fearlessly proclaiming the truth & the other truth! voice of the teknoshamanic institute
The Most Offensive Defence is A Spun Offence.
Published on June 8, 2005 By kingbee In Politics

gulag.

amazing that one small word can be so powerful or evoke such a horrific response. 

i first became familiar with the concept while reading 'one day in the life of ivan denisovich' by alexander solzhenitsyn when i was still in grade school (clearly my recreational reading tastes were a bit precocious as well as extreme).  for a week during the summer between 7th and 8th grade, i shivered in the heat and humidity of late july in da motah city as ivan and i--convict slave laborers--endured the frozen extremes of siberia and the brutally inhumane excesses of a pitiless totalitarian state that had nullified our lives.

why were we there?  for how long would we remain?  there was no way of knowing.  worst of all, no one--least of all our former families and friends-- except those who kept us here and our fellow slaves knew for sure we even existed. 

amnesty international's international report, released on may 25, 2005, characterizes as a gulag the facility at guantanamo, cuba where the us holds some of  those captured in its war on terrorism.   not surprisingly, the current administration refutes that designation.  according to bush, it's an obvious case of disassembly (which he defines as lying).

not surprisingly, there are more than a few ju bloggers who are outraged by the amnesty international report.  

the war on terror is an honorable endeavor being waged against those who hate us and are willing to go to any length to destroy us because--as our president has proclaimed--they hate freedom.

finally  amnesty international has revealed its true agenda  and shown it hates us and our freedom as well.

how could we have been so foolish as to believe that an organization which has, for years, despised  the freedom enjoyed in north korea, china, vietnam, algeria, myanmar,  the maldives, turkey, morroco, today's russia, the former soviet union and its eastern european colonies, chile (under pinochet), argentina, cuba, the sudan and dozens of other bastion of freedom countries wouldn't eventually add us to the list.? 

fortunately we have plenty of examples on which to base our response---thanks to those nations for which this whole thing is old hat.

before we go there, let's clear something up.  guantanamo isn't a network of slave labor camps in the wilds of siberia into which millions of our own citizens disappear, most never to return.  hell, it's not even cold there.

on the other hand, perhaps amnesty international meant it figuratively.  after all, there are 500 people who've been locked up in gitmo for nearly 3 years without ever having been charged with any crime.  as far as they know, it could be another 20 years before they'll have a day in court.  their families have no clue as to their status.  no one except the force that's detaining them knows whether they're well or ill or alive.

nawwww.  that couldn't be it.

ai has a lotta nerve.  after all, didn't the president pledge in his 2nd inaugural address that the us was dedicated to spreading democracy and freedom.  aren't we spending billions and putting our military into harm's way to do just that in iraq?  if you can't trust our government, who can you trust?  

(who better to answer that question than those of you who join heston in announcing that they'll have to pry your gun outta your cold dead hands.  but then again, amnesty international doesn't own any guns huh?)

so anyway we're busy spreading freedom and democracy  not only by deed but by example--certainly there's no better advertisement than good example--and all amnesty international can do is criticize us.

no wonder cheney took offense and won't take ai seriously.  he's a flexible guy and just because he, the president and rumsfeld used to take them seriously enough to cite them multiple times in white house position papers  on hussein's iraq  Link  (In August 2001 Amnesty International released a report entitled Iraq -- Systematic Torture of Political Prisoners, which detailed the systematic and routine use of torture against suspected political opponents and, occasionally, other prisoners. Amnesty International also reports "Detainees have also been threatened with bringing in a female relative, especially the wife or the mother, and raping her in front of the detainee. Some of these threats have been carried out." ) , don't mean he cant change his mind.  or maybe his mind is the same but amnesty international is different. ( i can hear him singing along with joe walsh...'everybody's so different, i'm still the same.' )

fact is, amnesty international provided a good deal of the source material used by bush, cheney and rumsfeld to justify their planned invasion of iraq.  so having ai slam em now must really not bother them a bit because the organization just doesn't have any credibility

not that everything ai had to say about america was bad.  they approved the supreme court ruling that requires a court hearing for prisoners of the 'war on terror'.   big deal huh?

the final straw has to be ai's outrageous demands that the us stop secretly holding prisoners incommunicado (ghost prisoners), permit the international red cross access to all prisoners, ensure due process for all prisoners, implement an independent investigation of all allegations of torture and prosecute all who cause detainees to be brutalized or tortured while in the custody of the us. 

if that sounds familiar, it's probably cuz those damn amnesty international freedom-haters stole it directly from past presidents who demanded the soviet union do the same thing at their gulags.

if all of this pisses you off, you're not alone.

i'm pissed off too.  pissed off really badly that my country has engaged in the type of thing for which we used to condemn rogue states like north korea and the soviet union.   pissed off that my president says he wants to promote democracy and freedom throughout the world while eroding the essentials of democracy and freedom at home. pissed off that such blatant hypocrisy is ignored and--even worse--approved by those who claim to be the most stalwart advocates of the rule of law and our constitution.

one final note: in another thread, one commentor said he was dismayed because amnesty international had diminished the horror of the gulag in its report.  after all, there's no comparison.   this same commentor claims to be a student of history.  not a very good student in my opinion or he'd remember that gulags--like rome--aren't built in a day.  once you lay the first stone, the next one is a little easier. 


Comments (Page 7)
13 PagesFirst 5 6 7 8 9  Last
on Jun 09, 2005
"i don't know how this can be proved or disproved."


Oh... come on. That's argument for argument's sake. I can't believe you haven't seen just as many PBS or History Channel documentaries as I have wherein German and Japanese survivors of WW2 talk harshly about the US. That doesn't even count all the revisionists and apologists out there.

"it's my understanding the detainees in guantanamo are supposed to be more than mere combatants."


Yes, and my point was they aren't mere combatants, and neither are they criminals to be dealt with by the justice system. Neither is suitable. If the US government is pressed, they will tend to deal with them more as combatants, and less will be taken alive.

I can't pretend to know why the remaining prisoners are being kept in Cuba. Assuming the worst, that it is some sort of political prison, doesnt' make any more sense than assuming they are all raving, bloodthirsty terrorists. In the end we simply don't have a way of dealing with them, so they are in limbo.

What would you do with them Kingbee? Not being snide, I'd just honestly like to know. There are people there that will walk out and start rebuilding terrorist networks. Those same people haven't violated laws in the US so as to be traditionally prosecuted. What do you do?
on Jun 09, 2005
So we put the guy on trial, decide a sentence and he serves it. Mr. Padilla is only guilty at this point of WANTING or DESIRING to kill us. That is why we give him enemy combatant status, because he cannot be convicted of a crime that he has not commited yet.


enemy combatant status has nothing at all to do with preemptive justice. it's a quasi-legal category that was imagineered to sidestep the protections now provided by the geneva accords to guerilla (stateless) fighters.
on Jun 09, 2005
What would you do with them Kingbee? Not being snide, I'd just honestly like to know. There are people there that will walk out and start rebuilding terrorist networks. Those same people haven't violated laws in the US so as to be traditionally prosecuted. What do you do?


some are criminally liable because of their involvement with al quaeda attacks against the us or other nations. it also appears as if there are some who may be victims of circumstance (wrong place, wrong time or sold into detention by slick locals who collected a reward for their efforts)

i'd guess most are arabs rather than afghans because al quaeda in afghanistan was largely made up of arabs. unfortunately it's prolly too late now to do what could and should have been done.

after 3 years of interrogation and investigation, there shouldn't be anyone there who hasn't been positively identified or provided all the information we're gonna get. those who arent indictable should be handed over to their country of record. that's an imperfect solution at this point. saudis, yemenis, egyptians and others who might have been happily tossed into prison by their enlightened governments had this been done 2 years ago, are sure to be seen with some sympathy now.

obviously they're not gonna take with them fond memories that might soften their hatred.

the best we can hope for is to keep tabs on them now we know who they are. it's really not a lot different than law enforcement vs crime families. gang members are released from incarceration alla time. the cops know they're gonna go back to their crime careers.

if we'd managed to capture the entire al quaeda organization including bin laden, there would be no guarantee we'd not be attacked again. (not having captured bin laden we are much more vulnerable, but thats a whole other argument).

the other alternative is the clearly flawed approach that's responsible for the no-win situation in which we are now mired. what profits a man who gains the world but loses his soul?
on Jun 10, 2005
what profits a man who gains the world but loses his soul?


Wow.

When thinking about all this, that kept running through my head.

I can't believe you posted that. I swear, I've been thinking about that all day.
on Jun 10, 2005
Wait, though, where will you send them? If you send them back to their home nations, like Saudi Arabia, some will face almost certain death. Won't the world say we are letting other governments do out dirty work when al quaeda memebers are sent back and immediately imprisoned or executed?

Imagine, if you will, if we have another attack on the scale of 9-11, and people released are implicated? Sure, from the popular perspective the government of the US has an obligation to the basic human rights of everyone in the world. That isn't really in the job description, though. If we seek to please those abroad by releasing these people, and the people our government is REALLY bound to protect suffer or die, what do you think the response will be?

No win situation is right. To me, they are choosing the interests of the people who sent them to Washington in the first place.
on Jun 10, 2005
I can't believe you posted that. I swear, I've been thinking about that all day


it happen more frequently since me waz hired to do da miss cleo ting. wanna know wot you be tinkin of tursday nex? gurl...cawwlllll me nowwww!
on Jun 10, 2005
Kripes Kingbee. Your hostilitiy towards Amnesty is remarkable. To attack a group that has so vociferously defended human rights is despicable and exposes your blind allegience to the Bush administration. You should be ashamed. Perhaps you 've not researched the issues enough. An independent organization simply confirms the reports trickling through the media about human rights abuses and you leap to defend those who are either incompetent or hold firm diseregard human rights and you offer knee jerk defense to those doing wrong.

The U.S. has lost it's moral authority and you defend fascism. Perhaps, before you die, you will repent..
on Jun 10, 2005
I hope that was sarcasm, Deference...

( Really, if not, maybe you should read it again... )
on Jun 10, 2005
If we seek to please those abroad by releasing these people, and the people our government is REALLY bound to protect suffer or die, what do you think the response will be?


it's not a matter of pleasing anyone. nor does it have anything to do with anyone but us.

there are americans who are a lifetime away from being cognizant as you about why this country exists or the incredible convergence of talent and vision that brought into being. for that reason, they may not truly appreciate how easily we've drifted off course in the past. nor how fortunate we've been so far in recovering while it was still possible. i'm as sure as i am about anything that you do.

it may be safer--and it will surely be easier--to relax our standards, especially when the consequence of maintaining them has the potential for such dire catastrophe.

easier and safer doesn't come with a guarantee. and it aint free. if i gotta be like our enemies, id rather not be at all.
on Jun 10, 2005
I disagree with the use of the word "gulag". While I believe the statement was meant to show the level of international disgust that Gitmo has drawn (comparing THAT, rather than the actions of our troops, with "gulag"), it is an unreasonable comparison and an overreach that does not belong in their report.


we agree that 'gulag' is literal overstatement and if i'm reading you correctly, we also agree on ms khan's motivation for using it. i'd suggest a more accurate choice--considering the issue--might have been 'kafka-esque', but that adds a whole other layer of difficulty (jeez i hate it when i suddenly realize i have the makings of a great pun here but i'm not gonna give in dammit).

AI has generally been a nonpartisan watchdog group, and we can thank them for much of their work, INCLUDING their detailing the actions of Saddam Hussein upon which much of the justifications for our military actions were based. Equally valuable were the reports on the actions of Taliban led Afghanistan


you're absolutely correct (it was this realization that inspired my post). the us regularly endorses and employs ai credibility (well deserved credibility)...except when a president and his policies (reagan, clinton, bush) are criticized.
on Jun 10, 2005
[
Again, you try to attack me with your "liberal intellect". You are only muddying the waters and avoiding answering a very difficult question that our president is forced to answer on a daily basis.


I think that one of the main points about this that some people seem to be missing is that its not as black and white as its made out to be.

Therefore, the waters are not being muddied, the waters are being shown as they are, not as someone tells you they are
on Jun 10, 2005
I don't care about someone else's opinion.


I think this is the real problem
on Jun 10, 2005
Criticize Bush all you want, at least he's got the balls to do what you guys obviously have nightmares about. Seriously, if you bleeding hearts ran the country, every American might as well walk around with a bullseye on their back.


as a general truism, brains and no balls trumps balls and no brains. i'd suggest you look over your shoulder next time you pass a mirror if you think you're any more secure today than you were on september 10, 2001.
on Jun 10, 2005
I think this is the real problem


gotta hit ya with an insightful for that one ov
on Jun 10, 2005
what I found is they were unable to decide if Americans were assholes or not.


Umm, based on some of the comments in tis discussion, I would have to conclude that some are!

But again some aren't....

(I will probably be labelled a terrorist)
13 PagesFirst 5 6 7 8 9  Last