Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
I'd like to note that beheadings didn't start happening in Irq until after news of Abu Ghraib broke. What happened to Nick Berg, roughly 3 weeks after the first photos were made public, was genuinely horrible. Nevertheless, the news delivered around the world was just the period to a sentence:
When the Abu Ghraib scandal first made news, many right-wing commentators here said that they shouldn't have revealed the photos, because they would only embolden the enemy, and result in retaliation. They were only half-right-- don't you think, as communities received their sons back, psychologically and physically scarred, bloodied and broken-- or dead-- that they knew? The pictures only served as confirmation.
The way you prevent "them" from doing horrible things to us and ours is by not doing horrible things to them in the first place, whether directly or through proxies like Israel or Pakistan.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
