What ee cummings said: "There is some shit I will not eat" (with Update)

You've quoted my favorite e.e. cummings line, and perhaps my favorite line of poetry, ever. I read that poem when I was in high school, right around the end of the Vietnam War, and the line has stuck with me for over 30 years.

Not a bad motto, when you think of it.

Julie: Mine, too.

Oh, thank you. You know I've been awestruck at the fact they are even debating whether to legitimate torture and do away with habeas corpus. It's not only unconstitutional according to the charter of our country, it's unconstitutional according to the common law of the country we split from. So where do these "elected representatives of the people" get off abrogating rights we people have had going back hundreds of years? What I'm really trying to say is this: these jokers don't have the authority to take these rights away.

Thanks for talking about this stuff - I think most people are distracted by other crap and just don't have the education to know that we are in the midst of profound troubles.

A great many Americans are eating a great deal of shit, apparently willingly.

I feel as if I am living in a surreal world in which our republic is swiftly turning into a neocon, facist state with references to "securing the homeland" and the congressional pussies that have been elected by us are succumbing to a set of ignorant, ballbusting dictators who shoplifted the election in 2004; all of them have decided it is fine to torture, to maim, to deprive anyone they want of liberty any time they want; it makes me nauseous, it makes me want to stand up and shout and scream. What is it going to take to wake up the American masses to remove these beings from power?

I'm re-reading Sinclair Lewis's "It Can't Happen Here." It is happening here before our very eyes.

Ordinary Americans and their political representatives need to stop worrying about their "tough guy" images & start thinking about how these horrendous policies could come back and bite them and their loved ones as innocent citizens.

Don't think it couldn't happen to you! It happened to an innocent Canadian whose only crime was the misfortune of having been born in Syria. During an in-transit stop in New York on his way home from a family vacation, US authorities, acting on a faulty tip from our own Mounties, shipped him off to Syria to be imprisoned and tortured for a year.

Back in Canada now, he has finally been fully and unequivocally exonerated. He was a model citizen and there was never any basis for Canadian, American or Syrian authorities to suspect him of any crime or to put him through the nightmare he suffered.

This is all turning into a really bad movie. Someone's got to find the guts to stop it!

I wonder aloud here if anyone has ever stood by during a torture session to see if it produces information? I can say that it produces a lot of information with all due respect to Revere. Some of it after day two or three is pretty worthless. I could get them to confess to the Kennedy assassination at that point. But do these people have the right to do it? Does anyone have the right to bomb, maim and kill thousands of anyones citizens either? Now there's the rub now isnt it?

Its all a matter of voltage and how and where you apply it. Its inhumane even in my opinion but I would do it to save anyone of you from being killed or having a WMD or a rail car with isocyanate being dumped in say-Chicago. One cup of this shit is worse than anything short of VX. Killed 50,000 in Bhopal. But yeah, I would stick the guy or girl over a burning fire to get the information to stop it from happening to the citizens of this country. Every other country maybe depending on whether they pissed me off lately or not. French would mean French Fried as they are on my shit list. If I knew a nuke was heading in their direction I might have to pause for a second or to to decide whether to tell them or not. I would, but still there is that second or two.

Colin Powell is right, they will do the same to our soldiers but they signed up to be all they could be and that was always an implied threat. None of the civilians ever signed up for anything and thats why the Dems are losing this ideological battle. Terrorists pull a knife, we pull a gun, they pull a gun, we pull out a 500 pounder. If necessary, it will go to the complete destruction of a country and I mean by the bright flash and the loud bang. Its only what 50,000 years of "evolution" has taught us.

Its gangland handling of a problem that could be ended by the police and militaries of every country on this planet. Arrest and try them for attempting crimes against humanity. Its only a crime if someone is around to try you for it.

Kruger,

While the execution (pun intended) of your point is poorly made, your point is made.

Is it an acceptable decision to sacrifice one for the good of many if we know 100% that the one has the information needed?

Is it an acceptable decision if we are mostly sure?

What is the ethical point at which you would sacrifice one for many? Does the ratio matter? Have you ever had to personally make that decision?

In U-571, understanably a military movie, Matthew McConaughey is not recommended for promtion by his supervisor even though he is good at his job and is liked by all. Bill Paxton tells him that he doesn't think that he could make the tough decision to send one of his men to death. Being Hollywood, the opportunity presents where McConaughey must seal off a compartment with alive men in it in order to save the submarine and others - with much fanfare and heart pounding music resolving to just a wrench beating on metal and crying.

Revere had posted on a Hypocratic oath previously for those in public health. I don't know if I could take the oath. I'm with Kruger in that, if I knew, not just suspected or had an ego to think, but if there was evidence that pointed that person X could save the lives of Y, hell yea I'd do what's necessary to get the best information.

I also agree that there is a difference in torture. Multi-organ failure [sic] is torture. Intentional pain is torture. But what about sleep deprivation? white noise? What exactly is torture? Is it ever useful? When would you, if ever, employ it?

It's not the politicians backing torture that upset me, it's the citizens. I already knew that politicians could be found to support burning of witches and sacrifice of babies to Baal, if that happened to fit the mood of the voters. I just had assumed that my fellow voters wouldn't ever get that kind of mood.

I used to wonder about how most Americans just ignored the nastiness of slavery, or how most Germans apparently accepted the mass murder of Jews and Gypsies and various other targets. Now I know, and I wish I didn't. It's not on the same scale, but I think it's the same process.

Let me be the first to say that this is the ugliest part of my former profession. Capture by the Nicaraguan Defense forces was a death sentence. I had a 10,000 USD bounty on my head the day I arrived there. My picture was on trees everywhere and I was a nobody. How'd they get it? I dunno. Torture for pissy information is ridiculous. If I had credible evidence that someone knew something big was about to happen, I would crack his skull wide open and in a heartbeat to get the information to prevent it. Problem is that we are trying to deal in a lawful way with an unlawful problem that has HUGE implications now. WMD's, home grown terrorists-Hell where is the effing SDS when you need a goat?

For both of you Alba and Darin I understand what you are saying because I have been on both sides of this fence. My problem is that once this starts, it will be hard to stop. But if they are beheading people on TV then I think its time to pull the gloves off. They do that for scare tactics and they havent got a clue as to what we really could do to them. They think they can continue to screw with a giant and not have him wake and stomp them. Once he is awake though it might take 2-3 generations to put him to sleep again.

Damn! Glad to be on the right side of the issue as opposed to the "wrong" side I am usually on with the Sunday sermonettes. IMO however you dress it up the administration still sets up a system of kangaroo courts with no legitimacy at all. Will anyone ever quote an "opinion" by a tribunal? Only in comparison with real opinions by real courts. What really irks me is that the old Soviet Union could have destroyed the United States as a functioning society in about 30 minutes yet we didn't have to create a police state to address the threat. Al-Quaida is nowhere near the league of the Soviets. On a good day they might nuke two or three cities but they could come nowhere close to destroying the whole country the way the Soviets could. Yet in fighting the cold war we didn't see the need to create a police state. Destroying a principle as fundamental as habeas corpus and then giving immunity to the people who do the torturing - never thought I would see the day in the United States.

MRK said:
"Every other country maybe depending on whether they pissed me off lately or not."

I think this is illuminating of the arbitrary nature of decisions about who, when, how much to torture, and the bias that can come into play in making them.

You wanna see torture?

Watch a 35 year old ovarian cancer patient slowly be whittled away surgery by surgery (10 should be enough), only to be rewarded with chemo and radiation. And then find out it has returned.

Watch a child die a slow lingering death from a congenital heart defect only to get a heart transplant that mandates massive daily doses of drugs, which swells them to twice their size. Watch them get condylomas (warts) that cover every inch of exposed skin, (including face, eyelids) because of their immunosuppression. Watch them grow hair over their entire body. Watch them grow to hate these changes so much they attempt suicide a few years later.

Every day, as part of my profession, I must cause pain to (hopefully) relieve pain. Would I accept another causing pain if I knew it might save a community? Hell, yes!

Our soldiers are being killed and drug through the streets in triumph. Innocents are beheaded. Charity workers are murdered. Women are beaten, mutilated and murdered for perceived offenses...at a whim. Placation is looked at as weakness. Rolling over and exposing your underbelly is an open invitation for eviseration. This is a war, not a tea party.

Where has all the testosterone gone???!!! I want some goal-oriented, kick-a$$, get the job done professional soldiers to protect our assets. And if I ever need my hearth and home protected from marauding invaders, I want a Hell's Angel, John Wayne, Terminator combo to do the job, not a pacifist, afraid to get dirty type.

Being "nice" doesn't stop cruel behavior at it's delivery. Instead, it is a catalyst for more cruelty. It's seen as a sign of weakness that increases the power trip. Ask any woman facing a rapist. Ask any child facing their tormentor. Ask any reporter or charity worker about to be beheaded.

Nice only works with "nice" people.

Sorry, Kruger, but it just doesn't work that way. The circumstances where we "know X," and we want to extract "Y" from the person that we are torturing will not begin to match the number of situations in which we know neither "X," nor "Y," and we simply set about extracting the information (which may likely reside entirely in our own minds) through any means available. The Bush junta employed this approach when they selectively "tortured" the necessary information out of the available intelligence, to lead us into the endless quagmire in Iraq. They "knew" that the justification for falsifying the information was there...and that's all that they needed. This won't be any different.

You can consider this, on the most immediate, material level, as a very crude form of "saber rattling;" only there is no one there, in any real sense, to rattle the saber at. The other side cannot profit by capturing "high profile" targets to interrogate. Why bother...they already know everything about us that they need to know. So we can expect them to routinely torture anyone unfortunate enough to fall into their hands. For that matter, what could conceivably keep them from taking a number of hostages to persuade us to forgo passing the "Torture Bill?" But, why should they? We're giving them one more very effective recruiting tool; why in the world would they refuse to accept it? Our vulnerabilities are legion; and no one can possibly convince me that we remain "safe" as a consequence of the tireless efforts of the bozo in the White House.

The opposition tortures without any pretense at obtaining information; the practice is simply engaged in as a matter of course. It won't be long before it will be utterly impossible to distinguish between "us," and "them." We make the assumption that there is much to be learned -- from our point of view -- through the employment of torture; I personally doubt the efficacy of this approach, never mind the ethical and moral problems that are presented. There's no "profit" in torturing your suspects (regardless of how much information you may have) if they have been provided with only enough information to carry out their specific assignment. And whatever information you obtain will likely be compensated for by an adjustment in the opposition's tactics or strategy. If you were the opposition, how would you react? And with this Administration the incompetence factor is so monumental that if you lay the information right in their lap, they still fail to do anything about it. This country is currently being run by the Keystone Kops; and now they want to go rushing around -- in their Model-T's -- with a legal imprimatur that empowers them to snatch up anyone they wish, and torture out of them whatever they desire. In the name of protecting liberty.

Anyone who thinks that we have repudiated the practice of torture in Iraq is a complete fool. When the Chimp says it's okay, then it's okay. No arguments. Are we winning yet? Are we going to torture our way out of Iraq? Is this a new (Administration) slant on "cut and run?"

It's the "soul" of this country, that is now being "tortured" by these pigs.

I'm sick and tired of Democrats compromising on values because they think it will win them votes. Partly because it's lame and disgusting. Mostly because it will not win votes. They want to look "strong on terror" by just rolling over and going with whatever the Republicans are for at the moment, because they completely misunderstand what it means to be strong.

Strong is standing up for a principle no matter the consequences. Strong is saying, "I'm against torture, and I refuse to support it or accomodate it, even if doing so costs me the election."

For all the talk of the American public being brainless sheep (and I admit it's an easy conclusion to reach, given the last five years), they know the difference between real strength and the fake stuff. And for as weak and scared as the Republicans are, lashing out wildly and jousting with straw terrorists, the Democrats are painfully obviously weaker and more scared: too scared to say what they believe.

Well, if that's the way it is, to Hell with the lot of them. But, mark my words, the angry liberals will make a comeback. It may not be in 2006, but it only takes a look around to see that plenty of people are sick of hitching their wagons to these timorous asses. It's only a matter of time before a the movement either kicks these turkeys out of their entrenched positions in the Democratic leadership or puts forth a real third-party alternative that supplants the Democrats entirely.

We're a bit culturally disadvantaged 'round here because we don't watch television. We do have a Netflix sub and we recently plowed through a season of 24 on DVD. I was astounded to see such a propaganda pile purported as timely entertainment. The very sort of stuff that makes the populace willing to agree to the barbaric trend now being consolidated in the Congress.

TJ had it right:

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it's natural manure."

I doubt he had in mind that this refreshment should first be tortured though it might have been common in the times and certainly the tribes of Abraham have elevated it to a sacred concept with the promise of hell.

I'm beginning to have a Pogo like intimation that we have met the enemy of freedom and he is us. We seem to go through this revolving door every few generations (variations on the Alien and Sedition theme). I hope the door drops us out safely one more time. But if this is not to be, consider that TJ also thought we might need a rev every 20 years or so. On which side of the Memphis insurgency do ya think you'll land, Randy?

nsthesia said:
"Every day, as part of my profession, I must cause pain to (hopefully) relieve pain. Would I accept another causing pain if I knew it might save a community? Hell, yes!"

Well that's it then. Let's just go kill 'em all and make this world a safer place.

Yes, I built a strawman, but for comic effect. Just as I hope you intended your own post to be: for comic effect.

"Being "nice" doesn't stop cruel behavior at it's [sic] delivery."

So you propose we torture prisoners in order to deter the actions of our military opponents? Why do you think this will make any difference for the best?

Again, i hear all of your comments but I will comment again on this. The Supreme Court in the 1940's (a Dem Court) ruled that POW's do not have the right to challenge their captivity and broke it down by their combatant status. In fact ladies and gentlemen you are talking about the lowest on the totem pole for official status in the "war." I say again, "WAR." They can be shot on sight for not having a uniform on. Well, there we go again. Trying apply a law situation to one that it doesnt work on.

These people hide guns and bombs and then blow people up or shoot them in the equivalent of a drive by. They attack our troops. They will if we pull out be on our doorstep in months. You will of course disagree. I in the past submitted that they just didnt kill enough people in the WTC's for everyone to get the picture. Nor have we had enough people with the cajonies to do something about what is happening in the world.

So once again America is in the wrong. If so then why arent middle class Muslims not standing up to stop these things that are happening in the world? In fact they are allowing their religion to be hijacked by a bunch of nut cases. So what are supposed to do, negotiate? So far that has gotten us zip but dead people and or hijackings, or embassies blown up and we are supposed to ignore military actions and just call the police. That REALLY works out there. Works great in LA too.

I wonder Edmund, Carl, Joshua what your reaction would be to having your whole town wiped out by an attack? Dylan you too. I am watching a scenario that was put in front of me at the War College years ago unfolding. Its almost surreals. Everything you see in this world is about to change if we dont take them on. But by taking them on we infuriate them more. So which doctrine would you like to have? We are outnumbered, and shortly going to be on a regional parity with them for weapons. What will be your reaction when N. Korea launches a nuke at Japan or the West Coast? Same with Iran against Israel, or Paris, maybe New York. Are we still going to have those we gotta treat them with the laws that didnt work in the countries they came from people saying they got rights? Habeas Corpus is more like Having Corpses. Hey lets go get Jimmy Carter... Yeah thats the ticket! In the end even Mr. Peanut went to the military option and because he quarterbacked it from the White House, it was doomed before it started.

You guys are no longer in the majority and while I wish the world you want to live in existed, it doesnt for all of the reasons you allude to. Politics, corruption, money, power, women, sex, guys, and whatever you want to label it with. It's not going to change a thing. By the way, the law enabling the President to do what he wanted has just passed. It will be on his desk in the a.m.

I am sorry for the lack of Utopia in the world. If you think diplomacy is going to work be sure to board the next plane for Baghdad and run up to the Falujah triangle and tell them that you think they are right. All I am saying is that screw them ALL IF IT SAVES ONE AMERICAN OR OUR ALLIES LIVES! Plain, simple and to the point. I would use everything in the arsenal that I could think of to protect Americans. Does that make me wrong for wanting to protect the interests of the US and its citizens? Kill them all? Guys I would do it in a heartbeat if I thought it would do any good.

This is one that God will have to decide I think as to who was right because our political system gives to many rights to those who take away ours. Pendulum has swung. Hope we dont get tagged, but ultimately we will because diplomacy hasnt worked at all. They tag us, we tag them harder. He who is standing at the end wins. God sorts out the rest.

Randy: We are talking at each other across a great divide, so I won't try to convince you about what I cannot accept. I wish there were more people on both sides standing up and staying "enough," including apparently most middle class americans who don't mind torture, have wiped out whole towns and have their own Randy Kruegers saying the same thing in another language. If I could put you all in a room and let you fight it out I would, but I can't.

I don't want to be associated with torturers. There is no excuse for it. The "ticking time bomb" scenario is a fraud and we have already been misled in the past two years alone by information extracted by torture even if that were a valid reason.

I'm not going there. Not now. Not ever. I'm not asking for Utopia. I want release from this horrible dystopia our leaders have perpertrated. We aren't respected in the world because we don't deserve respect.

Write, don't call or e-mail, you local newspaper and list the votes your 3 Federal legislators cast on this issue. In my case, I expect both Senators to vote "Aye", and my Representative already did. I told them not to, but they chose to ignore me.
Now, I will write to my news outlets, list their votes, and tell the editor (and hopefully the world) that they voted to support the imprisonment and torture or our children and grandchildren. I will say that these people, who swore to uphold, preserve and protect the Constitution of the United States, have now voted to eliminate one of the most basic rights upon which this Nation and that Constitution was built; one that goes back to the 14th Century, and more recently to the Habeas Corpus Act of 1679; one of the rights that makes this America.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_Corpus_Act_of_1679

The only thing that separates us from our dispicable enemies is our morality. It is exactly that which this bill sacrifices.

If nothing else Revere, fear commands respect. As for the torture the bill that was approved in the last few hours it doesnt approve of torture, but it does prohibits access to civilian courts by enemy combatants.

Every few dozen years or so we have to dust our military off and go out and get the respect for our government. Every time we allowed the military to go after N. Vietnam in the 60's they wanted to negotiate suddenly. But to get that respect we lose lives in the process. Daniel Ortega in the 80's decided to launch an attack with 500,000 troops in an undeclared war to make a move on Mexico and Hondurdas. Why? Because he lost his fear and respect for us and doubted our resolve. Six days later he regained his fear and respect after there were continous B-52 strikes that took his forces down to about 100,000. He was deposed a little over two years later. Democracy allowed for free elections.

You dont have to associate with torturers Revere. Its prohibited by law and as I said, the law is for those who obey it. Havent seen any of them in front of any courts yet. Now they are going to go before military tribunals. It will be harsh and yes if found guilty they wont be tortured, they will be hanged. I personally like beheadings on Iranian TV myself so they can as they say see that the sword cuts both ways.

As for the law, you break it consistently in the face of threat of force and you are either mad or dont care. I fear the latter. Therefore I respect my enemies and they had better start respecting us else the outcome for them will be far more severe if there is a WMD attack on US soil. God help them if they are dumb enough to do it. Will we survive as a nation? Certainly, but genocide is not a term that would cover the capabilities that would be unleashed upon them.

It is now incumbent on this nation to rise up and cut the cancer from this planet that is starting to grow. There will be major organ damage and the patient will be severely disfigured as a result but it will survive. There is a chance at plastic surgery later. I would never say you are a cut and run type Revere, I have seen you take on some really hairy types here and give it back to them. On the other hand though this war began years before any of the current Presidents and it goes back to one key incident and that was the taking of the hostages in Iran. It should have been met with force and a lot of it. You and I are old enough to remember it. They realized then that we were paper tigers and we could be had. Once that got into their heads they saw they could take on the Russians in Afghanistan albeit with our help.

The key incident was our downfall and the causes were many but the cited incident was a humanitarian one of accepting the Shah into the country for cancer treatment. France wouldnt take him, Germany the same, Israel said okay but the thought was that it would have been even worse than us taking him. This to me indicated the bent of radical Muslims and even our own very well trained Osama is a product of years of the Cold War and we are getting what we paid for. WWIII ended the day of the fall of the S. Union. WWIV began the day they took Americans hostage and our country didnt help them. They no longer fear us because we never respond completely and that would include knocking out mosques where they hide, bombing entire cities, and above all deciding who is going to be at the top of the food chain here. We did this flattened earth policy in WWII so where are our balls now?

You will disagree of course and I fully understand your position. Hell I agree with much of what you say but it wont change the outcome. The dice have already been rolled and the answer is boxcars. We are going to have to light up a lot of people with various types of ammunition to get back to the balance of terror we enjoyed during the Cold War. After a while they will see one or two types of light. One is to beat the swords into plowshares light, the other is a blinding one that in effect does what was done without compunction in WWII and that is kill civilians and lots of them. Have to kill civilians to get at the bad guys. No one in the military will want to do it, but it just becomes necessary. War is no longer an all out thing. Its a negotiation about acceptable targets, whether its a historic site or a religious post. So what. Dust and dead men dont shoot at Americans and thats my point. If we have to we will do them all.

Hang in there Revere and keep beating me up when you think appropriate. I know its not personal as some would make it. Its ideology. I appreciate your and the others positions more than you know. I just feel that because of current events that more severe methods are needed. I remain one of the necessary evils in this world and even with my departure from the military my own SEI codes require that I be "maintained" for future use. You will know the pooh pooh has hit the rotary grinder if they have to make that phone call to me.

Bests.

Rounding up suspects by offering bounties in other countries doesn't help,

especially when we torture them all, the guilty and innocent alike; keep them locked up for the rest of their lives.
What would we do if our countryfolk were being treated this way by a nation trying to go against its own Constitution, international conventions, changing its own laws to do so by propagandizing that those who disagree are unpatriotic and putting citizens at mortal risk next week unless you give them all they power they want? Wouldn't our loved ones, kinfolk and fellow citizens hate and distrust such a nation, for generations?

Any news laws and "effective" means of interrogation, to see if they are ok,

try reading them with instead of "terrorist" or "enemy combatant", the words

"American military personnel", "American citizen" or "American President" and see how they sound.

(M. Randolph Kruger, you seem to have quite a perspective on one world situation, some other time maybe have you said how that will go if we have a human influenza pandemic year in the forseeable future?
That would end up killing many civilians and military alike, regardless of who they were or what they thought, on its own timetable.)

Despite the all the A.P. English and the English B.A., with the attendant poetry classes and anthologies, I never saw this e.e. cummings poem before. I wonder if it lacked the subtlety of his better poems, or if it was just too crude in its language... or if it was too bald-faced to meet with the approval of today's editors.

Thank you for sharing it. And for feeling as I do. I've been moved, this past year, to revisit the poems of Wislawa Szymborska (in translation):

Nothing has changed.
The body is a reservoir of pain;
it has to eat and breathe the air, and sleep;
it has a good supply of teeth and fingernails;
its bones can be broken; its joints can be stretched.
In tortures, all of this is considered.

...

Nothing has changed.
Except perhaps the manners, ceremonies, dances.
The gesture of the hands shielding the head
has nonetheless remained the same.
...

Nothing has changed.
Except the run of fivers,
the shapes of forests, shores, deserts, and glaciers.
The little soul roams among these landscapes,
disappears, returns, draws near, moves away,
evasive and a stranger to itself,
now sure, now uncertain of its own existence,
whereas the body is and is and is
and has nowhere to go.

That, and a poem about the torturer and how he goes home to his family. And how he is afraid, too. Marge Piercy, maybe?

It's so hard not to give up hope.

caia: Thanks for that.

Lindsay: Sigh.

Tymp-Hi. Well, we dont have revolutions because we have elections. These guys that run the mosques dont give them the option. Truly there the adage of "You are either with us or against us" comes into play. We could have the greatest diplomats now and because we didnt hold them accountable back when, they are coming after us now. Revolution? Dunno. Only if its necessary. Oh and just in folks both the House and Senate have voted on the wiretap and torture bill. The wiretap laws are modfied but need a tribunal of judges to review it, just like before and there is no "torture" of prisoners. Should be up on Fedlaw by next week for full reading.

The enemy of freedom is us Tymp. We had every opportunity to snag the bearded bastard and we passed. It was Clinton. He could have trumped up charges and they would have stuck. At least he would have been off the hilltops. You were likely looking at it from only the LAW GIVERS point of view. Osama doesnt follow our laws except in the local Pakistani rag. Ho -hum, we do have to be more careful when we blow something up. Watch the codes on the phones boys.

Carl..I am sorry. Habeas Corpus was ruled against in the 1940's against German and Japanese POW's. Democrat appointed Supreme Court. The same guys who gave us Japanese in the US concentration camps. Thought you would never see the day?

Joshua..Dont count them Dems out just yet. I dont like whats happening either but it is necessary. I get the feeling that something BIG is up and there were a lot of Republicans who didnt want to go this route either. Applying citizens rights to non citizens is a dangerous thing. So is information extraction. You act on it and you are wrong you might get another Iraq. They fought but tonights vote was 2/3rds along with yesterdays vote just a tad shy of 2/3rds. Believe it or not I agree with the Dems, but in the interest of national security can we err to the rights of the guy who was caught with Moammar Qaddafi's Semtek in his hands?

crfullmoon-I wonder if you would be saying that if you were riding the WTC's down. Is it unpatriotic to demand the tools that are needed to get information before something like that happens. The conservatives point is simple, "Do we just let it happen because its not in the interest of our Constitution?" Supreme Court ruled almost immediately after December 7th AND 9/11 that the overwhelming need to know to preserve the other parts of the Constitution are also parts that must be maintained. That being that all people shall have the right to life, liberty and pursuit are the mandate of the Administration, not of the Courts or the Congress. They pointedly said that the rights of the individual when in a national crisis OR WAR can be slipped in lieu of the greater good. Post Dec 7th, 5th columnists were blowing things up, starting fires and they found them in the Civil Defense. So individual rights broke down in front of the common good. Thats all this is and they can revoke this later on when the pendulum swings AFTER they overstep their bounds or when the terrorists are gone.

As for torture of terrorists. Well now its going to be reviewed by courts as it happens to ensure we dont overstep the Conventions of War. But note now that this has a whole new life of its own. Those people are now soldiers and if they kill civilians, they will be executed with impugnity after a speedy military trial.

Oops in the first stanza of that poem, there should be line breaks after each of the semi-colon. That was excerpts from a poem called "Tortures." Another of hers that haunts me is "The Century's Decline."

...
Anyone who planned to enjoy the world
is now faced
with a hopeless task.

...

God was finally going to believe
in a man both good and strong
but good and strong
are still two different men.

"How should we live?" someone asked me in a letter.
I had meant to ask him
the same question.

Again, and as ever,
as may be seen above,
the most pressing questions
are naive ones.

Both from the Wislawa Szymborska collection, view with a grain of sand. (OT, but Revere(s), you might particularly appreciate a poem called "Discovery", which is about a scientist: "I believe in the refusal to take part.")

Ok, now I know I line-breaked that first stanza, and it comboned them into one paragraph again. How strange. It really goes:

Anyone who planned to enjoy the world
is now faced
with a hopeless task.

Pardon my fiddly correcting; my background just won't let me improperly line-break poetry. *g*

No offense, but you are seriously deluded, in your assessment, here, Kruger. The legitimate pursuit of "The War on Terror," such as it is ("terror" is a tactic; you don't declare war on tactics), led only so far as Afghanistan. And that is where the emphasis should have remained. We had all of the leverage, at that point. But that simply wasn't good enough, for the neocons. They thought that was a license to steal. They decided that it was time to spread "democracy," throughout the Middle East (while thoroughly undermining the concept at home). Beginning with Iraq. Truly stupid fucking move! If you refuse to see that, by now, then you are worse than blind; you have to be terminally stupid, and utterly complicit, too.

Everybody is figuring it out, now, except the fucking Chimp, and his bumptious, clumsy crew of criminal miscreants. And the several people who still support them. Their numbers are rapidly dwindling, and it will only get worse, from here on out. Inescapable. They can only continue to hide what is going on for just so long. Lot's of cracks spreading over the facade, now. Every fucking thing that they do -- either here, or in Iraq -- smells of the worst sort of desperate deception. Because it is. It's all tumbling down, now, right around their fucking ears. And that's the way it will continue to go. And why is that? Because that is exactly the way that it has gone, for the last three-and-a-half years. Haven't you noticed? How strange. Most reasonably intelligent people have, by now. Do you really think that the tide is somehow going to turn, through an act of divine intervention perhaps, now? If the House and Senate weren't packed with so many unspeakable, despicable cowards, this charade would have ended a long time ago. I have no doubt at all that History will record this period as one of our country's darkest moments. John Dean hit it squarely on the head, when he authored "Worse Than Watergate." Those people were clumsy, laughable amateurs, compared to this collection of pukes. As Dean correctly pointed out, no one died as a result of Watergate.

That you continue to support this fulsome enterprise is sufficient to convince me that you are no better than they are. And the "with us or against us" logic is deeply flawed, here. I'm against both of you (the Bush criminals, and bin Laden). And it's truly difficult to determine who is the more despicable scumbag, when you start drawing comparisons. Choice group of scrotes that you elect to hang with, there, Kruger. Match made in Heaven, no doubt.

Finally. "We" are on our Country's side, in these matters, it seems clear to me. And, as such, you are "either with us, or against us," Kruger. Here, the logic is not visibly strained. When the dust finally settles, we'll see just who is left standing. The sun is already beginning to set on the cowardly motherfuckers in the White House. Crawford, Texas, will have a new candidate for the position of elementary school crossing guard, in the not too distant future. And the world will be a far better place, as a result.

(My apologies for the terrible language, Revere. Sometimes, I just cannot help myself.)

(My apologies for the terrible language in my last post, Revere. Sometimes I just cannot restrain myself.)

Kruger - Sorry but Article I indicates that habeas can only be suspended in cases of war or invasion. It was officially suspended during WWII only in Hawaii (not anywhere else - it was also suspended in part during the civil war). It was not thought applicable to about a half dozen captured German sabatours. That is a tad different than the administrations assinine proposition Congress suspends hapeas even though they have not actually said so and that suspension applies to thousands of people captured in battlefields or kidnapped by Americans because someones security service said they might be a terrorist) It is assinine to create a system of kangaroo courts and then pretend to apply U.S. criminal law in ways Congress never intended. It all becomes irrelevant in any event in that if anyone was found not guilty by the kangaroo courts (AKA military commissions)they still would not be have to be released. If these morons had just run this as a war rather than a law enforcement problem and treated the captured terrorists as POWs they would not have this mess.

Randy, Fear does not command respect. Fear commands fear, and fear breeds loathing, and loathing engenders hate, and hate leads people to sneak through the woods and hide behind rocks and kill those who march blindly along in straight lines, marching to the drumbeat of King George.

I read that on July 4, 1776, George III wrote in his diary, "Nothing of consequence happened today."

I wonder what George II wrote on September 28, 2006.

An uplifting and depressing post: depressing because one would expect Democrats not to vote for government-sanctioned torture. Don't know why I expect or hope for better of the liberal left: here in the UK the last thing I'd have expected to see was a Labour (historically much further to the left than your Dems) voting for and going to war with a Republican. Uplifting because clearly there is a body of articulate, angry Americans talking about this and (I hope) doing omething other than blogging, actually going out and doing something about it - and now we, can find out about it, share the anger, know there are more people of good will around who oppose our governments' wish to trample human rights. George III might have written that nothing big happened on 4 July 1776. It certainly did, he just didn't know about it. Someone else made a similar mistake in 1858: the president of the Linnaean Society wrote that not much of note had come before the Society that year. He'd just heard the Darwin-Wallace paper announcing the theory of natural selection.

Pilgrim noted re-reading Lewis' "It Can't Happen Here." The last fiction I read was Roth's "Plot Against America." I couldn't put it down because I was amazed at how quickly the fictional America turned fascist - how ... easy it was. You go about your life, and things are happening in the background, and then all of a sudden, it's too late.

Anybody else get that feeling?

As an aside, I blame Joe American for this, but only to a certain extent. Joe is stretched beyond recognition in this horrible economy, and when Katie Couric tells him that everything's going peachy, it's good enough to let him rest for five hours before he starts his second job. I blame the "fourth column" much more than anyone else.

Dylan, the trip back to Iraq was inevitable. Clinton and Blairs troops hit target after target inside of Iraq during the years of the no fly zone. There were from what I read 3365 attacks launched against Iraq during this time. call it what you want Dylan...All roads in the Middle East lead to Baghdad. He who controls it controls the Mid-East. Do I think we went on bad information? Yup, but where is the VX. Where are the pieces of the reactor..All UN verified?

I cant agree with your assessment of the situation. Mistakes were made by both Bush, Clinton 1 and 2, Bush 1 and 1.75. BAD ones. Clinton could have gotten Osama and they acted like they never heard of him. In Iran Contra Ollie North said that the government paid for a 50,000 security system at his house to prevent an attack by guess WHO? Osama! And guess who was questioning him about it? Al Gore. Never heard of the guy. Osama went off the reservation with a lot of his Indians after the Russians left and tried to set up a new Islamic state and got thrown out.

You can scream about incompetence and stupidity and what ever.It doesnt change anything. Everyone gets a piece of this disaster and since its now into a military arena, it will stay there for several more years. Be sure you try to negoitate with the new head of Al Qaeda in Iraq. I am sure they will never torture a soul, or blow up a convoy or attack the Iraqi police. We leave and the Iranians will roll in there in under a month. Want to see what the economies of the world will do under that thought? Even the damned French are seeing that they cant sit the fence any longer. Their own riots proved that. You got a diplomatic answer to this stuff then pull it out, I am listening. If Iraq falls then the entire planet will have to deal with a huge United States of Islam within three to five years and one that controls our economies. Global economies work both ways. One that you supply for food and tools and supplies you with oil, can demand things from you. Like parts for missiles, gas separation centrifuges for turning Uranium into Plutonium. Stick around Dylan... This isnt even the end of round one.

Carl. Point is that it was suspended. And indeed it was suspended in the entire United States for certain individuals of Japanese descent and others. It was held in the courts which is the other point.

Your point about them treating them as POW's is taken. Good and thats what their official status is now. If they target civilians they will now be executed. They will be tried and hanged/shot. I have seen nothing in the last 6 years that has limited anyones rights here in the US, and its not going to. Congress can do away with this in very quick fashion if it gets out of control. No one is going to let the abuses of the 60's come back. Too many long memories. Sit back and enjoy the high drama as this is implemented. I think they will stop more plots than you can count. This was basically in effect in the 1950's-60's when J. E. Hoover was using it against his enemies and LBJ against his. Thats the reason we have so many law enforcement agencies now at the federal level. It decentralized the power so it could be controlled. Sort of.

It's TRUE! And I would have never believed it! But, the feminization of maledom is complete! I love all the emoting males. And add in the poetry...tres bon!

Using proscribed tactics to elicit information under dire circumstances from an enemy does NOT equal murder, nor does it equal a routine or daily event for every single detainee.

Would all those adverse to any discomfort, kill a home invader that was raping their 10 year old daughter? Or would you talk "nice" to them? try to understand their point of view? sympathize with their unfortunate childhood?

I asked where all the testosterone has gone. With no tongue in cheek. The countries where all our battles are being fought, have populations with median ages in the teens. Lots of young men with LOTS of testosterone. They aren't thinking like our soft, emoting, masses who want nothing better than to not be bothered with any physical activity.

Look around at our soft, aging, emoting nation. And then look at them. Hard, young and angry. Quite a contrast.

I watched "The Charge of the Light Brigade" on TV a few nights ago. Those in charge argued about drinking champagne vs. beer while their troops were sent on a suicide mission due to poor leadership. They focused on ensuring that the troops wore their high, black hats and bright uniforms, instead of strategy/tactics. I thought of Nero fiddling while Rome burned.

And of this thread...

History DOES repeat itself. Those "leaders" lost focus. They wanted to remain in their comfortable, civilized drawing rooms, drinking tea, reading poetry and smelling flowers. They refused to acknowledge that they were in a foreign WAR, requiring that they adapt. Tea room manners do NOT suffice in war. Unless your enemy is also a brocade-robed, champagne-drinking, similarly socialized fellow.

There is a time and a place for everything. And a season...

We have strong beliefs in fundamental rights. Our policy is based on those beliefs. But in extremis, there must be room for exceptions.

nsthesia: With your bedside manner, it's a good thing all of your patients are unconscious.

You may have a belief in human rights, but it's not a strong one. You get to decide, I guess. And who gets to decide what is in extremis? The torturer? Or a judge? Or a soldier (paging Lt. Calley, paging Lt. Calley, come in please). Do you really think torture produces accurate information? And if so, why do you reject the opinion of professionals on that score?

How about raping a man's ten year old daughter in front of him to get information? OK with you? How about threatening to wipe out a village unless the partisans reveal who is killing your soldiers? In extremis?

I'm not sure what to make of your "feminized males" remark. Anti-torture is for girls?

nsthesia: silent?

We all grew up with profound respect for our fathers and grandfathers--from the US, Britain, Canada and the other allied countries--who stood up to Hitler's evil in WW2 and unhesitatingly sacrificed everything for the principles at stake here.

Now we see our mighty neighbours cowed by a few thousand religious nutcases halfway around the world--nowhere near the threat we grew up under during the Cold War years, as someone pointed out above.

Nine-11 was a terrible tragedy. We had our own terrorist tragedy back in 1985 when extremists blew up an Air India flight from Canada, killing 280 Canadians & over 300 in all. Spain and Britain have confronted their own terrorist disasters recently; Germany endured the horror of the Munich Olympic massacre of visiting Israeli athletes; Italy and Greece have also been convulsed by terrorist violence.

Yet Europe and Canada are still standing strong in defence of the principles our grandfathers fought together for. We need our most powerful ally, the Americans, to put away fear and stand tall with us. If we're not prepared to continue accepting the price that goes along with our values and principles, everything we've fought together for in the past half-century will have been in vain, and it's only a matter of time before our very humanity is once again at stake.

Nsthesia, way back in the days when men were real men (as in ripping out and devouring their opponents hearts in victory), being a poet-warrior was entirely compatible. It was the increasingly insecure generations who followed who worried about humanity being confused for weakness. Now, for the mindless shoot-everyone-in sight videogame generation, apparently even principle is a sign of weakness.

The suburbanites of middle America (and they've got company north of the border, albeit thankfully a clear minority) who seem to be so supportive of torture should all have to go to Guantanomo and Abu Graibh to try performing the dirty deeds with their own hands--and on their own friends & relatives--before going to the polls.

Today I saw the Statue of Liberty being lit up with blue lights on television. How ironic that it is when America's beacon of light for democracy and freedom and justice is quickly dimming that they have chosen to light up this icon.

In Pakistan and Afghanistan (and probably Iraq) the Americans pay cash for anyone turned over to them as suspected terrorists. But what happens is that people want to get revenge or want the bounty or just to get rid of someone - and this has happened HUNDREDS of times - then they get tortured.

I am against torture , period. But other than my profound abhorrance of it, I am convinced that it is counterr productive. How about the US teaching torture methods to the goons in South America (the infamous School of the Americas) - now the long awaited backlash is coming. The governments who condone torture always fail in the long run.

I never thought I would see an American President pushing hard to legalize torture and join the infamous list of leaders like Pinochet, Videla, Franco etc. etc. etc.

Let us hope that the smarms are voted out and that the Supreme Court will uphold the Constitution.

O'Leary: right you are. The paradox of a President saying we must spread democracy and freedom abroad and abrogating habeas corpus and sanctioning torture at home and abroad would be laughable if it weren't so abhorrent.

Dictators are bad, especially when they are torturers -- unless, of course, they are OUR dictators (your examples are much to the point), then it's OK. And who does Bush have advising him now? Henry Fucking Kissinger, one of the biggest war criminals this country has ever produced (although he has some reasonable competition). The only reason he isn't on trial in The Hague is the US is a superpower and by definition can't commit war crimes.

I am still in a blind rage about this.

First of all from wayyyyy over here on the right of center I have to say that Revere, O'Leary are the conscience of this nation. NO ONE wants to do this but I fear that we have to. The reason is very simple and its at the root of the problem. We cant take the chance. Yep, its going to ding our international reputation but what will happen if we dont? I fully hope that the military tribunals deal with these people in the harshest manner possible if they target our civilians. The one thing that is good about this is that it takes them out of the legal limbo they have been in for the last 4 years some of them. I didnt like that nor did the civil liberties people. Everyone should get a trial even if you are sentenced to death. Fair and impartial? Well, you blow up a convoy and then duck into a girls school I think your ass is grass.

Is this going to change things? I certainly hope so for the good. I have to say that Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus, torture did occur in the civil war. It was codified that no enemy combatant in WWII had the rights to access to our civilian courts and nor shall they now according to the Supreme Court. They will uphold this law and Harry Reid be damned. They are not citizens and they are not afforded the same civil rights as Americans and that my friends who argue the point has been held time and again in our courts Dem and Republican. The American Taliban was tried in a civilian court and wasnt tried as an enemy combatant under a plea deal. So the goverment was mindful of his status as a citizen. If he fails to help us out, he goes back to a military tribunal with charges of sedition, treason, providing material support to the enemies of this nation. It IS a declared war folks.

Its one big shit mess we are in and I agree fully with Revere/O'Leary about that. The difference lies in how to handle it and I for one am not handing out any more carrots to the big bad wolf. Son of a bitch keeps biting me. They are attacking us every day in Iraq, they are trying to intercept WMD's and with all due respect Jimmy Carter is not the President and the Congress that voted in the last 72 hours is a bipartisan one that deserve the respect that should be afforded to them. A lot of Republicans voted against this thing but it was a 2/3rds majority in the House and just a tad shy of it in the Senate, but not much. The idea is clear. If you are wrong then you will have American CIVILIAN blood on your hands. The military as I said before signed up for this contrary to popular beliefs of some.

There are those that would say that REvere/O and others are unpatriotic for not supporting the effort. Scuse me but fuck you. They are as honest in their beliefs as I am mine and to assert that they are unpatriotic??? Let me repeat, fuck you. They just havent convinced a majority of Congress or the President of the United States that their position is sound and the right way to go. I havent seen anything other than cut and run but boys and girls I can say as a member of the military for 13 years that they by God have the right to say whatever the fuck they want. I applaud their efforts. The military guys in Iraq right now would like to be playing pool somewhere chasing girls and drinking beer. But its just not possible right now. Its a different day for everyone.

Revere and the others want us to all have the same rights in this world but just like in East Los Angeles there are some really bad actors preventing it. Their ability to screw with this country and others is NOT against the militaries as true warriors would attack, its civilians and civilian targets and this is where President Bush and others for better or worse fall into the mold. It was done in WWII for seven German saboteurs and they were executed for it. The Supremes rarely go back on a decision. Modify it a bit, yes. But hardly ever go back on it.

To me the problem lays in the perception of war. Some people and I think that this includes Revere, Ollie Stone, O'Leary, et. al. that believe we arent. M in H would tell you that I dont have access to information that John Q. Public gets. Its okay, but everyone has to understand that being wrong here means dead people.

Okay.. its very simple. If I were going to bomb Pearl Harbor again and I told Mary that 1000 or so Hawaiians were about to lose their lives undeniably and it were about to plunge the planet headlong into war for four years, killing 30 million people and she had the chance to stop that by blowing some Japanese guys gonads off, would she do it? Conjecture will follow but ultimately she would do the right thing. No the guy MIGHT have had the rights not to get his gonads blown off. But in a trial, Mary would walk. Why? Because no one here would fail to use common sense to give her a pass. In Japan though, she would be held to the highest accountability. This is where we all lie. To Revere and others they have rights, to me I would use their head for a wheel chock under an M1 Abrams. Dont think for one minute I wouldnt do it either. I embrace my horrors for what they are. Revere and others try to hold the world to higher ideals and God bless them for it. So get off their damned backs. I am the method of last resort short of a nuke and they better not run out of people like me else the bright flash is only a short time away. I personally from wayyy over on the right want Reveres and O'Learys bashing me up at every turn when I start to go after some asshole with a bomb by blowing up his village, or city or regime change. Its the balance to this deal that we have. The Constitution doesnt mean shit unless someone is able to convert it for their own use. We might see some temporary slips, but nothing permanent. Wiretaps and the like are just grating on my soul right now, but I think they are necessary as do a majority of the citizenry. In ten years they may not and the law will modify. Our nets are going out, we will catch many but some of the porpoises will get hung and die too. When this happens they will make a new net that excludes them and we will catch a few less. God bless Revere et al.

Randy: Without habeas corpus they are not guaranteed a trial. Just indeterminate detention at the whim of the President, world's biggest screw-up (I was going to say fuck-up, but you know how I hate language like that here).

Torture will certainly extract information from people. We just won't know if the information is true or not. The only purpose of giving it up will be to stop the torture, not to inform. That isn't what I would call a very reliable method of information gathering.

Because someone is accused and tortured doesn't mean they are guilty of anything. Consider the Tripoli 6, some of whom have confessed to infecting children that analysis shows were infected before these folks set foot in the country.

MRK: You say: "If I were going to bomb Pearl Harbor again and I told Mary that 1000 or so Hawaiians were about to lose their lives undeniably and it were about to plunge the planet headlong into war for four years, killing 30 million people and she had the chance to stop that by blowing some Japanese guys gonads off, would she do it?" ...and just when I was enjoying a nice friday night beer, reading all this great stuff going back and forth between you all, and thinking I might stay out of it for a change.

But to answer your proposition, If you came and told me you were going to bomb Pearl Harbor, I wouldn't need to then cut your nuts off, because you'd already told me. I suppose if you then clammed up before you gave me the details, I might do something to get more out of you. However if I only thought you might possibly know something about some nebulous rumor that there was potentially going to be another pearl harbor, and I got out my pliers and attached them to your family jewels and starting twisting, you would probably tell me you were bin laden himself just to make me let go. Then afterwards, with your voice an octave higher - permanently - you would take it all back, deny everything. So what good was your information? Could I really believe it? If I have that much uncertainty, what makes it of any use? If I can't act on it, why bother to torture you in the first place? That's the point. That, and the fact that we can hardly claim the moral highground when we are as despicable as any other low life in history, who no doubt used similar justifications for their use of torture. What, you think they openly admitted that they enjoyed torturing people because they were simply sadistic assholes? No, they had "good reasons" just like those reasons you give us. Probably almost identical.

Actually - although you seem to sincerely believe we have an enormous amount of potential carnage to fear at the hands of Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, North Korea and all the rest - I think the fact that they must resort to the poor man's war methods of using their own recruits as human guided missiles, blowing themselves up in order to inflict damage because its the only effective wmd they can afford, demonstrates just how little threat they truly are. As individuals, we have more to fear re the loss of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness from our own government then from foreign terrorists. We usually only get shot at and blown up (9-11 being one of the rare exceptions) when we invade other countries and blow them up first. If you compare the amount of damage we have done to Iraq and its citizens (who were never involved in 9-11 in the first place) compared to what they have done to us, who's the terrorist? This law allowing torture and doing away with habeas corpus can be used against any of us, not just "terrorists". I would not be at all surprised if at some point it was used against me personally, since I tend to be a big mouth when it comes to speaking out against our government, (especially since I just posted my latest novel online, in which I make a case for the current administration and their friends all being reptilian aliens.) And believe me, if they resort to torture, I swear I'll talk. I'll tell them you put me up to it!

>Dylan, the trip back to Iraq was inevitable.< - Kruger

Why? Because you say so? Apparently.

Iraq was completely contained, prior to March 2003. We had the most formidable military machine on the entire planet, then. And we did not need to use it. And we had 2700 people that we no longer have (who are all now just a memory); and at least 30,000 Iraqi civilians (that the Chimp alone can take credit for murdering) were still above ground, who now no longer enjoy that particular privilege...many, many of them women or children. Shock and Awe.

Because of a handful of cowardly, twisted scumbags...with an ignorant, adolescent, coke-snorting, alcoholic, born-again, sociopathic-frathouse-asswipe-scuzball as their putative leader...we are now in the fourth year of a war (brought on solely by the aforementioned collection of assorted "heroes") where defeat has clearly been snatched from the jaws of "Mission Accomplished." What a truly amazing display! Except, of course, for one minor detail. It was all utterly predictable. Gen. Shinseki, Gen. Zinni, Gen. Etc., Etc., would you mind filling Kruger in, here? What was it that you had to say about this? How about you, Secretary Powell? You break it, you own it? Remember that?

And how about the chief criminal, in this murderous rampage? What's his fate? Well, he's just going to continue to hang on, right down to the last dead American. Right down to the last drop of "our" blood. Down to the last dead Iraqi child. Down to the last burned, blackened body. And then he's just going to slide entirely on out from under this untidy little mess. When his term is over. (He's content to let history judge him. A court in the Hague would be the only proper forum for rendering judgment on this unspeakable prick, if Justice was actually to be served, here.)

Why will he do all in his power to avoid acknowledging the obvious?

Because, of course, that way he doesn't lose. That is the one thing that he cannot allow to happen, here. And that is what this has now become all about. This is not about "us." This is all about this slimeball puke's hide. Nothing else. All other collective, and individual, sacrifices are meaningless. If he can get out of office, with one person still alive, in Baghdad, and our military (or what's left of it, at least) still on the ground, there, then he hasn't "lost." Has he? And he can hand his winning strategy (on the "war on terra'") over to the next person to occupy the Oval Office. And, if Iraq should collapse, after that, why, whose fault could that possibly be? That's right. And if, somehow (with the injection of 300,000 more American troops into the miasma -- just who else do you think is going to go?), we should squeak out a "victory," who will be assigned the credit? That's right. (That grotesque, hideous, turgid, Pillsbury Doughboy...Karl Rove...always was a smart motherfucker, after all.)

But what do "we" get out of his "victory?" Well, we've already enjoyed most of the benefits. Let's not be greedy, here.

Kruger gets what he wants. And all of the other "Krugers" out there get their fair share, too. The country they despised will become the country that they love...the country that they can "believe in." It'll be the country that is destined to lead all other countries into a new, and glorious, millennium. A destination that all of the Krugers have been secretly (and not so secretly) longing for. America...America...Gott shed his grace on thee!

Amerika Uber Alles?

Over my fucking dead body, Kruger. Fuck the Chimp, and everybody like him. And the pig he rode in on.

Lets hope it doesnt have to go any farther than just the suggestion of torture my friends. Torture is NOT in the new law and its definitely not something that the FBI or DEA will be allowed to engage in. Habeas Corpus is preserved. Just not for non US citizens. They will be treated as POW's and if they attack civilian targets with or without orders they can now be tried and hanged. Thats about it. Vigorous interrogation measures is what it says and folks I am sorry but that means sleep deprivation, and other select measures. But physical abuse will not be tolerated. They will have access to the Red Cross for review and all cases will be under a tribunal for judicial review. The post that Revere made also stated that fact and that the Supreme Court has upheld it time and again. If someone wants to join the other side then okay, sedition, treason and whatever else they can lay at their feet. If they are taking their orders from a foreigner, they will be enemy combatants out of uniform. Bad news. Again, you have the right to elect someone who might come up with something different. I havent heard anything from the other side other than defeat and retreat. Me I would have taken out the nuke facilities in Iran by now. But I dont have the button. Thanks for all your criticism of the Administration everyone. Now you just have to convince the majority of Americans you are right. Lets see what comes in November-If you are right then I will sit back and watch for a couple of months, if not you have to sit back for a couple. I just dont think you guys are on the right side of this because there is as stated no limited war. Take the head off the chicken in Teheran for starts and then the nuke facilities. Who gives a crap anyway what the rest of the world thinks because they hated us long before Bush or Clinton. Now its time to really give them something to remember us by. By the way Revere, Calley was convicted as per the law. So lets assume for the time being until this thing is tested in the courts that it might just work. It was military guys who put him in the box too. Honor where honor is given.

Were this my blog, I would stop allowing "M. Randolph Kruger" to post his enthusiastic sentiments for mass murder on it

Which reminds me of a line I just saw in the movie "The Island" - a naive clone asks a "real" human (the latter played by Steve Buscemi) who "God" is - the reply - "You know when you wish really hard for something you want? God is the guy that ignores you" -

which might be a good segue into the Freethinker Sunday Sermonette

Early on in these posts, I asked what was 'ethical breaking point'? Where would you draw the line?

Nowhere in coflict resolution does a battle of will or attrition win the war. Battle, maybe. The Nazis tortured, the Stalinists tortured, the Americans tortured in Vietnam. We all lost. Torture is a piss poor technique of getting bad intelligence and is used because the torturers weren't good enough to get good intel.

An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth may be cathartic, but the emotion will remain because the war will not be won by torture. I'm not saying that I'm devoid of emotion; I'm just not foolish to believe that torture will reap any operational benefit.

Freddy: You are not the first to say this. I decided to keep this an open Forum early on and once decided I have tried to stick to it on principle. There is no shortage of people here who express their views about what he has to say. Most other bloggers I know have decided the best way to handle these things is to let other commenters respond. It is useful to all of us and I think to MRK to see that the views which he is unselfconscious enough to state quite baldly here (and which are not uncommon in either his world or in this country as a whole) are also not viewed with favor by many people and there are good arguments, principles and genuine passion that oppose them, often by people he respects. Moreover, MRK, like the rest of us, talks about many other things and his remarks are valued by readers here. I don't personally think he gets a lot of traction with his periodic advocacy of mass murder (and I agree that is what it is and said so here). It's a blog. He's a commenter. He's not on the front page.

So I don't think I am giving anyone a tall platform for views which I have made clear are odious to me and many others. It's a place where he can say things and others can respond, that's all. And that still seems reasonable to me. He's not yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater. Bush is the one doing that.

It is important for people to state explicitly that mass murder of innocents, even when justified for "a greater good" is deeply offensive to us. MRK gives us an opportunity to say it. He gets an opportunity to hear it.

Darin: I agree with your points. In addition, however, I think it is important that we not openly, publicly and legally sanction torture. We have done it just as others have done it. War is an inhumane context

The argument that torture is ineffective is secondary--we shouldn't even need to go there.

Whether it's effective or ineffective, even contemplating the use of torture requires that we compromise the fundamental principles that underlie our justice system and the rule of law, because it involves punishing people for a crime without ever having to prove them guilty--indeed even before there are sufficient grounds to lay charges for the crime in question.

No society can officially condone torture in any form and expect that the basic principles of justice that underlie western democracies and western civilization could survive.

Well, well, well...

revere, quite frankly, I am surprised. I expected more of you. For you to make personal attacks and wild assumptions about my beliefs is beneath someone (you) who professes such reverence for human rights. Your personal jabs are not to promote a constructive dialogue, but merely just to jab. Again, I expected more of you.

IMO, there are times when extreme measures must be utilized. It happens in my profession, as I am sure it does in yours. Soldiering/warfare is not my profession. But if those professionals deem it necessary to elicit information utilizing alternative measures, it is not within my knowledge base to say otherwise. Not if it saves lives.

You never heard me condone the killing of a detainee or the torture of their family. Soldier to soldier or combatant to combatant is another thing. If you read my post, I mentioned proscribed actions, written directives that would require prior approval.

I can see where certain actions like sleep deprivation, etc. could be useful. Not for years of detention, but initially, to gain information. Hell, practically every patient in an intensive care unit is sleep deprived! Actually, they are often sleep deprived (from all the noise, machinery, lights, constant evaluation, etc.), undergoing painful interventions, sedated, restrained and THEN presented with a whopping bill to pay for all that torture. I suppose we should even consider all the staff that work double shifts and mandatory overtime and residency in that category. And, myself included, after a weekend of call.

Like everything, there are degrees. Like everything, there are exceptions. In an ideal world, there would be no pain, no sorrow, no war. But this ISN'T an ideal world, largely because idealism is in the eye of the beholder. And those filled with righteousness may have too much pride to see beyond the end of their own nose.

You know, we may soon find ourselves in a pandemic situation. Surrounded by dilemmas and cruel decisions of necessity. Having to make and live with distasteful decisions. Making choices of who will live and who will die. Who will get comfort care (or NO care) and who will get food/water, meds.

In our comfortable societies, many will have extreme difficulty facing these realities. We have let others deal with our sick and dying, instead of having them in our homes. We have let others deal with our combat in far away lands. Soon, it may all be at our individual doorsteps. I hope and pray if the time comes when all of this is a tangible and not just ethereal, that we are all strong enough to do what has to be done. With courage and dignity AND some common sense.

nsthesia:"Our soldiers are being killed and drug through the streets in triumph. Innocents are beheaded. Charity workers are murdered. Women are beaten, mutilated and murdered for perceived offenses...at a whim. Placation is looked at as weakness. Rolling over and exposing your underbelly is an open invitation for eviseration. This is a war, not a tea party."

Maybe we shouldn't be there at all. Then that wouldn't happen. We got our ass kicked in Vietnam. The world didn't come to an end. We kill and rape their citizens in their own country in their own homes. That happens in war. So maybe we shouldn't be at war in their own country. To think we are pure and they aren't or that what you are saying isn't just a mirror image of what they are saying is blindness (and make no mistake; the Iraqis are not happy about us being there by all evidence, so why do we stay?).

Regarding sleep deprivation as torture. This is disingenuous. You know we aren't talking about sleep deprivation. We are talking about water boarding, electrodes and whatever else the people who are interrogating feel like doing.

Regarding the real pain people feel in intensive care in with disease. I've know a lot of patients in intolerable pain that would say anything to relieve that pain. Anything. I see and have seen the same things you do as part of my profession. I'm in this line of work because I don't want to see it and for those who are in pain we do our best to stop that pain, not create more of it. Suppose you could find out something that you thought MIGHT maybe save the lives of everyone in your unit if you caused intolerable pain and death to one of your patients (let's say it was a hostage situation). Would you say, "Hell, yes"? I shudder to imagine what you think "doing what has to be done" means "when the time comes."

I think your testosterone comment indicates clearly what your notion of courage is. It isn't mine.