Friday, April 24, 2009

The Road Too Much Travelled

No, this is not a road trip post. Although I have been on the road quite a bit over the past two days. And that plays a part. Being on the road has given me the chance to listen in on some of my favorite radio shows on AM 1090 here in Seattle: Stephanie Miller; Thom Hartmann; Ed Schultze.

What's struck me is the amount of time and attention being given to irrelevant, bullshitious side show topics like: The (in)effectiveness of torture. A bullet to the head is quite effective in preventing your lover from cheating, but that's murder. And it's illegal.

I know that by giving air time to this crap, they avoid the trap that I fall into: Torture is a war crime; Dubya is a war criminal; end of argument; now what do I talk about for the rest of the show/week/month..? But it's irrelevant whether or not it worked. Just as it's irrelevant that we're "at war." The moral bearings of those subjected to torture is irrelevant.

One of the things that came out during one of Thom's shows was the fact that after 9-11, the Muslim world was united and ON OUR SIDE! There's nothing inherently anti-American about Islam. bin Laden was inspired to do what he did on 9-11 by what we did in Lebanon. And those swelling the ranks of al Qaida are inspired by our actions in Afghanistan, Iraq... and abu Graib, Guantanamo, Bagram...

I don't give a rat's hairy ass if Nancy Pelosi knew about Bush's torture. Or Jane Harmon, or Harry Reid, or... Try them too. They should have their asses kicked just for continuing to use the term "enhanced interrogation." It's TORTURE. And if they knew and approved, then they're, what's the correct term? Assessories? Accomplices? Whatever. Arrest them and try them too. If Congress has to shut down because there's no quorum, so be it.

We're supposedly the good guys.

Then we should act like it.

We should begin by abiding by our own laws. By the treaties we've signed. By past precedents set during say the Nuremberg Tribunals, or the Andersonville Trials.

So where do I get off saying all this? Am I one of Joe Scarborough's morally superior Liberals? or as he said, Liberals who like to get all high and mighty with a sense of moral superiority. It's like this Joe: When you (or your ilk) argue in favor of torture, you place yourself on the same plain as those who would argue in favor of beating their wives or children to keep them in their place and teach them respect. I do nothing.

Am I morally superior to the Scar? I don't know. I suppose if I were given the chance to waterboard Sean Vannity....? What would be the measure? If I stopped when he shit his pants and sputtered his choked off squeals? If I ignored all that? Or if I never started? By ol' thumbs up to Keith O for calling out that little poppinjay. Any wayyyyy....

Don't get caught up in all the superfluity of assenine legal quackdom. Those who authorized, justified, exercised torture are criminals and should be tried as such.


Anonymous said...

Those who we elected to enforce our laws shouldn't be telling us in the case of torture it's political. Plain and simple, if you can't enforce our laws, step aside and let someone who can take your place. That probably goes for a great many in the Congress and on the Senate side as well.

Chris in Seattle said...

All of the arguments against prosecutions are ludicrous. Ignoring this is equivalent to hiding it. "Truth commissions" ... horseshit. Why are they so agreeable to sweep this shit under the rug? Are they just as guilty as Bush? Is Bush blackmailing them? With shit he got from his unconstitutional illegal wire tapping? That they couldn't muster the spine to stop? ???