- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Her/his sarcastic response to me: "You’re right, of course. So true. What a lousy human being Andrew is, that the torture of unconvicted, untried people that aren’t – well, him, fills him with rage. You tell him, Victoria L! That’s not empathy, Andrew, that’s not holding bullies up to the harsh judgment they so richly deserve: that’s you being a self-loathing class–act."
First of all rage is never a noble or constructive sentiment. We all feel but it should not be proudly paraded about as if it were a badge of honour to be so unnuanced in our reactions. Rage means you are seeing things in black and white.
"that’s not holding bullies up to the harsh judgment they so richly deserve"
So you laud O'Hehir's rage at the fate of "unconvicted, untried people" and then attack me for calling O'Hehir a hypocrite when he describes dumping naked "unconvicted, untried people" in the middle of a harsh desert. You deserve a special hypocrisy award, a-ignatius.
O'Hehir's fanatasy solution is short on "judgement" and long on the punishment "they so richly deserve". If you advocate torturing Bush & Co. with or without a trial, don't you become just as bad as all the Right-Wing Fox pundits poo-pooing Abu Gharib?
