I think, Amity, it's that we are capable of change

while the rest of the world is either tradition bound or busy copying us.

It's called hope.

Thank you Grasshopper. Such counter-intuitive wisdom in one so intuitively unencumbered. Hell, I never thought you could top:

Leave it be. Let it heal. We did worse in Vietnam - through torture deaths and plain old ordinary burning - over two million innocent deaths. They forgive us. why? We let them. Let's let the Iraqis forgive us. We didn't exterminate them or even try. Let it go.

...but hey, you just managed it.

Hope.

Yikes.

I guess congratulations are in order for your new Hallmark gig, but I am curious: is this feelgood "we-have-met-the-jingoistic-but-wisely-self-forgiving-narcississy-fascists-and-they-are-us" theme geared specifically for the 4th of July?

Or is it meant to trigger a more general nostalgia for those bygone days when our country actually stood for something? You know, the kind of thing the whole family can enjoy all year round...

When you think about who talks about torture and defends it who comes to mind? Jack Bauer. Rush Limbaugh. Alan Dershowitz. John Yoo. Who has the bigger popular impact? The writers/producers on 24 and Rush. They are the drivers of the popular lines about torture. For the intellectuals it's Dershowitz and for the legals it Yoo. But Rush's ideas and Jack Bauer's arguments drive attitudes for millions.

Right here in San Francisco the radio hosts Brian Sussman and Lee Rodgers on KSFO are pro-torture. San Francisco, ground zero for pro-torture? You bet. For many of you outside the SF area the people driving the pro-torture debate are Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity.

This week they will ignore, downplay and redefine what this ACLU report is about. And no body will challenge the.

Rush is having this conversation with millions of Americans and no one from the Red Cross is on to say. "No. You are wrong. People were tortured, they died. They weren't terrorists. There were more than 7. They are not frat party guys blowing off steam." Rush will never have that conversation. And Rush is the head of the Republican Party. Why can't he come out and talk to Philippe Sands? Mark Danner?

The supporters, deniers and appeasers are on talk radio and cable. But the ACLU can't get on the shows. People were TORTURED TO DEATH and they interview former Gitmo interrogators who can't reveal what they really did.

They will not let anyone in with the facts. If they do, they argue, browbeat and "win" the conversation after the caller hangs up(Hannity). Rush will talk to his imaginary producer to create his strawman and explain why it's not really torture.

I've know since at least 2005 that people were tortured to death based on the army's own reports (Taguba and Schlesinger). I've know that 100's were involved because of Mark Danner's book "Torture and Truth." and the photos.

We don't really have a conversation about this topic in the country because we don't involve the people who are the most supportive of it who control their own shows with an iron grip.

Mark Danner, the ACLU or the Red Cross aren't challenging their incorrect information.

I think the hosts' views on this topic are not only incorrect, but morally repugnant. But nobody is going to get on their shows who will tell them that. It's their show after all.

No one will do to them what John Stewart did to Tucker Carlson and call them on their disgusting views. So we will never have a conversation on this topic with the leaders on the right.

Unfortunately, things are still going not very well in Iran, and there is some belief that they may go worse. Newsweek's jailed reporter made an on TV confession, there are government figures calling for harsh treatment, the streets are still flooded with security forces, there are still, by some estimates, thousands of people imprisoned or otherwise unaccounted for, there is still a major blackout on getting information out of the country.

Avaaz.org has a couple of campaigns going, one is to help fund alternative internet set-ups for communications.

This is the time, if history serves, when bad things can happen. The protests are still active, the force is still in place, and the news media have found other things to do, or shinier baubles to put on the front page. So this is when people who are watching need to keep watching. If you don't believe in it, that's fine, but if you started watching, you should stay until the party's over. Huffpo is still carrying liveblogging as is The Lede at NYTimes. It's probably too soon to reset Twitter time zones away from Tehran time. AFAIK they still need servers and anonymity methods.

http://www.amnesty.org/en/appeals-for-action/iran-must-recognize-the-right-to-peaceful-protest

http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/06/23/iran-violent-crackdown-protesters-widens

http://www.rsf.org/spip.php?page=article&id_article=33626

On another note, it is possible that there will be some kind of competency session in court tomorrow involving Aafia Siddiqui's lawyer's appointed psychiatrist. I've also heard Friday, or on July 6th (which was supposed to be her trial date and is now a final competency date). There's pretty much no news printed on it in the U.S. much anymore, so it's hard to figure out from conflicting reports in other countries what's happening. Maybe that helps one sympathize on the people trying to get news in and out of Iran.

http://www.app.com.pk/en_/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=80339&Itemid=2

Next month, it will be one year since she was shot in Afghanistan and rendered to Brooklyn. I tracked down the origin of that very tired looking photograph of her in the black shawl. It was taken by the Governor of Ghazni, the day before she was shot (so right after the Afghans took her into custody). The blue cloth in the foreground is a burqa, that she had not wanted to take off because of the camera.

By the Red Cross, I assume you mean the International Committee of the Red Cross? They will never rebut Rush Limbaugh. They are a neutral observer, their report was leaked, they would not have published it. Damage that, and they won't be able to get access to the worst places in the world. Since they're often the only ones getting in to those places, that might condemn people to death, or worse. Let them do what they do, and be glad somebody is doing it.

Mark Danner or the ACLU should rebut them. But not the Red Cross.