[A guest entry from my other twin brother, who we last heard from in Total War Blog.]

By Panzerbeorn

The liberal media elite - yes it exists - doesn't admit defeat easily. It couldn't prevent the liberation of Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Ukraine and Georgia. It couldn't protect its oil buddies in Baghdad or the noble rebels of the Taliban from the righteous anger of an America awakened. It couldn't steal the election for Kerry. It didn't get away with the AWOL forgery. Everything's going downhill for the chattering classes these days.

So they've turned to plan B: Poison the fruits of victory. Feed the public endless stories of "torture" and "abuse", of rebellion and terrorism. Sow seeds of doubt and dissent, not for any constructive purpose, not to reach any positive goal, but merely for the joy of destruction. Because that's the kind of people they are.

That's why there's a new abuse story every week now, each more desperate than the last. A guard maybe slaps a terrorist during a ticking clock investigation, there's a story about it in the New York Times the very next day. Some minor official thinks maybe he heard about some foreign holy book not treated with the utmost respect, Newsweek grabs onto it, stirs up riots in Afghanistan. A bomb goes off in Baghdad, killing a few people, suddenly it's big news on CNN. (As if bombs don't go off in Baghdad all the time!)

The angle is always one of "compassion" and "concern". Maybe we shouldn't be impolite to those baby killers on Guantanamo, it's not their fault they're psychopaths bent on world conquest in the name of a demon God - give them a chance to talk about their feelings, and it will all be okay. Maybe things aren't going so well in Iraq as "we" thought - that's "bad", so let's worry about it on a talk show and see if that helps. It's always about helping, and worrying, and making the world a "better place".

But make no mistake. Deep in their hateful little minds, what the liberal media elite is really thinking is that Saddam Hussein was a misguided idealist, and that the United States is the mother of all the world's problems, all of which would be solved if we just were to embrace International Communism. They don't care about democracy, liberty or common decency, only about the fulfillment of their own perverse utopian fantasies.

Evidence? Read the newspapers! Turn on the news! You have to be deaf and blind not to see the malintent. Look carefully at the news anchors as they report increasing "unrest" in Iraq - you'll see the glee in their eyes, the pure evil joy of the loser who knows that he's taking the winner down with him.

For it's working, oh yes. The liberal media elite is good at what it does - it has been perfecting its poison for decades. People are beginning to ask questions. "Should we really be holding people indefinitely without trial?" "Why are we sending people to other countries to be tortured?" "What if some of them are innocent?"

There's no point trying to argue with the liberal media elite. They already know the truth, they know good from evil, they just choose to ignore it, choose to fight for the other side. What could there possible be to say? But for the rest of you, who after years of unrelenting propaganda are beginning to feel that maybe not all the aspects of the War on Terror are wholesome and righteous, I have one thing to say:

Don't you know there's a war going on? So maybe some guy gets "tortured" just a tiny little bit, is that the end of the world? Puh-lease. The armies of al-Qaeda are preparing their summer offensive, and we worry about some soldiers with a sense of humor. Let me tell you something about war. War is dirty, and dangerous, and people die. Remember a little something called the Second World War? People were dying by the millions back then, and I don't recall anyone whining about it. I don't recall anyone complaining to Amnesty when some German city got wiped off the map, or POW's were massacred and tortured. People in those days had resolve. They knew that some times, when the world faces destruction at the hands of a multi-million strong army of fanatics, you have to do things that, to people of a more squeamish age, may seem cruel, pointless and evil.

It was true then, it is true today. Let's keep some perspective here. In the old days, when a country invaded another, it would kill all the men and take the women and children as slaves. That was the norm throughout most of human history. Now we just torture people. I say that's a big improvement, a cause for celebration, not criticism. Why, we could torture a lot more people than we do today and still come out better than our ancestors. Burn a city or two down to the ground too. Create a puppet government and steal all their resources. Maybe we should, too, teach them some respect.

All these ways in which we're not so bad as we might have been, and we worry about some foreigner being tortured in Syria for a year! We could send ten thousand foreigners to Syria to be tortured for ten years, and it wouldn't show up as a footnote in history books.

It's war. Unpleasant things happen. What's the big deal? Nothing, but try tell that to the liberal media elite.

(Update: For the two of you who were confused, this entry is satirical.)

What happened to our friend who loves dictators with facial hair?

Considering comrade Medvedev and Panzerbeorn(shouldn't it be Panzerbär?), I think I prefer plain Bjørn.

Torture is hilariously funny! While we're at it - expressing dissent clearly makes them accessories after the fact - which makes the liberal media insergents, per definition. And they're certainly not soldiers, so the stupid Geneva Convention can't protect them! Cluster bombs to the lot of them!

Ah, the slightly inconvenient unpleasantness of war. I hope they start writing about more important things again soon, like tax cuts.

Oh, Palode, you have no sense of humor.

You never put underwear on your head?

Sandy,

Pointing fingers at their wee wees is a form of torture that can scar for life. I'm sure Palode will concur.

Now THAT'S what I'm talkin about! Darn Tootin!

Its good you've finally come around there Bjørn!

Heh heh.... heh.

In frankness though... and stow all the references to deliberately doing EEEEVVVIIIILL (because the issue is that meaningful constructs of good and evil are so simplistic anyway to the bulk of those you have indicted above anyway), and cast out the malice just for the Darth like glee of it, and strip off the caricuature of a vast informed conspiracy... and you're left with some points that I KNOW you enjoyed writing without equivocating.

To wit: "misguided idealist"?, "the US as the mother of all the world's problems"?, utopia fantasies that are only vaguey substantive driving ideological biases? (I'm paraphrasing here.. indulge me.) These concepts as intellectual constructs that "anchor" the emotive imagery that drives so many people into lockstop... are not old. Nor are they easily dismissable as the domain of wingnuts.

Alas... would that they were!

And I just KNOW you had fun indulging in them.

Its not easy Bjørn, I'm quite sure, to maintain your Zen like state of equanimity... in the face of purveyors of self indulgent, shallow and intellectually incoherent arguments who despite being educated (actually, its especially when "educated" in most cases... but thats another thread) lack the rigor and philosophical anchorage even to recognize their own insubtantive weakness.. even when you've clearly bitch slapped them. (They will simply recast the events and go on maintaining the smarmy certainty of their own innate superiority... and they will find any number of sources around them to coddle them back into that odious cocoon of mass solipsism after you have rattled them).

Yup... I know you had fun with that piece. I think that perhaps it bothered you so much (the enjoyment) that you made it EVEN more cartoon like by the end.

Alas though... maybe I'm projecting.

:-)

G'nite.

PS Cool your jets there Palode... what are ya.. nuts or something? I get the feeling that your veins were popping out when you typed your "sequel to the parody".

Dette er en stor troll.En kjempe troll, av den slags som tilhører nettet og ikkje norske eventyrene, da.
Når jeg prater med spanske, svenske og tyske venner, bl.a. om Norge,er vi ofte enige om dette: Norge, og mest sisten generasjonen er så mye avhengig av en sær type av amerikansk-engelsk og ukjent med andre kulturer, tom. den norske kulturen !

Vel, til slutts, blir det til en utrolig stor antall av web sider som er bare opptatt av pseudo-betraktninger med mange amerikaner som speiler det Hvite Hus offisiell propaganda.

Kva skjer ? Er så mye nordmen blitt dumt ?
Hvor skal en til for å kunne egentlig drøfte spennende emner på en utfordrende måte ?

Jeg deltar i noen US grupper hvor nivået av innlegerna er mye bedre.

By the way... in the wake of the impending dissolution of the latest "European Experiment in Unity"TM , after the last one that launched (the Thousand Year Reich) failed to live up to the expectations of the Intellectual elite, and the aborted project via the "Peoples" Soviet Republics was terminated... I think its fair to say that the EU classes (which include many of the types Bjørn has described above) have had a bad few weeks.

Notwithstanding George Galloway, who has done what he could for the morale of the Progressive-Collective, returning as he has as the heroic icon of all things International... and Peace oriented, and Multi-lateral and all that good stuff...

Yet I think we should lay off the Media/Academia/Eurocrat triad for a while.

After all... they ARE human beings after all.

We can't keep expecting them to absorb the shocks of things like the moral and political implosion of the UN, the spread of Freedom in the M.E. and elsewhere, and the widespread undermining of tyranny, all in repsonse to THAT bloody country.. in ALL its excruciating and exasperatingly simplistic absurdity... just actually STANDING for something.

They can't absorb all this and hang on to their Transnational Sanity just by say... continuing the "Principled Negotiations" with Iran again. Pretty soon... Iran might even stop indulging them... then what will they do?

Who'll pay for the self esteem therapy for millions of pseudo-intellectuals whose worldview is informed by the minor they took in "Peace Studies" for gooodness sakes! It will cost billions!!!

I think we should stop. Give them a chance to catch up so they can write reassuring media pieces on how nothing that has happened (except anything that might be considered bad) is due to America. (It won't take them long... don't you rememeber how quickly after the Wall fell... it was suddenly just as everyone predicted?.. and of course had NOTHING to do with the US...and CERTAINLY not Reagan.. Puhlease!)

Yeah... the world should slow down for a few weeks.

Its the nice thing to do...the Christian thing to... no... strike that last.

It will just end up setting the teeth of the tolerant to grinding.

Just nice... leave it at nice.

KM

I am just hoping... just really hoping.. that Antonio is goofing. Because if the Michael Moore manifestation in firmly held opinion is that overfladisk, well then... there's little hope.

"...web sider som er bare opptatt av pseudo-betraktninger med mange amerikaner som speiler det Hvite Hus offisiell propaganda"?

Thats the youth of today ladies and gentlemen! Well informed, ready to think on their own, and eager to have their insular views challenged...

Not.

"Kva skjer ? Er så mye nordmen blitt dumt ?
Hvor skal en til for å kunne egentlig drøfte spennende emner på en utfordrende måte ?"

Up above, I half jokingly (...Half) referred to "purveyors of self indulgent, shallow and intellectually incoherent arguments who...lack the rigor and philosophical anchorage even to recognize their own insubtantive weakness."

... Well... I think this falls in that category. But then again, its after 4AM, I havent posted here at Bjørns for almost a year... and I'm going to go collapse for three hours.

'Nite.

Chimp Woman Visits Middle East, Snubs Suha Arafat

The Shrub shipped his woman off to tour the Middle East, hoping her vacant smile and artificial personality would win the hearts of the folks he's been bombing for four years. Instead of adoring crowds, she was predictably greeted with boos and jeers. Halliburton Cheney told her she'd be welcomed with flowers in the streets, but alas, all poor Laura Bush got were piles of razzberries.
It's a sharp contrast from our previous First Lady, who was warmly welcomed to the Middle East with shouts of "Allah bless you, Hillary!" and "I kill three joos for you, Hillary! Three joos!" Perhaps Mrs. Bush should have taken a lesson from her predecessor and kissed Suha Arafat rather than give her the cold shoulder.
I'm not talking about a measly peck on the cheek, either. The damage Bush has done to America's credibilty is too extensive for half measures. If we're ever to win back the trust and friendship of the peaceloving Muslim peoples, Laura Bush will have to slip Suha Arafat some serious tongue-age. I'm afraid that no less than five minutes of full-on tonsil hockey between Laura and Suha will put us back onto the Roadmap of Peace.
Being from Texas, I doubt Laura Bush is open-minded and spiritually mature enough to enjoy kissing another woman, though. That's why it is so imperative that we elect Hillary Clinton in 2008. President Hillary will never hestitate to make out with the wives of world leaders, including those of murderous madmen. Bill Clinton wouldn't either, which is why he'll make an excellent First Man.
Suha's succulent lips await you, Mrs. Bush. She's single now, and looking for a good time. Will you pucker up and do what it takes to insure world peace? Or will you continue to prance around the Dome of the Rock in a black scarf, trying desperately to look like Jackie O while your husband pushes us closer to global annihilation?
.
.
http://blamebush.typepad.com/blamebush/2005/05/chimp_woma_visi.html

Bjørn,

Wouldn't that be your other triplet brother?

Kevin McDonnell: Its not easy Bjørn, I'm quite sure, to maintain your Zen like state of equanimity... in the face of purveyors of self indulgent, shallow and intellectually incoherent arguments

Right, but which ones are we talking about? The ones who really do blame the world's problems on the US - they're easy to see through - or the ones who so enjoy being on the right side that they're happy to find excuses for it when it goes too far? Who think it's better to snarl about the liberal media than to hold some of the most powerful people in the world accountable for their actions. Who don't care to know more about some guy who was treated horribly because at least he was treated horribly by the right side, and who knows if he's telling the truth, and hey it's war, bad things happen.

Those people? No, it's not easy.

"I am just hoping... just really hoping.. that Antonio is goofing."

well Kevin: to goof or not to goof, is that the question?

"Up above, I half jokingly..."

yep, I got that from the first reading, of course.
Still, I feel that there's too many threads spinning around the topic of US bushian-imperialism, always in a bipolarized way: yes/no, wrong/true, black/white, evil/angel like if what the White House is up to these days could be a real serious topic.
Bushians are re-inventing the wheel of empirialism.
Ok, if we try to warn them, we get the "you are against us, like Dubya said (the ones who are not with us, blahblahblah), which fires endless threads like this one.
Everything was already told.Just let them search WMD in the desert and experience reality like a baby learning to walk: hitting walls, putting fingers in the power outlet, and so.
Of course they are going to break some thinks meanwhile.

It's a very bushian attitude to build a retrospective theory where USA appears like the origin of anything good in the universe.Then if you discuss you're turned into the nasty who is always making USA the source of all evil...(see how they hate us!)

Last remark: it's quite obvious that the regular educated norwegian is so much soaked in anglo-american litterature and marketing (which is not good nor bad by itself, but just a fact) compared to others yuropean cultures, that often such weblogs turns into a peculiar anglo-american tone which natively narrows perspectives.Simply put: the use of english in such topics doesn't really makes for catching a broader variety of audience than if that was only in norwegian, because the kind of native-english contributors coming are often yanks (no bad meaning with that word) who will bring they very narrowed view of the universe (most of the time).More volume not more points of view.

Well, as they say: my two cents..
Som jeg er ingen nordman, er jeg mye mer interessert i norsk og det norsk samfunn gjennom norsk språket enn i alle forsøkerna av Ola og Kari for å skaffe oppmerksomhet på engelsk.
Dog er det jo også viktig å erfare litt av kva blir sagt på engelsk til resten av verden.(bare at som jeg sa før da,det er ikkje egentlig resten av verden som bringer innlegger etter hvert...men ofte kun anglo-amerikaner).

They don't care about democracy

Wouldn't the people who have the opinions Panzerbeorn voice here be the same people who rather loudly say :"USA is not a democracy, it's a republic" ?

[a href="http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=3388"]Link

Rune:
"Wouldn't the people who have the opinions Panzerbeorn voice here be the same people who rather loudly say :"USA is not a democracy, it's a republic" ?"

Amongst others.. And it wasn't, but is becoming, I am sad to say..

And no, I have no qualms with torturing a possible Al-que? operative, as long as the methods used are reversible, ie. not cutting off the persons fingers and the likes. Drugs, sleep deprivation, isolation and by all means the flushing of que?ran down whatever hole should be used in the fight against terrorists.

Does this mean I would extend this treatment to citizens of my own country that are suspected of purse-snatching and or other non-terrorism related crimes? Of course not.

ch: And no, I have no qualms with torturing a possible Al-que? operative

But how do you know he's an al-Qaeda operative? I'm have no doubt there are a lot of "bad people" on Guantanamo, but there's a reason democracies have developed an independent judicial system, and it's not to be nice to bad people - it's to prevent injustice. And when you move people outside that system, injustice is what you get. I don't think that price is worth paying.

Hmmmmmm,
is this the same Bjørn that recently wrote in Norwegian that he «does not hate muslims»?

You don't hate them, just like seeing them tortured for a year just in case. Maybe they were about to start considering making a counter-attack against USA/Israel some time in the future?

norvegia :-)
norvegia.motime.com

"But how do you know he's an al-Qaeda operative?"

I would believe that people without uniform firing weapons on american troops in Iraq, should suffice as reasonably sucpicious as to qualify for potasium chloride..

I do not advocate random torture as a means to discover who is a terrorist...

Yeah, what's a few more torture victims? It is war and everything is allowed in war, right? Especially to those who have started the war, started the blatant aggression against the entire world.

United States is the aggressor here, so it isn't strange that they're defending their prevalent torture practices, their inhumanity. They've deceived half of the world. The other half, refusing to be deceived, they wage war against.

To support them is ridiculous, bordering on the criminal.

ch: I would believe that people without uniform firing weapons on american troops in Iraq, should suffice as reasonably sucpicious as to qualify for potasium chloride..

And how do you know that the right judgments are being made when so much of it happens outside public scrutiny? Torture is not only a deliberate tool consciously applied by rational investigators, it's something that happens in the dark, carried out by powerful people who enjoy hurting others, against innocents who were just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Even if the first kind was acceptable, and I don't think it is, it's difficult to have one without the other - and especially so when the public is eager to excuse it.

Norvegia: is this the same Bjørn that recently wrote in Norwegian that he «does not hate muslims»?

Hm, still satirically challenged? I'm sure you'll get along with my other twin brother just fine, then.

Keppler:
"To support them is ridiculous, bordering on the criminal."

If this be criminal, make the most of it..

ch:
And no, I have no qualms with torturing a possible Al-que? operative, as long as the methods used are reversible
The army is investigating thirty-some deaths in interigation. Do you consider death reversible?

norvegia:
is this the same Bjørn that recently wrote in Norwegian that he «does not hate muslims»?

No it's his evil twin. (What happened to the ultra left triplet by the way)

PS
By the way i was for the war in Iraq, but i don't have a lot more respect for the pro-torture people than i do for people who think Iraq and Talibanistan makes together makes "half the world."

PPS.
Come to think of it i think of it i think his ultra-left triplet had a sexchange and became head of Amnesty Int.

BS:
"And how do you know that the right judgments are being made when so much of it happens outside public scrutiny?"

I cannot, of course, but that goes for a whole lot of governmental business, which relies on the public trusting their government, and for the press to dig up the dirt in the cases where the public servants stray.

BS:
"Torture is not only a deliberate tool consciously applied by rational investigators, it's something that happens in the dark, carried out by powerful people who enjoy hurting others, against innocents who were just in the wrong place at the wrong time."

This borders on a conspiracy theory. I do not believe power-lust is the same as pure sadism, and that US politicians travel to Gitmo to get their fingernail pulling on...
I have no problem seeing that the use of torture can be abused by sadist and/or others. I do on the other hand trust that good people will blow the whistle in such cases.

BS:
"Even if the first kind was acceptable, and I don't think it is, it's difficult to have one without the other - and especially so when the public is eager to excuse it."

It does not look like the public is eager to excuse it, the world press has been on the Gitmo case and the abuG case condemming it for more than a year now. Even going to the extreme of printing rumors as facts.

Torture is not be common practice in a free nation, but I believe we are on moral high grounds if we decide to apply torture against terrorist, to swiftly capture or kill the leaders and supporters of such organizations. Thereby curtailing terrorist acts and saving citizens lives.

Rune:
"The army is investigating thirty-some deaths in interigation. Do you consider death reversible?"

Are you serious?

"To support them is ridiculous, bordering on the criminal."

Support the Islamist Koranimals then, as that does not border on the ridiculous and the criminal.

Antonio,

Regarding: "Last remark: it's quite obvious that the regular educated norwegian is so much soaked in anglo-american litterature and marketing (which is not good nor bad by itself, but just a fact) compared to others yuropean cultures, that often such weblogs turns into a peculiar anglo-american tone which natively narrows perspectives."

All I can say is... Oh dear.

If you really believe that Norway is awash in materials that make for a discourse skewed in a way that favors an "Anglo-American tone", I can only plead for you to realize that this is certainly a convenient perspective to hold. Particularly when conforming to a status quo that can be empirically made inarguable as being primarily anti (and sometimes surreally so) American... to the hilt.

It amuses me to no end, that marching in lockstep with such a reflexively predictable opinion range, is rationalized for the “masses” here by claiming that there is some sort of fictitious pro-American skew (this is beyond laughable) that magically makes everyone who is under this reflexive malaise... instant freethinkers.

Only a profoundly flabby intellectual perspective can recast laser tight conformity into some sort of radical rebelliousness.

You kid yourself.

Cheers,

KM

Bjørn,

Of course I know the point you made my friend. But do you really hold to the position which your reply seems to take, that "they're easy to see through"? Really? As opposed to the ones "who so enjoy being on the right side that they're happy to find excuses for it when it goes too far?"? Are the lines of distinction so clear? It seems to me that this is a highly "nuanced" (in the contemporary sense) position Bjørn... in the sense that it lacks it.

The underlying premise here is one of context. To even consider that there is a skew in the discourse that is associated with context, implies that there is SOME body of opinions that is closest to sober and accurate. I don't need to take that concept down into the rationalizing abyss of postmodernity while deconstructing myself via perception versus reality… in order to reach conclusions based on what I have seen done again and again. I have seen, and we have discussed here before, stories conveyed about events in the world, where the conveyors of those events, have selectively included only parts of what they CLEARLY knew, in order to recast the event according to their own ideological narrative. I state this as empirical fact. I have documented huge depressing piles of them from just here in Norway.

In any case, I think you are making sweeping characterizations in your pat assessment above. You seem to allude (regarding holding leaders accountable) to the issue of torture for example, and there is a fairly sober discussion at the website below (inhabited by many of those who the mainstream would label as you did as those who "don't care to know more about some guy who was treated horribly because at least he was treated horribly by the right side") which addresses that issue:

http://www.qando.net/details.aspx?Entry=1878

I recommend it. I also strongly recommend that you read the comments section…at least the first twenty or thirty or so. There is a lot of good and open discussion about some of these "skewed discourse" issues there that are very revealing.

The fact is, that there is much ignorance on the part of an all too large fraction (as in the vast majority) of the public here in Norway (and elsewhere). This is not the result of the machinations of the Pentagon or the Whitehouse (Please!). It is a top down ignorance that is imposed by the fact that the media/academia collectively recast and revise in real time. Interestingly, ignorance and stupidity are behaviorally similar... but they are NOT the same. The attitude of all too many whose duty it is to bring to us all, an accurate picture of the story of the world... consider the bulk of us... to be stupid, and thus in need of their "help" so that we can see things "the right way". It is supremely ironic that the actuality of this is that we are ignorant by their hand. That is power Bjørn... and it is being abused and cultivated.

You say that "those people" think that "it's better to snarl about the liberal media than to hold some of the most powerful people in the world accountable for their actions." Really? I think that is a simplification that I find deeply distressing. And if there was indeed a true and open discourse that was unafraid to address issues of such import without the endless caricature and distortion that begins every discussion with an important set of preconceived truths (and which thus nullifies meaningful debate) I can say this: There would be less seething and adamant hatreds in the shadows (which ARE once again on the rise); There would be more accountability on the part of ALL people in power (State is only one available medium for its projection); And there would be more transparency towards that set of unwashed masses to which you and I seem to belong.

Who would this unambiguously GOOD state of affairs hurt?

Would it undermine the American endeavor in Iraq?

I think not.

Who?... What institutions seem to operate primarily from behind a cloud of nuance and "complexity"? What arcane re-castings of the world emanate with Derrida powered sophistry, bleaching any meaningful distinctions from the events in the world until virtually everyone is ready to accept anything about whatever… just to make it go away.

These are not unanswerable. They simply remain untouched in that same discourse.

Of course they do.

Cheers,

KM

PS And Bjørn... I would probably fall into the subset you described above according to the "mainstream discourse". Except that in Truth... I don't.

But that doesn't matter.... these days.

Kevin, when I write something like this I do it not as a Norwegian writing for Norwegians, but as one of the outlying nodes of the pro-Iraq war blogosphere. That's still my background as a blogger, and that's still where most of my readers have come from. I could write about the mistakes and biases of the Norwegian media, and I often have, but in this blog, that's preaching to the choir. Few people here need to be convinced that Bush's foreign policy has been misrepresented and misunderstood in Norway, but judging from what I read in other blogs there are a lot of people who either make direct excuses for torture, or buy the story that it is the left-wing mainstream media that is the real enemy, for undermining the war effort and giving excessive focus to stories that put Bush in a bad light.

I don't need to add a disclaimer saying "oh by the way, I still think it was right to invade Iraq, and of course there's a lot of sloppy and biased reporting too", because anyone who knows me already knows I believe that. Assuming that context, I think it's important that other people who share many of my views start taking the problem of torture and indefinite detention seriously. Stop seeing the media as an enemy that must be whipped into submission, stop using its bias as an excuse for not dealing with power abuse.

Bring up context as much as you like, (though there's no point, for I already agree), but I reserve the right to attack people who make excuses for torture, no matter what they may otherwise be right about.

ch: This borders on a conspiracy theory. I do not believe power-lust is the same as pure sadism, and that US politicians travel to Gitmo to get their fingernail pulling on...

Hm? I didn't write that. All I'm saying is that some people enjoy torture. You can't look at the Abu Ghraib photos and say those people weren't having fun. So when you give interrogators and guards the freedom to mistreat their prisoners, not all of them are going to use that power coolly and rationally, some will also be using it for fun.

BS:
"Hm? I didn't write that. All I'm saying is that some people enjoy torture."

You actually wrote:

"Torture is not only a deliberate tool consciously applied by rational investigators, it's something that happens in the dark, carried out by powerful people who enjoy hurting others, against innocents who were just in the wrong place at the wrong time."

It sure didn't sound like just "some people"...

BS:
"You can't look at the Abu Ghraib photos and say those people weren't having fun."

No, I cannot. The fact that we are seeing those photos, proves my point that good people will blow the whistle on such behaviour. Another thing, the abuG case is not about legalized and approved torture, this could happen in any prison in any free country, there is no guarantee against this kind of behaviour from prison guards.

BS:
"So when you give interrogators and guards the freedom to mistreat their prisoners, not all of them are going to use that power coolly and rationally, some will also be using it for fun."

Control procedures can be designed to decrease the risk of abuse to an absolute minimum.. Psycological testing of the interrogators, surveillance and strict rules can be applied and so on and so forth..

ch said:
"I would believe that people without uniform firing weapons on american troops in Iraq, should suffice as reasonably sucpicious as to qualify for potasium chloride.."

First some things about me as:
- I supported the wars in both Afghanistan and Iraq
- I don't believe that people without uniform firing weapons on troops (american or norwegian) are protected by the geneva convention (except some corner cases)

Still - I do not believe the US is treating them justly. There should still be a public trial to determine whether they have done what the US military claims they have done - and it should be checked whether they are protected by the geneva convention.

The geneva convention has quite strict guidelines about who is protected, but one important point is article 4.6:

"Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war."

Every one of the inmates in gitmo needs to be tested against that article in a court with public transcripts. If they qualify, then should've been treated like PoW's, not unlawfull combatants.

If they do NOT qualify for PoW status, I certainly won't object to them being at gitmo, receiving pretty harsh treatment. If they're found to qualify for PoW status, then they should be sent back to afghanistan.

Bjørn,

Fair enough. In that context :-) I can accept your position without condition. I of course am clearly disturbed by the undeniable prisoner abuse that HAS taken place during the course of this war. This is particularly so from the fact that some (though at least at this point it seems quite small in historical context) of these cases were rather arbitrary, and as will always be the case when unchecked violence is arbitrary, there were victims who were completely innocent of crimes upon which they were being held. That smacks of things like group hatred and dehumaniization en masse.

Such are the dangers of "Limited War" that goes on for an extended period. The very nihilism and ruthlessness that pervades the enemies of freedom... infect its erstwhile defenders in due course. The only reasonable check on this is unequivocal and effective leadership. And this has indeed lapsed on several fronts.

Cheers.

KM

ch,

It seems quite obvious to me that the statement "carried out by powerful people who enjoy hurting others" is referring to the power that one has when one holds others completely under their sway... as in prison guards. In this scenario you are de facto "at their mercy" and without very clear guidelines with consequences for falling outside them, the human fact of the worst in people manifesting itself is almost a foregine conclusion. Look at any war (or, if you dare, any totalitarian society from the Soviets on down) and you will see clear proof of this human characteristic in spades.

Returning to context, I'm not going to attempt to dissaude you from your obvious saturation with righteous indignation over Abu Ghraib. I will however note, that its exceedingly interesting that Abu Ghraib, in the Western Discourse... has only acquired the modifier "notorious"... now that the Americans have been associated wioth abuses there. Call it torture if it pleases you to do so, but it seems to pale in relevance next to what occurred their before new management moved in. Fingers removed with bolt cutters, amamings and murders in front of family members including children. 40 executions a week in two chilling execution "festivals" on Saturday and Tuesday. The unmarked mass graves which continue to sprout up in the environs of that deeply notorious place speak to a horror almost inconceivable.

Yet… it is only now that we consider Abu Ghraib... to be notorious.

Odd, isn't it?

Christopher Hitchens had this to say:

“To the Iraqis, it was a name to be mentioned in whispers, if at all, as "the house of the end." It was a Dachau. Numberless people were consigned there and were never heard of again. Its execution shed worked overtime, as did its torturers, and we are still trying to discover how many Iraqis and Kurds died in its precincts. At one point, when it suffered even more than usual from chronic overcrowding, Saddam and his sons decided to execute a proportion of the inmates at random, just to cull the population. The warders then fanned out at night to visit the families of the prisoners, asking how much it would be worth to keep their son or brother or father off the list. The hands of prisoners were cut off, and the proceedings recorded on video for the delight of others. I myself became certain that Saddam had reached his fin de régime, or his Ceauşescu moment, when he celebrated his 100-percent win in the "referendum" of 2003 by releasing all the nonpolitical prisoners (the rapists and thieves and murderers who were his natural constituency) from Abu Ghraib. This sudden flood of ex-cons was a large factor in the horrific looting and mayhem that accompanied the fall of Baghdad.I visited the jail a few months later, and I can tell you about everything but the stench, which you would have to smell for yourself. Layers of excrement and filth were being shoveled out; cells obviously designed for the vilest treatment of human beings made one recoil. In the huge, dank, cement gallery where the executions took place, a series of hooks and rings hung over a gruesome pit. Efforts were being made to repaint and disinfect the joint, and many of the new inmates were being held in encampments in the yard while this was being done, but I distinctly remember thinking that there was really no salvaging such a place and that it should either be torn down and ploughed over or turned into a museum.”

I don't condone the events that occurred in Abu Ghraib at all ch. But I do know that they represent the work of people who, as Bjørn said, were foolishly given absolute power over others
with little, or inneffective checks on their behavior. That is a failure of leadership. It is not, much though you might wish it to be, a sign of the war mongering mean spirited imperialistic hubris of the capitalist, Oil hungry Americans. Ask many Iraqis who are actually there, and you would be laughed at.

Unless of course you spoke exclusively to the minority of Sunni's previously associated with the Fedayeen and Saddams Security forces... who have now become the oppressed and "dis-enfranchised" few in that ever seeking "social justice" heart of the progressive collective.

You can always find those who will speak to your worldview... as long is it suits their agenda... if thats all you want.

Best,

KM

Stærk brings up a good point. Why are these captured Jihadists in Iraq/Afganistan not presented for a quick military tribunal, lined up and shot as simple war criminals already, per the Hague Convention?

KM:

It seems quite obvious to me that the statement "carried out by powerful people who enjoy hurting others" is referring to the power that one has when one holds others completely under their sway...

I reacted to the use of the words "powerful people", they normally does not transcend to prison guards, that said, I do of course recognize
the power a prison guard and welfare-office clerk hold over their "subjects".

KM:
I don't condone the events that occurred in Abu Ghraib at all ch. But I do know that they represent the work of people who, as Bjørn said, were foolishly given absolute power over others
with little, or inneffective checks on their behavior. That is a failure of leadership. It is not, much though you might wish it to be, a sign of the war mongering mean spirited imperialistic hubris of the capitalist, Oil hungry Americans.

I wonder if this paragraph was meant for me or someone else? If it was meant for me then KM should maybe read more of what I have written, if not for me, good speech, repeat it in public often!

I would love more signs of war mongering, especially on the Iranian border...

to Kevin,

"If you really believe that Norway is awash in materials that make for a discourse skewed in a way that favors an "Anglo-American tone", I can only plead for you to realize that this is certainly a convenient perspective to hold."

I fear I wasn't able to make understand clearly my feeling about that language/thinkings stuff.It's not about skew or bias rather about the ability to switch mental contexts *before* even the layers of analyse and judgement begin to work.
But well, I let that.

--------------------
to the topic:

So back to the panzerbeorn initial post:

"It's war. Unpleasant things happen. What's the big deal? Nothing, but try tell that to the liberal media elite."

it's as clear as spaghetti code is in programming.
There's no big deal at all.
First the USA completely lack the experience of a real war against a foreign enemy at home.War is an off-shore affair.Still they do cry if things don't work as expected.
Second, many countries warned it was a wrong war.USA did go ahead though.
Third: they went ahead by themselves and they got more or less wounded.Then they cry a lot.Explain me that.
So what has the "liberal" media to do here ?

The "liberal" media complains about "abuses" here and there.Man, when X-Ray camp began hosting afghan guests, that was no big deal, nobody did care.That was fair: USA was hunting the WTC instigators.But after so many years, what is the point with the camp? I mean either you take those prisoners, do torture them slow and long and good, and maybe you feel happier.Or you get to obtain informations from them, then you throw them away.That's what has been done since ever.Here instead, we have seen no results: the USA didn't win the war faster in Iraq , nor did catch BinLaden.So it's counter-working against the USA instead by bringing more terrorist faith to the extremist muslim shocked by the idea of his bro' jailed.Same when some drunk soldier is playing with prisoners or throwing a koran in the toilets.
What the hell?
Them the rest of us are quite amazed: what's the meaning of the game ? Were is the consistency.
Moreover dumb special agents keep arresting people around the world by mistake.
How do you want that "liberal" medias will not make noise about that?

The text of panzerbeorn had some other funny things, like:

"It couldn't protect its oil buddies in Baghdad"

well, now it's the oil buddies of Cheney.Big deal.
Changed owner...Many people accused of being "commies" or "liberals" or "frogs" or ..., just doesn't care about who is going to do the business and to take the colonial turn at the place.But they were just upset when Dubya and the whole White House propaganda machine was wanting to hyptonize people and make them believe that it was about pure moral values, and for the sake of WMD.
It's just a big move on the Asian chessboard to take control over strategical areas, because you know neo-conservatives decided that America must control the world.
The point is that the neo-conservative dream is hitting many walls in real life.
What the hell to expect then from the "liberal" media ??

I did read that about 30-some deaths on a log somewhere but i can't find it. Everything points to it being posted by some tinfoil hat lefty at some center-to-center-right log. I have o other option but to admit to the egg being on my face.

When that is said though i still disagree with most of the justifications for light torture. The information is often flawed as inmates tend to tell interrogators what they think they want to hear rather than the truth. Then you get a lot of FBI/CIA agents running around on wild goose chases.

Here are 4 excerpts from a training manual found in an AQ-operatives house in Manchester .Part 4 page 16 is where it tells operatives to claim torture when imprisoned. That is not to say torture doesn't happen.

Antonio:
First the USA completely lack the experience of a real war against a foreign enemy at home.War is an off-shore affair.Still they do cry if things don't work as expected.

I do believe they fought the british, the french and the mexicans on their own land, with success..

And who is in fact doing the crying?

Antonio:
Second, many countries warned it was a wrong war.USA did go ahead though.

Are these the same countries whose politicians keep turning up in the UN oil-for-food scandal?

Antonio:
Third: they went ahead by themselves and they got more or less wounded.

Believe it or not, but they did get support from other countries.

"Wounded"? I believe they haven't even lost 2000 men.

Antonio:
Then they cry a lot.Explain me that.

Same as above, who is doing the crying? Not the 50+% that reelected Bush, that's for sure..

Antonio:
So what has the "liberal" media to do here?

By your arguments, everything.

Antonio:
It's just a big move on the Asian chessboard to take control over strategical areas, because you know neo-conservatives decided that America must control the world

A brilliant liberal media summary, this is in essence exactly what the liberal media have been saying since the first american soldier plantet his/her foot on iraqi soil. And someone has absorbed every last sentence..

Rune:
I did read that about 30-some deaths on a log somewhere but i can't find it.

I wasn't refering to the death toll...

I wasn't referring to the death toll...

I made a snide comment based on information only found in my head. I thought pointing the the fault in the first part i automatically retracted the reversible death remark. Should have been clearer: That remark is null and void.

I'm still against torture though. I don't for a second buy into the line of thinking that Abu Graib/Guantanamo gives excuse to terrorists organizations or dictatorships. The last thing they need is an excuse. The problem is with borderline militants and couch radicals in the moslem world who see this and just might get inspired to do something about their beliefs.
Also the AQ-manual i linked to tells operatives to claim torture. With the admitted pressure tactics ( Which fall way short of common practice in every single moslem country in the world) they can very easily claim a lot worse than what is actually happening. Given a 'if this is what they admit what they're really doing' kind of thinking.

ch,

I sort of blurred you with Antonio, Keppler, and Norvegia (after the cheese?). It was late... I read all the comments one after the other... and I was fading.

Apologies.

KM

PS Well put (re your reply to Antonio)... but I have to say it seems almost too cartoonish how parroting of the party/media line he seems. I suspect he is just trying to take the piss out of you. At least I'm sort of hoping that.

Rune: Should have been clearer: That remark is null and void.

Ok.

Rune: I'm still against torture though.... The problem is with borderline militants and couch radicals in the moslem world who see this and just might get inspired to do something about their beliefs.

I on the other hand believe that showing strength and determination weakens the inspiration and motivation of the terrorists. I would rather these "couch radicals" come forth and show their faces so they can be dealt with, than having to worry about what to say and do so I do not "inspire" them. Doing the latter is most prevalent today, and it is not in our interest...

Kevin McD: Norvegia (after the cheese?)

Yes, it is after the cheese, seeing that the title of norvegia's blog is "norvegia - folkets favoritt" which is used in the commercials for the cheese. Now a days their slogan is: "Hard day, mild cheese"... I would change the name if it was my blog, it makes me think it is a mild and cheesy political blog, sponsored by the agricultural elite in Norway...

Kevin McD: suspect he is just trying to take the piss out of you. At least I'm sort of hoping that.

Antonio sounds very spanish, puede-ser que el es el gilipollas que ha escrito "no a la guerra" a la pared de mi casa..

Let's hope for peace and prepare for war...

@ch:

"I do believe they fought the british, the french and the mexicans on their own land, with success.."

LOL. And the indians too...Story of the expansion of a former british colony...
For mexicans, California, Texas, etc, were mexican territories stolen by gringos.Who's right? The winner.Is there a moral or true opinion? Nope.
I can't spend the time showing few obvious points.Then it will be too long to explain what was the real meaning of my sentence.(believe me or not it's *not* US-baiting)
I will just recall that: in "The New Yorker", different writers did contribute texts around 9/11 and aftermath.
One writer told he was in Wien, Austria, when he saw WTC falling on TV.Few days after he headed to the airport and while talking about the event in the taxi, the austrian driver said: "Two towers bombed? Big deal.In Europe we got a lot of big cities burnt to ashes.So..."

Many people in many countries could tell that one or both of their grand-dad was killed on his own treshold, defending his own house against {germans, fascists, russians, serbs, etc}, not defending the investment of an oil cartel overseas.

"And who is in fact doing the crying?"

well, panzerbeorn complains in the initial post.
Not happy because "liberal media this and that".Ok, go kill them all, the nasty liberal media.

"Believe it or not, but they did get support from other countries."

yes, like the Tuvalu Imperial Guard, with a massive amount of 40 soldiers of great value.
Take magnifying glasses to find Tuvalu in the middle of a Pacific map.

""Wounded"? I believe they haven't even lost 2000 men."

Dubya told "they'll be no casulties".And that was to be a quick affair.Btw., where are the WMD?

I still wonder why instead of raiding Saddam who was anyway under embargo since Bush Sr., Dubya didn't free Cuba.It's a steinkast from the floridian beaches and Castro is such a nasty dictator, starving and torturing his people, who risk dead by any mean to sail to Miami.
Castro did even bring in commies nukes at the time of Krutcheff.Jesus-Christ! Nukes pointing to the USA!
Wouldn't it be nice to have in La Habana a replica of the green statue holding a torch in Ellis Island.Wait, maybe not, after all it's a gift from frogs, liberal nazi-commies cheese eaters...
Lets throw it in the sea, or rename it "Liberty Fries", ha!

I guess the cuban people was not worth to be freed.The Iraqi instead was more.What could Cheney do with an oil-less Cuba ?

About USA as the Nice Leader of the World, it's simply on the agenda of the neo-conservative since ever.At http://http://www.newamericancentury.org and zillions other sites.
Well, not good nor bad.
Business is the ultimate value for those people.
It's not about "democracy", "liberty", "justice" or whatever.Don't play that game, we got enough of it and it's not new, because that was a similar game by others before, with british or french imperialism for instance.

CH
I appreciate that showing showing strength and determination is necessary. In the early to mid eighties you had the Lebanese, the achille lauro, the Berlin discotheque bombing and more. Then the USA bombed Libya and there was 1 terror attack the next seven years. In retrospect keeping up the pressure and retaliating against Lockerbie would have been better than dropping the ball.
I 'm also aware that anything considered a sign of weakness by hardcore islamists will give inspiration to them. Osama himself have reportedly admitted being inspired by the pullout from Somalia. That operation was badly planed and carried out. It didn't succeed neither in securing aid convoys or stabilizing the country. It got 17 US soldiers and others from the international force killed. On those grounds a pullback was the right decision. What Osama saw was: “'only' 17 dead and the USA are running”

I will maintain that fighting the wars forcefully is what needed to show fundamentalists and torture is counterproductive.

Couch radicals: What i meant was that if they just have radical opinions and scream and shout but don't act on it they're annoying but not dangerous. Should they start pick up AK47s or dynamite belts then they become dangerous. Sort of like RødValgallianse contra Bader-Meinhoff.

Antonio:
The fact that there have been many wars on this continent doesn't matter all that much when a huge majority of Europeans where born after the last war. Apart from Yugoslavs today's Europeans have no experience of war. If anything Norwegians old enough to have seen WW2 are more often for the Iraq war than postwar generations.

The 'we know terrorism' argument is not very good either. 9-11 killed more people in a couple of hours than IRA,ETA,Bader and Italian Red Brigades have killed combined the last 30 years.

And just when did Bush say that about no casualties ?
One credible source is all i ask.

Antonio: About USA as the Nice Leader of the World, it's simply on the agenda of the neo-conservative since ever.

Yes, I think I read something like that between the lines of the "Da Vinci Code", must be true...

Ok... so its clear that Antonio actually wasn't taking the piss out of ch. He is in fact, a leftist caricature incarnate. I barely even know where to begin to address the convoluted, pseudo-hitorical, deconstructed and adolescent mess of a screed that he posted above... which included an eclectic collection of bizzare and internally contradicted statements. Because I am occasionally overcome by a sense of despair over the forces that pull Antonios "freethinking" strings... I'm going to put a little time into it.

Come with me now on a journey into the mind of the pervasive "whateverness" that has turned the public discourse of so much of the world and a self satsfied circle jerk that does not even deign to address anything falling outside of its ever narrower scope.

It begins:

"LOL. And the indians too...Story of the expansion of a former british colony...
For mexicans, California, Texas, etc, were mexican territories stolen by gringos.Who's right? The winner.Is there a moral or true opinion? Nope."

Ah how secure is the self satisfied solipsism of the post-moral moralist. Is there right and wrong? Of course... its just that in the complex nature of historical evvents (and even in personal events) it becomes impossible to for one mind to reduce to essence, every intent and every act until it is unambiguous. Oddly though, since Antonio seems to profer that the result was that the "territory was stolen by the gringoes"... he at least seems to conclude that there IS in fact a right and wrong. It appears that for him, there is only ideas so "unsophisticated" as moral right and wrong... when the results argue against the positions of certainlty that he himself arrogantly clings to without question. Odd... and typical.

"I can't spend the time showing few obvious points."

Thats a relief.

"Then it will be too long to explain what was the real meaning of my sentence.(believe me or not it's *not* US-baiting)"

Lay off the Derrida Antonio... they may have required it in your studies of "Peace" in the humanities coursees you took... but its bad mojo for the pliant mind. Your call though ... just some friendly advice.

blah blah... blah... and then the quote of the austrian driver who said: "Two towers bombed? Big deal.In Europe we got a lot of big cities burnt to ashes.So..."

Oh my. What more can we say about that. And you are trying to prove... what? That moral relativism and equivalence to the point of meaninglessness drives the public discourse in Europe? That any event can be equated wqith any event so that moral distinction can become clay for the clever... to make anything mean whatever?

The only connection between the fact that Europe had cities burnt to ashes and the Towers falling... is that they were both rooted in moral abomination and relativist powered nihilism. In Europe's case, it was enabled by the same ideologically twisted sophistry that, in extreme irony... allows anyone who swims in it to smarmily cast off: brutality, tyranny, genocide and suffering in plain sight... with a jaded ho-hum and a dash of masturbatory illusions of innate moral superiority.

What a tragedy. Its the same thing that allowed tyrants of all flavors to operate with impudence in the fog of nuance in Europe all through the twentieth century... until they were ready.

Nobody loves sophistry better than the ruthless.

And they love the European discourse described by Antonio today.

Of course they do... it is full of hate and nihilism.

"Many people in many countries could tell that one or both of their grand-dad was killed on his own treshold, defending his own house against {germans, fascists, russians, serbs, etc}, not defending the investment of an oil cartel overseas."

I see. The herioc ideal of Antonios defender of freedom is distinct from the American in Iraq... because the war there... is all about OOOOOIIIILLLL. You need to update your self deception Antonio. That one is getting hard to defend even in the Guardian.

Oh blah blah...blah... nothing to add. And then:

Dubya told "they'll be no casulties".And that was to be a quick affair. Btw., where are the WMD?

Poor man. Where DO you get your data. There was never any statement even remotely like the babove coming from the Whitehouse. It fascinates me no end that this has become a self indulgent totem to so many of our "peace loving" protestor puppets. A lot of things like "long, hard, slog" and "We will leave when the mission is complete" came out BEFORE the action... and have continued with admirable resolve. As to the WMDs... well, give it a rest. It may be there were none (though EVERY major intelligence agency in the world belived there were) or it may be that during the all too long period where the UN was debating the meaning of "is" in deference to the odious influence of the Oil for Food scandal by "diplomats" who claimed the same moral superiority as Antonio... that the nasty stuff was moved to Syria as an odd series of Satelite photographs indicate may be the case. Regardless Antonio... this was NOT the only raisson d'etre for regime change in Iraq, nor for many, even the main one. It WAS the only "acceptable" reason for the Sophisticated class in the UN and Brussels. The reason being of course... that this way it could be turned into a case for that ever malleable pseudo-legal concept called "International Law". (which... if we ever let its present spokesmen codify it, would end up making the EU constitution look like cliff notes for a short story.)

I still wonder why instead of raiding Saddam who was anyway under embargo since Bush Sr., Dubya didn't free Cuba.

Um yeah... whatever.

Then there was a paragraph of something so bizarre and internally conflicted that I actually pitied Antonio for the mental torment that must have accompanied it. Something with attempts at irony including "Nukes, Castro, Liberty fries. It was a bit like the typings of a sub sentient creature resulting from a mad scientist combining the DNA of Chomsky with that of a slime mold. I will let it perish without comment.

Some more Blah blah... link to one of the tastier sites ala mass solipsism in the progressive collective. Balh blah... ends mentioning French imperialism... which I thought was a nice touch.

Alas... Antonio, do not flater yourself that I went through all this trouble in response to you. It was a gerneral response to the pervasive "idea of you", which I see so much that I sometimes despair for the future of mankind.

I won't be having retorts to you on any consistent basis. I don't have the time. Take what I said and do ... ya know... whatever.

KM

My sides hurt from laughing.

I cannot recall the last time I was so entertain by a posting on this blog.

KM: I am in awe at your wit, intelligence, and eloquence:

"Ok... so its clear that Antonio actually wasn't taking the piss out of ch. He is in fact, a leftist caricature incarnate. I barely even know where to begin to address the convoluted, pseudo-hitorical, deconstructed and adolescent mess of a screed that he posted above... which included an eclectic collection of bizzare and internally contradicted statements... "

And it only continued to get better from there. It goes without saying that I wish I had written that (what you posted).

I simply am not worthy!

Dearest Antonio: Aside from a loud "BOO YAH!" in your general direction, I was wondering about your thoughts on, oh... let us say, Spain for example. On Spain's role in the whole sad affair of Spanish Colonization of South America, the forced slavery of the natives, etc., etc.,.

I mean, truly, if you are in the business of dragging out all the ghosts of Christmases past, you need look no further than your own backyard.

Susan nailed it bang-on when she posted a comment to you on 5-31-2005:

" "Sorry, but everything you say I've heard 1000 times already, practically lock-step, as if read from a talking points memo issued to all America-Bashing EuroLefties(TM). You're not nearly as
original as you think you are. What do native Americans and the Rio Grande have to do with the topic at hand? Nothing. It's just a typical bullet point on the talking points memo: Bullet Point Number 5: "If you disagree with an American on any point, be sure and point out how they murdered all the Native Americans." "

She has you pegged all right. I am sitting on my hands, anxiously waiting for your condemnation of the U.S's lack of universal health insurance! (Please do not disappointment me as I cannot continue sitting on my hands... I do have work to do, my desk is absolutely buried under a stack of paperwork)

In closing, Jan Haugland's "Secular Blasphemy" has a very interesting and well written article titled: "Where to go now, Europe?" that you really should go and read. Here's a small excerpt:

"Europeans' close proximity to their sordid past of grand social experiments have naturally made them a bit touchy about their own identity. And maddenly preachy, to be sure."

Who knows, maybe you will have a cathartic moment and realize that America/Americans/Capitalism, alone, are not to be blamed for all the ills of this world. And just maybe you will also realize that Europeans are NOT "the Most Sublime Rational Ones" either.

*.¸¸.•´¨`*»•..•«*´¨`•.¸¸.*Erin*.¸¸.•´¨`*»•..•«*´¨`•.¸¸.*

Antonio: "The USA completely lack the experience of a real war against a foreign enemy at home. War is an off-shore affair."

Yeah, and there's a very good reason for that, genius.

Now if Antonio could give us the name of the tribe which was taking over the Southwest, we might all learn something.

Anonymous, no public trials, this is a military matter.

----

Isn't the history of Europe stolen territories?

Or is Antonio just pissy we "stole" a bit of Mexico from frogistan and Spain?

---

Or is his real gripe the territories stolen are better off than Mexico?

Sandy, you know I can't let you have all the fun!

Everything old is new again:

Via Dailypundit, from This is London.

--While British party leaders were unanimous in declaring the constitution dead, German chancellor Gerhard Schroeder joined forces with France's Jacques Chirac in refusing to accept the verdict.

Germany was reported to be proposing an "inner core" of EU members to recreate the old Franco-German axis.

OK, maybe it's a martini affecting my brain and it's time for me to go to sleep, but . . .

Mountain meet molehill, anyone?

Am I the only person who thinks the Abu Ghraib scandal is one giant crock of shit? I'm sorry, folks, but I just can't take it seriously. There are too many bad things going on in the world. This little scandal has consumed far too much newsprint. Too many trees have died because of it.

The moral of the story is: don't fuck with Americans, or we will fuck with you. Goodnight all.

Krekar's at it again, huh?

Sandy P wrote:
Anonymous, no public trials, this is a military matter.

In theory I would agree. I'm kind of split on the subject - here's my reasoning:

- If the US has shot the gitmo prisoners on the battlefield, as unlawfull combatants - that is, warriors without uniforms, then I wouldn't have objected.

- The US did not do that. They took them prisoners. This isn't defined in any of the laws of war. They're not protected by the geneva convention (except a few that might be covered by article 4.6).

Now, option two is of course far better for them than option one - however, as soon as we talk prisons I get this "but they SHALL have the right to a trial to see if they're guilty".

I'm pretty sure that most of them wouldn't qualify for protection under article 4.6, but since they're there - and since it's a situation not thought of before - I think it should be trials in public scrutiny. Since the US military has "legitimized" a new way to treat unlawfull combatants - I think it's people should be consulted on it.

.. of course, the left will scream their lungs out in any case ..

Totoro,

You are so right! One word to sum it up - islamist propaganda! The pan arab press has been vigorously exploiting the abu ghraib incident as a means to delegitimize the US efforts against extremists:

http://www.adamyoshida.com/2004/12/terrorists-are-enemies-of-human-race.html

The link above from adam yoshida says it all:

".....Terrorists are Enemies of the Human Race
The dumbest political episode of this past year was the torrents of fake outrage and abuse hurled at the Bush Administration over the Abu Ghraib prisoner “abuse” “scandal.” So far as I’m concerned, the real wrong committed at Abu Ghraib was committed not by the US Army and not by the Bush Administration, but by CBS News and others who reported on something which, in wartime, ought to have been covered up and dumped deep into a file for scholar to discover and write a journal article about in thirty or forty years...."

"........To be ultimately successful the Global War on Terrorism must be a war of extermination.

What is required for victory in such a war is a program of de-humanization. By worrying about the “rights” of terrorists and showcasing them as “victims”, we help to make them seem more like humans in the eyes of the public......"

"........We need to breach the artificial wall that now seems to separate the military and “civilian” side of Islamism, for it is the civil side: the radical Imams, the shops which sell Islamist propaganda and the web sites which store Islamist videos which feed the military side.....

.........What’s needed is a program of counter-terrorism designed to wipe these malevolent creatures out"

http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1135797/posts ( relative atrocity !)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1406405/posts

(......Its time to change the tone of the debate. Why is Islam the only religion recognized by the United Nations as being victimized by defamation? Answer: Because the rest of the world has slowly succumbed to dhimmitude. What makes the Qur'an more 'noble' than say the Bible)

Sister Ayesha Nyanyaponika Kim
أخت عائشة نيانيابونيكا كيم

I don't watch O'Reilly, but I did catch the beginning last night.

It's a concerted effort by the left to get W.

We have the billionaires, ACLU, ANSWER, the usual suspects.

Yet, Econopundit just posted this:

"Okay, I want you to invade, and then get them out in secret. That's right. Secretly. Understand?"

Do those with expertise in international politics have a handle on what this new story means?

Is UNMOVIC dickering for continued funding by making peace with the US -- by starting to lay a case (based for starters on its current satellite evidence) that WMDs were in place in Iraq prior to the invasion, but were somehow removed?

Or is UNMOVIC crazily initiating a claim the US for some unknown reason secretly removed the very weapons it launched a war to find?

UPDATE: Yes, I know, there's a third possibility -- "Bush the chimp sent in so few troops the clever Iraqis were able to dismantle the WMDs and get rid of them after the invasion." I doubt anyone will argue this too strongly because it suggests the WMD intelligence wasn't so flawed after all.

Here's a little more via LGF:

UNITED NATIONS - U.N. satellite imagery experts have determined that material that could be used to make biological or chemical weapons and banned long-range missiles has been removed from 109 sites in Iraq, U.N. weapons inspectors said in a report obtained Thursday.

U.N. inspectors have been blocked from returning to Iraq since the U.S.-led war in 2003 so they have been using satellite photos to see what happened to the sites that were subject to U.N. monitoring because their equipment had both civilian and military uses.

In the report to the U.N. Security Council, acting chief weapons inspector Demetrius Perricos said he’s reached no conclusions about who removed the items or where they went. He said it could have been moved elsewhere in Iraq, sold as scrap, melted down or purchased.

He said the missing material can be used for legitimate purposes. “However, they can also be utilized for prohibited purposes if in a good state of repair.”

He said imagery analysts have identified 109 sites that have been emptied of equipment to varying degrees, up from 90 reported in March....

war is going on !
i am writing from israel.

our problem is just how to "market" it correctly to the world.
until now, for 5 years, israel has been fighting back terorisim, that has made us the cevilians the main target for human bombs.

some how, some one has managed to turn the "story" up side down !!
using the media, the news channels to the world,
we bacame the world peace enemies..
we are the most evil people living on this planet..

as if we are the one who danced on the roof tops at 9/11 when the world trade center colapsed !
(all around the west bank and gaza there were big celebrations that night !! you could hear the music coming loudly from the speakers on the towers of the praying places)

most of the people around the world, take the facts as given to them by the news channels as "gods own words"..
no matter how a conflict starts.. if my country fights back.. imidiatly we are being pulled by the media to the hanging poll.

thank you
and Shalom
Dekel

I saw your Norwegian Blog Manifesto mentioned in Dagens Næringsliv today. Fun. There is a 6 page article about blogging.

Dekel, I would not take too seriously the criticisms of Israel that appear in the European media. Much of what you read there is biased. Anti-semitism and anti-Americanism are entrenched in European thinking, and we must always take that into account. Remember -- it's just talk.

I 'm also aware that anything considered a sign of weakness by hardcore islamists will give inspiration to them. Osama himself have reportedly admitted being inspired by the pullout from Somalia. That operation was badly planed and carried out. It didn't succeed neither in securing aid convoys or stabilizing the country. It got 17 US soldiers and others from the international force killed. On those grounds a pullback was the right decision. What Osama saw was: “'only' 17 dead and the USA are running”

Trackback URL: http://bearstrong.net/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1589