« Have you noticed that those supporting Obama's decision not to release abuse photos did not criticize his earlier promise to release them? | truthseeker77's Blog | The Bronx deserved it »
GQ endangers our troops. Where's the outrage?
As you know, GQ published an article today detailing how Donald Rumsfeld likened US invasions into Muslim countries as a "Crusade" and even quoted the Bible.
Would anything anger terrorists more than a reference to the Crusades?
I expect those who opposed the release of detainee abuse photos under the argument that it would endanger our troops, to voice outrage about this new anti-troop GQ story.
Unless, of course, you were not really outraged in the first place about the photos because your goal is to simply make Obama look good no matter what he does.
Link to outrageous piece: http://men.style.com/gq/features/topsecret
Advertisement
How about those of us who agree that the photos should be released; and that if we prosecute torture and those who made it a policy, it will diminish the harm of those pictures? I think you're assuming that everyone agrees with Obama's decision on this. I don't, but for me the pics are a flea; it is the torture that is the problem.
The GQ pictures only prove what the muslim world already knows; that George was conducting his own crusade -- something he said himself. However, I am shocked that picture books with bible verses were his briefing materials. Even I didn't think he was that pathetic.
May 17, 2009 4:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Then you were not the target of my post. I wrote:
The group targeted in my entry was very specifically defined.
May 17, 2009 4:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, from your title, the implication that there were no voices against the suppression of the photos.
May 17, 2009 4:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't take the meta shit too seriously.
May 17, 2009 5:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think both GQ piece and the disclosure of the photos (memos, and all evidence for that matter) demonstrate to the world that while maybe America falls down; our system ensures that the dirty laundry comes out, we address it, and try and do better. Few other governments do anything like that without either being conquered or having a violent revolution.
I sure hope we don't end up like France is with Armenians ... arguing over the meaning of "genocide" (or torture) instead of simply addressing the underlying issue and victims, regardless of semantics, then moving forward with honor.
May 17, 2009 5:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can't decide if this is to do with making Obama look good or with inability to stop the pathological fixation.
Perhaps it's both.
May 17, 2009 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, you missed it. It's not about endangering the troops any more; apparently it's now about Obama demonstrating the wisdom to yield to the judgment of the seasoned veterans who have been in the trenches for lo these many years.
Justification tag! You're it.
May 17, 2009 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
God forbid they should trot out the old chestnut about Dems being soft on defense. We should probably go start a third foreign 'engagement' in order to dispel that myth once and for all.
May 17, 2009 8:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I thought the same thing when I saw these this morning. So very strange and these are just the cover sheets(and people thought Cheney was manipulating the Pres). It's true that the Muslim world probably realized this about Bush where many Americans still don't , but it's the same with the torture/abuse photos. They've seen much worse for years over there in the Arab press. Of course, the photos here are heroic images of the "Mission Accomplished" type . It seems national security secrecy is to protect from exposure at home as much as abroad. I wonder if he sent Bush any of the abuse photos with Biblical commands superimposed to justify it.
May 17, 2009 4:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh hell, this is like comedy. Seriously, if someone had done a mock-up of this for Jon Stewart back at that time ... they wouldn't have imagined it would *really* look like that.
I think you are right, this will just confirm what everyone in the Arab world thought about Bush. Hopefully Obama doesn't fuck up his image so we can attach it to Bush and let it float off and maybe some of the anger can start to dissipate.
May 17, 2009 5:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
For a split second, I thought about posting some mock-ups, but even though it's so very ludicrous, it's also so damned sad.
"Open the gates, that the righteous nation may enter, The nation that keeps the faith." Seriously?
Hope you're right, and hope may be all we have left here (don't see that much change).
May 17, 2009 6:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
"(don't see that much change)."
I do, espically the they of way the President has ran the Oval Office instead of running it like a deluted cowboy like Bush did. There other reasons as well. You were refering the President when you said that, yes?
Also to kgb, I don't see Obama having his image being fucked up. The man is too smart to let that happen. I don't look at him like a total fuck like me and the rest of us did with Bush. Like how he looked, talked and how he would butcher sentences. He was a fuck up with regards to that. I don't see that in Obama.
May 17, 2009 9:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of course, Bush and Obama are night and day. But we're talking specifically about the torture and renditions and invasions and occupations and bombing of civilians in the M.E. Imperial War of Civilizations.
I don't see Obama trying to rehabilitate America's reputation because he wants to bury what we've done; put the past behind us; fuggedaboutit. That will not solve the problem. Speeches in countries that are our rendition dictatorship friends like Egypt will not solve the problem (but it is acceptable to Israel, so we're good, right?).
At this rate, we likely will have the endless, omnipresent war Bush/Cheney dreamed of, not to mention the damage done to this country, which used to stand for something.
May 17, 2009 10:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
You make good points and I agree with you about Obama and torture. Yes i'm glad were not doing it anymore and i'm glad he's trying to close Gitmo by Jan '10,and getting out of Iraq within 1-2 years and I think I can speak for everyone when I said that we all want to move forward past the dark days of the Bushies but your right. We can't do it without an investigation of torture. Obama can try to swept this under the rug, but by doing this the 300 gorilla known as torture will always be in the room. That will never change.
Personally what do you think about the guy, you like him, is there anything that he's done you applaud. I'm curious?
But yeah i'm with you on what you said Don. You make good points and it's what kgb said, you can like a politican and still criticize him when you thing he's wrong and I just did it.
May 17, 2009 11:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I’ve liked Obama since his speech at the Kerry convention (he’s an impressive orator). He’s smart, eloquent, charming and, I believe, has his heart in the right place. He has poise as they say and always appears confident and strong, but is he?
When he ran for the nomination I read everything I could about him (not his books). What I noticed early on was that the higher he moved up in political stature, the more he played ball with the fat cats. He went from a progressive community activist who supported the Palestinians to assisting nuclear power corporations.
He is, above all, a politician.
I understand that he wouldn’t be president if he didn't play the game, but instead of playing to the right and swinging to the left after election, he did the opposite (actually started after locking up the nomination). These are not just signals or feints, this is where he’s going; what he’s doing. There will not be a 180 turn around at some time in the future. He's not playing some ingenious 3D chess game. He’s not pulling a rope-a-dope. This is where he’s landed and where he’ll stay- that seems to be the way it works in politics.
But these are not times for compromise and conciliation. His economic bailout included some good things in the stimulus, but not near enough, while the bank bailout is going to throw tens of $trillions down a hole instead of reforming the system. Making the "banks" bigger instead of breaking them up is a hurt that will keep on hurting working people for decades to come.
I love the things like the recent rollback on the fraud and usury that is the credit card industry, the promise of a new green industry, rebuilding infrastructure, greater college assistance and revamping regulating agencies. OTOH, health care, transparency, revamping regressive taxation, cutting military, reversing globalization trends (outsourcing and in-sourcing), immigration reform and other noble ideas are being or likely will be compromised away.
We can hope that Obama is the exception and once established and strong enough will become a true “change” agent but the longer he burrows into the DC establishment, the more he winces every time someone impugns his toughness on security or the economy, the less chance of that change. This is not the time for capitulation to achieve modest gains but for revolution. If that sounds like shrill radical leftist nonsense as our media would have people believe, tell it to Thomas Jefferson and company.
May 18, 2009 12:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well compromise is apart of government, everyone can't get what they want every time. But you makes some excellent points Don. For that I commend you.
May 18, 2009 12:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, Bradley, we can't get what we want every time. But if we try some time, we might find, we get what you need :)
May 18, 2009 3:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's true, if you fight for it. Very good point Don.
May 18, 2009 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
A good point from Mick and Keith, Bradley.
May 18, 2009 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don Key, an excellent write-up which accurately reflects the severe disappointment many of us have experienced thus far with Obama. My only "hope" left is a delusional thought that maybe, just maybe he is feigning and will swing for the Progressives ultimately. Otherwise, Obama would have indeed divided and conquered...the Left. Something Bush could never do. A most depressing prospect.
May 18, 2009 2:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
For someone who goes by the Orwellian name of "truthseeker..." you have a rabid contempt of those who tell the truth. Good for GQ !
When I see the USA destroying the Muslim World - over 1 million killed, and 3.5 million "displaced"(according to Amnesty International)- it makes me proud that Canada said "No" when Mr. Bush said "You are with us, or against us."
I am certainly against your Iraq Crusade.
I feel sorry for all Americans and their police state.
Sincerely,
A free man in Canada
May 17, 2009 6:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I could be wrong, but I think truthseeker had his tongue firmly implanted in cheek when he titled this blog, (otherwise known as snark).
May 17, 2009 8:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
why kaint oure adults and aduktdresss reed bery gud?
May 18, 2009 2:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well first of all, the speaker was Canadian, and as such may speak an obscure dialect sometimes known as the 'KING'S ENGLISH'. It is an idiom we need not address today dear Q. Now... Get that tongue out of your cheek laddie. Goood... press lightly to the soft palate... well done! Now 'flick' the tongue forward, off the teeth while expelling breath. There. See that wasn't sooo hard. We'll see you next week right here for further instructions .
May 18, 2009 2:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dude. Thanks a lot. I just horked on my monitor. Jeez.
May 18, 2009 5:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fortunately not on your keyboard. Much more serious consequences. LOL.
May 18, 2009 10:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
I do not assume Obama actually believes the formal reason for not complying with the court. But I can believe that some necessary allies do, or that they are just too uncomfortable facing more photos. I would bet Obama is more pleased than not with GQ, since they're doing what is needed, and he can dodge any heat from the right.
We will not achieve anything unless we get some support from the right, as in Nixon. The absence of that weakened Iran-Contra. Not only the weak case, but also the absence of significant Democratic support for impeaching Clinton doomed that. Obama can't do more than launch a war, without more GOP pols being offended by what they are now associated with.
May 17, 2009 7:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
The magazine Gentleman's Quarterly, aka GQ, did not make up the phraseology that invasions by the US into Muslim countries is a modern-day "crusade." By your own typing you acknowledge the attribution belongs to none other than Donald Rumsfeld: GQ published an article today detailing how Donald Rumsfeld likened US invasions into Muslim countries as a "Crusade"...
GQ did not "endanger" our troops. That dubious "honor" belongs to G. W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and the rest of the cast of characters that made up the administration of the 43rd President of the United States.
Where's the outrage? Pull your head out of your a... er, out of the sand. It's all around you.
May 17, 2009 8:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
First off, your point is way off the mark to begin with. Images of exactly what our troops did to detainees would result in retribution inflicted on any captured Americans. It doesn't only anger the Muslim world, it actually DOES endanger the troops.
The idea that Bush was on a religious crusade is old news to the Muslim world, who believed that already on tenuous evidence. It's nearly impossible to get the Middle East angrier at George W. Bush or the idea of our invasion of Iraq. Releasing the information that yes, W. is a fundie, holy warrior, blue-nosed baboon does nothing to put our troops in harms way.
Every time I read your blog, my emotional response is the same. First I get really angry that someone actually "thinks" this way, then I move to pity as I try to understand what it must be like to be this wrong, and to have to cope with the fact that your entire way of thinking is refuted and dying out. The neoconservative Republican meme is in its death throes and you and your colleagues on the right are grasping at straws.
May 18, 2009 9:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
What's the deal? Rumsfeld's quotes from the Bible only echoed what Bush heard God telling him in private. Rumsfeld was just making sure that Bush got the message right.
May 18, 2009 11:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
BWAhahahahahahahaha!
(thunk)
May 18, 2009 11:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oy! Me sides are hurtin', now, luv!
And here I am trying to go to sleep....
Shellie, you rawk.
May 19, 2009 12:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Geez, now I'm busy picking Bwak up and trying to get you to lay down.
Y'all rawk double!
Also.
May 19, 2009 12:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think the goal of those who don't want the pictures released is to prevent an investigation into those who authorized torture - Cheney/Bush/Rummy/Yoo/Bybee et al.
May 18, 2009 11:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Some of them ... like Gates and Odierno IMO.
May 18, 2009 2:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Some of them ... like Gates and Odierno IMO.
May 18, 2009 2:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey ... apparently this was important enough to say twice. Haven't done that in a while.
May 18, 2009 2:29 PM | Reply | Permalink