![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pecuniumI'm listening to the Rose Garden "press conference". For some reason I don't really think he wants to answer questions.
He just said that the trials will be fair, but they won't be allowed to see the evidence against them. He also said the intelligence services "believed" the accused did things.
He also tied, indirectly, in about the same way he ties That Tuesday to Iraq, the "shampoo plot" at Heathrow, and that without being allowed to do this (and torture) al Qaeda will attack us again. And he says that unless he's allowed to engage in unsupervised spying on Americans; which has been called unconstitutional (he describes this as an, "unfortunate" fact, that the Supreme Court has said such things), and hold kangaroo courts and kill people with secret evidence, in secret courts.
"It's unnaceptable to think there is any comparison between the United States and islamic terrorists who kill innocent women and children"
"I wish I could tell the American people to now worry about it" but he can't, which is why he is building, "a vast coalition." How he intends to do that; if as Powell says much of the world is beginning to doubt our moral position (which is what the question was about), isn't clear.
HE thinks the statement, "outrages against human dignity" is vague and the only reason we are talking about torture is because the Supreme Court, again "unfortunately" said we had to abide by the law. He then goes on to say we "have to question" evil people who planned evil things.
He says Article 3 of the Conventions are so vauge they can't be lived under, and now he's using the Detainee Treatment Act; credited to John McCain to justify torture, by making it possible to beat people, deprive them of sleep, make them stand until their leg burst, shake them (which can cause traumatic injuries to the brain; just as with babies), beat them on the stomach; which can lead to things like organ failure; because it will be legal.
He is being belligerent, "Our professionals tell me they won't do it if they are afraid they will held accountable" (I'm paraphrasing him),
Well good. Torturing people is something people ought to be held accountable for.
He wants secret trials (shall we get a nice room with stars on the floor and cieling? We can make the background field blue, the walls white and the (blacked-out) windows, can be trimmed in white. Then the accused can feel all kinds of warm-fuzzy patriotic thoughts when they are told that, while they were out, the court decided to execute them because people they didn't know, with evidence they weren't allowed to know about had been enough to condemn them.
For grace notes the confessions beaten out of them can be entered into the record, and the testimony they were compelled; by physical means, to provide against themselves, were allowed into the public record.
*****
He wants people to know we support the right of people to speak in the public square; I suppose this means he's against the proposal of the AF General who thinks we ought to field test "non-lethal" weapons as crowd-control devices in the United States.
Now he's tap-dancing around connections between Hussein and That Tuesday. The justification now (and he doesn't want people to "re-write history") is that the he thought Hussein was a threat, and that we can't afford to ignore threats.
"The world would be a better place" if the world adopted our standards, but no one can work inside the, "vague standards of Article 3."
He hopes they adopt the standards we adopt. He has just said he wants other coutries to be allowed to use the following:
1. The Attention Grab: The interrogator forcefully grabs the shirt front of the prisoner and shakes him.
2. Attention Slap: An open-handed slap aimed at causing pain and triggering fear.
3. The Belly Slap: A hard open-handed slap to the stomach. The aim is to cause pain, but not internal injury. Doctors consulted advised against using a punch, which could cause lasting internal damage.
4. Long Time Standing: This technique is described as among the most effective. Prisoners are forced to stand, handcuffed and with their feet shackled to an eye bolt in the floor for more than 40 hours. Exhaustion and sleep deprivation are effective in yielding confessions. (this was a favortire of the Soviets. All one has to do is give in, and the pain stops. After about 48 hours crippling injuries occur. Somewhere in the 72-98 hour range the subject dies.
5. The Cold Cell: The prisoner is left to stand naked in a cell kept near 50 degrees. Throughout the time in the cell the prisoner is doused with cold water.
6. Water Boarding: The prisoner is bound to an inclined board, feet raised and head slightly below the feet. Cellophane is wrapped over the prisoner’s face and water is poured over him. Unavoidably, the gag reflex kicks in and a terrifying fear of drowning leads to almost instant pleas to bring the treatment to a halt.
That, in his words, would be a good thing for all the world to hew to, so that we all know that the "vague terms," of Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions against "outrages to human dignity" and prohibiting coercion, physical and mental, are being treated with a common, and humane, standard.
Change of topic.
"Imagine an enemy we disagree with getting ahold of oil resources," and then using it to impose economic sanctions against us because they don't like what we're doing.... that to me is unacceptable.
And on that I have had enough of trying to pay close attention, because he is now going on about how we need to have a pro-active force engaging in aggresive peace keeping in Darfur. "Now is the time for the U.N. to act," and that we need to be allowed to more actively control how the U.N. spends its money, and pointed to his track record with claims of solving problems in the economy, and hurricanes; engaged in fiscal responsibility, "which is why the deficit can be cut in half."
He just said that the trials will be fair, but they won't be allowed to see the evidence against them. He also said the intelligence services "believed" the accused did things.
He also tied, indirectly, in about the same way he ties That Tuesday to Iraq, the "shampoo plot" at Heathrow, and that without being allowed to do this (and torture) al Qaeda will attack us again. And he says that unless he's allowed to engage in unsupervised spying on Americans; which has been called unconstitutional (he describes this as an, "unfortunate" fact, that the Supreme Court has said such things), and hold kangaroo courts and kill people with secret evidence, in secret courts.
"It's unnaceptable to think there is any comparison between the United States and islamic terrorists who kill innocent women and children"
"I wish I could tell the American people to now worry about it" but he can't, which is why he is building, "a vast coalition." How he intends to do that; if as Powell says much of the world is beginning to doubt our moral position (which is what the question was about), isn't clear.
HE thinks the statement, "outrages against human dignity" is vague and the only reason we are talking about torture is because the Supreme Court, again "unfortunately" said we had to abide by the law. He then goes on to say we "have to question" evil people who planned evil things.
He says Article 3 of the Conventions are so vauge they can't be lived under, and now he's using the Detainee Treatment Act; credited to John McCain to justify torture, by making it possible to beat people, deprive them of sleep, make them stand until their leg burst, shake them (which can cause traumatic injuries to the brain; just as with babies), beat them on the stomach; which can lead to things like organ failure; because it will be legal.
He is being belligerent, "Our professionals tell me they won't do it if they are afraid they will held accountable" (I'm paraphrasing him),
Well good. Torturing people is something people ought to be held accountable for.
He wants secret trials (shall we get a nice room with stars on the floor and cieling? We can make the background field blue, the walls white and the (blacked-out) windows, can be trimmed in white. Then the accused can feel all kinds of warm-fuzzy patriotic thoughts when they are told that, while they were out, the court decided to execute them because people they didn't know, with evidence they weren't allowed to know about had been enough to condemn them.
For grace notes the confessions beaten out of them can be entered into the record, and the testimony they were compelled; by physical means, to provide against themselves, were allowed into the public record.
*****
He wants people to know we support the right of people to speak in the public square; I suppose this means he's against the proposal of the AF General who thinks we ought to field test "non-lethal" weapons as crowd-control devices in the United States.
Now he's tap-dancing around connections between Hussein and That Tuesday. The justification now (and he doesn't want people to "re-write history") is that the he thought Hussein was a threat, and that we can't afford to ignore threats.
"The world would be a better place" if the world adopted our standards, but no one can work inside the, "vague standards of Article 3."
He hopes they adopt the standards we adopt. He has just said he wants other coutries to be allowed to use the following:
1. The Attention Grab: The interrogator forcefully grabs the shirt front of the prisoner and shakes him.
2. Attention Slap: An open-handed slap aimed at causing pain and triggering fear.
3. The Belly Slap: A hard open-handed slap to the stomach. The aim is to cause pain, but not internal injury. Doctors consulted advised against using a punch, which could cause lasting internal damage.
4. Long Time Standing: This technique is described as among the most effective. Prisoners are forced to stand, handcuffed and with their feet shackled to an eye bolt in the floor for more than 40 hours. Exhaustion and sleep deprivation are effective in yielding confessions. (this was a favortire of the Soviets. All one has to do is give in, and the pain stops. After about 48 hours crippling injuries occur. Somewhere in the 72-98 hour range the subject dies.
5. The Cold Cell: The prisoner is left to stand naked in a cell kept near 50 degrees. Throughout the time in the cell the prisoner is doused with cold water.
6. Water Boarding: The prisoner is bound to an inclined board, feet raised and head slightly below the feet. Cellophane is wrapped over the prisoner’s face and water is poured over him. Unavoidably, the gag reflex kicks in and a terrifying fear of drowning leads to almost instant pleas to bring the treatment to a halt.
That, in his words, would be a good thing for all the world to hew to, so that we all know that the "vague terms," of Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions against "outrages to human dignity" and prohibiting coercion, physical and mental, are being treated with a common, and humane, standard.
Change of topic.
"Imagine an enemy we disagree with getting ahold of oil resources," and then using it to impose economic sanctions against us because they don't like what we're doing.... that to me is unacceptable.
And on that I have had enough of trying to pay close attention, because he is now going on about how we need to have a pro-active force engaging in aggresive peace keeping in Darfur. "Now is the time for the U.N. to act," and that we need to be allowed to more actively control how the U.N. spends its money, and pointed to his track record with claims of solving problems in the economy, and hurricanes; engaged in fiscal responsibility, "which is why the deficit can be cut in half."
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-09-15 04:02 pm (UTC)Once again, thank you for what you do--as a real patriot, in all capacities.
no subject
Date: 2006-09-15 04:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-09-15 04:06 pm (UTC)Which means that the very same techniques... can be used (legally in his view!) against our own troops.
Someone has to take that and run with it. "Bush wants other countries to be able to slap, freeze, cripple, and smother our soldiers. This is what he calls a 'free world.'"
no subject
Date: 2006-09-15 04:07 pm (UTC)You may quote it, though I ask that quotations inlcude a link, so people can come and see the context of the whole.
So yes, you may link, to this, or to anything.
TK
no subject
Date: 2006-09-15 04:11 pm (UTC)TK
no subject
Date: 2006-09-15 04:16 pm (UTC)And on that I have had enough of trying to pay close attention, because he is now going on about how we need to have a pro-active force engaging in aggresive peace keeping in Darfur. "Now is the time for the U.N. to act," and that we need to be allowed to more actively control how the U.N. spends its money, and pointed to his track record with claims of solving problems in the economy, and hurricanes; engaged in fiscal responsibility, "which is why the deficit can be cut in half."
Does he really believe this stuff? Does he really think he's that good? I also can't help noticing that now we're willing to "work" with the UN after this administration spent time bashing the UN during the lead up to Iraq.
Maybe he and Resa LaRu Kirkland are in the SAME alternate reality?
I can't stomach listening to him either.
DV
no subject
Date: 2006-09-15 04:21 pm (UTC)It was surreal.
But then his father did send us to Somalia.
TK
no subject
Date: 2006-09-15 04:33 pm (UTC)Surreal, indeed. As long as we're continuing this clusterfuck in Iraq, how many soldiers can "we" send to Darfur?
no subject
Date: 2006-09-15 04:35 pm (UTC)TK
no subject
Date: 2006-09-15 04:36 pm (UTC)What part of "torture is wrong" does this guy not understand?
no subject
Date: 2006-09-15 04:58 pm (UTC)In order to get such a resolution to pass, the Bush Administration would have to engage in that whole "diplomacy" thing, and this Administration has proven itself as incompetent at diplomacy as... umm... as they are at everything but winning Presidential elections.
In particular: As I understand it, one of the chief obstacles to a UN-authorized invasion of Darfur is that China will veto it. What kind of leverage do we have to convince China to go along with us? "Abstain from this vote, or we'll stop financing our national debt by selling you T-bills?"
no subject
Date: 2006-09-15 05:33 pm (UTC)Does he honestly believe this? I've begun to doubt whether he's capable of honestly believing anything.
However, in my mellower moments I consider him almost as honest as Richard Nixon.
no subject
Date: 2006-09-15 05:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-09-15 05:49 pm (UTC)Convenient how we only care enough about women being raped and mistreated by oppressive regimes (ie Taliban in Afghanistan) when it's politically useful.
DV
no subject
Date: 2006-09-15 05:50 pm (UTC)I'm starting to think that he's one of those people who starts believing what they say, even when it's not true.
DV
no subject
Date: 2006-09-15 06:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-09-15 06:16 pm (UTC)I'll have what he's having.
no subject
Date: 2006-09-15 06:46 pm (UTC)And yes, of course they will talk. They'll say anything to get you to stop, I would suspect... and that's the problem in a nutshell.
Bush doesn't want actionable intelligence, because there is never enough actionable intelligence. He wants more intelligence, whether it is garbage or not, because in his mind, it is better to go after any theoretical threat -- no matter how many innocent people suffer -- than to target the enemy.
This philosophy, however, is not only unamerican, illegal, and inhumane... it's also anathema to actually winning the battle of hearts and minds when fighting a counterinsurgency.
As you might have suspected, my conversation with this special forced guy wasn't pretty, as there is no nice way to tell a person who, for many reasons, needs to have superhuman skills of self-justification that their widespread use of waterboarding was essentially a debasement of what should ideally be an elite, disciplined fighting force.
no subject
Date: 2006-09-15 09:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-09-16 03:55 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-09-16 11:46 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-09-17 04:19 am (UTC)Unless a person is chained to the ceiling, how do they force the prisoner back to his feet? Can prison guards use "necessary force"?
I imagine they'd say it's not torture, to beat a prisoner who's refusing to stand. Torture is what you do when you want information from someone. No, this is just a guard using reasonable force to demand compliance!
I never thought we'd have to wonder if the President - any President - was playing word games about torture.