Thursday, May 20, 2004
And you find this admirable Patrick?
I mean, for... fucks... sake!
We are the United States of America. We are a good people, a just people and, above all, people who treasure freedom, democracy and all that comes with having those things.
They are the rulers of the modern dark ages. They are (or were, as the case may be) Saddam, Uday, Qusay, bin Laden, al Sadr, the Mullahs of Iran and many, many others. They are from many countries, many different places, but they all represent the same thing: evil.
I'm sorry, have we caught you in your Two Minutes Hate? Do you give 'a squeak of mingled fear and disgust' whenever the face of the Enemy of the People comes on screen? And of course most of them were friends of the US Government once as well. What was Strength again? Oh yes, I remember...
We see abuse of prisoners as a crime. They don't.
Hang on, pull back. Have the things to which 'we' and 'they' changed. 'We' see abuse of prisoners as a crime. Well, some of 'us' do. If the 'we' from the first sentences, the 'we' of the United States, the sole bastion of truth and decency in the world, see abuse of prisoners as a crime, how could 'we' do it? One cannot claim innocence of wrongdoing because it was their hand that did the act, they take responsibility. If one US soldier, or UK soldier, or Chinese soldier or any member of the Coalition of Those Unable to Stand Up To Bush do wrong then all have committed a crime, therefore 'we' may see abuse of prisoners as a crime', but if 'we' still do it, we have no right to lecture others on their immorality. And also 'we' don't know whether 'they' didn't see abuse of prisoners as a crime. All we can say is that 'they' apparently didn't care. Please pay more attention.
We make those who abuse others pay for their crimes. They reward them.
George Bush gives Donald Rumsfeld his full support. Can we just be clear again? Who is 'we' and who is 'they' through the looking-glass?
We view prisoner abuse as an aberration. They encourage it.
"I was instructed by persons in higher rank to stand there, hold this leash... and they took the picture. That's all I know," [said Private England]. 'They took the picture'. 'They'. It's always 'them' isn't it?
They cut off their prisoner's hands. Wefind doctor's to give the victims new hands.
'We' can rebuild them! 'We' have the technology!
We have men and women among our ranks who commit crimes and dishoner the armed forces. We do what's right. They hired people specifically to behead, torture and rape prisoners and that is what they consider honor.
The funny thing is, you can switch the 'we' and the 'they' around and both sentences still make absolute sense and are as true. 'We' call it psychological warfare, 'we' call 'them' doing it torture.
That is what separates us from them and why you should never say we are just as bad as they are.
We are the good guys. They are not.
And I really wish that saying made it so. What the events in Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and any number of hell-holes around the world has shown is that both sides in a battle quickly come to an equilibrium of brutality, the only difference is in which side can more effectively scream to eternity "But we're the good guys!" So sleep well, tell yourself that you're better than 'them', just as 'they' once rationalised their crimes over others.
I mean, for... fucks... sake!
We are the United States of America. We are a good people, a just people and, above all, people who treasure freedom, democracy and all that comes with having those things.
They are the rulers of the modern dark ages. They are (or were, as the case may be) Saddam, Uday, Qusay, bin Laden, al Sadr, the Mullahs of Iran and many, many others. They are from many countries, many different places, but they all represent the same thing: evil.
I'm sorry, have we caught you in your Two Minutes Hate? Do you give 'a squeak of mingled fear and disgust' whenever the face of the Enemy of the People comes on screen? And of course most of them were friends of the US Government once as well. What was Strength again? Oh yes, I remember...
We see abuse of prisoners as a crime. They don't.
Hang on, pull back. Have the things to which 'we' and 'they' changed. 'We' see abuse of prisoners as a crime. Well, some of 'us' do. If the 'we' from the first sentences, the 'we' of the United States, the sole bastion of truth and decency in the world, see abuse of prisoners as a crime, how could 'we' do it? One cannot claim innocence of wrongdoing because it was their hand that did the act, they take responsibility. If one US soldier, or UK soldier, or Chinese soldier or any member of the Coalition of Those Unable to Stand Up To Bush do wrong then all have committed a crime, therefore 'we' may see abuse of prisoners as a crime', but if 'we' still do it, we have no right to lecture others on their immorality. And also 'we' don't know whether 'they' didn't see abuse of prisoners as a crime. All we can say is that 'they' apparently didn't care. Please pay more attention.
We make those who abuse others pay for their crimes. They reward them.
George Bush gives Donald Rumsfeld his full support. Can we just be clear again? Who is 'we' and who is 'they' through the looking-glass?
We view prisoner abuse as an aberration. They encourage it.
"I was instructed by persons in higher rank to stand there, hold this leash... and they took the picture. That's all I know," [said Private England]. 'They took the picture'. 'They'. It's always 'them' isn't it?
They cut off their prisoner's hands. Wefind doctor's to give the victims new hands.
'We' can rebuild them! 'We' have the technology!
We have men and women among our ranks who commit crimes and dishoner the armed forces. We do what's right. They hired people specifically to behead, torture and rape prisoners and that is what they consider honor.
The funny thing is, you can switch the 'we' and the 'they' around and both sentences still make absolute sense and are as true. 'We' call it psychological warfare, 'we' call 'them' doing it torture.
That is what separates us from them and why you should never say we are just as bad as they are.
We are the good guys. They are not.
And I really wish that saying made it so. What the events in Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and any number of hell-holes around the world has shown is that both sides in a battle quickly come to an equilibrium of brutality, the only difference is in which side can more effectively scream to eternity "But we're the good guys!" So sleep well, tell yourself that you're better than 'them', just as 'they' once rationalised their crimes over others.
