How many shoes are this admin allowed?

[Norm]

:

Interrogators at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, forced a stubborn detainee to wear women's underwear on his head, confronted him with snarling military working dogs and attached a leash to his chains, according to a newly released military investigation that shows the tactics were employed there months before military police used them on detainees at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

The techniques, approved by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld ....

[Jonathan]

[bobfrgsn]

[Jonathan]

[mlovell]

[Norm]

[Jonathan]

[mlovell]

[Jonathan]

[Norm]

:

Interrogators at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, forced a stubborn detainee to wear women's underwear on his head, confronted him with snarling military working dogs and attached a leash to his chains, according to a newly released military investigation that shows the tactics were employed there months before military police used them on detainees at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

The techniques, approved by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld ....

Jonathan: Let's make sure, then, to keep the good folks at the WaPo away from fraternity houses. This scandal might really get big.

You are a bit late; it is already big. In our responsibility, people have died due to our treatment, not to mention the anger fueled against our country for treatment of prisoners that did not lead to death. And this report strongly points to a culture of mistreatment that stems directly from Rumsfeld. Roll your eyes if you wish, but some of us are concerned for the welfare of this country (and others) and its ethical ideals. We desire justice, but don't wish to sacrifice the best of our heritage in its pursuit. To sacrifice such would, then, attenuate our moral ground for said administration and the argument that a similar form of government to our own is worthy of emulation.[/quote]

Jonathan: I roll my eyes at the shock expressed over a report in the Washington Post where an individual who is committed to the mass death of US citizens is forced to have a female undergarment placed in his head and/or to be subject to barking dogs....and this, in the face of beheadings, discoveries of mass graves, etc... is considered a "culture of mistreatment"? Cry me a river. Heck, they get three amazing squares per day, a US tax payer funded translation of their holy text, etc...

How many squares do those that died in our custody now receive? How much bitterness toward the US have we created by using means that for years has been known not to be effective in gaining information? Are we now a nation that embraces the end justifies the mean?

Here's an idea: let's have the trials that show that this treatment is neither illegal nor a violation of Geneva (uniformed troops anyone?) then let's broadcast to the world the clear message: "If you purpose to murder Allied citizens under the guise of holy war and we don't kill you outright, prepare yourselves for panties and doggy drool."

How about we bring said people to justice and demonstrate behaviors for doing such that is consistent with the highest ethical/moral standards that humanity is capable and of which this country likes to tout? As Christians, are we at our patriotic best and serve our country well with bloodlust?

Jonathan: If you are truly concerned about the welfare of this country and its ethical ideals, where is the outrage at Isikoff's blunder that led directly to innocent deaths or where is your support for hunting down and killing all Al Queda members?

Isikoff was not verified on one point, but was on the larger one, that is, we have treated prisoners with a good degree of ineptness and such fuels hatred for this country. Still he was wrong to publish said detail until it was verified, and he did his country and others a disservice with said detail. Where have I not supported bringing to justice those that have criminally disabused the United States?

[Jonathan]

[Norm]

[Jonathan]

[Norm]

[Tony]

[Norm]

[mlovell]

[Jonathan]

[mlovell]

You're apparently okay with assigning "irrational" to me -- though it's not a word I used. Recall that you've more than once called people to task for using comparisons with far more differences, including differences in degree, than similarities.

My point: You declared as fact that which has not been proven or demonstrated.

These two, plus other recent posts from you (one with an interesting omission from a quote you cited to make your point), indicate that you're not feeling particularly bound by facts. I presume you'd use facts if you had them.

[Jonathan]

[mlovell]

[Jonathan]