Friedman, Amnesty International: Shut Down Guantanamo

Thomas Friedman and Amnesty International are channeling each other. From Friedman: Just shut it down. And from the Amnesty folk, courtesy their annual report: Amnesty International calls for Guantanamo shutdown.

4 Responses to “Friedman, Amnesty International: Shut Down Guantanamo”

  1. Rise Against Says:

    Very cool article by Friedman. It was actually re-printed in my local newspaper (Toronto Star) today. Unfortunatley, the article makes too much sense and will probably be ignored by those that can do anything about it.

    5 years ago my vision of America was that of a country that valued freedom, justice, and opportunity for all. I don’t think I need to expalin the vision that I (and I’m sure many others) have of America these days under the leadership of Dubya.

  2. Robert Says:

    What’s You Problem Rise, come on don’t be shy ???

  3. Rise Against Says:

    I guess I”m not surprised that you don’t what my problem is Robert, given the fact that it seems really difficult for you to use your brain.

    But to answer your question, my problem is with a coked-up-cowboy from Texas who has made this world more dangerous than anyone could ever imagine. So you know, my problem with ‘fucktard’ started well before his reckless reaction to 9/11. It started when he started reversing all the environmental policies that were adopted by Clinton. We all know Kyoto isn’t perfect, but I think we can all agree that air and water pollutants aren’t very healthy for anyone.

    Another problem I have is with sheep like you Robert. You offer no contructive discussion to the debates that go one here, and just spew forth propaganda coming from the White house or Faux news. Don’t feel too bad though, you’re not alone there.

  4. ethan-p Says:

    Rise Against,

    I’m not sure what happened to freedom, justice, and opporitunity for all. Did it ever exist in America, or has it always been this way? I honestly don’t know.

    Maybe I believed the rhetoric from other leaders more than this one.

    I feel that with the Gitmo deal under the Bush administration, that ideal has (at the very least least) rounded a corner and turned into freedom, justice, and opporitunity for all Americans, but only those who we’re not suspicous of.

    Where I’m especially torn is the part where “we hold these truths to be self evident…that all men are created equal”. Then we have this bill of rights that is supposed to be a fundamental belief that all people are supposed to be granted these rights…then, we turn around and disappear people — trying them in courts run by Americans, but outside of the country, ignoring due process, claiming that they’re not Americans, they’re enemy combatants. Enemy combatants don’t deserve due process. What ever happened to “all men are created equal”?

    It’s starting to feel like Animal Farm, where “all animals are created equal”, which was amended later in the story with “…but some are more equal than others”.

    Are Americans more equal than people in the Middle East? We don’t trust the government to disappear Americans and try them without due process. Why do we trust them to take other people? Is it because it isn’t us? Should we only speak out when they come for us?

    I’ve heard justification for this on numerous occasions. The primary justification is that “we’re at war”. Here’s my problem with that justification: we’ve been in the midst of two other losing wars on things (not countries) for decades now. Those two wars are the war on drugs and the war on poverty. Some civil liberties have been eradicated by the war on drugs, but I can’t think of any with the war on poverty.

    Remember that history shows that wars on things are generally losing wars. It seems an excuse for an ongoing action.

    As far as you commentary on Bush’s environmental policy, I have mixed feelings and probably shouldn’t respond…since I don’t want to debate it, but I’ll bite. I don’t mind that he refused to sign the Kyoto protocol, as I’m personally not sold on the whole global warming debate (specifically, the idea that fossil fuels are causing it). I’ve discussed that before, and I’m sure that my feelings can be found here. The stuff that I do have a real problem with is the fact that Bush has put former energy industry lobbiests in key environmental regulatory positions. I tend to believe that most of Bush’s policies and appointments aren’t nefarious…just misguided. I can legitimately disagree with many of them without thinking that he’s out to screw me so he and Cheeny can get richer. However, I really have to question his motives on those appointments.

    Anyway, I’ll shut up now…

    -Ethan P

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.