Cox & Forkum has a great cartoon today that spells out exactly what many bloggers (myself included) Posted about the other day. Read my post here if you some how missed the story. Basically though, the media were too afraid......

Since no one really has a clear picture of the situation as a whole, the side you pick is invariably matched to your personal biases and nothing else.

and he is right. My personal biases are based on although never having served myself living almost 40 years in a military town. Knowing hundreds of military personell, travelling to numerous countries around the world, and being a well informed citizen.

I can say without bias and with every certainty that the horrible treatment that some prisoners received at Abu Ghraib was an aberation and not the norm.

If you had any common sense you would know it as well.

Think about how American media is going out of its way to act all "sensitive" to Islam, either refusing to show the cartoons or blurring them out to avoid offending anyone. Yet they're all too eager to get back on the Abu Ghraib scandal train again....

You should know that our soldiers have the moral fiber and authority to refuse such unlawful orders. Hopefully you'll sleep better at night now.

In any rational discussion, the burden by this point would be on the U.S. to demonstrate that it *doesn’t* have such a policy, and to explain in detail how these abuses have managed to crop up at widely separated locations.

So we have the right to be guilty until proven innocent, and the suspected 'terrorists' have the right to be innocent until proven guilty. Truly telling. This is a perfect case of leftward constitutional philosphy- it only applies where they want it to.

So then you're back to Bush and company. Please explain to me how the President manages to get around to 'all these' locations so quickly.

Again, if I said it once I said it a thousand times, questioning the President doesn't mean you 'hate America'. However:
slamming the difficult job our troops do by making blanket statements;
supporting the enemy by unnecessarily highlighting the crimes of a few during war (name a war where they have not happened);
extending consitutional rights to international terrorists but being totally dissatisfied with military justice for our own;
stupid partisanship...
....those things sort of wreak of 'hating America'.

Well, that *is* what some of us think: a U.S. policy to treat our prisoners with contempt and degradation. We did it at Bagram, we did it at Gitmo, we did it at Abu Ghraib, we're doing it at "secret prisons" in, last time I checked, northern Africa.

In any rational discussion, the burden by this point would be on the U.S. to demonstrate that it *doesn't* have such a policy, and to explain in detail how these abuses have managed to crop up at widely separated locations.

But of course, this is politics, so there's nothing rational about it. PREMISE: Bush makes no mistakes and does nothing wrong. CONCLUSION: Anyone upset about these abuses hates America.

I didn't really want to post on the new Abu Ghraib photos because they're nothing but propoganda for terrorists and we all know that already. But I see many other bloggers all had the same thought as I did, immediately......

How does this equate with Abu Ghraib?

Unless you think one prison's atrocities are representative of US policy this comparison is not analogous.

L

NEWS: - Feeding Frenzy May Have to Search for Bites After Cheney Interview - Justice Alito Hires Trusted Conservatives - In Ohio, Bush Touts Health Savings Plan - Liberal Group May Target Conservative Democrats - Frist Gets Tough on Tax......

All we ever see from conservatives are excuses.

And all we ever see from liberals are sweeping, blanket statements, judging people by their political affiliations rather than as individuals.

Now, removing my tongue from my cheek, the above statement obviously doesn't apply to all liberals, but it's certainly fair to say it about Ken.

You're prejudiced, Ken. You're discriminatory. You put people in a pre-assigned box that makes you comfortable so you don't have to actually think.

You, Ken. Not liberals. You.

When pictures of the current atrocities are published today we get people debating whether or not they are somehow 'worthy' of being published. This is a peculiar reaction. Understandable only in light of the fact that among a lot of people thier ideology is so deeply ingrained that it takes precedence over basic human values.

Where is the outrage?

All we ever see from conservatives are excuses.

...yet it also doesn’t mean that systematic abuse of detainees isn’t going on and it’s more then “just a few bad apples”

Huh? I can't follow the logic here. Because pictures inside the prison don't serve as evidence of other, more widespread abuse, they also don't refute that it IS happening? Well, neither does the price of tea in China. Sounds like you're looking for a more systemic problem, for SOME reason...

Since no one really has a clear picture of the situation as a whole, the side you pick is invariably matched to your personal biases and nothing else.

Because YOU don't have a clear picture, doesn't mean that 'no one' has a clear picture. There are a lot of Veterans that have done the job, and who know how they conducted themselves.

I wouldn't have recommended publishing either the cartoons or the Abu Ghraib photos in a vacuum. In either case, though, I'd say they don't justify violence.