Monday, May 10, 2004
Move along folks, nothing to see here
The efforts to fudge the moral issue of torture in Iraq, or suggest it is time to move on (as Cheney did today) leave me stunned, if not surprised. The rhetoric from the right includes such blood boilers as this one, from the National Review's Kate O'Bierne (caught by TPM):
Who is betraying America and endangering our troops? Not the torturers themselves, not the higher-ups that condoned or ignored it, but the people's representatives demanding an explanation and accountability. We should this what it is: fundamentally amoral and anti-democratic arguments from a member of the "party of morality" on a worldwide crusade to spread "democracy".
A Fox News editor chimes in
See him eviscerated here. Also note that a.) Falluja was months after Abu Ghraib, and if you want to causally connect them (and I can't imagine why you would), the causal arrow would go the other way, b.) Everyone and his mother---in Congress, on the left, on the right---was outraged and horrified by Falluja; to suggest otherwise is to call critics inhuman. I could go on (if it is necessary in war to sink to the level of your adversaries, no matter how low, why ever choose to go to war? we had a choice) But it's beating a dead elephant.
Some American politicians make a big deal of morality. To me, respecting basic human life, rights, and dignity is the most important moral imperative, and thus our actions in Abu Ghraib the gravest moral failing. So what do we get from such supposed moral leading lights as Joe Lieberman?
A prisoner at Abu Ghraib must wonder what he has to do with Al-Qaeda, an organization with little or no roots in Iraq, or the Falluja uprising, which happened after the torture. If this ticks you off, read this rant, with the money line:
The most recent images of abuse concerning Iraqi detainees will inevitably fuel the anti-Americanism that endangers American lives — not at the hands of sadistic young misfits but at the hands of our elected representatives. Members of Congress elbowing their way into camera range to question, in the absence of any evidence whatsoever, whether abuses were widespread and senior commanders were implicated and accusing the military of engaging in some cover-up are abusing the Abu Ghraib scandal and recklessly putting our troops at risk.
Who is betraying America and endangering our troops? Not the torturers themselves, not the higher-ups that condoned or ignored it, but the people's representatives demanding an explanation and accountability. We should this what it is: fundamentally amoral and anti-democratic arguments from a member of the "party of morality" on a worldwide crusade to spread "democracy".
A Fox News editor chimes in
Without showing the charred bodies of Americans dangling in ignominy, or the lopped off-arms of justice Saddam-style, how can we judge the pictures we are now clucking over?
Was one worse than the other? Where was the outrage, after Fallujah, from members of Congress and other self-appointed mullahs of morality? Do we expect American soldiers to be morally superior to the people who are trying to kill them, and at the same time win a war in which there are no rules of conduct for one side? Does that somehow smack of ... racism?
See him eviscerated here. Also note that a.) Falluja was months after Abu Ghraib, and if you want to causally connect them (and I can't imagine why you would), the causal arrow would go the other way, b.) Everyone and his mother---in Congress, on the left, on the right---was outraged and horrified by Falluja; to suggest otherwise is to call critics inhuman. I could go on (if it is necessary in war to sink to the level of your adversaries, no matter how low, why ever choose to go to war? we had a choice) But it's beating a dead elephant.
Some American politicians make a big deal of morality. To me, respecting basic human life, rights, and dignity is the most important moral imperative, and thus our actions in Abu Ghraib the gravest moral failing. So what do we get from such supposed moral leading lights as Joe Lieberman?
Mr. Secretary, the behavior by Americans at the prison in Iraq is, as we all acknowledge, immoral, intolerable and un-American. It deserves the apology that you have given today and that have been given by others in high positions in our government and our military.
I cannot help but say, however, that those who were responsible for killing 3,000 Americans on September 11th, 2001, never apologized. Those who have killed hundreds of Americans in uniform in Iraq working to liberate Iraq and protect our security have never apologized.
And those who murdered and burned and humiliated four Americans in Fallujah a while ago never received an apology from anybody.
A prisoner at Abu Ghraib must wonder what he has to do with Al-Qaeda, an organization with little or no roots in Iraq, or the Falluja uprising, which happened after the torture. If this ticks you off, read this rant, with the money line:
That's it for Joe, folks. I propose that the man doesn't have a shred of "moral" credibility left... Joe doesn't get any more chances. He's done. He's used up his last vial of Joe-mentum. You need never take him seriously again, on any question whatsoever. The next time he gets up and drones on about the soul-corroding aspects of Grand Theft Auto III, you can say, yes, Joe, tell it to the prisoners of Abu Ghraib. Or if you want to get meta-ironic with him, you can say in a lugubrious baritone, with deeply furrowed brow, "Grand Theft Auto III contains deeply disturbing images of violence, yes, but I cannot help but say that those who were responsible for killing 3,000 Americans on September 11th, 2001, have never apologized for bringing their disturbing images of violence to our television screens."
