sick - rather tasteless. Too bad Lyndie's superiors will escape the rath of a court martial. Pretty much sop for the armed services. If they were truly serious, they would make an example out of someone who was really in charge. (Rumsfeld comes to mind - of course you know that will never happen)
RE: the Abu Ghraib situation . . . There are two possible scenarios. Here they are, with the solution for each scenario: (1) The orders came from the highest levels, and reflect an "Unofficial" US policy of harassing prisoners in violation of International Law. This would mean the soldiers are telling the truth when they say "We wuz just followin' orders." In this case, the solution is to fire Rumsfeld. (2) They really were a renegade group acting on their own. This would mean that nobody is in charge, and our soldiers are allowed to run amok with no discipline until the public is made aware of it and becomes outraged. In this case, the solution is to fire Rumsfeld. (I know this is a little off topic.) Comments?
Preface: All who were involved in the Abu Ghraib crimes against humanity should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. Now, it's interestng that Abu Ghraib photos are readily available and have been broadcast by the liberal media ad nauseum, while the brutal beheadings of Americans in Iraq as well as the killing of innocent children in Beslan, Russia, by terrorists are nearly "hush hush." America is always the bad guy and the terrorists are the good guys to those on the far left of the political spectrum. The "Blame America First" crowd is as radical and as dangerous as the "America First" crowd in the days of Charles Lindbergh, Father Charles Coughlin, and the reborn Populist Party of the 1980's that still has remnants in pockets of Americana.
AGREED (heartily) The object was not "Let's blame America" as much as that those who allow such outrages should be held accountable for their actions (or lack thereof.) Let's see what the response is to the schoolchildren thing in Russia. I bet Putin does more than wring his hands over that.
We are supposed to set the example. If we are really better than the rest of the world, we have to show it by example and practice. No one, even the far left, beleives that American's are always the bad guys. The only people that are spouting off that are the Neo-con fear mongers. (the same people who started the flip-flop crap. If you look at the record, Bush is also one of those flip-floppers they hate so much) Do you ever stop the Neo-con dripple concerning the "liberal" media?
I have no problem with the liberal media just as I don't have a problem with the conservative media. I detest the far left and the far right media. They are subjective ideologues who cannot substantiate one iota of their claims, charges, or as you say, "dribble." Chris Matthews is considered a member of the liberal media and I thoroughly enjoy his commentaries. They are fair, non-partisan, and refreshingly objective and accurate, whether I agree with them or not. Bill Bradley, who writes political commentaries for some publications, is a liberal. But here again, he's fair, objective, and refreshingly honest. The problem with most who are critical of anyone who supports Bush is that they lock these supporters into an ideology of which many Bush supporters and a number of Republicans do not adhere. Furthermore, my dear friend, not every Bush supporter subscribes to every position he has, does, or will espouse. Anyone who agrees in toto with any politician, especially a leader, is treading on dangerous ground that smacks of Hitlerism or Stalinism. The sooner you learn this and apply these principles to your discourses, the sooner you will begin to expand your mind and view those who disagree with you in a respectful and civil light honoring freedom of thought, speech, and ideas. To do less reflects a mind that is closed and a brain that is strangulated.
