dagblog - Comments for ""I Was Only Following Orders""

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/

Resistance — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 11:01:54 +0000

In reply to "I Was Only Following Orders"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_Whom_the_Bell_Tolls

"Because thou art a miracle of deafness....It is not that thou art stupid. Thou art simply deaf. One who is deaf cannot hear music. Neither can he hear the radio. So he might say, never having heard them, that such things do not exist

As he had done in "A Farewell to Arms", Hemingway employs the fear of modern armament to destroy romantic conceptions of the ancient art of war: combat, sportsmanlike competition and the aspect of hunting. Heroism becomes butchery: the most powerful picture employed here is the shooting of María's parents against the wall of a slaughterhouse. Glory exists in the official dispatches only; here, the "disillusionment" theme of A Farewell to Arms is adapted.

The excuse needed by some who tortured and didn’t care if memos were legalized permission slips. Will they be brought to justice?
Having never read the law, is this an excuse for violating the law?

America needs to wake up. “Take the rafter from your own eye before trying to remove your neighbors splinter “.
May 1, 2001 REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT TO STUDENTS AND FACULTY AT NATIONAL DEFENSE UNIVERSITY
“They hate our friends, they hate our values, they hate democracy and freedom and individual liberty.”

No more words, Be Still, We are not the beacon on the Hill
They hate our values they hate our hypocrisy.

Losing It – Rush 1982 album Signals
Words by neil peart, music by geddy lee and alex lifeson
Thirty years ago, how the words would flow
With passion and precision,
But now his mind is dark and dulled
By sickness and indecision.

And he stares out the kitchen door
Where the sun will rise no more...

Some are born to move the world ---
To live their fantasies
But most of us just dream about
The things we’d like to be

Sadder still to watch it die
Than never to have known it
For you -- the blind who once could see ---
The bell tolls for thee...

They are basically excluding

eds — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 10:51:40 +0000

In reply to "I Was Only Following Orders"

They are basically excluding everyone who was not an avowed sadist.

The definition of "good faith" definitely warrants examination, or the whole idea needs to be tossed out.

What happened here was people

Don Key — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 07:37:29 +0000

In reply to "I Was Only Following Orders"

What happened here was people were given orders, they questioned the legality of those orders, and were told, in effect, yes, these orders are legal.

Excusing an interrogator (any branch) from culpability is, in effect, alleging that they have no knowledge of the Army Field Manual or their SOP equivalent, Convention Against Torture, Geneva Convention, Nuremburg Tribunal Charter, US Constitution, or common ethics.

This is like excusing a police officer from shooting a wheelchair bound, unarmed elderly woman in the back because the Chief had “expanded” use-of-force regulations.

Military personnel and law enforcement are trained in the laws, regulations, rules and procedures applying to their profession. I imagine that it's a high priority for interrogators and their responsibility to know them.

That’s not to say that someone's actions aren't mitigated if they were grossly misled by seniors, but that’s up to a court to decide. I don’t think anyone is out to get those who were caught up or forced into abetting this and didn’t commit egregious crimes, but it needs to be sorted out in public. Secrecy and do-nothingness has brought us low.

Of course 'we' will be

adelfarb — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 07:28:17 +0000

In reply to "I Was Only Following Orders"

Of course 'we' will be attacked again. I am certain that the actions taken by the US over the past decade will continue to reap a whirlwind of vengeance from those who have lost loved ones to the 'precision bombs' and 'shock and awe' attacks. Either we have and adhere to laws or we don't.

Perhaps if you were to see or

adelfarb — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 07:24:02 +0000

In reply to "I Was Only Following Orders"

Perhaps if you were to see or experience real, unsolicited torture you would think differently. But then again maybe not...

"Um, excuse me, will all

Don Key — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 07:23:50 +0000

In reply to "I Was Only Following Orders"

"Um, excuse me, will all those who were not acting in good faith please step forward?"

Subplot or not, excusing

adelfarb — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 07:22:06 +0000

In reply to "I Was Only Following Orders"

Subplot or not, excusing torturers is wrong. Of course the architects of the war are guilty of the crime of waging a war of aggression, among many other things. The discussion of the problems with the torturers should not be seen as diminishing any of the other crimes.

I am not sure that

adelfarb — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 07:18:44 +0000

In reply to "I Was Only Following Orders"

I am not sure that 'generosity' is the appropriate term to use in discussing treatment of acknowledged torturers. Obama swore to uphold the law, and he has in this failed.

Indeed, from the first there

adelfarb — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 07:16:14 +0000

In reply to "I Was Only Following Orders"

Indeed, from the first there have been abuses in the American enterprise, but that does not excuse any of them. Blood is blood, pain is pain. No ones suffering is worth more or less than anyone elses. This is incident is merely one of the most recent abuses in a long history. One thing here though is that Obama has failed in his promises to so many by his excusing the torturers. It does not matter that he excuses one or all of them, he has spoken.

For who are the laws written?

adelfarb — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 06:53:21 +0000

In reply to "I Was Only Following Orders"

For who are the laws written? We are an nation of laws. Compromise is just that. Obama came in trumpeting a return to 'justice'. And with this he has shown it is just that, 'justice'. The little actors get nailed, the architects (Speer?) walk after a reprimand. If Demjanjuk had connections, he would not be in the position he is, guilty or not. Von Braun and the Japanese BW researchers lived pretty well after the war. Why? Because the US government thought they were valuable. Right and wrong don't come in degrees or shades of gray. The ICRC called it torture, therefore there is a very good chance it was. Who was running the show? Bush and his cronies. Did they not prosecute the Abu Ghraib soldiers? Why should they not prosecute their enablers? Obama has likely done what he has because he feels that there is no other way. That does not mean that his actions are appropriate. I don't want to begin a series of ad hominem attacks, but just try for a moment to put yourself, or someone you care about, in the place of one of the detainees. I would think that after the second or third bounce against the wall you would be thinking "call the ACLU!! This is un-constitutional!!". Yes, terrorists are monsters, but by torturing them, we have collectively lowered ourselves to their level.

At Nuremberg, the allies punished the ringleaders. Germany continues to investigate and punish the people who participated. Unfortunately many were let off, a sad testament to their compromises. But Germany has indicted Demjanjuk on 29,000 criminal counts for his actions over 60 years ago. I doubt very much that Bush or his henchmen will face justice in the US.

Laws in this country are supposed to be for everyone, remember equality before the law? No one is above the law? America used to espouse, even if it did not practice, a higher ideal. Now that has been lost and Obama flushed it.