Squaring the Culture




"...and I will make justice the plumb line, and righteousness the level;
then hail will sweep away the refuge of lies,
and the waters will overflow the secret place."
Isaiah 28:17

04/20/2009 (9:18 am)

War Crimes Trial for King Mohammed VI!!!

memeotorture

King Who?

King Mohammed VI, of Morocco. Let me explain.

The blog chatter late last week came mostly from the Left, and mostly concerned the release by the Obama administration of four, previously-classified memos from Bush administration officials regarding the use of harsh interrogation techniques to question highly-placed al Qaeda detainees who might have knowledge of imminent attacks. The memos documented in some detail the specifics of the techniques that were used, most likely rendering them useless for future interrogations since America’s enemies will now be prepared for them.

It’s possible that the dollar may collapse in the wake of the current administration’s grotesque overspending; it’s also possible that the US economy could collapse. Either would probably cause the world’s economy to collapse, resulting in the loss of millions of lives worldwide due to poverty and disease. Islam as a religion perpetrates the killing of hundreds of people worldwide regularly (318 killed in Islamic terrorist attacks worldwide so far this April), and Wahabist terrorists routinely threaten mass killings around the world; they continue to hunt for weapons of mass destruction with which to perpetrate larger murders. Irrational tyrants are testing intercontinental ballistic missiles possibly carrying nuclear weapons, which they might just fire at a major city someday. If global warming alarmists are correct, the world faces ecological calamity, and if they are not correct (as current research suggests,) the world faces deliberate crippling of its economic power, which will result in vast and permanent global poverty. And if none of that is bad enough, there’s a growing disaffection among American citizens regarding whether their government is behaving according to its Constitution, and a wave of immigrants threatens to undermine the ability of border states to maintain civil services. There are real, serious threats facing the world, and the nation.

And so, surrounded by very real, very frightening threats, the hard Left in America is screaming like agitated, feces-flinging gorillas about some two dozen individuals, who helped plot major terror attacks, being deliberately slammed against a soft, flexible wall designed to make a loud noise that would startle them — after having that specific technique approved for that particular detainee by some highly-placed official, with monitoring of the detainee’s vital signs to make sure there would be no permanent damage. Or having them squat in an uncomfortable position for no more than four hours. Or making them stand undressed in a room with temperature certified to be no less than 64 degrees Fahrenheit, making them feel embarrassed. This is the defining issue of the Bush administration, to these moral and intellectual giants — whether 28 individuals were treated in this manner.

Have they gone insane?

I’m pretty sure they have, and I’m not using hyperbole. The agitation with which the hard Left regards the possible mistreatment of some two dozen anti-American terrorists in our custody over the past 8 years constitutes a moral inversion of truly astonishing proportions. I’ve read portions of the memos, including the descriptions of the techniques. Americans are pussycats. The first, general definition of “torture” mentioned in the memos rests on the phrase, “acts that shock the conscience.” The only thing about the techniques in these memos that shocks my conscience is how much effort the Bush administration spent evaluating whether it was proper to do these things, and when, and under what circumstances. It’s shockingly decent. It’s virtue in unheard-of proportions. Can you imagine any other government of any nation anywhere in the world, at any time in human history, writing hundreds of thousands of words, spending hundreds of hours evaluating laws, investing thousands of hours of psychologists’, doctors’, and engineers’ time designing techniques that would not hurt anybody, but would achieve the desired result of making them tell us what they knew of plans to harm us? What sort of people fret over when and whether it’s permissible for a questioner to slam one of their sworn enemies against a wall — a fake wall, carefully engineered to prevent him from bumping his head — to thwart a deadly calamity like the WTC attack? The Bush administration was careful in a manner practically unheard of in human history.

After reading these memos, I am deeply, deeply proud of my country, and of my government. These are good men who did the right thing with a very difficult problem. There is still much good in America.

There is simply no rational explanation for the level of anger on the political Left regarding this topic. The only plausible explanation is irrational hatred gone out of control; they wanted so badly for so long to find something, anything, with which to justify their inner, uncontrollable hatred for this one man, President George W. Bush, that they are now pretending that something unusually decent is something unusually indecent — in a world filled with real indecency. The people who engaged in this charade, and who continue to engage in it, need help. They’re simply and completely insane; and because their insanity is pushing them, by the thousands, toward insisting on world-approved war crimes prosecution for some of the most morally sound leaders in human history, they’re extremely dangerous.

So, what’s all this got to do with King Mohammed VI of Morocco?

Well, one of the more alarming incidents that people point to who want to prosecute the Bush administration for war crimes is the case of one Binyam Mohamed, whose case is currently being heard in British courts. When people I know were challenged to produce evidence of torture, it was Binyam Mohamed’s case to which they pointed. Mr. Mohamed was detained in Pakistan while boarding a flight to the UK bearing a legal passport belonging to somebody else, but with his own picture inserted over the photo. He’d been weapons-trained by al Qaeda operatives at a camp in Afghanistan, and is alleged to have been involved in a “dirty bomb” plot. Mr. Mohamed testifies that he was questioned improperly in Pakistan by MI5 operatives, then rendered by the CIA to Morocco, then to Afghanistan, and finally to Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, courtesy of the US government. And while imprisoned in Morocco, testifies Binyam Mohamed, he had his penis sliced with a scalpel 30 times.

Now, let’s ignore for the sake of argument the fact that we have in writing instructions given to al Qaeda members training them to make horrific claims of torture if they’re captured and held, for the sake of propaganda. And let’s ignore for the sake of argument that the British court has not even evaluated the evidence supporting this man’s claim yet, they’ve simply ruled on whether certain evidence is going to be allowed. And let’s ignore for the sake of argument the fact that there’s no public evidence supporting the claim that this man’s manly bits have been damaged, or that if they were, they were damaged where and by whom he’s accusing. And let’s ignore for the sake of argument the fact that the man has no legally supportable reason to infer that any of this has the slightest to do with the US. Let’s ignore all that, and assume he’s telling the truth (and let me be plain, I don’t think any rational person should believe that for a millisecond.)

It was in the Moroccan prison that the penis slicing allegedly occurred. If the most outlandish claims of the Leftist Torture Poo Flingers are correct, the CIA deliberately transferred this poor, innocent British subject to Morocco specifically for the purpose of letting the Moroccans do what Moroccan torturers do. This means that it’s known that in Morocco, you get tortured in prison. This would also be true of other, barbaric places to which the CIA deliberately transferred prisoners.

So, there are prisons all over the world where the keepers engage in acts like slicing prisoners’ penises with scalpels, and everybody seems to know it.

exaspbobAnd for this reason, the Poo Flinging Geniuses want to prosecute… drum roll, please… George W. Bush.

Will somebody please explain to me why these Protectors of the World’s Conscience are not calling for the war crimes prosecution of the King of Morocco, under whose inspiring leadership prisons have been constructed in which Bad Cops around the world can count on prisoners having their favored bits sliced thin? Or for the prosecution of Hamid Karzai, President of Afghanistan, under whose leadership Binyam Mohamed was mistreated? Or for the prosecution of Pervez Musharraf, the Prime Minister in Pakistan under whose leadership Mohamed had interrogators play Russian roulette with him, claiming out loud “the Americans told us to treat you this way,” and then had them turn him over to the CIA? (The assertion about the Americans is particularly hilarious. Seriously — can you imagine an interrogator informing his subject who told him what to do? or a subject believing it even they did? or one remembering that specific detail? Binyam’s claim about this was alleged by the raving communist loons at theworldcantwait.net, who you can read about at discoverthenetworks.)

My conscience is shocked by penis-slicing prison keepers. That’s repulsive. And yes, there are plenty of places in the world where humans do such shocking things to other humans. I have no argument whatsoever with people who genuinely, in good conscience, want to go to places where people are treated in this manner and convince them not to do it. If I believed that the American left genuinely had the eradication of world mistreatment of prisoners in mind with their activism, I would at least applaud that concern; and if I thought they had a legitimate means of making it happen, I’d probably support them, both financially and verbally. Furthermore, if it were the case that the US had willfully sent prisoners to Morocco for the express purpose of being tortured, I’d favor the prosecution of those who sent them — as accessories to the actual crimes committed by the Moroccans, and after the Moroccans had been duly prosecuted and convicted. And if it were the case that the US had sent prisoners to Morocco for sound reasons but discovered after the fact that they’d been tortured, I’d argue against sending any more prisoners to Morocco — and call for the prosecution of the Moroccan jailers.

The fact that they’re going absolutely berserk over this topic here in America, and using it to insist on the prosecution of George W. Bush, proves beyond even unreasonable doubt, let alone reasonable doubt, that their goal in all this has Abso.Bloody.Lutely nothing to do with concern over torture, and everything to do with irrational hatred of George W. Bush. Real torture regimes have existed all along, and not anywhere controlled by the US. These activists should be calling for King Mohammed’s head, not George Bush’s. They’re not, ergo torture is not their concern. QED.

It’s really fairly simple, and it’s been clear for at least 40 years. The one government that stands in the path of World Socialism is the United States government, and really, it only does so when it’s in the hands of Republicans. For this reason, socialists worldwide have been systematically, consistently attempting to demonize American government, and especially Republican American government, in any way possible for most of our lifetimes. The agitation over “torture” (which is, truly, anything but torture) is part and parcel of that effort, and to the extent that any citizen in the United States has participated in the agitation, they are either dupes of World Socialists, or partners with them. The Democratic party of the United States as a whole has absorbed more of the assumptions of World Socialism than most Democrats realize, and for that reason most American Democrats cooperate unconsciously with World Socialism, but that’s what this is about. Otherwise, we’d be banging the drum for sanctioning of Morocco, Pakistan, and Afghanistan at the UN, not banging the drum for lynching George W. Bush and John Yoo. Who the hell is John Yoo, anyhow?

We cannot allow the legacy of Bush Derangement to simply slide unremarked into the past. This is the era during which political partisanship took on horrific and dangerous proportions in America. Seemingly ordinary folks became obsessed and enraged with irrational hatred, and used that hatred to tear the nation to pieces. This is beyond ordinary, allowable disagreement. They’re calling for war crimes trials, not just for the Innocent, but for the Good. To continue to pretend that what separates us in the American body politic is simply disagreement between ordinary citizens of equivalent good will is delusional. We need to recognize the level of insanity, and we need to protect ourselves, and it cannot be done within the existing American republic. They’ve gone nuts over there on the left, and they’re going to harm us with it.

« « DHS Extremism Report: Caution/Paranoia | Main | That Scene From Dave » »

10 Comments »

April 20, 2009 @ 5:40 pm #

Last Thursday, our friend Joe published the 1988 Convention Against Torture, signed by President Reagan (whom I voted for). I really don’t think it leaves any room for doubt about whether or not to prosecute members of the administration of Bush (whom I voted for). No inversion here!

Joe introduces:

I thought I’d provide a copy of the Convention Against Torture (see below), of which the U.S. is a signatory – President Reagan signed the treaty in 1988 – and which was ratified as a Treaty by the United States’ Senate in 1994. I’m just providing Part I. The other parts are organizational.

The link is here:

http://moreunsolicitedthoughts.blogspot.com/2009/04/convention-on-torture.html

April 20, 2009 @ 7:30 pm #

Fine, Jim. But can you answer the challenge made in this article? In Morocco’s prisons, prisoners allegedly get their genitals sliced to ribbons. Political prisoners simply disappear in Niger, and in Chechnya. The Sudanese recently executed nine defendants who allegedly confessed under torture — real torture, not fake walls designed to give way. Where is your conscientious activism aimed at ending this sort of barbarism?

America clearly documents what happens in its prisons, has clear accountability for actions, makes every necessary effort to see that prisoners are not harmed in any way. The recent memos, clearly not constructed for public view, confirm all of this. So, what’s the obsession with “bringing to justice” the most humane prison regime in the history of mankind — but not a word is uttered about the people who are genuinely engaged in real torture? In what way does this represent justice, in your mind?

April 20, 2009 @ 8:48 pm #

“In what way does this represent justice, in your mind?”

Two words: It doesn’t : )

I don’t think it’s unfair, though, to hold ourselves up to a higher standard than the rest of the world, however. These abuses you note are worthy human rights causes that ought to guide our foreign policy, as had been the concern for decades with Eastern Bloc countries, China and a host of others.

Whether or not the hard leftists are not being completely consistent or honest does not remove the concern that, in the case of these memos and the resultant treatment of these prisoners, we failed to live up to 1. our ideals, and 2. our word. If we do not at least look into these abuses (which WE own), we have given up something of ourselves, and I would bear some shame as an American for it.

April 21, 2009 @ 1:50 am #

Why do I have the feeling that if Bush had approved genital slicing, Plumb Blob would be defending it.

Apparently he’s forgotten or is ignoring Abu Ghraib where people died from American inflicted torture; and perhaps you don’t realize the CIA deported some prisoners to Syrian jails for interrogation, including several innocent Canadian citizens, all of whom returned with physical and psychological scars from the torture inflicted on them. They were taken to Syria by the CIA, illegally.

You might also want to read up on the Nuremberg trials.

The authors and signatories of the torture memos should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, preferably in The Hague.

April 21, 2009 @ 3:08 am #

Why do I have the feeling that if Bush had approved genital slicing, Plumb Blob would be defending it.

You probably get that feeling because you’re responding out of irrational hatred, not out of rational thought. I said the opposite of what you claim; you’re accusing me of lying, without the slightest factual reason to do it. And because I now have solid evidence that you are willing to make such accusations without a single shred of evidence, I don’t believe any of the other bullshit you say, either.

Apparently he’s forgotten or is ignoring Abu Ghraib

Oops, false dichotomy. He’s neither forgotten nor is he ignoring; he understands Abu Graib based on the facts of the case, and knows that it was not official government policy, but rather a tiny, perverted little sex ring run by the night shift. Lesley, here, has apparently forgotten, or is ignoring, the fact that the military was already the better part of a year into the prosecution of the perpetrators when the New York Times dishonestly and with no evidence whatsoever attempted to tie their crimes to the President. Or perhaps Lesley is deliberately aiding the NYT and al Qaeda in spreading false accusations, an ugly possibility that I’ll only mention to complete the list of plausible options. Don’t want to repeat Lesley’s false dichotomy, do we?

As I told another poster attempting what you’re attempting, Lesley, you’re entitled to make comments here like anyone else, but if you’re going to make accusations of criminal conduct, you absolutely must post links to documentation supporting the claims. This blog’s comment section will not become another false accusation echo chamber. So, your claims about “innocent Canadian citizens” and rendition — which I don’t believe, because I already know you make accusations for which you have no evidence — will be treated as if they don’t exist unless you post your sources. If you post again without sources, your post will be deleted from the blog and returned to you with a request that you repost with the sources included. False accusation is evil, and it will not occur here.

And for the record, if you want my next reply to be more civil, don’t begin your next comment by calling me a liar.

The authors and signatories of the torture memos should be prosecuted

And how about those Moroccan jailers who sliced that man’s penis? What prosecution for them? Objectively, by ignoring them and focusing on some bureaucrat in the Justice Dept, you’re condoning their acts. So whereas you have no reason to accuse me of condoning genuine torture, I have sound reason to accuse you of the same. It’s you, not me, who condones torture.

April 21, 2009 @ 4:54 am #

darkhorse,

If there’s no justice in it, then we should not do it. Good men did the right thing; if there’s a law saying that their good work is illegal, let’s slap their wrists very, very lightly and then change the law so that it punishes things of which we really should disapprove.

April 21, 2009 @ 8:49 am #

You got me wrong on the “Where’s the justice in that” answer. Say what we can about abuses in other countries, AND go after abuses in our own, HARD.

I think what I said bears repeating:

Whether or not the hard leftists are not being completely consistent or honest does not remove the concern that, in the case of these memos and the resultant treatment of these prisoners, we failed to live up to 1. our ideals, and 2. our word. If we do not at least look into these abuses (which WE own), we have given up something of ourselves, and I would bear some shame as an American for it.

April 21, 2009 @ 8:58 am #

Here’s the thing, though, Jim:

For the last 80 years or so, hard leftists have deliberately been dredging up topics like this and throwing them in our faces, specifically because they know we have consciences (and specifically because they have none) and can be manipulated by such issues. This is why Soviet spokespeople used to repeatedly bring up the treatment of American negros in the South — not because they cared in the slightest for black people, but because they could make Americans jump through hoops by mentioning them. More or less the same people are continuing to do more or less the same thing, and they are succeeding in pushing the US into World Socialism with it.

When your conscience becomes a weapon against you in the hands of a control freak, do you simply allow it to be so? In my experience of dealing with individuals who have control issues, that’s bad policy. What you have to do is identify the control freak, clearly articulate what they’re doing, deliberately ignore what they say, and go on with your normal behavior as though they had not spoken. That’s the only policy that will not reward their aberrant behavior.

So, no, I’m not inclined to allow my conscience to be used as a weapon against me, and I’m not willing to go after abuses “HARD.” Very bad people are deliberately trying to take down very good people. The sound policy is to call the bad people “bad,” and the good people “good,” and to make sure the bad people achieve nothing of what they came to achieve. If respect for law requires us to do anything at all, we do it in a manner that makes the efforts of the bad people a waste of their time. Fuck them.

April 21, 2009 @ 7:14 pm #

It must be very comforting to be able to judge, after the fact, and after years of no further mass strikes on the United States proper, the hard decisions made by people whose first task was to ensure that what happened on 9/11 DID NOT HAPPEN AGAIN. These memos, released for no apparent purpose but to damage the Bush administration (par for the course for the childish and petulant Obama administration) detail the methods used to question those people who had direct involvement in those attacks, in an obvious and successful attempt to thwart follow-on attacks.

This is really an example of the lack of historical context that plagues the hard left. Forgotten is the near certainty of the entire country that more (and possibly more horrific) attacks would happen any day. The people charged with protecting citizens of the United States took their responsibility seriously, and did whatever they could to stop those attacks from being carried out. There was very little legal framework for the Long War we have been forced into on 9/11. The Bush administration attempted to define what its legal options were, and then used every means it considered lawful. Congress lagged far behind in its responsibility to codify methods to be used in holding and questioning detainees, letting the executive take the lead (and the heat) in defining what we could and would do.

Also forgotten is the role of the Supreme Court in granting “rights” to unlawful combatants who, according to the Geneva Convention, can be executed out of hand. Belatedly, after the executive had done the heavy lifting and made the tough decisions, the legislative and judicial branches began chipping away at the framework that was being developed. The legislative branch was particularly cowardly about putting their names to any serious law that would define the treatment of detainees. The Court contented themselves with ruling that the amended military tribunals, which Congress finally got around to addressing years after they had been set up, were not appropriate before the appeals part of the process had even begun.

Some people have acted like adults throughout this process, including John Yoo, and George W. Bush. Adults have to make hard decisions based on incomplete or conflicting data, without clear precedent, often when the only choices are bad or worse. Compare their behavior to the present administration, which releases secret information in order to puff themselves up and denigrate their predecessors.

April 27, 2009 @ 7:55 am #

Phil said:

“Very bad people are deliberately trying to take down very good people. The sound policy is to call the bad people “bad,” and the good people “good,” and to make sure the bad people achieve nothing of what they came to achieve. If respect for law requires us to do anything at all, we do it in a manner that makes the efforts of the bad people a waste of their time. Fuck them.”

You’re right, Phil. Screw ‘em. Let’s put them completely out of our minds, forget them.

There, now that THAT’S done, let’s turn our attention, with a clean slate, to whether or not some people broke Treaties and International Law.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>