Join 3,432 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Rumsfeld expressed puzzlement at the notion that his policies had caused the abuse
April 18, 2006 11:53 AM   Subscribe

“My God, you know, did I authorize putting a bra and underwear on this guy's head?” Rumsfeld “personally involved” in abuses at Guantanamo - according to a recently obtained (by Salon) army inspector general report which contains a sworn statement from a Lt. General
posted by Smedleyman (101 comments total)

 
“The question at this point is not whether Secretary Rumsfeld should resign, it’s whether he should be indicted.”

This pretty much says it all.
posted by leftcoastbob at 11:59 AM on April 18, 2006


prev discussed here (et.al)

Some of what’s new:
“But the never-before-released full report also includes the transcripts of interviews with high-ranking military officials that shed new light on the role that Rumsfeld and Miller played in the harsh treatment of Kahtani, who had met with Osama bin Laden on several occasions and received terrorist training in al-Qaida camps.”
posted by Smedleyman at 12:00 PM on April 18, 2006


Rummy will resign. He's just tying up some of his many, many loose ends.
posted by Pollomacho at 12:03 PM on April 18, 2006


Supposedly he already tried to resign, and bush wouldn't let him.

*shrug*
posted by delmoi at 12:05 PM on April 18, 2006


Supposedly he already tried to resign, and bush wouldn't let him.

That's because Bush is smart enough to know if Rummy goes he needs to fire him. Unfortunately, monkey-boy isn't smart enough to know that he needs to fire Rummy.
posted by three blind mice at 12:10 PM on April 18, 2006


This is my surprised face.
posted by wakko at 12:13 PM on April 18, 2006


Surely this will be the----

NO CARRIER
posted by keswick at 12:15 PM on April 18, 2006


I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!
posted by I Love Tacos at 12:15 PM on April 18, 2006


Carl Bernstein: Senate Hearings on Bush, Now
posted by homunculus at 12:19 PM on April 18, 2006


We should impeach Bush now. Then it won't matter if Rumsfeld resigns.
posted by muppetboy at 12:29 PM on April 18, 2006


I agree, muppetboy. Things certainly would be different under President Cheney, by gum!
posted by keswick at 12:30 PM on April 18, 2006


keswick, perhaps we'll get some fresh blood in the White House... for Cheney to feast on.
posted by thefreek at 12:34 PM on April 18, 2006


Although Schmidt said that he believed that Rumsfeld did not specifically order the more abusive methods used in the al-Qahtani interrogation, he concluded that Rumsfeld’s policies facilitated the abuse.

and...

Rumsfeld could be liable under the doctrine of “command responsibility” – the legal principle that holds a superior responsible for crimes committed by his subordinates [...]

Lotsa weasel words in the HRW report. I don't see it proving Rummy guilty of much of anything (except being a war-crazed psychopath, which hardly bears mentioning.)

I think HRW undermines a lot of its own good work by issuing these lighter-than-air press releases every twenty minutes.
posted by 327.ca at 12:36 PM on April 18, 2006


i saw Bush on the cover of some supermarket tabloid yesterday. Something about how he and Laura's marriage is on the rocks or something.

It struck me as odd because this is the first time i've seen one of these tabloids go after them with their pseudo-news.

i find if fascinating how quickly the press [real or tabloid] has turned on this administration.

All i have to say is 'WTF took you guys so long?!'
posted by quin at 12:49 PM on April 18, 2006


Have they released that chicken farmer from Guantanmo yet?
posted by homunculus at 12:51 PM on April 18, 2006


Bird flu = teh terror, homunculus.
posted by keswick at 12:54 PM on April 18, 2006


This led me to google the words, without quotes, worst president ever. That was interesting too. And then I searched images.

W. is the worst president ever.
posted by swlabr at 1:00 PM on April 18, 2006


So can we now all agree Rumsfield is fucked?
posted by Meccabilly at 1:09 PM on April 18, 2006


*feld
posted by Meccabilly at 1:10 PM on April 18, 2006


I now see the brilliance of Cheney as VP. As long as he is there, no one would want to impeach and remove Bush to have him replaced by Cheney.
posted by SirOmega at 1:10 PM on April 18, 2006


Just out of curiosity, what would happen if both the President and the Vice President were unable to lead? In other words, who is third in line for the position, or what would the political process be in such an unlikely event?

President Rice?
posted by stinkycheese at 1:14 PM on April 18, 2006


Indict the bastard already.
posted by ahimsakid at 1:15 PM on April 18, 2006


Dennis Hastert is next in line after Dicky.
posted by octothorpe at 1:20 PM on April 18, 2006


Thanks octothorpe - Rumsfeld himself is sixth in line! God, what a horrible thought.

And I am amused by the fact the Secretary of Education is Margaret Spellings.
posted by stinkycheese at 1:23 PM on April 18, 2006


You're saying that Rummy did something immoral and illegal? No way man. No freaking way. Not a member of this administration. Next you'll be trying to peddle a story to me about how someone in this administration sold out one of their spies as a means of political retribution or somethi-

Oh wait.
posted by Effigy2000 at 1:26 PM on April 18, 2006


Those rules of succession would only actually happen if there were some sort of King Ralph type of event. Most likely it would be like when Nixon resigned, the new President would get to appoint his own VP. So who would Cheney appoint?
posted by octothorpe at 1:39 PM on April 18, 2006


here is the Order of Presidential Succession
posted by edgeways at 1:41 PM on April 18, 2006


President Rice

Only if Bush, Cheney, Hastert, and Ted Stevens are all shown the door at once. In the event of such an extraordinarily unlikely scenarior, we can only pray that Condi, Rumsfeld, and Gonzalez are also granted their richly-deserved prison sentences.

Long live president Johanns?
posted by nakedcodemonkey at 1:41 PM on April 18, 2006


So who would Cheney appoint?

Oh, somebody "proven" (in a Halliburton sorta way)...
posted by 327.ca at 1:41 PM on April 18, 2006


I think Schmidt is just being thorough and honest 327.ca.

P 14 of Schmidt’s statement
“(The sec def took a list of interrogation techniques and..) says this is approved to be used in special circumstances which I will approve and it’s for Mr. Khatani number one. So this becomes a special interrogation plan. It’s issued now. It is promulgated through US Southern Command with almost no guidance added to it.”

He goes on to say statements were made that the special interrogation plan started two weeks early before Rummy signed off and no on could remember whether Rummy approved anything before he signed it and he says “So rather than to call an entire line of people liars, we said that probably happened. You just can’t prove it. So it’s unknowable.”
And “If they deemed to be abusive intentionally or whatever than they were approved. So it became a non-relevant thing.” (p.15)
- outside the scope of his investigation, ‘cause he’s just investigating the abuse not looking for scalps.

Schmidt goes on to say General Hill was clear on his need for guidance and said he found some things troubling such as threatening families, etc. and said “I’m not sure we’re on solid ground with this”

And on P.25 - Rummy sez “yeah, I didn’t say that...but did I say put a bra and panties on this guy’s head and make him dance with another man? ‘No, you didn’t say, Sir, but just under that broad technique that was application.’”

p.26 - “In my opinion the JTF Commander was the only one that had the suitable knowledge of what the SECDEF meant because he talked to (Rummy). He’s the only one that really knew the intent of what a technique was and probably where the line was, and crossing it, and should have watched that. It was not an (sergeant).

P.35-36 -
“When the (sec def) is personally involved in the interrrogation of one person and the entire general counsel system of all the departments of the military and the office of general counsel and the (sec def); and the (sec def) is personally being briefed on this...and I find it hard to believe, as does anybody, that when the (sec def) has that kind of interest...He doesn’t know anything that’s going - and he doesn’t even know what they’re doing with this guy?”

It’s all worth a read. He says General Miller wasn’t derelict but failed to monitor Rummy’s prisoner. That the intent could have been to have ambiguity result in lots of creative applications of interrogation techniques.

Stuff on “Crazy Bob” too.
posted by Smedleyman at 1:44 PM on April 18, 2006


Rumsfeld will find the real killer!
posted by Artw at 1:49 PM on April 18, 2006


I think Schmidt is just being thorough and honest 327.ca.

Yeah, I was reacting more to the HRW press release than Schmidt's report (which I'll read tonight). Thanks for the post!
posted by 327.ca at 2:15 PM on April 18, 2006


Resign, Rumsfeld
posted by jcruelty at 2:16 PM on April 18, 2006


I trust everyone who's shouting "Impeach!" has actually contacted the appropriate representatives and suchlike, to voice their opinion directly.

But I suspect my trust is misplaced. If you guys were the least politically active, instead of just loudmouths, the USA wouldn't be in its current situation.

You get the government you deserve.
posted by five fresh fish at 2:41 PM on April 18, 2006


Australian comic god Tony Martin did a gag on his radio show yesterday that the comedy of errors that Rumsfeld has been a part of is very much like a sitcom.

With the music from Seinfeld playing in the background, Tony described an episode of Rumsfeld in which Rummy spends all his day make detainees at Gitmo wear puffy pirate shirts while his idiot friend George continues his futile attempt to properly pronounce the word "nuclear."

OK, I admit, this is a slight derail, but it was funny, damn it!!
posted by Effigy2000 at 2:44 PM on April 18, 2006


i guess you had to be there.
posted by keswick at 2:50 PM on April 18, 2006


...so basically, more nothing is going to happen? Cool.
posted by fet at 2:54 PM on April 18, 2006


intentionally deprived of sleep,
forced into painful physical positions (known as stress positions)
subjected to forced exercises,
forced standing
sexual and other physical humiliation.

forced to accept an intravenous drip for hydration
refused trips to latrine >urinated on himself at least twice.
threatened with forced enemas,
forced to undergo an enema.

white noise
sexual humiliation

Um, which of these is torture? I think these are all legitimate interrogation techniques. I would hope these techniques would continue to be used; not on every detainee, but certainly on occassion. Vive l'humiliation!
posted by ParisParamus at 3:03 PM on April 18, 2006


Dennis Haysbert is next in line? Now you're talking!
posted by klaatu at 3:08 PM on April 18, 2006


FFF, actually, I think we have a better government than we deserve--but you do have a point.
posted by ParisParamus at 3:09 PM on April 18, 2006


Um, which of these is torture? I think these are all legitimate interrogation techniques. I would hope these techniques would continue to be used; not on every detainee, but certainly on occassion. Vive l'humiliation!
posted by ParisParamus at 3:03 PM PST on April 18 [!]
People like you have done more damage to this country than anything al-Qaeda could have dreamed up.

Get out of my country, and take your stupid with you.
posted by scrump at 3:11 PM on April 18, 2006


Hmm... ok Paris, I take your challenge.... Is it... 'forced to undergo an enema'? What's my prize? An enema?
posted by klaatu at 3:12 PM on April 18, 2006


Klaatu, that may, or may not be over the line. Enemas have legitimate therapeutic use. Not obvious. Certain not impeachment/criminal outrageous.
posted by ParisParamus at 3:14 PM on April 18, 2006


Homunculus always posts great links, but sometimes I wish he would also post an extract of the linked article, because click-lazy people may miss the good stuff.

Bernstein's essay is excellent:

"The Senate Watergate Committee was created (by a 77-0 vote of the Senate) with the formal task of investigating illegal political-campaign activities. Its seven members were chosen by the leadership of each party, three from the minority, four from the majority. (The Democratic majority leader of the Senate, Mike Mansfield, insisted that none of the Democrats be high-profile senators with presidential aspirations.) One of the crucial tasks of any committee charged with investigating the Bush presidency will be to delineate the scope of inquiry. It must not be a fishing expedition--and not only because the pond is so loaded with fish. The lines ought to be drawn so that the hearings themselves do not become the occasion for the ultimate battle of the culture wars. This investigation should be seen as an opportunity to at last rise above the culture wars and, as in Watergate, learn whether the actions of the president and his deputies have been consistent with constitutional principles, the law, and the truth."
posted by digaman at 3:15 PM on April 18, 2006


scrump: LOL.
posted by ParisParamus at 3:15 PM on April 18, 2006


Actually, Paris, that's a rather beautiful poem you've written there:

Intentionally deprived of sleep,
Forced into painful physical positions
(known as stress positions)
Subjected to forced exercises,
Forced standing,
Sexual and other physical humiliation.

Forced to accept an intravenous drip for hydration
He refused trips to the latrine
And urinated on himself at least twice.
Threatened with forced enemas,
forced to undergo an enema.

White noise
Sexual humiliation

And tomorrow is Sunday.
posted by klaatu at 3:19 PM on April 18, 2006


culture of life
posted by edverb at 3:25 PM on April 18, 2006


Enemas have legitimate therapeutic use.

As does major abdominal surgery!
posted by Artw at 3:29 PM on April 18, 2006


Secretary Rumsfeld told Rush Limbaugh that the US press is being manipulated by Zarqawi's media committee. Is Zarqawi's propaganda campaign better than the Pentagon's propaganda campaign to magnify Zarqawi's role in Iraq? Or are Rumsfeld's remarks part of the Pentagon's campaign? Maybe President Bush shouldn't have avoided attacking Zarqawi before the invasion.

Of course, the US has been exaggerating foreign fighters' involvement throughout the war.
posted by kirkaracha at 3:40 PM on April 18, 2006



posted by boaz at 3:42 PM on April 18, 2006


Can anyone here who may have been of age during Nixon remember if there was a segment of society as blinded to his aberrancy as Bush's loyal followers are now? I'm serious about this as it seems to me a new phenomenon but I have no way of comparing.
posted by docpops at 3:44 PM on April 18, 2006


President Bush: "I'm the decider and I decide what is best and what's best is for Don Rumsfeld to remain as the Secretary of Defense."
posted by kirkaracha at 3:45 PM on April 18, 2006



FFF, actually, I think we have a better government than we deserve--but you do have a point.


Obligatory link.
posted by eyeballkid at 3:55 PM on April 18, 2006


But I suspect my trust is misplaced. If you guys were the least politically active, instead of just loudmouths, the USA wouldn't be in its current situation.

I think "least politically active" means "voting", and it takes a whole lot more than voting -- and a whole lot more than the people on this board.

Now, if you instead say "if the majority of Americans were politically aware and politically active, instead of just ignorant and complacent, the USA wouldn't be in its' current situation" -- well, then I'd agree with you.

yes, I'm an American
posted by davejay at 3:58 PM on April 18, 2006




...I should have made the lightning blue. Ah well.
posted by kaseijin at 4:09 PM on April 18, 2006


ParisParamus,

Forced enema = anal rape to most rational people.
posted by wsg at 4:21 PM on April 18, 2006


wsg, I will err on the side of caution and agree with you. But the credibility of the outrage would be far greater if the other nine or ten items were removed from claims of torture. And since one can reasonably assume that at least of the nine or ten items cited is an embelishment/distortion, the list doesn't impress me.
posted by ParisParamus at 4:31 PM on April 18, 2006


"If it's not lopping off a limb, it;s not torture!'
posted by Artw at 4:33 PM on April 18, 2006


(one of the nine or ten items cited...)
posted by ParisParamus at 4:35 PM on April 18, 2006


"Can anyone here who may have been of age during Nixon remember if there was a segment of society as blinded to his aberrancy as Bush's loyal followers are now?"

Yes. I remember the night Nixon resigned. My friends and I cheered while my parents shook their heads in disbelief at the loss of such a "good man". Keep in mind this was shortly after Agnew had resigned to cut a deal on bribery charges, also seen as a great injustice. No matter what was revealed during the watergate hearings, including tape recordings of Nixon authorizing hush money, it was all "politics" to the koolaid drinkers of the time.
I am convinced that one of the reasons we are in the mess we are now is that Nixon and Agnew didn't serve time in prison.

Of course, I don't remember hearing anything this absurd:
"Enemas have legitimate therapeutic use."

I'm sure if the North Vietnamese had been giving our POW's forced enemas, PP would see nothing wrong with it.
posted by 2sheets at 4:38 PM on April 18, 2006


FFF, don't be so judgmental of the Americans. Us Canadians are just as guilty of Geneva Convention violations by turning over Afghani prisoners to the Americans and by allowing CIA planes to land in our country without a murmur of dissent.
posted by angrybeaver at 4:41 PM on April 18, 2006


"Of course, I don't remember hearing anything this absurd:
"Enemas have legitimate therapeutic use.""

Are you saying thay enemas are never administered in hospitals in connection with radiographic examinations or for digestive tract problems? Is it that long a stretch for someone of ill will to twist such a thing legitimately done on a prisoner into torture?
posted by ParisParamus at 4:42 PM on April 18, 2006


Thank you, Canada. Now if you would just turn over that pot seed guy...
posted by ParisParamus at 4:47 PM on April 18, 2006


FFF, I'm pretty sure the people who answer the phones at my Senators' offices are sick of hearing from me. I keep calling anyway. (Although it's much easier to get through to Richard Burr--Elizabeth Dole's voicemail is constantly full.)
posted by EarBucket at 4:55 PM on April 18, 2006


Amputations are performed in hospitals all the time! So's dosing with radiation and chemicals! That means they can't be torture!
posted by EarBucket at 4:56 PM on April 18, 2006


Are you saying thay enemas are never administered in hospitals in connection with radiographic examinations or for digestive tract problems?

Applying powerful electric shocks to the body has legitimate therapeutic use (in the case of defibrillation) so I guess PP has just convinced me that when Saddam was hooking folks up to car batteries I should consider that appropriate treatment of prisoners.
posted by Jezztek at 5:00 PM on April 18, 2006


I guess EXLAX pranks from camp are out, too....WIMPS.
posted by ParisParamus at 5:13 PM on April 18, 2006


The sad thing is that more people will probably care about pot seed guy than Maher Arar, Omar Khadr, or the Secret Trial Five.

But at least the underground railroad is running again.
posted by angrybeaver at 5:24 PM on April 18, 2006


"Can anyone here who may have been of age during Nixon remember if there was a segment of society as blinded to his aberrancy as Bush's loyal followers are now?"

Yes, they were my grandparents and their general social group. And even at... hmm 8 years old I couldn't believe that they would staunchly support the President when it was glaringly clear even to my limited understanding that he was, indeed, a crook.

Just wrote all of my reps in D.C. I'm just so tired of this crap.

"I think these are all legitimate interrogation techniques."

OK, how about we try a few out on you then, Paris? Maybe you can tell us afterwards whether you would consider any of them to be torture. Y'know, treat others as you yourself would be treated? Be a good thing for you to demonstrate your confidence in these techniques, and how humane they are. We'll interrogate you as to why you think PCs are better than Macs while we're at it. (Yes, I know you don't.)

Sheesh, I know you're mostly a troll, but really. If you would do such things to another human being, you're borderline monstrous.
posted by zoogleplex at 6:02 PM on April 18, 2006


Well, I for one am glad to see that Paris has the moral clarity necessary to recognize that, when dealing with terrorist enemies of the people, we can't afford to be swayed by liberal crap like "human rights," the "Geneva Conventions", or "common decency." There's always some damn soft-on-terror liberal whining about it whenever a nation does what it has to do to stand up to the Enemy. Here's an example of such from the recent past.

Now, according to Paris's wise and decent standards, those are all perfectly legitimate interrogation methods right there. Sleep deprivation, bright lights, forced standing, humiliation, all perfectly acceptable stuff, no worse than pranks at camp, or frat hazing. Indeed, as Paris so aptly stated, "Vive l'humiliation!" And yet, this Solzhenitsyn guy just keeps moaning and complaining about how awful they are. What a bleeding heart sob sister wimp, eh, Paris?

(sigh... and here I told myself before I registered I was just going to ignore Paris and not respond to him...)
posted by a louis wain cat at 6:09 PM on April 18, 2006


Subjected to forced exercises, Forced standing = "borderline monstrous"

No wonder this country is so fat.
posted by techgnollogic at 6:13 PM on April 18, 2006


Can anyone here who may have been of age during Nixon remember if there was a segment of society as blinded to his aberrancy as Bush's loyal followers are now? I'm serious about this as it seems to me a new phenomenon but I have no way of comparing.

docpops, I think the phrase you're looking to Google is "silent majority."
posted by pax digita at 6:20 PM on April 18, 2006


"Subjected to forced exercises, Forced standing = "borderline monstrous"

No wonder this country is so fat."

Another troll. Nevertheless, how about we stand you up for 72 hours straight in a box where if you fail to stay standing, a claymore mine will go off at your legs?

Sound like fun exercise to you?

This country is so fat because we eat too goddamn much, and most of it is crap.
posted by zoogleplex at 6:24 PM on April 18, 2006


he won't resign and he won't be fired--he's solely in charge of Bush's legacy, along with Cheney---Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, etc.
posted by amberglow at 6:30 PM on April 18, 2006


Can anyone here who may have been of age during Nixon remember if there was a segment of society as blinded to his aberrancy as Bush's loyal followers are now?

My in-laws are the type of people that never thought that Nixon had done anything wrong. To this day, they're mad at the Democrats for the way that they treated poor Nixon. I'm not kidding. There is literally nothing that could happen to shake them out of their good old Southern Republican ways. If Bush ate a baby live on TV, they'd complain about the liberal media always making the president look bad in a time of war, and hey, wasn't that baby like twelve months old, more of a toddler than a baby if you ask me, ad infinitum.
posted by rks404 at 6:56 PM on April 18, 2006


what rks said---there are still millions of Republicans mad at FDR, for God's sake. They're completely party over country.
posted by amberglow at 7:46 PM on April 18, 2006


Bush had a shit fit in front of the press corps today, practically screaming at them "I'm the decider and I decide what is best and what's best is for Don Rumsfeld to remain as the Secretary of Defense." (as posted by kirkaracha above.)

Let that sink in a minute..."I'm the decider and I decide what is best."

A statement revealing his true attitude: the very anthesis of democracy.

Who the fuck is he to shout at anyone when the question of why our kids are dying and what can be done about it comes up? He gets more worked up over the idea of his choice of Secretary Of Defense being challenged than he does the idea of thousands of kids coming home in boxes.

For all we know, he want's to keep Rumsfeld close so that he can keep watch over what he says - maybe he feels Rummy knows too much. Rumsfeld has tried to resign, so he says, but W won't let him.

In comportment he's beginning to resemble very much Nixon during his final days in office. I remember it well.
posted by Nicholas West at 7:54 PM on April 18, 2006


Sorry......ANTITHESIS of democracy..
posted by Nicholas West at 7:55 PM on April 18, 2006


Raise a hue and cry, people, and raise it loud. I think most of you have finally become convinced that it's time to rid yourselves of a Very Bad administration. Now's the time to commit to it.
posted by five fresh fish at 8:19 PM on April 18, 2006


I agree, and this time let's make sure they go to prison, if any of their actions so warrant.

No pardons, if we can help it.
posted by zoogleplex at 8:40 PM on April 18, 2006


Rummy Runs to Rush
posted by homunculus at 8:48 PM on April 18, 2006


"Jiminy Christmas, why can't I place lacy frilly panties on the head of an Enemy Combatant™ when he is clearly a threat to the Homeland? My stars, if I can't dabble in using soiled undergarments as a means of obtaining vital security information, the whole protective apparatus is kapoot!"
posted by moonbird at 8:55 PM on April 18, 2006


Bush had a shit fit in front of the press corps today, practically screaming at them "I'm the decider and I decide what is best and what's best is for Don Rumsfeld to remain as the Secretary of Defense."

I just heard that a little while ago on (streaming) NPR and grinned from ear to freakin' ear. The strain of the chicken(hawks) coming home to roost is showing on the little homunculus†, and I hope he cracks like the... er... easily-cracked thing that he is. Reality TV.


† no insult to actual homunculi intended.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:07 PM on April 18, 2006


All this makes me a little sad, because I'm not sure I think that Bush is a bad man in his heart. Something about him gives me the impression that he really believes that he is doing the best thing he can for the country and the world.

However I do think he is quite a disturbed man with Messianic tendencies, and not intellectually capable of seeing gradations in issues , and this makes him unquestionably dangerous to the stability of the world and to the integrity of the United States.

I do not feel any sadness about Cheney, who I consider a truly dangerous and sociopathic individual, with far more Machiavellian intelligence than Bush. Just fear, basically.
posted by Nicholas West at 9:28 PM on April 18, 2006


† no insult to actual homunculi intended.

None taken ;)


I hope he cracks like the... er... easily-cracked thing that he is.

That might be bad, actually.
posted by homunculus at 9:57 PM on April 18, 2006


so, doesn't dangerous = bad? he's bad for the country, bad for the world, bad for our futures, bad for all who serve in the forces, bad for all the Iraqis (and Iranians and Afghanis), bad for business and the economy (except for oil of course, and Halliburton), bad for our health and educational systems and infrastructure and national parks and environment and deficit and tax system and freedoms and rights ...
posted by amberglow at 9:58 PM on April 18, 2006


Er....yes, he is bad for all those things. But that is not the sense I meant of the word. I meant "bad" as in purposely and intentionally evil, a la Hitler et al. I don't see Bush as a man full of murderous hatred. I see him as bad in the sense that he is mentally inadequate to drive this country, and doesn't seem to understand what people are saying to him, and has some kind of psychological problem.

A poorly contructed car can run you off the road and get you killed, but it doesn't mean the guy who constructed it had the specific intention to see you dead.

But the sense of the word is now moot really......it became obvious a long time ago that he was going to be a dangerous President and I'm really dumbfounded that so many people have supported him as long as they have.
posted by Nicholas West at 10:16 PM on April 18, 2006


Nicholas West,

Bush is bad to his core because the only way his family knows how to do business is crooked business. From granddad Prescott Bush's Nazi profiteering on down. It's unconscious because it is ingrained in all of them from the get go. It's unconscious, but still evil, and what's scary is that they think it's the right way.
posted by wsg at 11:00 PM on April 18, 2006


I am too--millions are.

back to Rumsfeld, who's doing "a heckuva job": There are two signs that a Republican is in trouble. One is they start talking about Bill Clinton. The other is they book an interview on Rush Limbaugh’s radio show. It’s a coveted spot. A request and opportunity that can’t be denied.

Rush Limbaugh rarely does interviews on his show. It’s all bluster, all b.s., all the time. But when his boys and girls get in trouble, they can always count on Rush inviting them in for a little informal chat. He’s done it with Deadeye. Yesterday he did it with Rummy. ...

posted by amberglow at 11:01 PM on April 18, 2006


They're completely party over country.

Not that I don't think the current whitehouse is out. of. control, but I think it's best to be careful here. This is not only a sweeping generalization that I don't think applies to all republicans, but I think it's slightly off at its heart. Except for a core of the corrupted who are out for nothing but power, and a bunch of the proud who simply can't stand losing or conceive of being wrong, I think many (probably most) of true republican believers simply have lost the distinction between party and country. When this form of identification takes place, it's exceptionally powerful, and I think that's one reason why you see political operators of all stripes trying to make it stick. Those other guys? The ones in the other party? They're communists, not Americans.
posted by namespan at 1:18 AM on April 19, 2006


stuff the fuckwit with Aspartane ;)
posted by borq at 2:07 AM on April 19, 2006


Everything is clear now. PP likes enemas!
posted by acrobat at 4:10 AM on April 19, 2006


I think these are all legitimate interrogation techniques.

In a world of kharma, one could only hope you are asked questions in such a way.

Vive l'humiliation!
posted by ParisParamus at 3:03 PM PST on April 18 [!]


And is self humiliation why you post on Metafilter?
posted by rough ashlar at 5:45 AM on April 19, 2006


All this makes me a little sad, because I'm not sure I think that Bush is a bad man in his heart.

There are more than a few web sites that outline statements about Bush family past which offer up data points where such a position of "bush not 'bad man'" goes challenged. Doing searches on Prestcott Bush would get you started.

And you will know you are far along when you come across the bit where Barbra Bush is a love child of Alstiar Crowley. (Over the top? Sure. Provable via DNA testings, and would be interesting to watch the reactions if true)
posted by rough ashlar at 6:12 AM on April 19, 2006


Also, do good men mock and imitate women on death row, as Bush did? Do they kill innocent people? ...
posted by amberglow at 7:12 AM on April 19, 2006


amberglow..this is very true...very true. That is despicable.
posted by Nicholas West at 7:24 AM on April 19, 2006


I think perpetuating the line that he's misguided, or ignorant, or misled by those around him, or has a good heart, etc, is just enabling him to keep on doing horrendous things, and gives him an all-purpose pass. We can't afford it anymore and never really could.
posted by amberglow at 7:28 AM on April 19, 2006


Amberglow, I think the same thing about you: just a little misguided...
posted by ParisParamus at 8:13 AM on April 19, 2006


The Decider Sticks With the Derider
posted by homunculus at 10:02 AM on April 19, 2006


The Geneva convention prohibits outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment for any prisoners.
The ill-treatment of prisoners of war, even for the purpose of eliciting information deemed vital to self-defense, has long been considered a violation of the law of war.

“Of liberty I would say that, in the whole plenitude of its extent, it is unobstructed action according to our will. But rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add “within the limits of the law,” because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual.”
- Thomas Jefferson
posted by Smedleyman at 1:37 PM on April 19, 2006


...And then, someone very close to the President said to me, you know, he won't fire Rumsfeld because it would be the equivalent of firing himself. He can't acknowledge that it was such a big mistake, in so many ways. And so Rumsfeld will stay. And that's the decision that the President has made and I think Rumsfeld will stay and try to see this through. ...
posted by amberglow at 5:14 PM on April 19, 2006


« Older Well, this settles everything:...  |  Hugo Chavez to Carlos the Jack... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments