Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Maybe I was rash, but think about it. A significant portion of Iraqis wanted us to invade and throw out Saddam. Our aerial attacks were far less careless in “collateral damage.” We didn’t have a confined, starving population where we used woman and children and the Red Cross for shooting practice. True the end result was far more devasting in Iraq and the Middle East. For true senseless savagery, the Israelis top the Busheviks. Maybe I hate them equally and my congress for supporting them.
I'm not so sure we were less careless or just better and suppressing the results of our bombing to the US audience. Iraqis may not have been confined, but many were starving...courtesy of US sanctions, which were in place longer than the post occupation Gaza blockade. Not to mention the destruction of much of the basic Iraqi infrastructure. Remember the highway to hell at the end of Gulf War 1.0? Hard to say if I prefer my savagery senseless or in support of Iraqi Freedom. Did a significant number want us to invade, or did we slyly conflate anti-Saddamm sentiment for pro-US invasion sentiment
Why assume I am being disingenuous?
An Arabic-language newspaper (al-Quds al-Arabi) is reporting that American Engineering Corps' officers are, at Israel's request, assisting to unearth smugglers' tunnels in the area of the Egypt-Gaza border.
I hasten to add that it appears that this report has not been confirmed by any other news source.
http://news.antiwar.com/2009/01/07/are-us-troops-helping-in-israels-war-on-gaza/
(or link in signature)
Hunger strikers surge to 10 percent at Guantánamo
BY CAROL ROSENBERG, crosenberg@MiamiHerald.com, Posted on Thursday, 01.08.09 (see sig)
Guantánamo captives are staging a fresh wave of hunger strikes ahead of the seventh anniversary of the controversial prison camps -- a campaign a lawyer links to the speedy release of Osama bin Laden's driver from U.S. military detention.
As of Thursday, 30 of the 250 war-on-terror detainees were classified as hunger strikers, 25 of whom were being fed through tubes in their noses, said Navy Cmdr. Pauline Storum at Guantánamo.
Defense lawyers have long described the tactic as a spontaneous protest against their indefinite detention.
Military officials see it as part of a choreographed power struggle between detainees and their guards.
Washington lawyer David Remes, who represents 17 Yemenis, said some of his clients launched the latest hunger strike after Yemeni Salim Hamdan went home in November, a month shy of completion of his 66-month prison sentence.
''They've actually gone ballistic at the fact that Hamdan, who was convicted of supporting terrorism, was released and they, who have been charged with nothing, continue to languish there,'' said Remes, who met with clients before Christmas.
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/americas/guantanamo/story/843586.html
I just read yesterday's piece about Thomas Tamm. Whistle-blowers would appear to be among the loneliest of creatures. He mentions in the Newsweek article that he's setting up a defense fund to help pay for legal expenses. I'm sure his lawyer knows this (and you as well), but it bears repeating: There are large law firms with tremendous resources who do pro bono work. Why can't his defense by the Venable lawyer be aided by one of these firms? It's tragic that he has to bear the worry of legal expenses along with everything else; he's taking a hit for all of us.
My personal favorite in New York is Schulte Roth & Zabel. They were listed as No. 2 on a national list of law firms doing pro bono work a few years ago by the New York Times. (Paul Weiss was No. 1.) I believe Shearman & Sterling is representing some Guantanamo defendants. These are just examples.
Not to sound like a ditto machine, Glenn, but thank you for all that you do. (And your commenters, too.)
It seems that our politicians and our media cannot keep pace with majority public opinion, or they do not because the majority opinion is in conflict with their gravy train.
Why assume I am being disingenuous?
It's not an assumption, it's my perception, and it's based on years and years and years of experience with people in f2f and online disagreements. It is a style of argument, and you are far from the only practitioner of it.
I don't necessarily doubt that you do sincerely believe that "you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar," but even taking that at face value: it's not like you're going to change anyone by nagging them into it. Quite frankly, your approach often pisses people off, provoking the exact response you decry.
Funny how that works, huh?
Mine is more focused on the irresponsible and nonproductive tone employed by G in much of his writing.
Utter horseshit.
What has GG written that is "irresponsible" in a "nonproductive tone"?
Nada.
Put another way, what has come from polite, forgiving and laws?-what-laws? commentary from the establishment press? Nothing. What are most of his posts about? They're about incomprehensible (to me) malfeasance and the total immorality of the secure, safe and well-nested elite.
You object to a "nonproductive tone"? Focus instead on the irresponsible and nonproductive policies that are--for most of us--criminal.
Good Lord, there's a lot more worth addressing here than tone.
Christ.
I'll stop because I'm about to blow my top.
QED.
Don't forget that the perversion of german civilisation as you've described was prefaced by the destruction of her economy.
people afraid and insecure about their immediate future seem much more likely to go along with all manner of delusional messianic schemes than people who are secure and prosperous.
Just a coincidence?
You decide ....
I believe that most of G's readers already agree with him on most points, and this is the crux of my theme lately, that there is not much point in writing articles and having a forum like this if it is only to preach to the converted.-- tommy1733
"Preach to the converted"? I'm not "converted" and I don't see what Glenn does as 'preaching'. I was basically of the mind that you read from me now on this comment board long before I ever knew of Glenn Greenwald. Reading here helps to keep me informed. Plus reading here also allows me to interact with like minded and informed folks, as well as some who are of a different take, and some who are just foolish dolts such as Shooter. The latter of which I don't enjoy or have any constructive use for. I'd just as soon that the pathologically deceitful, such as Shooter, realize once and for all that they or he are making fools of themselves here in this venue, and then move on to some other venue to entertain themselves if they simply must continue to lie on a daily basis. Shooter provides no useful commentary.
You seem to be under the impression that the most vocal commenters on this comments board are the mass of the people who read Glenn Greenwald. If so, then, you are greatly underestimating his readership. There are many more 'lurkers' on this blog than there are commenters, and Glenn is also published or viewed in other venues besides this blog. Sometimes by a reprint of what he has written here, and other times with something he has written exclusively for some other publication.
It's clear to me that Glenn writes out of passion. Not to "sell books". Writing and publishing books is an outlet for Glenn to reach out with that passion. He works very hard at what he does. Whether you agree with most or any of what he writes or not, it seems absurd that you can not recognize that he is sincere and that he works long hours in order to research and understand what it is he wants to write about, and then to write about it.
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"
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Salon headlines in your mailbox
