A suggestion to save time
Why don't we just skip all the b.s., and call for an outright end to the illegal, immoral, and unjustifiable Dutch occupation of the Arab Republic of the Netherlands? Or, at least, propose a two-state solution. No doubt many Dutch will object to this, but surely we can't let extremists determine the agenda.
End the occupation now!
Well, the Parisian journalist Frederic Royer has just launched a new weekly tabloid called L'Anti-Americain. The first issue includes a parodic diary by George W Bush with the entry: "Ask the CIA: Where's China?"
Hilarious! Bush is so dumb he can't even find the real 21st-century superpower on a map! As it happens, it was the Canadian prime minister, a renowned sophisticate and indeed a fluent franco-phone, who last year declared in public that China was the most important nation in the southern hemisphere.
I can't find the source for this quote, but I do recall this admonition by the Left's intellectual superstar, Bill Clinton:
An expanded NATO is good for America; and a Europe in which all democracies define their future not in terms of what they can do to each other but in terms of what they can do together for the good of all -- that kind of Europe is good for America.
Second, America must look to the East no less than to the West. Our security demands it. Americans fought three wars in Asia in this century. Our prosperity requires it. More than 2 million American jobs depend upon trade with Asia.
That's right: while well-traveled Rhodes Scholar Clinton is delivering the State of the Union in Washington, he places Europe to the west, and Asia to the east. I wonder if Bush Jr. would be able to get away with such a faux pas, not to mention the part in italics, which seems to imply that American prosperity requires fighting wars in Asia.
Steyn link by way of LGF.
Happy fourth LGF-a-versary, Charles! Here's to many more years of one of the most informative and sorely-needed sites in the blogosphere.
And for the record, I also found that Bush-chimp picture funny, and still do. Just because I agree with the guy on foreign policy, doesn't mean I won't make fun of him on occasion. Laughing at our leaders is how we keep from forming cults of personality. Chomsky fans should try that sometime. Ditto for these weirdos.
Defining torture down, Part 238
The Boston Globe is raising the banner of triumph over Monday's court decision that the Guantanamo prisoners. And boy oh boy, are they ever giddy:
The Bush administration created the prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, as its version of Devil's Island, where jailers' edicts would prevail in place of civil law. A federal district judge took a sledgehammer to this imprisonment on Monday by declaring that the rights of 11 inmates were being abridged in violation of the U.S. Constitution.
Wow, a sledgehammer! Sounds impressive! Just how much of an impact did this ruling make? Umm, well...
Judge Joyce Hens Green's ruling is at odds with one issued by another federal district judge, which said in effect that the inmates had no rights to violate. A higher court will have to work out which view prevails.
Well, this is certainly a letdown -- it's an already-conflicted ruling, which will require other rulings! Not exactly sledgehammer stuff here. It's not as though we didn't expect the prisoners' attorneys to appeal if the case didn't go their way. The impact of this case is exactly zero, and I certainly don't recall this much noise being made over the earlier court decision. But let's get past the Globe's hyperbole, and get into vacuous conjecture:
Green's reasoning jibes better with a Supreme Court ruling last June. Abuse at the prison is well known, as are cases of unjustified detention.
Number of examples given by the Globe? Zero.
There is little reason for the high court to give inmates the power to sue unless it expected that some of their cases would prevail.
It's hard to pick out the single most asinine claim in this article, but the preceding is a good contender. The Supreme Court's decision to let some Guantanamo prisoners sue is in no way an indicator that they might have a case. It's simply a legal position that says enemy combatants are not automatically excluded from judicial review. But forget this lawyerly stuff, let's get to the meat and potatoes -- or, rather, the very watery broth:
If the courts won't interfere, who will stop the torture cited by Green in her decision -
Torture? Surely some examples are coming! Cigarette burns, nails pulled out, flesh carvings, sodomization, that kind of thing?
- inmates chained hand and feet in a fetal position for 18 to 24 hours, air-conditioning turned off or jacked up to near freezing levels?
...Wait, that's it? The prisoners were made uncomfortable? They were made to feel hot (My God! No air conditioning! In the Caribbean! Who can withstand such horrors?), cold (No, please, don't crank up the A/C now!), and stiff from holding the same pose for a day? How does the Globe think information is extracted, by saying "pretty please" a lot? But, hold on, the full horror of a Guantanamo imprisonment is yet to come:
And, while it did not figure in Green's decision, the recent report that a woman interrogator was using fake menstrual fluid to frighten inmates also illustrates the abuses encouraged by Guantámano's lawless status.
Yep, that's right. Menstrual fluid. The prisoners were "abused" by having some liquid put on them. Mind you, it wasn't even real blood, but they were told that it was. Who wrote these definitions of "abuse" and "torture" -- preteen girls? Ewww! Get away from me, you unclean menstruating infidel! By the power of Allah and Mohammed his messenger, that is, like, totally grrosss! I now fully expect the next batch of released jihadis to breathlessly claim that their American jailers theatened them with a permanent infection of cooties. Zionist cooties.
To call this "torture" is to belittle everyone who has ever suffered the real thing -- much of it at the hands of dictators shielded by the "progressives" of their day, which the Globe dimwits who wrote this tripe no doubt consider themselves.
In comparison to the preceding alarmist idiocy, the closing paragraph is an improvement, as it is merely inane and pointless:
Green criticized the tribunals set up to handle prisoner appeals, but did not specify a better system. Bush should establish one that fairly processes appeals, then release inmates that pose no threat, transfer the others to a military prison in the United States, and close the Guantánamo detention camp. If he won't do that, U.S. judges need to keep reminding him that battling terrorism is not an open-ended invitation to violate human rights.
Brilliant. We will capture all these people on the field of battle, then try them each individually, while giving each one a private room at the Waldorf-Astoria, where they need never be in the presense of an "unclean" menstruating woman, lest they should be made uncomfortable. And we will magically figure out which inmates "pose no threat" and have no useful information. We can do no less: just because we're trying to keep Islamic nuts from killing our citizens by the dozens does not mean we have "an open-ended invitation to violate human rights." Thank you, oh the enlightened souls at the Boston Globe -- you truly are members of a banality-based community.
- Little Green Footballs has received sincere and en...
- A suggestion to save time Why don't we just ski...
- Mark Steyn: Well, the Parisian journalist Frede...
- Best Wishes Happy fourth LGF-a-versary, Charles...
- Thinking Meat presents... A summary of the Demo...
- Defining torture down, Part 238 The Boston Glob...
- ▼ February (6)
- ► 2004 (93)
- Make Money Online
- Staunch Moderate
- Rittenhouse Review
- Work at Home News
- Second String Swap
- Investment Banking Monkey
- Just Another Opinion Blog
- TRR Blog
- Bloombox Reviews
- Hairstyles and Nails
- Home Tips
- Health Talk and You
- Beadle Beads
- Glass Beads Supplies
- Paquet Full of Glass
- Native American Jewelry