![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
hermionesviolinTo quote Josh Chafetz of OxBlog, after he and other bloggers got e-mails from people upset that they hadn’t commented on the abuses at Abu Gharib
I was sad that i didn’t have a chance to attend any of the conference thingy at the Chapel last weekend but hi, i was kinda busy.
The torture of Iraqi prisoners by American officers should be denounced by America. The complicity of various UN officers’ complicity with Saddam should be denounced by the UN. It is not okay for certain people to do bad things and/or cover up bad things just because you happen to like said people. Didn’t we all learn this in kindergarten or something?
Another double standard is that CNN has "more coverage of prisoner abuse in a week than they gave Saddam's torture and mass murder in a decade."
Instapundit also notes that there is no big media outcry over the regular mistreatment of prisoners in America (or elsewhere). *points to today’s Boondocks*
Stephen Green talks about how bad things are going to happen even in just wars, because that’s the nature of war, and that’s how it’s always been, but that doesn’t mean war isn’t worth it.
Oh hey look, "Kosovo UN troops 'fuel sex trade' ". What, but i thought the UN was all that is right and pure in the world. *feigns shock*
Apparently NATO won’t start helping in Iraq until after this November’s U.S elections. What, saying “America is le suck and we don’t wanna support them in any way shape or form” is more important than helping the Iraqi people? Schmucks.
In other news, a solid explication of why the Iraq war was a good thing, and why this sort of action is generally a good thing. Andrew Sullivan explains why "if I knew before the war what I know now, would I still have supported it? [...] My tentative answer - and this is a blog, written day by day and hour by hour, not a carefully collected summary of my views - is yes, I still would have supported the war. But only just." He continues: "And then, when November comes around, we have to decide whether this president is now a liability in the war on terror or the asset he once was. How he reacts to this crisis - whether he is even in touch enough to recognize it as a crisis - should determine how the country votes this fall. He and his team have failed us profoundly. He has a few months to show he can yet succeed." Jacob Levy has a roundup of thoughts.
Oh and lastly, my father asks, "If this was a war for oil, where the **** is the oil?" acknowledging that "The obvious logical possibility is that the Bush people wanted to "steal Iraq's oil" but are bleeping incompetent. And one can adduce certain pretty uncontradicted facts: The Bush people did not realize what bad shape the Iraqi oil industry was in, being held together with the metaphorical chewing gum and baling wire. A lot has to be invested to get a lot of oil out. But there are people with the motive, means, and opportunity to screw up new investment--blow things up, threaten Iraqis who work with the Americans."
I haven't said anything about Abu Ghraib because I don't have anything non-obvious to say. Lots and lots and lots of people are doing quite good jobs at expressing appropriate moral and political outrage -- what else could I say? We don't aim to be a comprehensive source of news or commentary (and God help you if you use OxBlog that way), so I don't really feel any need to issue pro forma denunciations of things that lots of other people are doing perfectly good jobs denouncing.I feel rather the same way, but the issue ties in to other stuff i am interested in posting about, so i’ll talk about those, peripherally mentioning Abu Gharib as relevant.
I was sad that i didn’t have a chance to attend any of the conference thingy at the Chapel last weekend but hi, i was kinda busy.
You are invited to a simultaneous webcast of a conference on EVIL in HUMAN LIFE Sunday-Tues., May 2-4. Sponsored by the Office of the Chaplains.I was especially interested since that weekend was when the Blogosphere started talking about Kofi Annan’s involvement in the oil-for-food scandal. (InstaPundit.com has a whole lot of posts and i’m not going to link to every single one.) Roger L. Simon, for example, wrote "Maybe it's just me, but I find unbelievably contemptible the actions and pretences of a man who did little or nothing to save hundreds of thousands from genocide in Rwanda, yet fights tooth-and-nail to hide the most hideous de facto pro-fascist corruption in his own organization." InstaPundit writes "It's funny that people who are calling for Rumsfeld's -- or Bush's -- resignation over the Iraq prisoner abuse incident still worship Kofi Annan, who turned a blind eye to genocide."
Hon. Kofi Annan will be the keynote speaker Sunday at 7:15 pm. Details attached.
------Naming Evil
with keynote speaker Hon. Kofi Annan
May 2-4, 2004
Webcast at Bodman Lounge (lower level), Smith College Chapel
Northampton, Mass.
Trinity Institute’s 35th National Conference, May 2-4, 2004, “Naming Evil”
All members of the community are invited to drop in to this conference at any time. The Office of the Chaplains will provide beverages and webcast facilities in our lounge.
Sunday May 2
7:15 - 9:00p.m. - The Honorable Kofi Annan, Sec’y-Gen of the U.N., “Naming Evil”
Monday, May 3
9:30 - 12:00 N.: Seyyed Hossein Nasr - “Whence Evil: To Confront and Overcome Evil in Human Life” & Michael Sandel - Socratic Dialogue
1:30 - 4:00 p.m. Jon Levenson - “Jewish Reflections on Evil, Cosmic and Moral” & Michael Sandel - Socratic Dialogue
Tuesday, May 4,
9:30 a.m. - 12:30p.m. - Joan Chittister: “The First Lesson of History: The Good of Evil,” plus Joan Brown Campbell: Socratic Dialogue & Interfaith Worship.
The torture of Iraqi prisoners by American officers should be denounced by America. The complicity of various UN officers’ complicity with Saddam should be denounced by the UN. It is not okay for certain people to do bad things and/or cover up bad things just because you happen to like said people. Didn’t we all learn this in kindergarten or something?
Another double standard is that CNN has "more coverage of prisoner abuse in a week than they gave Saddam's torture and mass murder in a decade."
Instapundit also notes that there is no big media outcry over the regular mistreatment of prisoners in America (or elsewhere). *points to today’s Boondocks*
Stephen Green talks about how bad things are going to happen even in just wars, because that’s the nature of war, and that’s how it’s always been, but that doesn’t mean war isn’t worth it.
Oh hey look, "Kosovo UN troops 'fuel sex trade' ". What, but i thought the UN was all that is right and pure in the world. *feigns shock*
Apparently NATO won’t start helping in Iraq until after this November’s U.S elections. What, saying “America is le suck and we don’t wanna support them in any way shape or form” is more important than helping the Iraqi people? Schmucks.
In other news, a solid explication of why the Iraq war was a good thing, and why this sort of action is generally a good thing. Andrew Sullivan explains why "if I knew before the war what I know now, would I still have supported it? [...] My tentative answer - and this is a blog, written day by day and hour by hour, not a carefully collected summary of my views - is yes, I still would have supported the war. But only just." He continues: "And then, when November comes around, we have to decide whether this president is now a liability in the war on terror or the asset he once was. How he reacts to this crisis - whether he is even in touch enough to recognize it as a crisis - should determine how the country votes this fall. He and his team have failed us profoundly. He has a few months to show he can yet succeed." Jacob Levy has a roundup of thoughts.
Oh and lastly, my father asks, "If this was a war for oil, where the **** is the oil?" acknowledging that "The obvious logical possibility is that the Bush people wanted to "steal Iraq's oil" but are bleeping incompetent. And one can adduce certain pretty uncontradicted facts: The Bush people did not realize what bad shape the Iraqi oil industry was in, being held together with the metaphorical chewing gum and baling wire. A lot has to be invested to get a lot of oil out. But there are people with the motive, means, and opportunity to screw up new investment--blow things up, threaten Iraqis who work with the Americans."
no subject
Date: 2004-05-11 07:45 am (UTC)I think that the torture of Iraqis (and others) under Saddam Hussein did affect US citizens. Even if only for the fact that it was a justification for sending US troops (and private entities) to war. If I were the foreign press, I'd jump all over it. Here we sit, the United States, the most powerful and righteous country in the world, ready to condemn anything and everything we don't like or that doesn't mesh with our morals... and our troops are beating, mutilating, raping, and humiliating other human beings.
Maybe it's time to change the name of Freedom Fries back.
I take the US media, in general, with a grain of salt. They're the ones who'll cover Columbine incessantly and barely brush over yet another shooting in an inner-city, mostly minority school. Or the main news story will be about some actor, and there are people starving to death. What people care about isn't necessarily a good thing, because it leaves those very people blind to the world.
But, I guess that means i agree with you. And I'd certainly like to know how to change it, too.
no subject
Date: 2004-05-11 08:05 am (UTC)I'm always happy to have commenters discussing amongst themselves so you certainly have my blessing for jumping into comment threads in my LJ any time you like :)
The fact that Saddam's horrible behavior was a big justification for our involvement is a major reason why i think we need to be really serious about punishing those Americans who did similar things. We need to be consistent in our condemnation of that kind of behavior, and even if we sometimes let other countries get away with it we certainly can't let our own citizens get away with it.
Freedom Fries was a bad idea 'cause it looks foolish and makes everyone laugh at you. It was only in the Congressional cafeteria, though; i mean at least they didn't expect the country at large to be all about it.
And yes, i certainly agree with both you and