[Zipperfish]

BartSimpson wrote:

Myself, I find it amusing that Obama not only kept Gitmo, he's kept the US in Afghanistan and Iraq and now he's dragging us into war in Libya, too.

Amazing, the best operative the Republicans have in gettng back the White House is its current occupant.

Maybe he's trying to lure Republicans.

[BartSimpson]

Zipperfish wrote:

BartSimpson wrote:

Myself, I find it amusing that Obama not only kept Gitmo, he's kept the US in Afghanistan and Iraq and now he's dragging us into war in Libya, too.

Amazing, the best operative the Republicans have in gettng back the White House is its current occupant.

Maybe he's trying to lure Republicans.

I was about to write something snarky about gay rights but what's funny about that is Obama's stance on gay marriage puts him at odds with the Catholic Latinos who voted for him and it puts him at odds with the black Baptist crowd that supported him. Nationwide, he's looking at a loss of some 20 million votes next year just on gay rights.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/11/ ... 1859.shtml

Quote:

Other numbers paint an even grimmer picture. If exit polls are to be believed, some 70 percent of African-Americans voted Yes on 8, as did 52 percent of Latinos and 49 percent of Asians; each of these demographics went heavily for Obama, blacks by a 94-to-6 margin. Los Angeles County, heavily minority, went 50-50 on Prop 8. These results have shocked gay activists, who knew from earlier polls that black voters favored Prop 8, but they were seeing much smaller margins, closer to 50 percent.

Looking at this we can anticipate Obama losing support in those communities next year - especially in the swing states where such support is critical.

[Psudo]

I agree that the detainees by right deserve a case-by-case analysis. I don't particularly care whether that analysis is made public, but that's a minor quibble. My main complaint is that prisons are run by people with exactly the same rights, and I protest your assumption torture is standard operating procedure for American military prisons.

Janis Karpinski, formerly a Brigadier General and commanding officer of all Iraq detention facilities during the Abu Ghraib scandal, was reprimanded for dereliction of duty and demoted to the rank of Colonel. It's not conviction of a crime, but it is definitely a punitive response to someone a couple ranks more senior than Lieutenant Colonel Steven L. Jordan. The investigation that exposed the miserable mess of Abu Graib and resulted in her (Janis') demotion was instigated by her commanding officer, Major General Antonio Taguba. It seems to me that for Abu Graib to have been the fault of anyone higher in the "official channels" of the military command structure, Antonio Taguba would have had to have been involved. Instead, he was instrumental in investigating and prosecuting those involved.

I wonder, who was the lowest ranking officer Lt. Colonel Jordan and Guantanamo Bay Commanding Officer Captain Steven Blaisdell had in common? If there's an official connection between the abuses at Abu Graib and detainee treatment at Guantanamo Bay, orders to that effect would necessarily go through such a person. Whoever that person is, they would have had to outrank then-Brigadier General Janis Karpinski (whose authority was limited to Iraq) and have given orders to Antonio Taguba's underlings without his ever finding out. I state these criteria because I think this arrangement of traits is unlikely to exist, and even less likely in light of the very few individuals in a position to give such orders.

For full disclosure, both of these two generals have had an axe to grind against the Bush Administration since those events. Karpinski thinks she was punished for following orders, and Taguba thinks he was forced into early retirement for investigating Abu Ghraib. Almost everyone reflexively points fingers when things go badly for them. I've been wrestling with the urge to blame my bosses for two months since I lost my job. My perspective makes sense to me, but I don't have any proof and I have to admit I'm pretty bitter. Though I have no inclination to believe it, maybe my loss of my job is my own fault. Similarly, maybe Taguba was urged into early retirement for the very valid reason that his office leaked a confidential report to the press, a major security leak that he may even have approved. And I certainly believe Karpinski deserves demotion for her inability or unwillingness to prevent abuses of no interrogative value inflicted on the prisoners under her authority, orders or not, but claiming she was acting on orders provides the plausible self-justification she emotionally needs.

I've related this to myself to emphasize that I don't think these people are evil or stupid, but merely bitter -- like me. Their complaints can be explained quite plausibly by normal human reaction without resorting to a belief in an elusive conspiracy for which there is no evidence.

I retain my belief that there is no reason to generalize American military prisons as torture centers except emotional bias.

[Zipperfish]

Psudo wrote:

I agree that the detainees by right deserve a case-by-case analysis. I don't particularly care whether that analysis is made public, but that's a minor quibble. My main complaint is that prisons are run by people with exactly the same rights, and I protest your assumption torture is standard operating procedure for American military prisons.

Janis Karpinski, formerly a Brigadier General and commanding officer of all Iraq detention facilities during the Abu Ghraib scandal, was reprimanded for dereliction of duty and demoted to the rank of Colonel. It's not conviction of a crime, but it is definitely a punitive response to someone a couple ranks more senior than Lieutenant Colonel Steven L. Jordan. The investigation that exposed the miserable mess of Abu Graib and resulted in her (Janis') demotion was instigated by her commanding officer, Major General Antonio Taguba. It seems to me that for Abu Graib to have been the fault of anyone higher in the "official channels" of the military command structure, Antonio Taguba would have had to have been involved. Instead, he was instrumental in investigating and prosecuting those involved.

This is the age-old battle. When a scandal happens to the right, the left will try to pin the blame on the highest-ranked possible source (myself being, shamefully, no exception), whereas the right will seek to pin it as far down as possible. And vice versa of course. Human nature.

I'm just glad to hear you speak out against what happened there. To tell you the truth, what horrified me most of all was the rather blase response by many on the political right.

Quote:

I wonder, who was the lowest ranking officer Lt. Colonel Jordan and Guantanamo Bay Commanding Officer Captain Steven Blaisdell had in common? If there's an official connection between the abuses at Abu Graib and detainee treatment at Guantanamo Bay, orders to that effect would necessarily go through such a person. Whoever that person is, they would have had to outrank then-Brigadier General Janis Karpinski (whose authority was limited to Iraq) and have given orders to Antonio Taguba's underlings without his ever finding out. I state these criteria because I think this arrangement of traits is unlikely to exist, and even less likely in light of the very few individuals in a position to give such orders.

For full disclosure, both of these two generals have had an axe to grind against the Bush Administration since those events. Karpinski thinks she was punished for following orders, and Taguba thinks he was forced into early retirement for investigating Abu Ghraib. Almost everyone reflexively points fingers when things go badly for them. I've been wrestling with the urge to blame my bosses for two months since I lost my job. My perspective makes sense to me, but I don't have any proof and I have to admit I'm pretty bitter. Though I have no inclination to believe it, maybe my loss of my job is my own fault. Similarly, maybe Taguba was urged into early retirement for the very valid reason that his office leaked a confidential report to the press, a major security leak that he may even have approved. And I certainly believe Karpinski deserves demotion for her inability or unwillingness to prevent abuses of no interrogative value inflicted on the prisoners under her authority, orders or not, but claiming she was acting on orders provides the plausible self-justification she emotionally needs.

Sorry to hear you lost your job, old pal. I'm certain you'll find something soon. Just from knowing you on-line here I can see you have many remarkable qualities a prospective employer would appreciate.

[Psudo]

Zipperfish wrote:

This is the age-old battle. When a scandal happens to the right, the left will try to pin the blame on the highest-ranked possible source (myself being, shamefully, no exception), whereas the right will seek to pin it as far down as possible. And vice versa of course. Human nature.

Next time there's a lefty scandal, remind me to limit my accusations to those with material evidence against them.

Zipperfish wrote:

Sorry to hear you lost your job, old pal. I'm certain you'll find something soon. Just from knowing you on-line here I can see you have many remarkable qualities a prospective employer would appreciate.

You know that thing I do where I nitpick about tiny technical flaws in your logic? I don't think bosses like that. I appreciate your encouragement, though.

[Kjorteo]

I, too, am sorry to hear about your job loss and wish you all the best in finding another one. I've been looking around for the past few months, as well. The job market really isn't the best right now, unfortunately.