RANGER AGAINST WAR: Genesis <

Saturday, September 01, 2007

Genesis

Salvation is a last-minute business, boy
--
The Night of the Hunter, James Agee

The weak in courage is strong in cunning

--The Marriage of Heaven and Hell, William Blake

And God saw every thing that he had made,
and, behold,
it was very good
--Genesis 1:1, the Bible

_________

Unfortunately, GWB misunderestimated [sic] when he heard "God said unto them. . .[subdue and] have dominion over. . .every living thing that moveth upon the earth." He did not mean the U.S. executive branch, via the military and judicial system.

But this is, after all, the man who said, "It's the executive branch's job to interpret law." (The satin sash emblazoned "South Carolina" which he wore campaigning should've been a hint.)

The
New York Times Op-Ed charges "Abu Ghraib Swept Under the Carpet" following the dismissal Tuesday of most charges against Lt. Col. Steven Jordan, leaving the tag of misfit deadenders on the 11 low-ranking soldiers who were skewered with charges for their abusive treatment of prisoners.

The higher-ranking misfits, "President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other top officials have long claimed that the abuses at Abu Ghraib were the disconnected acts of a small number of sociopaths. It’s clear that is not true."

"Abusive interrogations, many of them amounting to torture, were first developed for Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, after Mr. Bush declared that international and American law did not protect members of Taliban or Al Qaeda, or any other foreigner he chose to designate as an 'unlawful enemy combatant'."

But Abu Ghraib and Gitmo were not the first instances of torture in U.S. policy in the Phony War on Terror (PWOT ©).

How quickly America forgets the story of Californian John Walker Lindh, captured while serving as a Taliban rifleman in Afghanistan.


As a result of confused combat, Lindh was captured as an enemy combatant, which surely he was.
Combatant--yes; terrorist, no.

U.S. citizen Lindh was held
incommunicado 55 days following his capture. Testimony seems to bear out the fact that U.S. military brutalized and massacred Taliban captives (or allowed the Northern Alliance to do so) at Qala-i-Janghi fortress near Mazar-i-Sharif, where Lindh and his band were trapped.

Lindh was shot through the leg in a prisoner melee. After being secured, Lindh was stripped, taped to a stretcher and kept unfed inside a dark and freezing metal container for two days prior to his FBI interviews. When his blindfold was removed after this ordeal in the crate, an FBI agent presented him with a form waiving his constitutional rights. Lindh never received a note from his parents, sent via Red Cross, that they had retained counsel for him (Chertoff and Torture.)


The FBI interviews continued for two days. Afterwards, he was transferred to the USS Peleliu, where he was treated for dehydration, hypothermia and frostbite. The next day the bullet was removed from his leg.


Ranger reckons this is where it all started. The Departments of Justice, State, Defense and the CIA all learned that murder, torture and degradation were acceptable behaviors in the name of good. Thank you, Jesus, for wiping the true believer's slate clean for any number of atrocities.


However, the most egregious offense was to be committed later by the DoJ and the Federal Court system.
None of Lindh's statements could be considered voluntary, and should not have held up to a Fifth Amendment challenge. Instead, he is now serving a 20-year sentence obtained in a plea bargain, for committing a felony while in possession of a firearm.

One can expect CIA and DoD to trample upon the rights of a U.S. citizen, but not the Federal Court system.
Its independence and allegiance to an inviolable document, The Constitution, was hitherto sacrosanct.

Now, contrast Lindh's treatment with that received by Lt. Col. Jordan. This is the brave new version of fair and equal treatment that has become the hallmark of American justice.

Labels: , ,

10 Comments:

Blogger The Minstrel Boy said...

this has been one of the more shameful results of the bush administration's policies. during the first gulf war the american forces were still the army of choice for anyone wanting to surrender. there were stories about german units traveling hundreds of miles to surrender to americans. why? because they knew they'd be treated decently.

this policy had its beginnings with the policy of george washington during the revolution. there were several problems right at the beginning of the revolution. the british were conflicted in their policy because rebels could be classified as traitors, not enemy soldiers. common european conventions like prisoner exchange (especially of officers) were something that was legally murky. the hessians especially had a reputation for brutality toward captured troops.

washington thought long and hard. he wrote many soul searching letters to his subordinates and other revolutionies like dr. benjamin rush. his decision was that our response to abuses by the british and hessians was to demonstrate that this very behavior was one of the reasons we were in rebellion. he realized that it wasn't about who we were fighting, it was about who we were and would become.

with the hessians especially there was a wonderful unintended consequence. when hessian prisoner began to be held in western pennsylvania they discovered whole communities of german speaking people, ownership of land was a real possibility.

word spread through the hessian ranks that they could expect better treatment from the rebels than they could from their own officers. there began to be cases of the rank and file killing their officers and surrenduring (or maybe defecting would be the better term) en masse.

i have never, for a moment, bought the "few bad apples" defense of the government. i have seen bad apples at work and it is usually one or two assholes working in secrecy and darkness. this was entire units, whole facilities, operating as groups. they were so secure in the justifiable nature of their actions that they took pictures and videos. that is the action of folks that feel they are operating within the scope of their orders.

i have also had experience with operations whose scope was beyond the pale of policy. usually on a base like that we took steps to ensure that our actions would never see the light of day. things like personal cameras were banned, personal correspondence was discouraged. often we would have secured compounds within someone else's base. when we were in the areas of shadow and questionable legalities we behaved like we had something to hide.

the kids at abu ghraib didn't act like that at all. somebody with some brass on their hat told them they were okie dokie. and now they are paying heavy prices for being enlisted reservists without the courage to take on their own command structure.

it sickens me.

Saturday, September 1, 2007 at 9:42:00 AM EST  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Lindt case bothered me from the beginning, not just for the in-your-face cruelty and insane ignoring of Constitutional rights, but for reasons related. This young man was an American, and no, this doesn't entitle him to "special" rights....but it DID entitle him to several he didn't get. He signed up for foreign service in response to his own beliefs. Even our enemies, in most other wars, were treated with more respect than he received. And what about service in "other" armies, anyhow?

America's Army has service members who are not Americans. Do we expect that if they are captured by our enemies...or their home nation, that THEY should be treated as was this young man? We knew that the Taliban was in no position of nationhood to protect their erstwhile soldier and we responded brutally.

America acted barbaric....and not in this case, alone, obviously. But it seems to me there was a special fury with regards to this case, insulted that an American boy could make common cause with our enemies. Nevermind that free will and choosing for ourselves is supposed to BE what being American is about....Americans took sides in the Spanish Civil War, and we didn't lose our mind over that, did we?

And when Mr. Lindt went to Afghanistan initially, no state of war existed; so how was he a traitor? And when we went to war, please correct me if I was wrong, but wasn't it to get Osama bin Laden, wasn't the Taliban only a side dish? Minstrel Boy is right...shameful barely describes it. There is a traitor to American ways, alright, but he wasn't captured in Afghanistan.

Saturday, September 1, 2007 at 12:37:00 PM EST  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

minstrel boy,

A shameful change from Gulf War I, and all previous American engagements.

The photos from GW I are memorable of the units giving up en masse to U.S. troops, so sure were they of civil treatment.

I was repulsed by the initial exploitations of 9-11. Everyone bought that somehow everything had changed, hook, line and sinker. In reality, the only thing that changed, was us.

Due to that societal blindness and vengefulness, we are now reaping the winds. It is not what they do, but rather what we do, that makes us Americans. We forgot that.

The abuse of citizens Lindh and Padilla, the grotesqueries of Abu Ghraib, these are but the visible results. Of course Abu Ghraib came down from above. Those MP's were not clever enough to have engineered the systemic policies of abuse which they perpetrated. And those policies would not have spontaneously arisen simultaneously among so many.

Saturday, September 1, 2007 at 1:39:00 PM EST  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

labrys,

I am with you--you have said it well. OBL was the target, not Taliban. Our brutality removes our legitimacy.

Your comment on the traitor in our midst is correct, and we stand in thrall to him and our Congress at the moment.

Saturday, September 1, 2007 at 1:46:00 PM EST  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Might I suggest Steve Earle's John Walker's Blues off his Jerusalem CD. Steve has always exhibited the courage to write about controversial issues. Rich man's War off his The Revolution Starts Now CD is another gem in the same vane.

Sunday, September 2, 2007 at 1:16:00 AM EST  
Blogger The Minstrel Boy said...

please allow me to second trip wire's recommendation - - - steve earle is a rare talent - - - country with thought and soul.

i loves me some a him.

Sunday, September 2, 2007 at 8:54:00 AM EST  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

(The satin sash emblazoned "South Carolina" which he wore campaigning should've been a hint.)

That was a high-satire-quality remark!

Sunday, September 2, 2007 at 9:51:00 AM EST  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

3x on the Steve Earle recommendation.

In addition to The Revolution Starts Now, I'd suggest I Feel Alright and El Corazon.

Sunday, September 2, 2007 at 9:55:00 AM EST  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

trip wire, sean and minstrel boy,

I'm with you on the song picks, thanks. John Walker's Blues is a good suggestion. I used to be a huge blues fan. They're so miserable, yet redemptive, somehow. Why's that?

I've used Rich Man's War before, but there are always others. More minstrels and bards telling their tales and singing their songs than one person can know; more than this person can know.

Sunday, September 2, 2007 at 6:57:00 PM EST  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

[url=http://vioperdosas.net/][img]http://sapresodas.net/img-add/euro2.jpg[/img][/url]
[b]call shop software, [url=http://sapresodas.net/]buy bartender software[/url]
[url=http://vioperdosas.net/]shop 2.0 by software[/url] i buy photoshop in oem software price
software discount game software [url=http://vioperdosas.net/]buy genuine microsoft software[/url] Readiris Pro 11 Mac
[url=http://sapresodas.net/]lowest price for adobe creative suite 3[/url] software in order for
[url=http://sapresodas.net/]software purchase program[/url] software for a store
virus software to buy [url=http://vioperdosas.net/]buy software from microsoft[/url][/b]

Saturday, January 9, 2010 at 9:36:00 AM EST  

Post a Comment

<< Home