Tuesday, September 19, 2006

Trust Us, He's Guilty

Full story at http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=2456285

The US military has been secretly holding a Pulitzer Prize winning Iraqi AP photographer for five months, and have not officially charged him with anything. He had published a lot of photographs of the destruction of Fallujah, and was also able to photograph insurgents.

His crime? The US military believes he has “close relationships” with bad guys.
Are his pictures evidence of collusion with bad guys? Or, is he locked up because he takes pictures that embarrass or undermine the US Military?

This is exactly why secret detentions and secret evidence are so insidious. People can be locked up forever for pretty much any reason, and we’ll never know whether it is an abuse of power or a legitimate security concern.

After the WMD rationale fell apart, secret detentions and torture was the given reason we invaded Iraq. We used to call the Soviet empire evil because of it. It is a defining characteristic of totalitarian government.

Why do we continue to fight for values that we no longer uphold?

This also underscores how far Iraq has to go before it really has sovereignty. I presume the Iraqi constitution doesn't allow foreign soldiers to imprison their own citizens in their own country without the benefit of the rule of law, and yet that is where we apparently stand today.

<snark>If we are now going to start locking people up for having relationships with bad guys, maybe the guy shaking hands with Saddam in this picture should be locked up too.</snark>



6 comments:

snarkbutt said...

I like the HTML "snark" tags. I've never seen those before. Do they make the text within them drip with sarcasm?

Who IS that terrorist with Saddam? His outfit is sooo 1980.

Dan S said...

Is the text not dripping on your computer? Some HTML browsers don't recognize the <snark> command.

Hey what would a <snarkbutt> tag do, anyway?

KFingtree said...

Thank you Dan for posting that picture of 'Rummy' shaking the hand of the dictator that had nothing to do with 9/11. I believe that picture should be posted on every billboard next to every highway in America. Connect the dots is all you have to do, for this current inept administration is riddled with shady players of Oil based contractors. Iraq has never been about the war on terrorism, it's been about the same thing that hand shake was all about in 1983; Greed~
The Carlyle Group, Haliburton, Brown and Root etc.., connect the dots with these contractors and their executive boards, previous CEO and so forth. Tax shelter your headquarters in the Cayman Islands, create a diversion, fill the taxpayers with fear, use this same tax payer money (free money) to pay you and your friends with (Nepotism), never allow these tax payers to question where or how the money has been spent by using the Pentagon to cover their tracks(unprecedented corruption). Ingenious? No, Disgusting!!

Brownie said...

I don't know if it was Dan or Snark (I'm still waiting for my pizzas) who posted the photo, but I have a bone to pick with whoever did it.

I see a mirror image here. And the photo poster may want to look in that mirror.

You (whoever) condemn the adminstation for using "guilt by association" and then post this picture of Rummy & SadDUMB, effectively saying, LOOK, HE'S BAD BECAUSE HE ASSOCIATES WITH BAD GUYS!

Is this how it works?

Allow me to throw around some cliches. In my estimation, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If you want to be taken seriously, be serious. I hate to use the word hypocrite here, but if the shoe fits...

I'm calm. Just a little disappointed.

Namárië

snarkbutt said...

I didn't post the picture. I only post pics of emus and kittens.

Dan wasn't posting the picture to implicate Rumsfeld. He was doing it to point out the absurdity of a system that locks people up for who they associate with. If we use that standard, Rumsfeld himself should be locked up. (Although I'm sure Dan believes that Rumsfeld should be locked up, it's not because of his relationship with Saddam.)

Dan, I believe the "snarkbutt" tag would turn the text cynical, whiny, and little-brotherish. Use it at your own risk.

Dan S said...

So, *that's* what's wrong with my writing - I kept putting in those invisible snarkbutt tags, rendering them cynical and whiny.