WP: Gitmo Grovel: Enough Already

[hokie4redskins]

Gitmo Grovel: Enough Already

By Charles Krauthammer

Friday, June 3, 2005; Page A23

The self-flagellation over reports of abuse at Guantanamo Bay has turned into a full-scale panic. There are calls for the United States, with all this worldwide publicity, to simply shut the place down.

A terrible idea. One does not run and hide simply because allegations have been made. If the charges are unverified, as they overwhelmingly are in this case, then they need to be challenged. The United States ought to say what it has and has not done, and not simply surrender to rumor.


Moreover, shutting down Guantanamo will solve nothing. We will capture more terrorists, and we will have to interrogate them, if not at Guantanamo then somewhere else. There will then be reports from that somewhere else that will precisely mirror the charges coming out of Guantanamo. What will we do then? Keep shutting down one detention center after another?

The self-flagellation has gone far enough. We know that al Qaeda operatives are trained to charge torture when they are in detention, and specifically to charge abuse of the Koran to inflame fellow prisoners on the inside and potential sympathizers on the outside.

In March the Navy inspector general reported that, out of about 24,000 interrogations at Guantanamo, there were seven confirmed cases of abuse, "all of which were relatively minor." In the eyes of history, compared to any other camp in any other war, this is an astonishingly small number. Two of the documented offenses involved "female interrogators who, on their own initiative, touched and spoke to detainees in a sexually suggestive manner." Not exactly the gulag.

The most inflammatory allegations have been not about people but about mishandling the Koran. What do we know here? The Pentagon reports (Brig. Gen. Jay Hood, May 26) -- all these breathless "scoops" come from the U.S. government's own investigations of itself -- that of 13 allegations of Koran abuse, five were substantiated, of which two were most likely accidental.

Let's understand what mishandling means. Under the rules the Pentagon later instituted at Guantanamo, proper handling of the Koran means using two hands and wearing gloves when touching it. Which means that if any guard held the Koran with one hand or had neglected to put on gloves, this would be considered mishandling.

On the scale of human crimes, where, say, 10 is the killing of 2,973 innocent people in one day and 0 is jaywalking, this ranks as perhaps a 0.01.

Moreover, what were the Korans doing there in the first place? The very possibility of mishandling Korans arose because we gave them to each prisoner. What kind of crazy tolerance is this? Is there any other country that would give a prisoner precisely the religious text that that prisoner and those affiliated with him invoke to justify the slaughter of innocents? If the prisoners had to have reading material, I would have given them the book "Portraits 9/11/01" -- vignettes of the lives of those massacred on Sept. 11.

Why this abjectness on our part? On the very day the braying mob in Pakistan demonstrated over the false Koran report in Newsweek, a suicide bomber blew up an Islamic shrine in Islamabad, destroying not just innocent men, women and children, but undoubtedly many Korans as well. Not a word of condemnation. No demonstrations.

Even greater hypocrisy is to be found here at home. Civil libertarians, who have been dogged in making sure that FBI-collected Guantanamo allegations are released to the world, seem exquisitely sensitive to mistreatment of the Koran. A rather selective scrupulousness. When an American puts a crucifix in a jar of urine and places it in a museum, civil libertarians rise immediately to defend it as free speech. And when someone makes a painting of the Virgin Mary, smears it with elephant dung and adorns it with porn, not only is that free speech, it is art -- deserving of taxpayer funding and an ACLU brief supporting the Brooklyn Museum when the mayor freezes its taxpayer subsidy.

Does the Koran deserve special respect? Of course it does. As do the Bibles destroyed by the religious police in Saudi Arabia and the Torahs blown up in various synagogues from Tunisia to Turkey.

Should the United States apologize? If there were mishandlings of the Koran, we should say so and express regret. And that should be in the context of our remarkably humane and tolerant treatment of the Guantanamo prisoners, and in the context of a global war on terrorism (for example, the campaign in Afghanistan) conducted with a discrimination and a concern for civilian safety rarely seen in the annals of warfare.

Then we should get over it, stop whimpering and start defending ourselves.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/02/AR2005060201750.html

[SEF]

You really think this article was written for liberals? Nice troll, though.

[TheKurp]

Who uses the word "schmuck" anymore?

[Destino]

Originally posted by hokie4redskins
The United States ought to say what it has and has not done, and not simply surrender to rumor.


I agree the United States should come out and say what's going on. The problem is that this information is constantly "classified" or thanks to camera phones (which the DoD in the interest of truth, banned) proven inaccurate. How can we believe what they tell us when they clearly seek to hide as much as they can get away with?

It seems to me that leaders "serving" the US beleive that they should do what they believe is best for us, and if we don't like it, hide what they've done.

What do you think hokie4redskins, you mouth breathing right wing idiot? :)

[jpillian]

Good read.

Pretty poor subject title.

[Canyonero!]

2/10 for trolling. The extra point because I kinda like "schmuck". Very retro.

http://boardwarriors.ytmnd.com

[mardi gras skin]

Originally posted by LC80
You really think this article was written for liberals?

Of course not. "Get over it" and "stop whimpering" aren't sensitive enough for the liberal lexicon. :laugh:

[Destino]

Originally posted by mardi gras skin


Of course not. "Get over it" and "stop whimpering" aren't sensitive enough for the liberal lexicon. :laugh:

You want sensitive? Show a womans back before a monday night football game.:laugh:

[Larry]

Here I saw "howling Schmuck" and thought this was another thread about political correctness and some football team's mascot.

"Now the starting defense for the Howling Schmucks, . . "

-----

That said, as I've said on some of the other 2,000 threads about Koran abuse: It ain't torture, it ain't even "going to far". It is hurting our war effort. If it's happening.

And the Bushies are bringing this crisis on themselves, with their insistance on secrecy.

As I've also said: If you insist that anybody who looks behind this wall will be shot, then people are going to imagine dark and sinister things going on behind the wall. (Particularly when there's no aparant reason for 90% of the secrecy, unless it's to cover something up.)

[Cskin]

I liked the illumination of just exactly how far the US bends over backwards to accomodate enemy combatants... giving them their Korans and three square meals a day. Want to know what our POW's get? A knife across the throat! :doh: And the Left whines about one of our interrogators not using two hands to handle the Koran. :doh:

[hokie4redskins]

Subtle jabs at liberals are Krauthammer's MO. If you're blind to the underlying undertones, that's on you.

[Johnny Punani2]

Originally posted by Cskin
I liked the illumination of just exactly how far the US bends over backwards to accomodate enemy combatants... giving them their Korans and three square meals a day. Want to know what our POW's get? A knife across the throat! :doh: And the Left whines about one of our interrogators not using two hands to handle the Koran. :doh:

Dead on...

[Joe Sick]

He knew that the Pentagon was going to confirm the Koran desecration stories that Newsweek posted.

This is a pre-emptive strike. Have to be ready to change the talking point from "Newsweek is a liberal rag out to get the president" to "Well, mistreating the Koran isn't so bad."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8090656/

[portisizzle]

Originally posted by Joe Sick
He knew that the Pentagon was going to confirm the Koran desecration stories that Newsweek posted.

This is a pre-emptive strike. Have to be ready to change the talking point from "Newsweek is a liberal rag out to get the president" to "Well, mistreating the Koran isn't so bad."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8090656/

Wasn't that Clinton's MO?:D

[Thiebear]

You should edit the title: Rules state you list the title of the article and post your thoughts in the post there shrek...

I said on Day one there were 16ish abuses to the Koran/Quran whatevah.... and of that 5 May be real... of that I say who cares...
Said it from day one and say it now... WHO cares...

You give them the Koran.
You give them religiously based meals
You give them Geneva Convention rules that dont apply in my opinion and Torture now is defined as hurting their feelings... as opposed to actual torture. Physical abuse / Sleep/mind altering abuse...

Anywho.. was a nice trolling piece though...

[Spaceman Spiff]

Originally posted by Cskin
I liked the illumination of just exactly how far the US bends over backwards to accomodate enemy combatants... giving them their Korans and three square meals a day. Want to know what our POW's get? A knife across the throat! :doh: And the Left whines about one of our interrogators not using two hands to handle the Koran. :doh:

Yep.

[bearrock]

Originally posted by Thiebear
You should edit the title: Rules state you list the title of the article and post your thoughts in the post there shrek...



I thought Shrek was an ogre. ;)

[Thiebear]

Originally posted by bearrock


I thought Shrek was an ogre. ;)

He's more like an onion...

[bearrock]

Originally posted by Thiebear


He's more like an onion...

Tis true. What with all them layers.

[JimboDaMan]

Originally posted by Joe Sick
He knew that the Pentagon was going to confirm the Koran desecration stories that Newsweek posted.

This is a pre-emptive strike. Have to be ready to change the talking point from "Newsweek is a liberal rag out to get the president" to "Well, mistreating the Koran isn't so bad."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8090656/
Correct.

Now that the Pentagon has issued these findings, might I expect the right-wing foamers on this board to denounce "al Pentagon" and "Osama Bush"? If such drivel is directed at Newsweek, is there any reason other than hypocrisy not to direct the same blame at the military command?

[Larry]

As I said elsewhere:

When I hear complaints about a Koran being flushed, I get this image of Darth Vader. "And now, Your Highness, we will discuss the location of your secret rebel base, or I will stick pins into this teddy bear."

Of the abuses listed in the article, the only one I'd call abuse is the one that involves urine on a prisoner.

-----

That said, yeah, I agree. This release was deliberatly co-ordinated with the attacks on Newsweek et al, and was intentionally timed to try to keep as many people as possible from hearing about it at all.

And I'll also repeat: When photos come out about naked human pyramids, you don't help the reputation of the country by
Banning cameras from the prisons.
Smearing the paper that printed them.
Smearing the people in them. (Although, admittedly, they are guilty).
Announcing that it's merely a coincidence that these "isolated incidents" just happen to follow a plan that the White House drew up before the war.
Condemming the actions, but, we've got these legal position papers that say they were completely justified. But will be punished, anyway.
Promoting the guy who drew up the plans before the war (but which the US would never, ever, authorise. We just drew up the plans as an exercise.)
Announcing that after a carefull review, the incidents photographed are definatly, obviously, the only violations. All of them. We're shure.

And then wondering why "terrorists" (who you've held in solitary for years, but who you're now releasing with no charges whatsoever, but you're certain that every single person who's still 'disapeared' is guilty) claim they've been mistreated, and some folks believe them.

[Joe Sick]

And remember, this wouldn't have been a big deal if all the talking heads didn't blame the riots on Al Newsweek.

Now, it's going to be a way bigger story, although, in my mind, the actual torture on film is WAY worse.

And there are another group of pictures and video about to be released. (I'm sure it will be done on a Friday, also, like the latest economic numbers were. This administration counts on people to not be informed.)

A quick related question: If a Christian was in jail and a guard pi$$ed on their bible, would they pitch a fit?

[visionary]

This is a big story?????

Detainees, not soldiers, flushed Quran
Soldiers kicked, splashed urine on holy book


(CNN) -- A U.S. military investigation into the mishandling of the Muslim holy book at the Guantanamo Bay prison for suspected terrorists has determined that detainees -- not U.S. soldiers -- attempted to flush the Quran down the toilet there.

However, the report did find four confirmed incidents in which U.S. personnel at the base mishandled the Quran, including guards kicking a detainee's Quran; a guard's urine "splashed" a detainee and his holy book after coming through an air vent; and guards got in a water balloon fight that resulted in two detainees' Qurans getting wet.

In a fifth confirmed incident, it could not be determined whether a guard or a detainee wrote a two-word obscenity in a detainee's Quran.

The findings of the report, issued by Brig. Gen. Jay Hood, commander of the detention center in Cuba, were released late Friday. They found no evidence to support allegations that U.S. soldiers attempted to flush the Muslim holy book down the toilet.

The investigation was prompted after a Newsweek article citing unnamed sources made such a claim -- prompting violent protests in Afghanistan and other parts of the Muslim world that left more than a dozen people dead. (Full story)

Newsweek has since retracted the story.

The Hood report cited three separate incidents in which detainees tried to flush the Quran down the toilet.

In one incident, on February 23, 2004, the report said a guard saw a "detainee place two Qurans in his toilet and state he no longer cared about the Quran or his religion.

Five minutes later, after the detainee retrieved the Qurans, he ripped several pages out of one Quran and threw the pages on the floor. Then, he placed both Qurans on the sink."

Another time, on January 19, 2005, a detainee "tore up his Quran and tried to flush it down the toilet. Four guards witnessed the incident," the report said.

The report also cited 12 other incidents by detainees, including one who used his Quran as a pillow, another who urinated on his holy book and several who ripped pages from the Quran.

Capt. Jeff Weir, an Army spokesman at the facility, told CNN in a phone interview that the detainees were typically trying to stage some form of protest when they mishandled the Quran.

Hood said investigators reviewed more than 30,000 documents in an exhaustive probe.

"The inquiry found no credible evidence that a member of the Joint Task Force at Guantanamo Bay ever flushed a Quran down a toilet. This matter is considered closed," the report said.

It said the U.S. military has issued more than 1,600 copies of the Quran since January 2002, conducted more than 28,000 interrogations and carried out thousands of "cell moves."

"Mishandling a Quran at Guantanamo Bay is a rare occurrence," Hood said. "Mishandling of a Quran here is never condoned."

The investigators defined mishandling as "touching, holding or the treatment of a Quran in a manner inconsistent with policy or procedure."

Hood said the investigative team looked into 19 incidents involving allegations of mishandling of the holy book, only five of which could be confirmed.

Ten of the incidents did not involve mishandling of the Quran, the report concluded. Four incidents could not be verified.

According to the report, the five confirmed incidents were:

* In February 2002, a detainee complained that guards kicked the Quran belonging to a detainee in a nearby cell.

* On July 25, 2003, a contract interrogator apologized to a detainee for stepping on his Quran in an earlier interview. The interrogator was later fired "for a pattern of unacceptable behavior, an inability to follow direct guidance and poor leadership."

* On August 15, 2003, night shift guards threw water balloons in a cell block, wetting the Qurans of two detainees.

* On August 21, 2003, a detainee complained that a "two-word obscenity had been written in English on the inside cover of his English version Quran." The report noted that the detainee knew English and Arabic, and it could not be determined exactly who wrote the phrase. "It is possible that a guard committed this act; it is equally possible that the detainee wrote in his own Quran."

* On March 25, 2005, a detainee said "urine came through an air vent" and "splashed on him and his Quran while he laid near the air vent." A guard admitted he was at fault, saying he urinated near an air vent and the "wind blew his urine through the vent into the block." The detainee was given a new uniform and Quran. The guard was reprimanded and placed on gate guard duty away from detainees.

Weir, the Army spokesman at the facility, said about 540 suspected terrorists are housed at the maximum security prison. Noting that only five incidents of mishandling of the Quran could be confirmed, he said, "I will stand by the record here: It's outstanding."

He said even if a U.S. soldier was "contemplating misbehaving," it would be extremely difficult.

"Nothing goes unchecked in Guantanamo Bay," he said. "Everything is documented."

There are about 540 detainees at Guantanamo Bay. Some have been there more than three years without being charged with a crime. Most were captured on the battlefields of Afghanistan in 2001 and 2002 and were sent to Guantanamo Bay in hope of extracting useful intelligence about the al Qaeda terrorist network.

Both U.S. President George W. Bush and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld have denounced an Amnesty International report that called the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay "the gulag of our time."

The president told reporters at a press conference on Tuesday that the report by the human-rights group was "absurd."

On Wednesday, Rumsfeld called the characterization "reprehensible" and said the U.S. military had taken care to ensure that detainees were free to practice their religion.

However, he also acknowledged that some detainees had been mistreated, even "grievously" at times. (Full story)

Copyright 2005 CNN. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Associated Press contributed to this report.



Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/06/03/guantanamo.quran/index.html

[boobiemiles]

I'd rather be a bleeding heart liberal, especially when conservatives uses the word "schmuck". Why is it a problem to treat people with dignity? If I'm followng you guys right then we should start treating these guys with the same percieved malace that we are against.

[Destino]

Originally posted by boobiemiles
I'd rather be a bleeding heart liberal, especially when conservatives uses the word "schmuck". Why is it a problem to treat people with dignity? If I'm followng you guys right then we should start treating these guys with the same percieved malace that we are against.
Treating people with dignity because we are NOT them, has been replaced with a blood lust that is anything but moral and good. We should be like them, because that'll show'em not to mess with us. (nevermind that the terrorist want the situatioin to worsen because it aids their efforts)

Not to mention the true problem here is that it's so damn hard to get a straight answer these days. Newsweek made it up....no wait..wait...no it's true....no wait....no it turns out the prisoners were the ones flushing the book. I'm sure next week we'll hear a new version and so on.

[BG]

http://www.aivotrusti.org/x/we%20aint%20found%20****.jpg

[Johnny Punani2]

Still bringing up the newsweek article.

It's been shown that the article was WRONG and still there are those who in their delusional minds think it's some how been proven right.

[Thiebear]

Originally posted by Joe Sick
And remember, this wouldn't have been a big deal if all the talking heads didn't blame the riots on Al Newsweek.

Now, it's going to be a way bigger story, although, in my mind, the actual torture on film is WAY worse.

And there are another group of pictures and video about to be released. (I'm sure it will be done on a Friday, also, like the latest economic numbers were. This administration counts on people to not be informed.)

A quick related question: If a Christian was in jail and a guard pi$$ed on their bible, would they pitch a fit?


Umm Joe, ever heard of the virgin mary covered in elephant dung or the Cross upside down in a glass of urine?

Welcome to torture known as Art...

[Larry]

Originally posted by Johnny Punani
Still bringing up the newsweek article.

It's been shown that the article was WRONG and still there are those who in their delusional minds think it's some how been proven right.

Hard to figure out exactly which way to disagree with this. Let's try to list some of them.

Funny. The "spin it 'till it goes away" army's response to the article has gone from

Newsweek is a liberal rag. Everything they say is a lie, no further response needed.
They obviously made up the entire thing with no basis whatsoever, because they hate America and love terrorists.
Well, they had one source and a kind-of confirmation, but they should have had more before they printed it. And even if they had proof they still shouldn't have printed it, because we're at war, buddy, and you'd better salute if you know what's good for you.
Well, they might've been basing their story on this FBI report, but the FBI report was only based on stories from terrorists. (Talking point number 357: Everybody in Gitmo, or anywhere else for that matter, is a terrorist. Even the thousands we've let go without charges.) And the FBI said they weren't able to prove that it happened, so it didn't.
Well, it turns out, there really was a military report, and it really did verify Koran abuse, and not just according to "terrorists", and it really did mention flushing one down the toilet, but the Newsweek article, while it did correctly identify two things in the report ("Government confirms 'mistreatment' of Koran" and "Koran flushed"), it said (or implied. I seem unable to find the original article for the exact wording.) that the Koran flushing was one of the interrogators abuses, and that means they were slightly off, and that proves that they're still wrong.


Wow, it's kind-of like watching the "What's the reason we started this war this week?" show.

-----

The double standard of what constitutes "a lie" or "wrong" is still really amusing.

George Bush uses information in his State of the Union speach, when he has on his desk two, independant, statements that the information is, respectuvely, 'unable to verify and highly unlikely', and 'a forgery'. His administration spokesmen answered hundreds of questions about the need for war with variations of "We don't have to wait untill after the mushroom cloud".

But he never once used the exact words "imminent threat".

He used this spin in order to justify the invasion of another country.

Right-wing response: Nope, no deception here. (And "Clinton did it, too.")

Newsweek has information that they've been hearing for years, but from unreliable sources. A government source tells them that he's seen a government report that confirms what have, untill now, been rumors. A second source tells them that parts of the first source's information is wrong, but doesn't disagree with this other part.

They use this information to print a two-paragraph magazine article.

Right-wing response: Newsweek completely falsified this story, because they like terrorists. The story has been proven wrong.

[Earthcat]

Untill we are truthful with ourselves and the world, we are the wrong side spiritually. What are we afraid of? Oh, Hokie I know what you're afraid of...you're afraid you might have to play the Tigers again.

[bird_1972]

Originally posted by Earthcat
Untill we are truthful with ourselves and the world, we are the wrong side spiritually. What are we afraid of? Oh, Hokie I know what you're afraid of...you're afraid you might have to play the Tigers again.
:wtf:

[Beaudry]

huh? Why are we giving them all their own Korean? I'm suprised the civil liberty people aren't more concerned about that!

[chomerics]

Originally posted by Beaudry
huh? Why are we giving them all their own Korean? I'm suprised the civil liberty people aren't more concerned about that!

Hey where do I find my own Korean, I always liked their women :laugh:

The talking points of the righties are outright ludicrous. It just goes to show how many people tote the party line no matter what. People still are saying Newsweek was wrong, even though Larry put it correct on both counts.

I have found it increasingly amusing that the righties no longer debate any topic at hand. They know their talking points are so far off bounds, it's laughable. But then again, why would anybody try to argure an ever changing position? Hell, they know in a week that position will change, so they don't want to end up sounding like a fool and fail to debate the topic. All you get is one liners about the "evil liberal media".

Come on now, this is how the day goes for most of the righties. THey start the morning listening to Fox news and they hear about the "evil liberal media". They drive to work and listen to Hannity talk about the "evil liberal media". At lunch they listen to Rush talk about the "evil liberal media". They drive home and listen to Savage talk about the "evil liberal media" They come home and put on Fox News and talk about the "evil liberal media" The watch O'Reiley talk about the evil liberal media. They hop online and see the Washingtom Times, Newsmax and Worldnet talk about the "evil liberal media". They then go to bed thinking about the "evil liberal media" . . . not even recognizing that the media they watch, read and listen to is NOT liberal. Yet they think that they are some how correct in their thinking because a bunch of partisain hacks backed by the RNC is somehow "fair and biased".

:doh: :doh: :doh:

[Kilmer17]

Originally posted by TheKurp
Who uses the word "schmuck" anymore?

My grand-mother. But she thinks it's a curse word.