"Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!"

Reports that female interrogators at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba attempted to break-down suspected terrorists by wearing thongs and mini-skirts reminds me of Monty Python's Michael Palin torturing suspected heretics with pillows and comfy chairs. Regarding one such incident, the Associated Press reports that a female interrogator "began taunting the detainee, touching her breasts, rubbing them against the prisoner's back and commenting on his apparent erection." In another incident, a woman "took off her uniform top, exposed her brown T-shirt, ran her fingers through a detainee's hair and sat on his lap." Yet another "female interrogator grabbed a detainee's genitals."

I'm outraged, but not in the way the author of this piece wants me to be. Does our government really think that threats of close-up encounters with scantily-clad women will depress al Qaeda's recruitment of hard-up Middle Eastern males? Here's hoping the terrorists replace their methods of prisoner treatment with these American practices.

That's how they're getting terrorists to talk? God damn sign me up!

Only if that's what they think you hate Goblin. Remember to have a look of revulsion on your face.

I think the most effective (and hands off) method of torture yet to be implemented would be forcing the suspects watch a few episodes of Numb3rs. Similar to the rehabilitation film room scene in A Clockwork Orange.

Strap them in the chair, hook up the open eyelid contraption (complete with eyedropper standing by) and let the show commence. They'll be spilling their guts in no time.

Feck,

LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry Christopher...I plead ignorance. What is LMAO?

Laughing My A** Off.

Fylnn and fellow bloggers,

I just read a story regarding this abuse on Drudge Report.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/content_objectid%3D14042696_method%3Dfull_siteid%3D50143_headline%3D-MY-HELL-IN-CAMP-X-RAY-name_page.html

Can anyone tell me how legitimate they think this is? If it's as bad as this prisoner says, I would have to say that I'm deeply troubled. I am a huge supporter of our military, but this sounds VERY extreme to me. What do you think?

I was a bit slow with that particular acronym. Thank you for clarifying.

This is just plain wrong. To tempt someone like this, to put their very soul in danger, is one of the greatest crimes you can commit. We shouldn't wish Hell on anyone, even our worst enemies. And things like this bring Hell that much closer to BOTH the giver and receiver. Though, I doubt this is the problem as the media sees it, but it's plain evil.

There seems to be a lack of moral clarity. While these methods are not only wrong, not to mention very unlikely to actually be effective, they are simply not the moral equivleant of beheading someone. When the main stream news media tries to make it morally the same, they only reveal their moral bankruptcy.

Homer: get a grip! That culture fosters a perverse attitude toward women and sex, and this abuse plays on that. Only if one were oneself puritan would one think that some random TERRORIST was going to hell BECAUSE A WOMEN TEMPTED HIM.

I think some of you are missing the point. Regardless of how the media portrays this as a moral equivalent to beheadings, it still does not change the fact that this kind of behavior and abuse is just plain wrong. Did you read that Brit's report? Prostitutes, menstrual blood on prisoner's faces, black water and spoiled food. There needs to be a line drawn here.

As Americans, no matter how much the other side has wronged us, we need to overcome that evil and insist on treating every human being with dignity, regardless of whether they are a terrorist or not. Holding these people for questioning and using certain methods to get them to give us information does work, but taking away their God-given dignity and disrespecting their religious beliefs is sick and unjust.

Didn't we condemn the abuse and torture in Sadaam Hussein's Iraq? Although we are not directly killing people here, how can we in good conscious tell people what goes on here? How could we tell our children that this is how we protect our country? Not my America!

Let's not forget to hit them with the fluffy pillows.

Are we going insane in this country? Since when is enticing a guy to sport wood considered a means of extracting information from him? Gives the term ‘spilling the beans’ new meaning.

Can’t take this kinder/gentler approach craap much longer.

asdf,

Did you actually READ the whole account by the Brit who wrote it (I provided a link earlier)?

After you read it, why don't you start to think before you speak, instead of blurting egocentric views everywhere.

Do you have a faith, or are you so paralyzed by your weak Christianity that you can't be respectful of other's religious views and customs?

NEWS FLASH...There's a lot of Muslims out there, and if we are not tolerant and respectful of their customs we're ganna see 432346435343535432 more 9/11's. WE CAN'T LOCK THEM ALL UP, NOW CAN WE?

Geez Louise Doyle, don’t get your tidy whities all bunched up in a knot. And no, I didn’t read your link as I had enough information to foist a comment about the topic as presented.

So….seemed to me that our government was sporting for hookers to humiliate the terrorist prisoners down there in Shangri-La. That make sense to you?

Not sure how you got an ‘egocentric’ spin from my comments. But that’s just you.

Frankly, I could give a fat rat’s azz about being sensitive to anybody who is an aggressor against the U.S. and that includes those prisoners. They wouldn’t be there if they hadn’t violated certain laws or codes and, as prisoners anywhere, they are subject to whatever treatment their jailers decide is necessary to get from them what they need.

You sound like and appeaser to me and that has NEVER worked. The only thing that some cultures understand is strength. And until our enemies start to leave us alone and play fair, we should demonstrate that we are nastier than they could ever be.

Only if and when they come around, our strategy for dealing with them should change.

asdf,

You're a fool. I couldn't be more supportive of our military. And by the way, I work for Oliver North (you might have heard of him).

Have you ever stopped to think that you may be the fool? Maybe your take on this is the foolish one? No?

I think that my opinion is every bit as legitimate as yours is and you are as welcome to it as I am to mine. The big difference is that I choose not to look down on you for yours as you would with others.

And, if what you say is true, does working for Oliver North somehow gives your thoughts and opinions more weight?

Name dropping Dumbazz.

Time to get Olie another cup of coffee.

asdf,

The only reason I felt the need to tell you that, was because you accused me of never having worked, and that I was an "appeaser". Well now that you know who I work for, maybe you won't rush to judgement next time you open your stupid mouth when talking to people who you don't know (I also worked for The White House, so let the name dropping continue, shall we?)

That being said, I never commented that you weren't entitled to your opinion, and I didn't say that who I work for gives my opinion more legitimacy than yours; that's just your insecurity telling you to take your foot out of your mouth.

That being said, it seems to me that we haven't gotten this far in our relations with Muslims by putting underwear on their heads and forcing them to do things that are against their religious beliefs. That's like poking a stick at a Bee's nest man. Why do you think that our soldiers in Iraq were extremely careful not to tread on what the Muslim's consider their holy ground? It's called respect. Even if the prisoners are terrorists, that doesn't give us the right to take their dignity away from them and insult their religion. WE CAN GET WHAT WE WANT WITHOUT DOING THAT!

We have also punished military personel who have violated prisoner treatment codes. That being said, if there is misconduct, it should be dealt with swiftly and justly. Our code does not seek to humiliate and degrade prisoners, regardless of who they are. If we do, than we are no better than the terrorists we are trying to eliminate in order to liberate Iraq.

Oh and by the way, learn how to freakin' spell. "Ollie" is not Olie.

Take it easy man. This is what I wrote:

“You sound like an(d) appeaser to me and that has NEVER worked.”

The modifier here is ‘and’. Meaning appeasing has NEVER worked.

Why in the world would I accuse you of never having worked? What would that have to do with the price of apples or the discussion at hand? For all anybody knows, I could be unemployed, sitting in front of my computer in a Batman suit sipping on a cherry cool-aid and vodka. So why would I even bring that up?

In terms of appeasement not working: it doesn’t. I stick by that. So, if we need to get our point across using any means necessary, so be it. Even if this includes degradation and/or torture against our enemies.

Also, please spare me this respect for one’s religious beliefs and culture stuff. This country goes out of its way to respect and spare the feelings of all peoples, even our adversaries. As you may have gathered, I think too much so.

Funny how when Muslims are burning churches and torturing and killing Christians or other religious groups, or cutting people’s heads off or bombing innocents or flying bombs into large buildings in our country, they don’t seem to be too sensitive to our religious beliefs or culture. But, we need to be to theirs even when they are our combatants?

And I guess I have to explain that I am talking about enemies here in no particular religious or cultural order. Not your average joe on the street.

Anyway, didn’t mean to ruin your day. Just rendering an opinion.

Peace. And say hello to Ollie (and Stan) for me.

I see your point man. And I respect it. Take care.

ASDF and Christopher, your exchange is really etntertaining! I LedMAO

Rob Foshee, is that a pseudonym for Bill Bennett? You use the phrase "moral clarity" in your posts here like some people use the article "the." It reminds me of the 2000 election cycle where all those talking heads were driving me insane with their constant use of the word "gravitas."

And to Whatever, why are you perpetuating myths about the Puritans, they never thought someone would be condemned to hell by temptation alone. Poor Puritans always getting the shaft.

Brian

What I mean by the term "moral clarity" is a basic sense of right and wrong based on a biblical perspective. Western culture and the USA were generally founded on a Judeo/Chirstian world view. It has been my contention for quite some time that the post Christian west and post Christian America are sometimes lacking in this basic sense of values. Examples of this lack of claity abound. Just to site a few examples:
1.) George W. Bush says "we will go after the terrorists wherever they are." When Israel, our most important ally, goes after the "Palestinian" terrorists he says Israeli actions are "not helpful."
2.) France and Germany have assisted us in going after the terrorists in Afghanistan but they undermine the effort to go after the terrorists in Iraq.
3.)We send troops all the way to the other side of the world to fight terrorists yet some want to carve another terrorist supporting state out of Israel.
4.)Sexual humiliation is reprehensible. Make no mistake about it. Those who engage in such behaviour should be punished and they will be. The terrorists behead people. The main stream news media appears to imply that beheading people and sexually humiliation are somehow equally bad. Those who do this are either a.)morally bankrupt or b.)shilling for the terrorists. This leads us back to a.) only a person who is morally bankrupt would root for the terrorists, in this fight.

It has been my contention for quite some time that unless we and the rest of the western world develop clarity of purpose it will be much more dificult to win and win we must.

Perhaps I could have expressed myself more clearly. I apologize if the choice of words was annoying.

That was one longass argument you had there doyle, though i'm still curious as to why you think it's inhumane to parade hookers around in front of terrorists. Theres worse stuff we could be doing like, i don't know, shock them, pull out they're fingernails, put they're balls in a nutcracker, and yet your complaining because we're giving them free lap dances...

That was one long ass argument you had there doyle, though i'm still curious as to why you think it's inhumane to parade hookers around in front of terrorists. Theres worse stuff we could be doing like, i don't know, shock them, pull out they're fingernails, put they're balls in a nutcracker, and yet your complaining because we're giving them free lap dances...

Rob says:

"George W. Bush says 'we will go after the terrorists wherever they are.' When Israel, our most important ally, goes after the 'Palestinian' terrorists he says Israeli actions are 'not helpful.'"

Of course, you fail to mention that oftentimes, Israeli reprisals kill innocent Palestinian civilians and that since the beginning of the second infitada in the fall of 2000 around four times as many Palestinians have been killed as Israelis. Many of those Palestinians being brothers and sisters in the Lord Jesus Christ (not that this somehow makes their deaths more important than Muslim Palestinians, but it corrects the common misconception that all Palestinians are Muslim).

Rob suggests that those who support the establishment of a Palestinian state want to "carve a terrorist supporting state out of Israel."

I know this is a bit off topic from Mr. Flynn's original post, but its interesting to me how those who favored the Iraq war on the basis that Hussein could not be allowed to thumb his nose at the "international community" or United Nations resolutions had to be enforced, politely look the other way while Israel violates numerous UN resolutions banning the extension of settlements and calling for an end to the occupation. If the United Nations can be used as an authority in one case, why not in the other? Or are the recommendations of that body to be applied selectively? Food for thought.

Further reading:

Christians in Palestine

James

You make the statement that four times more Palestinians as Israelis have been killed. These comparisons are misleading. For documentation of this see the following books: "The case for Israel" by Alan Dershowitz (Pages 123-133) "The official handbook of the vast right-wing conspiracy" by Mark W. Smith (Pages 47-56) Any Palestinian civilians killed by Israel are not intentional and are the result of legitimate self-defense actions. This is contrasted with the Palestinians who deliberately target civilians. Since the beginning of the second intifada, the Israelis have thwarted thousands of terrorist attacks. Had these attacks been successful, it is estimated that the number of Israeli casualties would be at least ten times higher. The Israeli hospitals are vastly superior to the Palestinian medical system. Israel has offered to treat Palestinina victims but they have sometimes refused, leaving their people to die. Some Palestinian spokesmen have counted the homocide bomber as a casualty. Sometimes bomb makers who are killed in "accidents" are counted. The Palestinians have the stupid practice of firing off live ammunition into the air at funerals and protests. Sometimes these are even counted as war casualties. This is only the tip of the iceberg. Suffice it to say the comparison is misleading. I am unable to say for certain why the main stream media will not report the whole story. At best, they are lazy.

It is true that many people did support the removal of Saddam based on his violation of numerous UN resolutions. I think George W. Bush alluded to this and I think it is included in the Congressional resolution authorizing the use of force. This was not the reason I supported and continue to support the operations in Iraq. The reasons for my support of the operations are as follows: 1.)The sanctions were going to collapse and probablly soon. 2.) When they collapsed Saddam would have been able to quickly reconstitute his WMD program. 3.) It was only a matter of time before we would have had to deal with Saddam. 4.) Saddam was in violation of the cease fire he signed to end the first gulf war. 5.) Even if we had been able to maintain sanctions, which was very unlikely, this may have meant starving that country. Fortunately we took out a major threat before it could fully materialize. Thankfully George W. Bush, for all his flaws, and the coaliton had the moral back bone to do this.

The UN is an evil organization that needs to be demolished brick by brick, or at a minimum, moved to a place like Tehran or Moscow. The UN is dominated by totalitarian governments and, as such, is a totalitarian proxy. In fact, for the last few years, the thing the UN has done best is to reprsent the interests of Islamo/Fascists the world over, as such, we would expect them to oppose Israel. To expect Israel to submit to the UN is tantamount to asking Israel to commit suicide. It would be ludicrous to expect Israel to commit suicide just because Arabs don't like their existence. This dispute is not about occupation. It is about the existence of Israel and the refusal of Islamo/Fascists to tolerate anyone who will not submit to their will. The sooner we understand this the better. Even if Israel disappeared tonight, this would solve nothing. It would simply mean that Jihadist assets that are now deployed against Israel would be deployed elsewhere. I simply don't see how creating another Arab state at Israel's expense can be expected to solve anything. Let us pray that my my misgivings are wrong, as recent as recent Yahoo and Fox news reports indicate that Ariel Sharon and the Israeli government are bound and determined to go through with the withdrawl plan. To oppose their efforts would put me in opposition to the soverign democratic government of our most important ally. I just think our ally is unwise to institute a withdrawl plan at this time and the United States and other Western governments are unwise to encourage it. The Palestinians may be willing to stop the terror attacks for tactical reasons but they do not seem to be ready to stop the terror attacks because it is wrong. I pray that the plan works out. We all need peace.

I know there are Arab Christians living in the territories. I pray for them daily. I contribute to a variety of missions that minister to both Arabs and Israelis. The more people we can turn from Islamo/Fascist poison and to the one true God of the universe the beterr. The bible admonishes us to pray for the peace of Jerusalem (Pslams 122:6) This means praying for Jews, Chriatians, Islamists, and all others. This also means praying for all peace plans that have a chance to work. It is my considered opinion that the current plan just isn't likely to work, at least not without a radical change of heart by the Arabs. I hope and pray that I am wrong and the peace plan does work.

As stated in a previous post, I am not a big fan of President Bush. He certainly has not governed as a conservative. He has governed as a "liberal." This is in contrast to much of the democratic party leadership who seem to be "leftist." If you have read Mr. Flynn's excellent book, "Why the left hates America" you know what the difference is between them.

With Respect,
Rob

Glad to be able to entertain you Brian. Especially when I can take away from it that not only have I brightened someone else's day, but that I have the satisfaction of being 100% correct.

Man I wish women did that in the Army when I was in....to actually lap dance for a man instead of a woman! hyuk-hyuk!