The ‘Good Germans’ Among Us
By FRANK RICH
New York Times
“BUSH lies” doesn’t cut it anymore. It’s time to confront the darker reality that we are lying to ourselves.
Ten days ago The Times unearthed yet another round of secret Department of Justice memos countenancing torture. President Bush gave his standard response: “This government does not torture people.” Of course, it all depends on what the meaning of “torture” is. The whole point of these memos is to repeatedly recalibrate the definition so Mr. Bush can keep pleading innocent.
By any legal standards except those rubber-stamped by Alberto Gonzales, we are practicing torture, and we have known we are doing so ever since photographic proof emerged from Abu Ghraib more than three years ago. As Andrew Sullivan, once a Bush cheerleader, observed last weekend in The Sunday Times of London, America’s “enhanced interrogation” techniques have a grotesque provenance: “Verschärfte Vernehmung, enhanced or intensified interrogation, was the exact term innovated by the Gestapo to describe what became known as the ‘third degree.’ It left no marks. It included hypothermia, stress positions and long-time sleep deprivation.”
Still, the drill remains the same. The administration gives its alibi (Abu Ghraib was just a few bad apples). A few members of Congress squawk. The debate is labeled “politics.” We turn the page.
There has been scarcely more response to the similarly recurrent story of apparent war crimes committed by our contractors in Iraq. Call me cynical, but when Laura Bush spoke up last week about the human rights atrocities in Burma, it seemed less an act of selfless humanitarianism than another administration maneuver to change the subject from its own abuses.
(Contined here.)
New York Times
“BUSH lies” doesn’t cut it anymore. It’s time to confront the darker reality that we are lying to ourselves.
Ten days ago The Times unearthed yet another round of secret Department of Justice memos countenancing torture. President Bush gave his standard response: “This government does not torture people.” Of course, it all depends on what the meaning of “torture” is. The whole point of these memos is to repeatedly recalibrate the definition so Mr. Bush can keep pleading innocent.
By any legal standards except those rubber-stamped by Alberto Gonzales, we are practicing torture, and we have known we are doing so ever since photographic proof emerged from Abu Ghraib more than three years ago. As Andrew Sullivan, once a Bush cheerleader, observed last weekend in The Sunday Times of London, America’s “enhanced interrogation” techniques have a grotesque provenance: “Verschärfte Vernehmung, enhanced or intensified interrogation, was the exact term innovated by the Gestapo to describe what became known as the ‘third degree.’ It left no marks. It included hypothermia, stress positions and long-time sleep deprivation.”
Still, the drill remains the same. The administration gives its alibi (Abu Ghraib was just a few bad apples). A few members of Congress squawk. The debate is labeled “politics.” We turn the page.
There has been scarcely more response to the similarly recurrent story of apparent war crimes committed by our contractors in Iraq. Call me cynical, but when Laura Bush spoke up last week about the human rights atrocities in Burma, it seemed less an act of selfless humanitarianism than another administration maneuver to change the subject from its own abuses.
(Contined here.)
Powered by Blogger
1 Comments:
As usual, Rich provides some interesting insight.
A number of comments.
1. He blames the press for the lack of critical reporting prior to the Iraq invasion. The press did resurface in early 2005 and was on the job until September when Crocker testified … since then the Iraq has been off the television network news. Most outrageous is NBC which ran it’s Nightly News lead story (October 4) that a Minnesota judge ruled against Senator Craig and not the fact that the Justice Department issued secret opinions that authorized the CIA to use extremely harsh and brutal interrogation techniques. Pleeeeze which story is real news ? Which story will be written about in the history books ?
2. Rich mentions the killing of “private security personnel” in Falluja, but doesn’t mention its significance. When that lynching occurred it was a message to America that the insurgency was a real threat.
Writing in the Guardian newspaper, Jonathon Steele provided an account of the brutal actions taken by the marines in the days that preceded. “But as residents ushered reporters into their homes a few days ago,” he wrote, “shortly before this week’s attack on four American security guards (though mercenaries might be a better term), it was clear that deep communal anger was lurking here, and had reached the boiling point. They wanted to show the results of several US incursions over four days and nights last week.
“Rockets from helicopter gunships had punctured bedroom walls. Patio floors and front gates were pockmarked by shrapnel. Car doors looked like sieves. In the mayhem 18 Iraqis lay dead. On the American side two marines were killed. It was the worst period of violence Fallujah has seen during a year of occupation.
Bush responded with Operation :Vigilant Resolve - an assault on the city, but then retreated.
Bush cites the bombing of the Golden Dome Shrine in Samarra on February 22, 2006 as the key turning point … virtually two years after the Falluja event. When the Falluja killings occurred the American military death toll was over 600 (March 2004); when the Samarra bombing occurred the American military death toll was well over 2,250 (February 2006) (Casualty Count link) .
Either Bush never realized when things were going bad, or didn’t want to admit it during the 2004 election period, or he was mislead by Rumsfeld.
3. Rieckhoff’s comments and Rich’s assessment that it is in our national self-interest to attend to Iraq policy is precisely why Clinton/Obamba/Edwards refused that all soldiers would be out of Iraq during their first term. I will state again , the question is not how many soldiers will be in Iraq, but what is the right way to maintain stability ? Continued military occupation and force, or a surge in the diplomatic effort ?
The sooner that Bush-lite (Clinton) and Cheney-clone (Giuliani) recognize that we need to talk with Syria and Iran, then citizens will see a light at the end of the Occupation Tunnel.
4. Rich is wrong on Laura Bush’s comments about human rights atrocities in Burma. She has been talking about this issue for awhile.
In September of 2006, Mrs. Bush encouraged UN actions link and in May of this year, she worked with Senators to encourage more involvement by the UN
link . Although Mrs. Bush has been pushing these human rights violations, Mr. Bush has lost all creditability to get UN (or China) support. Rich should put the blame where it belongs … on Bush and the people (see Norm Coleman) who vilify the United Nations.
If Burma had been rich with oil, somehow I have to believe that Mr. Bush would have found a way to intercede.
Post a Comment
<< Home