Sunday, May 16, 2004
Well, the news media keeps beating a dead horse so I guess I will keep beating it in return. Did Rumsfeld order an expansion of a secret CIA program to sexually humiliate and torture Iraqi prisoners to gain information?
The only real surprise in this whole story is why it's such a big story. Rush Limbaugh and others have correctly pointed out that were these pictures funded by the NEA, liberals in Congress and the media would be telling us we need to "understand" what the artist was thinking. It's an amazing double-standard. The other aspect of this is the new story's lionization of the CIA for refusing to continue the program because they supposedly were using it on "cabdrivers, brothers-in-law and people pulled off the street" instead of terrorists. I get tired of repeating this line but repeat it we must, it seems: Abu Ghraib was a prison for those who had been caught trying to kill American soldiers. The people in there were not civilians in the sense of non-combatants. Suspects were detained but only the guilty were kept. This doesn't justify some of the things done to them, but it gives the lie to the idea that they were arrested while walking along, minding their own business. Besides, hasn't anyone ever heard of military justice? One man in a platoon does something wrong and the whole platoon gets punished. Angry about this, the man's (or woman's, so as not to be sexist)comrades punish him (her) as well so they'll be sure not to do it again. Maybe the "average" Iraqi people, whom we have been assured so often just want peace and stability, could help by tattling on the insurgents and helping the US restore stability in the area if they want to make sure no mistakes are made. It's worth a try.
The only real surprise in this whole story is why it's such a big story. Rush Limbaugh and others have correctly pointed out that were these pictures funded by the NEA, liberals in Congress and the media would be telling us we need to "understand" what the artist was thinking. It's an amazing double-standard. The other aspect of this is the new story's lionization of the CIA for refusing to continue the program because they supposedly were using it on "cabdrivers, brothers-in-law and people pulled off the street" instead of terrorists. I get tired of repeating this line but repeat it we must, it seems: Abu Ghraib was a prison for those who had been caught trying to kill American soldiers. The people in there were not civilians in the sense of non-combatants. Suspects were detained but only the guilty were kept. This doesn't justify some of the things done to them, but it gives the lie to the idea that they were arrested while walking along, minding their own business. Besides, hasn't anyone ever heard of military justice? One man in a platoon does something wrong and the whole platoon gets punished. Angry about this, the man's (or woman's, so as not to be sexist)comrades punish him (her) as well so they'll be sure not to do it again. Maybe the "average" Iraqi people, whom we have been assured so often just want peace and stability, could help by tattling on the insurgents and helping the US restore stability in the area if they want to make sure no mistakes are made. It's worth a try.
// posted by The Pendragon @ 10:01 AM 
