As President George Bush is in China lecturing his counterparts on human rights and detainee rights, pictures have emerged of the U.S. military’s use of small crates to hold detainees in Iraq. The wooden boxes are only 3 feet by 3 feet by 6 feet tall, but the Bush Administration insists that it is a perfectly humane way to hold detainees. That is no doubt something that Chinese will find instructive.
The boxes are used for up to 12 hours at a time. The average Iraqi male is 5 feet 9 inches tall.
In some ways, the exchange of information with the Chinese is only fair. After all, it was recently disclosed that we used torture manuals from the Chinese to torture our own detainees, here.
China previously defended its own abuses by citing the advances of the Bush administration in this area, click here.
It will take years for the United States to be able to speak internationally on the subject of human rights without a round of snickering — as soon by the reception of Bush’s implausible role as a defender of human rights in Beijing. President Bush has robbed the nation of the moral high ground to the point that we cannot even see over the Chinese government from our current position.
For the latest story and additional pictures, click here.
Where is Nancy Pelosi now? This is against everything that this country once stood for. We are now a torturer with gulags of various sizes and in various locations, under the guise of homeland security. This type of treatment must violate the Geneva convention accords, not to mention common human decency. Pelosi needs to be recalled by her district and the Speaker’s position should be filled by someone like Kucinich.
All the white man is responsible for this. All of them are!
Rafflw, get off Pelosi’s case already! She is not the enemy.
Feel free to go to her district and campaign against her, altough her people are unlikely to heed uninformed outsiders.
Also, since this blog is conducted by a conlaw teacher, please note that there is no provision whatsoever for recall in the constitution. The repeated calls for recall betray ignorance.
Members may be expelled by a two-thirds vote of their respective Houses. They may not be recalled by their voters.
Kucinich was free to run against Pelosi for Speaker at the start of this Congress, but did not do so, and will be free to do so again in the next Congress. He will get a landslide vote of one.
Publius,
I am well aware that this is a site run by a Constitutional Law Professor and I am aware that the Constitution does not provide for a recall. I am referring to her constituents voting her out of office when I wrote that she needed to be recalled by her District. As to staying off her case, you can forget about that. I don’t consider her the enemy, but I do consider that her policy on impeachment is ill advised. And if she won’t budge on what I and others consider a vital rule of law issue, then she is in the way. Have you seen the lame reasons why she stated she took impeachment “off the table”? http://jonathanturley.org/2008/08/02/speaker-pelosis-latest-justification-for-barring-impeachment-bush-would-never-cooperate-with-his-own-impeachment/ This posting by Prof. Turley is right on point.
We can get another Democrat from her district that will follow the law.
Well, good luck. Maybe you can get Ralph Nader to run. He should get a rock solid .01 percent of the vote. Why don’t you move there an run yourself. Feel free to stay on her case. You are a delight to the Republicans. There is nothing they like better than divided opposition. Just don’t complain if they cruise to victory again. Or complain. No one cares.
BTW, If you knew that the Constitution does not provide for recall, stop using the word. Recall means that the voters remove the incumbent before the term ends. Don’t use the word if you don’t mean it. Say that she should be defeated for reelection.
Turley lost big time on the Clinton impeachment. The learing curve has to start sometime.
Raff,
Publius is a fatalist. “The fault, dear country, lies not in ourselves, but the stars.”
Correction “… but in our stars.”
“The fault, dear Gyges, is not in our stars, But in ourselves.”
Elect a President and a Congress.
Conduct oversight.
Forget impeachment.
Gyges,
Our celebrities are kind of ditzy!
Publius,
The concept of oversight implies negative consequences (e.g. impeachment). Otherwise it’s just voyeurism.
Jill,
I don’t know, I really like some of the things Harpo Marx had to say.
I’d like to admit straight out that:
a) the joke’s very dated
b) I stole it from Annie
c) seriously, it’s the one good line
The concept of oversight implies negative consequences (e.g. impeachment). Otherwise it’s just voyeurism.
That is just wrong. There are many things short of impeachment that can ensue from oversight, including legislation, criminal referral to the Justice Department, civil enforcement, and more, including impeachment in very rare cases where a consensus prevails.
Publius,
What exactly is wrong with my statement? You yourself include my example of a negative consequence in a list of negative consequences.
Gyges,
There isn’t anything wrong with your statement. I have to say that I believe Publius is a visitor from the govt. because the administration is nervous right now.
The concept of oversight implies negative consequences (e.g. impeachment). Otherwise it’s just voyeurism.
You can have oversight without negative consequences. The concept does not necessarily imply negative consequences. Oversight of an agency may find that there was no wrongdoing, but it is still necessary and useful for public knowledge of agency operations. This is not voyeurism. It happens all the time
There, that is what is wrong.
The other thing that is wrong is that your words state that “oversight implies … impeachment.” Not always. Hardly ever.
I have to say that I believe Publius is a visitor from the govt. because the administration is nervous right now.
Sorry, Jill, you are wrong. I am a private citizen. I am sure that the prospect of impeachment is giving the administration some sleepless afternoons these days.
I should have said “oversight implies the possibility of negative consequences” I’ll grant you that. That would have been a clearer statement, but even without the addition I’m not wrong. The problem is that you assume that you assumed I meant the negative consequences had to be enforced, where as my statement simply says that negative consequences are part of the oversight process. It never says that that part has to be used, just there.
As to the “implies… impeachment” portion, I gave impeachment as an example of the negative consequences that oversight could imply. I did not give it as THE example. I’ll let you look up difference between E.G. and I.E.
Excuse me that should just be “You assumed”
Gyges, so what is your point?
My point was that you say we need oversight and then take a part of oversight off the table.
In his book, Fear Up Harsh, Tony Lagouranis describes the use of crates, larger than the ones in this article, which were used to break prisoners in Iraq. They were wired for sound to play loud music and they often had strobe lights. They could keep people in them in great heat or cold and isolation. It is amazing to see how degraded our treatment of prisoners was and probably still is in the black sites. Many in the military have tried very hard to treat people in a professional, decent manner. I am glad I live in a country that has people in it who will at least try to rectify past mistakes.
The bottom line is that over 90% of Americans would not have a problem with prisoners with violent tendencies being held in these cells for the limited times they are.
Let’s face it, no matter what our soldiers did to defend themselves or Iraquis concerned about these violent offenders, a few % of Americans would complain because they like to complain, not because a President Obama or Clinton would do anything different.
These violent offenders more than likely harmed innocent civilians time & again and would continue to do so if allowed to. Again, I don’t understand what there is to gain by complaining about such a trivial thing as how our soldiers keep themselves safe while helping the Iraquis control the violent offenders but keep complaining ’cause NOBODY IS LISTENING!
Dundar,
Got a source for that number?
dundar,
Do you take a poll before you make ethical choices?
John McCain used to say it was about us, not them. He WAS right about that. This is about who we are and what we stand for.
Another thing to consider is: 1. who gets to determine who’s violent? and 2. after mistreating a prisoner will they really be less dangerous to our soldiers? Unless you plan to lock them up forever or kill them, sometime you will have to deal with a person you abused. That doesn’t make you safe.
I would like to know, REALLY like to know just what Ms. Pelosi would consider impeachable conduct?
>The bottom line is that over 90% of Americans would not have a >problem with prisoners with violent tendencies being held in these >cells for the limited times they are.
Impossible. The criminal, Bush, got just over 50% of the electorate which was only about 30% of the eligible voters which is about 60% of the population. That is 50% of 30% of 60% of 300 million people. That’s about 9%. No one except those lunatics who supported this evil empire in the White House would condone this activity. Ok, I’ll double it to 20% (gotta include you and your vast network of like-minded but non-voting “friends”).
The rest of us love America and believe in what it stands for.
rcampbel: the biggest bunch of criminals in Washington are the Democrats in Congress that TRIED to lose a war for political gain.
rcambel: you need to grow up and stop being a whiner.
Russ,
Don’t let the facts get in the way of your simplistic view of the last 7 years. The Republicans were in power in Congress and the White House when the decisions were made that almost “lost” the occupation. Let’s not forget that the entire war was initiated for corporate gain. Can you spell oil? If anyone here is whining, it is you. You are whining that people actually expect our government to follow the law and follow the Constitution. You whine when Democrats actually try to enforce the oversight responsibility. Try using some facts to argue your point,instead of making up numbers.
Kathy’s question for Pelosi is a good one.
One more thing Publius. Bush isn’t losing any sleep these days because his arrogance blinds him to reality.
How many crates would it take to box up the Bush administration?
It would be an interesting sight to see Mr. Bush in a box like the ones mentioned in this story. Except he would probably just call up Daddy and buy his way out.
Bob,Esq:
“How many crates would it take to box up the Bush administration?”
******************************
Hey Bob long time no see. To answer your query, I guess thousands of them but I’d be willing to try to fit them all into one.
The “Daily Show” did a feature on this not long ago.
Publius- Yes Nancy Pelosi is the enemy as long as she does the same path and excuses the crimes. She’s the driver in the robbery.
For those of you upset about Pelosi check out Cindy Sheehan- http://www.cindyforcongress.org If that isn’t correct just google.
I am beginning to think that Publius, Russ, and Dundar are one and the same person.
Mespo,
I would like to watch the entire administration squeezed into boxes that measure 3 feet by 3 feet by 6 feet. That is basically the shape and size of a coffin. Do you think that is just a coincidence?
I can’t believe that there would be any hypocrisy in the US Government’s Foreign Policy.
I wonder what this means to the Middle Eastern peace agreement Bush has been working so hard to obtain before the end of this year.
Zakimar,
Bush does not seek Middle East peace, he seeks Middle East Oil.
rafflaw,
Your comment about the coffin size crates was just what I was thinking about yesterday. When the CIA rendered Khaled el-Masri, a German citizen, he was put in a coffin for days on end as part of his torture. Although the CIA later admitted the rendition was a mistake the supreme court in the US would not allow Mr. el-Masri to pursue his court case against the U.S. for the administrations unlawful action.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/03/AR2005120301476.html
Jill,
The coffin size crate was a not so subtle message to the detainees, in my opinion. It is sad day when this country has been reduced to being a torturer and of harboring war criminals in the highest echelons of the administration.
Rafflaw,
Russ and Dundar I can see, but Publius is a little to well spoken. Also he doesn’t seem to be supporting the Bush administration, just claiming that impeachment is pointless.
There are quite a few imbeciles on this blog that are too cowardly to hide behind one pseudonym, so they create several to make it appear that there are more lunatics out there that agree with them. They are like the people who signed ten petitions to get the bookstores to ban President Jimmy Carter’s great book, ‘Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid’, which I’m sure none of these clowns have read.
Gyges and rafflaw,
I agree that Publius seems very well informed. I do believe he was a govt. visitor. When I wrote that yesterday this page locked up on my computer and I couldn’t even get to the comments of anyone, only JT’s original posts. I think they are nervous about Suskind’s book and mounting evidence of detainee torture and abuse. With the sorry state of our media and Congress I’m not so sure they should be worried! Here’s hoping that all this evidence disturbs enough people to force cheney and bush to resign. It happened to Nixon, it could happen again.
Mespo: “Hey Bob long time no see. To answer your query, I guess thousands of them but I’d be willing to try to fit them all into one.”
Hey Mespo,
Sort of drifted away from cyberspace for a while; a good thing.
But speaking of fitting the Bush administration into one box, have you seen those ads on television for MrChipper?
You’d have six months to try for free!
Just a thought.
Bob
Jill Gyges Kathy Emily and Rafflaw,
Just one personal note.
Sorry, but I am not a government visitor, but a private citizen who, in fact, happened to vote for Gore and Kerry and expects to vote for Obama, and I am not Russ or Dundar or any other pseudonym on the site. I used a single pen name for all these posts, and it seems that each of you are also using a nom de plume.
Bob, Esq:
Well I didn’t want anything quite so dramatic as the “Black Hole of Crawford”, er, I mean “Calcutta,” but I think they are so deserving of one another they should stay in close proximity. You know the “birds of a feather” argument.
I’d also like to see Nancy Pelosi voted OUT of office when her term comes up. And I agree with Kathy that it would be nice to know what Pelosi DOES consider an impeachable offense. She’s been writing a blank check for the President on everything so far.
Just as long as Bush keeps supporting her Fatherland, Israel.