the abu Ghraib director’s cut.

  71. 71.

    jg

    October 6, 2005 at 1:28 pm

    A strawman is a made up person saying stuff that you can easily refute. kind of like saying the left hates the troops so you can attack the left from that point of view. You’re making up something to argue about. Strawman.

    You probably have great points to make but as soon as you go Darrel I stop reading your posts. I understand your anger but its misplaced and its clouding your thinking. The left doesn’t hate hte troops, they don’t want to see troops die. Let that go and talk about the issue. The administration does condone whats gone on. Memos back it up. Maybe libs have exagerated the issue but thats because the administration has acted like it hasn’t happened and they don’t need to answer to anyone anyway.

  72. 72.

    DougJ

    October 6, 2005 at 1:28 pm

    Tall Dave, why do you hate America?

  73. 73.

    Mike S

    October 6, 2005 at 1:28 pm

    The Left still hates our military and will jump at any chance to call them torturing, murdering thugs.

    You’re a fucking idiot. I suppose you now put McCain, Graham, Cole and Tacitus on the left now.

  74. 74.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 1:30 pm

    Have you read what the military investigation found in the Abu Ghraib case? One shift, one unit, one section of the prison. It wasn’t systematic, it was a few bad apples.

    Chalk up another winner for leftist, troop-bashing ignorance.

  75. 75.

    Nikki

    October 6, 2005 at 1:30 pm

    Interesting how Tall Dave has chosen to ignore those posts that show some on the right (Limbaugh, O’Reilly) DID say that the torture was a prank.

  76. 76.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 1:30 pm

    Mike S,

    No, you’re the fucking idiot. I said I support the bill.

  77. 77.

    DougJ

    October 6, 2005 at 1:30 pm

    And Tall Dave, I support your right to hate America. I’d just like to know what made you hate it so much? Was it being picked on as a kid?

    Okay, this is turning into a pile-on. I’m out.

  78. 78.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 1:31 pm

    Nikki,

    Intersting that you’re stupid enough to conflate actual prank-level things like putting panties on someone’s head with actual torture.

  79. 79.

    DougJ

    October 6, 2005 at 1:31 pm

    Sorry there, Tall Dave. I just like asking Bushies why they hate America. You’re okay in my book, even if you fall off the wagon sometimes.

  80. 80.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 1:31 pm

    DougJ,

    I love America, it’s idiots like you that hate it.

  81. 81.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 1:32 pm

    DougJ,

    Great, but you’re still an idiot in my book.

  82. 82.

    slide

    October 6, 2005 at 1:32 pm

    TallDave inscrutable logic:

    Yeah, it’s all just “condoned” and “systematic.” That’s why we have all these investigations and trials.

    yes TallDave how many high ranking officers have been charged? You can’t have it both ways, saying that there were all these many many investigations involving many many incidents and yet no high ranking officer was aware what was going on? just the midnight shifts having a little unauthrorzed fun? Not very bright TallDave but we already know that from your posts.

    And as to your claims of patritism, they fall quite hollow. My patriotism is to the ideals of my country, not what may be done in its name. Was it unpatriotic to voice opposition to the slaughter of our native americans? Was it unpatriotic to scream and yell about slavery? or segregation? Patriotism means a lot more to me than just wearing a flap pin in one’s lapel and looking the other way as immoral acts are committed in our name. Why do you hate america so much Tall Dave that you don’t care that our good name is sullied in such a horrible name? You should be ashamed to call yourself an American.

  83. 83.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 1:33 pm

    At least Clinton was honest enough to admit he “loathes the military.” You lefties don’t even have the courage to admit it, you pretend to be patriots while smearing our troops.

  84. 84.

    DougJ

    October 6, 2005 at 1:33 pm

    That’s okay, Tall Dave. I know you’re kind of upset right now.

  85. 85.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 1:34 pm

    I’m not the least upset, and you’re an idiot regardless.

  86. 86.

    DougJ

    October 6, 2005 at 1:35 pm

    Well, you sound upset to me, Tall Dave. You’re usually a lot nicer than this.

  87. 87.

    Mike S

    October 6, 2005 at 1:37 pm

    The next time I’m on vacation with twelve of my military friends, both active and retired, I’ll have to ask them if the child TellDave is right that I hate my country and the military. I’m sure they’ll laugh at the idiot as much as I do.

  88. 88.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 1:38 pm

    slides impeccable logic:

    TallDave how many high ranking officers have been charged?

    WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE that they did anything to be charged for??? Remeber “evidence?” The thing you need to charge someone with a crime?

    involving many many incidents

    The number of incidents was small for the number of prisoners and troops involved, and many were found to be unsubstantiated.

    My patriotism is to the ideals of my country, not what may be done in its name.

    How about the ideal of “innocent until proven guilty?” Guess that got tossed out the window.

  89. 89.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 1:39 pm

    Mike S,

    Be sure to tell them the military is systematic torturers. I’m sure they’ll laugh at what an idiot you are.

  90. 90.

    Tim F

    October 6, 2005 at 1:39 pm

    It’s amazing that the message hasn’t sunk in yet. I’ll say it directly. Attacking people’s patriotism is the grown-up version of cooties, except for the grown-up part. It’s a cheap dodge for people who can’t or won’t answer a question directly.

  91. 91.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 1:40 pm

    DougJ,

    Well, I’m not that nice when idiots call my beloved military a bunch of torturing goons.

  92. 92.

    slide

    October 6, 2005 at 1:40 pm

    TallDave it is YOU that is smearing the troops. You want to lay the blame on the poor privates and corporals while giving the generals and civilian leadership a pass. When troops systematically abuse prisoners its because LEADERSHIP is condoning it directly (Rummy’s memos allowing dogs to be used in interrogation, etc) or indirectly (wink, wink, I see nothing). YOU are the one that wants the troops to be hung out to dry, to be blamed for the horrible abuses we see.

    McCain hates the troops? Graham hates the troops? TallDave you are a complete moron and i’m never going to let a complete moron tell me I don’t support the troops. So you can just shove your faux patriotism.

  93. 93.

    Narvy

    October 6, 2005 at 1:40 pm

    Intersting that you’re stupid enough to conflate actual prank-level things like putting panties on someone’s head with actual torture.

    So is it OK to play pranks on prisoners as long as one doesn’t torture them? Putting panties on the head of someone raised in a culture with very strict sexual mores is merely a prank? Is humiliation in general merely a prank? Is it OK for American soldiers to alleviate their stress by treating a prison as a frat house?Is it OK to treat prisoners as playthings for one’s amusement?

    TD, could you elaborate on this?

  94. 94.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 1:42 pm

    Tim F,

    You’d have to have some patriotism for me to attack it.

    As usual, leftists pretend any attack on their patriotism is wrong and should be off limits. Guess I struck a nerve there.

  95. 95.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 1:43 pm

    Narvy,

    I didn’t say it was OK; that’s for a military tribunal to decide. But it ain’t torture.

  96. 96.

    Mike S

    October 6, 2005 at 1:44 pm

    Right idiot. Because I’ve said that all along. I’m sure that the ones that are Republicans will be very happy to know that idiots like you have their backs.

  97. 97.

    Tim F

    October 6, 2005 at 1:44 pm

    I pointed out earlier that I am more patriotic than you are. Easily proven – you think that these guys are behaving like Americans, I do not. QED, I win.

    You’ve gone into this tit-for-tat reactive behavior where you start reacting like a child. DougJ is right, it’s nappy time. See you on the next thread.

  98. 98.

    DougJ

    October 6, 2005 at 1:44 pm

    Well, I’m not that nice when idiots call my beloved military a bunch of torturing goons.

    I’m not saying that. I’m saying that I think the Pentagon has let the troops down by not setting conditions and guidelines up that would prevent this kind thing from happening. I believe, of course, that anyone who tortures should be disciplined. But I just don’t think any of this happened without problems having occurred higher up the chain of command.

    I’m not even sure you disagree with me on this issue. I just don’t like it when the Bushies say “the left hates the military” any more than I like it when the left compares the Bushies to fascists.

    If that makes me an idiot, then I guess I’m an idiot.

  99. 99.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 1:46 pm

    slide,

    You find me the smallest shred of evidence that any officer did anything wrong, and I am 100% behind a prosecution. What I despise is this notion that “Oh, since it happened in some cases the whole military must be aware and think torture is OK.”

    When troops systematically abuse prisoners its because LEADERSHIP is condoning it directly
    Bullshit. People do things they aren’t supposed to, things they’ve been told NOT to do.

  100. 100.

    Defense Guy

    October 6, 2005 at 1:47 pm

    OK DougJ From the recent AP article:

    It said soldiers in the elite 82nd Airborne deprived detainees of sleep, food and water,

    Depending on the time involved, this is interrogation tactics used by local police departments. I wouldn’t necessarily classify it as torture, barring more information.

    subjected them to extreme heat and cold,

    Potentially torture, depending on length of time and how extreme.

    stacked prisoners in human pyramids,

    This along with the dog leash photo, are what I believe are the source of the pranks claim. Humiliation to be sure, but not torture. Now, if she was dragging his ass with a leash around his neck then I’d say that elevates it to torture.

    kicked them in the face, and put chemicals on exposed skin and eyes.

    Torture, no question.

    during questioning, the report said. “Smoking” prisoners meant physically abusing them until they lost consciousness.

    Torture.

    He told him to bend over and broke the guy’s leg with a mini-Louisville Slugger, a metal bat.”

    Torture.

    “As long as no PUCs came up dead, it happened,” he said. “We kept it to broken arms and legs.”

    Torture.

    As to the claim of it being widespread and systematic. There are 150,000 or so troops in Iraq, and I do not believe for a second that a majority or even a substantial number are involved in this. I’d want way more proof before I would be willing to call it widespread and systematic.

  101. 101.

    slide

    October 6, 2005 at 1:48 pm

    IdiotDave:

    TallDave how many high ranking officers have been charged?

    WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE that they did anything to be charged for???

    Captain Fishback’s testimony is EVIDENCE. He said that he repeatedly tried to report the abuses but they were ignored. He was basically told to keep quiet. I know you might not know this Dave but testimony is EVIDENCE. More evidence is in memos from the civilian leadership in the Pentagon regarding prisoner handling that have been NOT released. Classified you know….national secrets… how convenient….

    More for IdiotDave:

    Well, I’m not that nice when idiots call my beloved military a bunch of torturing goons.

    show me where someone called the military a bunch of toturing goons. More strawmen for IdiotDave to debate.

    Is IdiotDave for real? or is this just one big troll? Can anyone be as stupid as he sounds? Is this just to egg us all on with moronic childish comments?

  102. 102.

    Narvy

    October 6, 2005 at 1:50 pm

    I didn’t say it was OK

    I know you didn’t, but reasonable people might draw the inference from what you did say. And, yes, it’s not torture in the sense of causing physical pain or damage to the body. But are you contending that psychological pressures are not a form of torture? The panties episode was an act of sexual humiliation. That may be a prank in New Haven, but it may be something a lot worse than that in a Muslim culture.

  103. 103.

    TallDave

    October 6, 2005 at 1:54 pm

    DougJ, etc.

    Military discipline is never perfect. If you expect prisoner mistreatment to never happen, ever, you’re holding them to an impossible standard. If you want to be reasonable, you compare mistreatment rates to civilian prisons, and consider the incredible pressure our troops are working under, and then you have to admit they’ve done a reasonably good job.

    THAT is the real problem here: people aren’t willing to look rationally at how common mistreatment, including torture and murder, is in prisons, and how difficult prisoner mistreatment is to prevent even under ideal circumstances. You all want to play gotcha instead, and say “SEE! RUSMFELD MADE THEM TORTURE! IT’S ALL BUSH’S FAULT!” Fine, rail at Bush if you want. But unless you have evidence, LEAVE OUR TROOPS THE FUCK ALONE.

    As much fun as this was, I’m out. Remember: our troops deserve to be innocent until proven guilty!

  104. 104.

    slide

    October 6, 2005 at 1:57 pm

    As much fun as this was, I’m out.

    I don’t blame you as you’ve made quite an ass of yourself. Look forward to the next time you entertain us with your brilliance.

  105. 105.

    DougJ

    October 6, 2005 at 2:01 pm

    Thanks, Defense Guy. I agree with your classification of torture versus not torture.

  106. 106.

    jg

    October 6, 2005 at 2:14 pm

    It said soldiers in the elite 82nd Airborne deprived detainees of sleep, food and water,

    Depending on the time involved, this is interrogation tactics used by local police departments. I wouldn’t necessarily classify it as torture, barring more information.

    Local police departments do this in interrogation? No wonder so many crooks go free. Local police would have to starve a person or sleep deprive them for days to make this effective, only the stupidest criminal wouldn’t ask for a lawyer almost immediately. Of course peeps in Gitmo or Grhaib can’t ask for a lawyer so its more effective there.
    As a punishment these techniques are acceptable but if they’re being used to extract information, then its torture. Its light torture, early methods, but its still torture if the intent is to get a person to talk. The problem is when stuff like this is condoned then its more likely worse stuff will happen. Give an inch, take a mile.

    We are better than them. Who? Anyone that can be brought up as an excuse that they do worse. We’re better than them.

  107. 107.

    Bob

    October 6, 2005 at 2:23 pm

    Gee, TallDave, who spiked your koolaid? Your ranting about who’s unpatriotic is enlightening to those of us who thought you may have a lick of sense in you.

    Two words: “extraordinary rendition.” Yeah, it’s been around for awhile, back to Clinton, maybe Bush the 1st. But then so were glo-sticks. The Bush administration rejiggered their own interpretation of the Geneva Conventions, US law, the code of military justice, whatever, to get more wiggle room to deal with prisoners. They invented a new categories between “prisoner of war” and “not prisoner of war.” People are being put in legal limbo dying cockroach position in violation of Anglo-Saxon legal premises that go back a thousand years.

    The criticism here is about the Bush Administration, not the military. You give a kid candy, he eats it. You give the military the ability to torture without question and they torture. The same CIA/military intelligence guys who ran Operation Phoenix in Vietnam, worked with and ran Operation Condor in South America (and in the case of a certain car bombing, in Washington DC) are no doubt the same folks running the Lynndee photo show in Iraq.

    You come in here presuming that criticism of torture is criticism of soldiers. When I was in the army you did your time and went back to civilian life. The military was supposed to be a means to an end, not the end in and of itself. There must have been some kind of wedding ceremony between you and the military during your time, or a welding ceremony, because you can’t seem to see how torturing people, or an administration that wants to veto restrictions on torturing people, may not be good for the country as a whole.

  108. 108.

    slide

    October 6, 2005 at 2:24 pm

    Depending on the time involved, this is interrogation tactics used by local police departments.

    As a 20 year police veteran, I can attest that the above is not acceptable interrogation tactics and would bar any confession or information obtained under such circumstances as being coerced and therefor not usable.

    Off topic for a moment. Lawrence O’Donnell who was the first reporter reporting that Cooper’s source was Rove, and has been dead right on the Wilson leak investigation, has a prediction on indictments. He said:

    Prediction: at least three high level Bush Administration personnel indicted and possibly one or more very high level unindicted co-conspirators.

    the interesting part for me, and something that I suggested a while back, unindicted co-conspirators. Cheney? Bush? hmmm… methinks next week is going to be very interesting.

  109. 109.

    Defense Guy

    October 6, 2005 at 2:25 pm

    We are better than them. Who? Anyone that can be brought up as an excuse that they do worse. We’re better than them.

    Of course the only thing we have to do to be better than them is to not videotape ourselves sawing captives heads off, or shooting them. It’s not the right argument, as we are better then them even with this crap. The better argument is that we simply do not torture because it is immoral and illegal.

    BTW – It is fairly common police interrogation technique, more the deprivation of sleep than the others. Also, many criminals are stupid, thankfully.

  110. 110.

    Clever

    October 6, 2005 at 2:27 pm

    Hey now, what happend to BJ Civility Thursday?

  111. 111.

    Defense Guy

    October 6, 2005 at 2:31 pm

    As a 20 year police veteran, I can attest that the above is not acceptable interrogation tactics and would bar any confession or information obtained under such circumstances as being coerced and therefor not usable.

    I’ll defer to your experience on this, although I know it is still used in places. Also, please note that I said:

    ‘I wouldn’t necessarily classify it as torture, barring more information.’

  112. 112.

    slide

    October 6, 2005 at 2:36 pm

    Defense Guy:

    Of course the only thing we have to do to be better than them is to not videotape ourselves sawing captives heads off, or shooting them. It’s not the right argument, as we are better then them even with this crap. The better argument is that we simply do not torture because it is immoral and illegal.

    I agree. What THEY do should have no bearing on what WE do. We should do the right thing because that is what America stands for (or should). Period.

  113. 113.

    jobiuspublius

    October 6, 2005 at 2:39 pm

    The beautifull part is McClellan saying that it is redundant and interferes with the WOT.(Find your own dam links!)

    This is show and tell. Let’s see what the new army manual says. Although, that could cause Monster in Cheif to stop hiding the salami:

    New Army Manual:
    …insert in rectum, slowly….

  114. 114.

    Halffasthero

    October 6, 2005 at 2:54 pm

    Sojourner Says:

    Don’t waste your time arguing with Stormy on this issue. She holds this position steadfastly even if it means supporting the rape of women and children.

    That is a cheap shot. And really uncalled for. I really wish you wouldn’t do that.

  115. 115.

    Slartibartfast

    October 6, 2005 at 2:56 pm

    Good God, slide and I agree on something.

    We must both be wrong.

    So, here’s my take: this isn’t so much an admission of widespread torture at the troop level as it is an explicit admission that torture is considered acceptable at the executive level. If you’re of the sadistic bent and know that the guy at the top of the chain thinks torture might be ok under some undisclosed circumstances, this knowledge might tend to look like permission. If you and a bunch of your friends are torturing prisoners and getting off scot-free, other like-minded sadistic bastards might be encouraged.

    So: not only should this be explicitly disallowed, but prisoners should be required to be under the supervision of the US military at all times, and the welfare of each prisoner should be responsible of the officer in charge of the facility.

    I don’t think this removes any of Bush’s powers; he’s still free to order the torturing of specific prisoners. I do think it’ll enhance accountability a great deal, though.

  116. 116.

    Slartibartfast

    October 6, 2005 at 2:59 pm

    responsibility, even. Cole’s spelling impediment is rubbing off, it seems.

  117. 117.

    Mike S

    October 6, 2005 at 2:59 pm

    McCain’s speach from yesterday, from A Sullivan

    Mr. President, war is an awful business. I know that. I don’t think I’m naïve about how severe are the wages of war, and how terrible are the things that must be done to wage it successfully. It is a grim, dark business, and no matter how noble the cause for which it is fought, no matter how valiant the service, many veterans spend much of their subsequent lives trying to forget not only what was done to them and their comrades, but some of what had to be done by their hand to prevail.

    I don’t mourn the loss of any terrorist’s life nor do I care if in the course of serving their ignoble cause they suffer great harm. They have pledged their lives to the intentional destruction of innocent lives, and they have earned their terrible punishment in this life and the next.

    What I do regret, what I do mourn, and what I do care very much about is what we lose, what we — the American serviceman and woman and the great nation they defend at the risk of their lives – what we lose when by official policy or by official negligence – we allow, confuse or encourage our soldiers to forget that best sense of ourselves, our greatest strength – that we are different and better than our enemies; that we fight for an idea – not a tribe, not a land, not a king, not a twisted interpretation of an ancient religion – but for an idea that all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with inalienable rights.

    I have been asked before where did the brave men I was privileged to serve with in Vietnam draw the strength to resist to the best of their ability the cruelties inflicted on them by our enemies. Well, we drew strength from our faith in each other, from our faith in God, and from our faith in our country. Our enemies didn’t adhere to the Geneva Convention. Many of my comrades were subjected to very cruel, very inhumane and degrading treatment, a few of them even unto death. But everyone of us knew, every single one of us knew and took great strength from the belief that we were different from our enemies, that we were better than them, that we, if the roles were reversed, would not disgrace ourselves by committing or countenancing such mistreatment of them. That faith was indispensable not only to our survival, but to our attempts to return home with honor. Many of the men I served with would have preferred death to such dishonor.

    The enemies we fight today hold such liberal notions in contempt, as they hold the international conventions that enshrine them such as the Geneva Conventions and the treaty on torture in contempt. I know that. But we’re better than them, and we are the stronger for our faith. And we will prevail. I submit to my colleagues that it is indispensable to our success in this war that our servicemen and women know that in the discharge of their dangerous responsibilities to their country they are never expected to forget that they are Americans, the valiant defenders of a sacred idea of how nations should govern their own affairs and their relations with others – even our enemies.

    Those who return to us and those who give their lives for us are entitled to that honor. And those of us who have given them this onerous duty are obliged by our history, and by the sacrifices – the many terrible sacrifices — that have been made in our defense – we are obliged to make clear to them that they need not risk their or their country’s honor to prevail; that they are always, always – through the violence, chaos and heartache of war, through deprivation and cruelty and loss – they are always, always Americans, and different, better, and stronger than those who would destroy us.

    God bless them as he has blessed us with their service.

  118. 118.

    slide

    October 6, 2005 at 3:20 pm

    Slartibartfast said:

    not only should this be explicitly disallowed, but prisoners should be required to be under the supervision of the US military at all times, and the welfare of each prisoner should be responsible of the officer in charge of the facility.

    I couldn’t agree more. Like in many organizations where there is a possibility for abuse to occur (police departments, correctional facilities, etc) those abuses inevitably WILL occur unless there strong leadership taking active steps to prevent it. It is human nature that under the stressful condidions of war, there will always be some that go over the line, take that extra step. Become abusive. If that isn’t immediatly and systematically dicouraged by policy, reprimand, discipline and firm leadership then you open the gates for more and more abuse. Failure to deal with individual cases of abuse becomes tacit approval of misconduct.

    That is why I as so strong on going after the higher ups because it is they that are truly repsonsible, not the poor 20 year old private that is looking for, and needs, clear boundries of behavior. They let this happen. This is a massive failure of command and they should be held responsible.

  119. 119.

    slide

    October 6, 2005 at 3:37 pm

    Off Topic: This just in re: CIA Leak Investigation:

    WASHINGTON – Federal prosecutors have accepted an offer from presidential adviser Karl Rove to give 11th-hour testimony in the case of a
    CIA officer’s leaked identity but have warned they cannot guarantee he won’t be indicted, according to people directly familiar with the investigation.
    ADVERTISEMENT

    The persons, who spoke only on condition of anonymity because of grand jury secrecy, said Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has not made any decision yet on whether to file criminal charges against the longtime confidant of
    President Bush or others.

    The U.S. attorney’s manual requires prosecutors not to bring witnesses before a grand jury if there is a possibility of future criminal charges unless they are notified in advance that their grand jury testimony can be used against them in a later indictment.

    Rove has already made at least three grand jury appearances and his return at this late stage in the investigation is unusual.

    The prosecutor did not give Rove similar warnings before his earlier grand jury appearances.

    hmmmm… not looking too good for the Rovester if he is going before the Grand Jury yet again at this late state.

  120. 120.

    jobiuspublius

    October 6, 2005 at 4:21 pm

    Hmm, Myers retires, Carey and Abizaid disagree with the WH. This could be some intersting blame game if torture becomes a hot legal issue. I wonder how the punishment of low ranking enlisted affects the highest ranking officers. Maybe that’s why some enlisted seem to get off with a slap on the wrist, making precedent.

  121. 121.

    Sojourner

    October 6, 2005 at 4:41 pm

    That is a cheap shot. And really uncalled for. I really wish you wouldn’t do that.

    Why is this a cheap shot? Stormy has been repeatedly provided with evidence demonstrating the fact that women and children have been raped while under American control. Yet she has repeatedly expressed her position that there has been no torture of prisoners. So the obvious conclusion is that she doesn’t have a problem with rape.

  122. 122.

    rayabacus

    October 6, 2005 at 5:00 pm

    [..]evidence demonstrating the fact that women and children have been raped while under American control[..]

    Do you have links to this evidence? I had heard only accusations of rapes, no evidence.

  123. 123.

    Sojourner

    October 6, 2005 at 5:49 pm

    Do you have links to this evidence? I had heard only accusations of rapes, no evidence.

    Here’s one. There’s more. Try google.

  124. 124.

    rayabacus

    October 6, 2005 at 6:06 pm

    Here’s one. There’s more. Try google.

    Evidence? This link is unsubstantiated allegations on a par with the newsreports of rapes and murders at the Convention Cneter in NOLA. Google just has the same stuff all going back to a couple of unreliable sourcing with no collaboration.

  125. 125.

    Sojourner

    October 6, 2005 at 6:30 pm

    Evidence? This link is unsubstantiated allegations on a par with the newsreports of rapes and murders at the Convention Cneter in NOLA. Google just has the same stuff all going back to a couple of unreliable sourcing with no collaboration.

    Sy Hersh is a very reliable journalist. At least for those who want to hear the truth.

  126. 126.

    rayabacus

    October 6, 2005 at 6:53 pm

    Sy Hersh is a very reliable journalist. At least for those who want to hear the truth

    Didn’t say he wasn’t. What publication did he write this “expose” for? If he has all of this damning evidence, why isn’t this very reliable journalist writing the story? It has Pulitzer written all over it if it is true and can be sourced. Question again, why hasn’t he written the story?

  127. 127.

    Sojourner

    October 6, 2005 at 7:48 pm

    He did write it. In The New Yorker. The same magazine through which he broke the Abu Graib story.

    Obviously, you haven’t been paying attention.

  128. 128.

    Slide

    October 6, 2005 at 7:54 pm

    rayabacus that is why some of us what the AG photos and videos released because guys like you are disputing what went on. The videos are supposed to show iraq boys being raped (not by US soldiers I might add). So since you are so interested in “seeing” evidence, I assume you support releasing the photos/videos of AG. Right?

    Oh, and you asked for evidence of rape? How about the report by Major General Taguba? Is that evidenece enough for you? A snippet:

    In December 2003, a woman prisoner, “Noor,” smuggled out a note stating that US guards at Abu Ghraib had been raping women detainees and forcing them to strip naked. Several of the women were now pregnant2. The classified enquiry launched by the US military, headed by Major General Antonio Taguba, has confirmed the note by “Noor” and that sexual violence against women at Abu Ghraib took place. Among the 1,800 digital photographs taken by US guards inside Abu Ghraib there were, according to Taguba’s report, images of naked male and female detainees; a male Military Police guard “having sex” with a female detainee; detainees (of unspecified gender) forcibly arranged in various sexually explicit positions for photographing; and naked female detainees3.

    The Bush administration has refused to release photographs of Iraqi women prisoners at Abu Ghraib, including those of women forced at gunpoint to bare their breasts, although these have been shown to Congress4.

    .

  129. 129.

    Andrew J. Lazarus

    October 6, 2005 at 8:30 pm

    If I lived in Oklahoma, I’d think about suicide too.

    What, the land of high school bathrooms with rampant lesbianism? Bet the national teacher shortage hasn’t hit there.

    So much for the jokes. Here are some serious questions:

    1. TallDave: What sort of chain of evidence shows that the highest levels of the Nazi government were responsible for Auschwitz, and not just the commanders on site? Please compare this to the evidence (Woo memo, Bybee memo, JAG memos) connecting Bush Administration policy with improper treatment of detainees.

    2. Is it just me, or is there something weird about saying there is no evidence of rape, while insisting that we do not release the photographic evidence that is strongly rumored to show rape?

    3. What exactly is the evidence that mistreatment of prisoners is isolated? ICRC reports? Or is this wishful thinking based on out of sight, out of mind.

    4. Enumerate specifically those practices that the Senate bill would prohibit that are essential to the War on Terror, Bush style.

  130. 130.

    Defense Guy

    October 6, 2005 at 11:16 pm

    Sy Hersh is a very reliable journalist. At least for those who want to hear the truth.

    Sy Hersh is on record as being willing to lie when it suits the purpose he feels is right. He knows better than to write down his lies, but in public speaking engagemants, another story.

    Google that, and tell me I’m wrong.

  131. 131.

    Cassidy

    October 7, 2005 at 10:13 am

    “allDave how many high ranking officers have been charged?

    WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE that they did anything to be charged for??? Remeber “evidence?” The thing you need to charge someone with a crime?”

    It’s the responsibility of leadership. You might want to learn a litle more about how you’re “beloved military” works.

    DougJ, there have always been guidleines. Anyone who says they weren’t properly trained is full of shit. It’s a weak and dishonest defense. Secondly, a whole squad does not get away with something, without someone higher up knowing about. Joe (Privates) talk people, that’s what they do best.

  132. 132.

    slide

    October 7, 2005 at 10:40 am

    Defense Guy:

    Sy Hersh is on record as being willing to lie when it suits the purpose he feels is right. He knows better than to write down his lies, but in public speaking engagemants, another story.

    Here is a perfect example of right wingnut technique. We are debating rape in Abu Gharib. Someone mentions that Sy Hersch had written/talked about it. So then we have now an attack on the credibility of Sy Hersch, totaly ignorning the underlying issue: rape in AG. Sound familiar.

    Attack Paul O’Neil not his revealing Bush’s intent to invade Iraq on day one of administration.

    Attack Richard Clarke not his revealing the total blind eye to terrorism the bush team had prior to 911.

    Attack Joe Wilson for revealing that there was no yellowcake/Iraq connection that was hyped in the State of Union speech.

    Attack Sy Hersch for revealing the sexual assaults at AG.

    Ok Defense Guy forget about Hersch. The OFFICIAL ARMY REPORT of General Taguba states there were sexual assualts. There is VIDEO of sexual assaults that YOU argue should not be shown to the general public. But lets attack Hersch because we don’t like what he reports.

    So very very typical Defense guy.

  133. 133.

    Defense Guy

    October 7, 2005 at 10:46 am

    Good lord you can be a pretentious ass slide. I said nothing about the alleged rape or about abu Ghraib, I merely pointed out that Sy Hersh is actually on record as being willing to lie. Which he is.

    Take your outrgae somewhere else.

  134. 134.

    slide

    October 7, 2005 at 10:58 am

    Good lord you can be a pretentious ass slide. I said nothing about the alleged rape or about abu Ghraib, I merely pointed out that Sy Hersh is actually on record as being willing to lie. Which he is.

    Exactly my point. The only reason Hersch’s name was brought up was that he had discussed the rapes at AG. And rather than discuss the issue at hand you decided to discredit Hersch and thereby discredit the allegations of rape. Why else bring it up? Dont’ be so disingenious Defense Guy.

    ROVE MANUAL: ATTACK AND DISCREDIT THE MESSENGER 101

  135. 135.

    Defense Guy

    October 7, 2005 at 11:15 am

    Right slide, the only time you should bring up credibility issues is when it helps the left, my bad. I’ll try to do better in the future.

    Can’t bring in uncomfortable facts, wouldn’t be helpful to the ’cause’. Might be accused of ‘attacking the messanger’.

    When we are discussing something in the future, I will remember to keep it one sided and not bring up these sort of things, I am SURE you will be obliged to do the same.

  136. 136.

    Defense Guy

    October 7, 2005 at 11:17 am

    ROVE MANUAL: ATTACK AND DISCREDIT THE MESSENGER 101

    If you were any more partisan, I imagine you would cut off your right leg and arm.

  137. 137.

    jg

    October 7, 2005 at 2:22 pm

    I said nothing about the alleged rape or about abu Ghraib, I merely pointed out that Sy Hersh is actually on record as being willing to lie.

    But thats Slide’s point. When the subject is talked about the right wing approach is to avoid the issue by finding a back door out of the argument. You’re saying that since Hersh lied before you see no reason to continue any discussion where he’s involved. You’ve found an out.

    Find a reason to not listen to someone making accusations against the administration, get that reason out to Limbaugh and the rest of the right wong media. And watch as TallDaves, Darrels and DG’s use that as a reason to completely avoid the issue. We don’t talk about what Joe Wilson found or reported on, we talk about whether or not he’s partisan and if this is all an orchestrated attack. That there was no yellowcake being bought is somehow on the back burner.

    Do you not see that hasppening a lot?

  138. 138.

    Defense Guy

    October 7, 2005 at 2:38 pm

    You’re saying that since Hersh lied before you see no reason to continue any discussion where he’s involved. You’ve found an out.

    You are putting words in my mouth. I am saying that the credibility of anyone making any claim on any subject is always part of the discussion. It is not an attempt to get ‘out’ of the discussion, it is merely another factor which must be considered. Are you saying that the truthfullness of someone making a claim is not important to the claim he is making?

    My attempt is caution, due to the source. It is not an attempt to quash the conversation or to sidetrack it.

  139. 139.

    Slide

    October 7, 2005 at 4:39 pm

    defense guy…. Hersh is ONE guy that brought it up. He is not by any means the sole source. As I have stated several times before, the offical Army investigation says there were sexual assaults at AG. So, yes, it is irrelevant whether YOU think Pulitzer Winning reporter Hersh is credible or not. It has no bearing whatsover on the issue of rape in AG which is documented ON FUCKIN VIDEO for christ’s sake.

  140. 140.

    jg

    October 7, 2005 at 5:54 pm

    You’re saying that since Hersh lied before you see no reason to continue any discussion where he’s involved. You’ve found an out.

    You are putting words in my mouth.

    Please. I was obviously talking about the implications of what you said. I know you didn’t say those exact words, but you were trying to blow off Hersh as a source. You were shutting it down with a quick, ‘he’s lied in the past’ put away. I’m sorry the RNC has made what you think is a deep, well thought out response into what is percieved as a talking point. Its so tragic for you.

Comments are closed.

Trackbacks

  1. Cadillac Tight » Blog Archive » Sully’s Dream Bill says:
    October 7, 2005 at 10:27 am

    […] when the Senate approved McCain’s new “anti-torture” bill. That’s well and good for Sully, John Cole, and others who have taken a “not in my name” style approach to the issue, but I’m still somewhat conflicted about it, myself. […]

Primary Sidebar

Political Action

Postcard Writing Information

Recent Comments

  • Baud on Tuesday Morning Open Thread: Unions Good, GOP… Not (Sep 26, 2023 @ 8:07am)
  • Baud on Tuesday Morning Open Thread: Unions Good, GOP… Not (Sep 26, 2023 @ 8:05am)
  • Dorothy A. Winsor on Tuesday Morning Open Thread: Unions Good, GOP… Not (Sep 26, 2023 @ 8:04am)
  • MomSense on On The Road – lamh26 – 2022 Birthday Trip to Italy! (Sep 26, 2023 @ 8:03am)
  • Kay on Tuesday Morning Open Thread: Unions Good, GOP… Not (Sep 26, 2023 @ 8:02am)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
What Has Biden Done for You Lately?

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Talk of Meetups – Meetup Planning

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Cole & Friends Learn Español

Introductory Post
Cole & Friends Learn Español

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!