Front page
Archive
Silflay Hraka?


Bigwig is a systems administrator at a public university
Hrairoo is the proprietor of a quality used bookstore
Kehaar is.
Woundwort is a professor of counseling at a private university

The Hraka RSS feed

Email
bigwig AT nc.rr.com

Friends of Hraka
InstaPundit
Daily Pundit
cut on the bias
Meryl Yourish
This Blog Is Full Of Crap
Winds of Change
A Small Victory
Silent Running
Dr. Weevil
Little Green Footballs
ColdFury
Oceanguy
Fragments from Floyd
VodkaPundit
Allah
The Feces Flinging Monkey
Dean's World
Little Tiny Lies
The Redsugar Muse
Sperari
Natalie Solent
From the Mrs.
ErosBlog
The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler
On the Third Hand
Public Nuisance
Not a Fish
Rantburg
AMCGLTD
WeckUpToThees!
Electric Venom
Skippy, The Bush Kangaroo
Common Sense and Wonder
Neither Here Nor There
Wizbang!
Bogieblog
ObscuroRant
RocketJones
The Greatest Jeneration
Ravenwolf
Ipse Dixit
TarHeelPundit
Blog On the Run
blogatron
Redwood Dragon
Notables
Greeblie Blog
Have A Cuppa Tea
A Dog's Life
IMAO
Zonitics.com
Iberian Notes
Midwest Conservative Journal
A Voyage to Arcturus
HokiePundit
Trojan Horseshoes
In Context
dcthornton.blog
The People's Republic of Seabrook
Country Store
Blog Critics
Chicago Boyz
Hippy Hill News
Kyle Still Free Press
The Devil's Excrement
The Fat Guy
War Liberal
Assume the Position
Balloon Juice
Iron Pen In A Velvet Glove
IsraPundit
Freedom Lives
Where Worlds Collide
Knot by Numbers
How Appealing
South Knox Bubba
Heretical Ideas
The Kitchen Cabinet
Dustbury.com
tonecluster
Bo Cowgill
mtpolitics.net
Raving Atheist
The Short Strange Trip
Shark Blog
Hoplites
Jimspot
Ron Bailey's Weblog
Cornfield Commentary
Testify!
Northwest Notes
pseudorandom
The Blog from the Core
Ain'tNoBadDude
CroMagnon
The Talking Dog
WTF Is It Now??
Blue Streak
Smarter Harper's Index
nikita demosthenes
Bloviating Inanities
Sneakeasy's Joint
Ravenwood's Universe
The Eleven Day Empire
World Wide Rant
All American
Pdawwg
The Rant
The Johnny Bacardi Show
The Head Heeb
Viking Pundit
Mercurial
Oscar Jr. Was Here
Just Some Poor Schmuck
Katy & Bruce Loebrich
But How's The Coffee?
Roscoe Ellis
Foolsblog
Sasha Castel
Dodgeblogium
Susskins Central Dispatch
DoggerelPundit
Josh Heit
Attaboy
Aaron's Rantblog
MojoMark
As I was saying...
Blog O' Dob
Dr. Frank's Blogs Of War
Betsy's Page
A Knob for Brightness
Fresh Bilge
The Politburo Diktat
Drumwaster's rants
Curt's Page
The Razor
An Unsealed Room
The Legal Bean
Helloooo chapter two!
As I Was Saying...
SkeptiLog AGOG!
Tong family blog
Vox Beth
Velociblog
I was thinking
Judicious Asininity
This Woman's Work
Fragrant Lotus
DaGoddess
Single Southern Guy
Caerdroia
GrahamLester.Com
Jay Solo's Verbosity
TacJammer
Snooze Button Dreams
Horologium
You Big Mouth, You!
From the Inside looking Out
Night of the Lepus
No Watermelons Allowed
From The Inside Looking Out
Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics
Suburban Blight
Aimless
The SmarterCop
Dog of Flanders
From Behind the Wall of Sleep
Beaker's Corner
Bad State of Gruntledness
Who Tends The Fires
Granny Rant
Elegance Against Ignorance
Moxie.nu
Eccentricity
Say What?
Blown Fuse
Wait 'til Next Year
The Pryhills
The Whomping Willow
The National Debate
The Skeptician
Zach Everson
MonkeyWatch
Geekward Ho
Argghhh!!!
Life in New Orleans
Rotten Miracles
Fringe
The Biomes Blog
illinigirl
See What You Share
Truthprobe
Blog d’Elisson
Your Philosophy Sucks
Watauga Rambler
Socialized Medicine
Consternations
Verging on Pertinence
Read My Lips
ambivablog
Soccerdad
The Flannel Avenger
Butch Howard's WebLog
Castle Argghhh!
Andrew Hofer
kschlenker.com
Moron Abroad
White Pebble
Darn Floor
Wizblog
tweedler
Pajama Pundits
BabyTrollBlog
Cadmusings
Goddess Training 101
A & W
Medical Madhouse
Slowly Going Sane
The Oubliette
American Future
Right Side Redux
See The Donkey
Newbie Trucker
The Right Scale
Running Scared
Ramblings Journal
Focus On Reality
Wyatt's Torch

June 29, 2005

Anti-Trust

Okay, maybe I missed it.

But why isn't the blogosphere running around with its hair on fire over this outrageously insane statement by Nancy Pelosi? Last time I checked, Karl Rove is basically a pollster for the President. Nancy Pelosi actually has a vote in the House, something Karl Rove lacks.

Yet there was a huge stink last week when Karl Rove slammed liberals - specifically speaking of the hard left variety of liberals - as being in favor of pie-in-the-sky treatment for terrorists, charging them with crimes in federal courts, rather than treating them as a military foe; on their side rather than on the U.S.' side in the war on radical Islamacism. So did he exaggerate in saying liberals cut that way? Was Rove right? Let's look at what Nancy Pelosi said.

Many of the detainees have been in U.S. custody since October 2001. Why have they been in custody for nearly four years without being charged? Why has so little been done to resolve the status of the detainees?

Got that? Charge them with a crime, or release them. There is a slight problem with that notion, in that if the prisoners are Enemy Prisoners of War and the Geneva Conventions protect them (something the Dems insist on) then it is illegal to try them, except in cases of crimes against humanity or other war crimes. Merely fighting against the U.S. isn't a crime, even though Ms. Pelosi thinks these inmates should be tried. One wonders what the charges should be... crossing a desert against the light? Unlawful tampering with cellphone materials? Failure to get a permit for that mortar?

Okay, so the Dems' senior leader in the house says we need to charge those Al Qaida fighters detained at Gitmo, or release them. That proves nothing, right? Admittedly, she isn't a totally representative sample, just an influential sample. She's just one person, right? Surely, other Dem leaders don't feel this way, do they?


Let's ask Ted Kennedy. He's a senior guy in the Senate. What say you, Tedski?:

We also need to make sure that the administration doesn't send these and future detainees to places unknown that are even more difficult to monitor.

FDCH Political Transcripts, June 15, 2005, Senate Judiciary Committee. Got that? We can't repatriate Al Qaida fighters to places where they might be tortured, and where the Senate can't keep track of their well being. Hmmm... I don't remember anything in the Constitution about "looking out for the well being of major league a**holes who would destroy this country," but perhaps it was tucked away behind a couple emanating penumbras. But then, that's just Ted, right? He's not the boss of me, or of the Dems on Senate Judiciary. Pat Leahy is. And Senator Leahy's statement for the record in the same hearing will surely clarify this statement, right? What say you, Pat?

The Administration also continues to defend its use of extraordinary rendition to transfer terrorism suspects in U.S. custody to the custody of countries where they are likely to be tortured, a patent violation of the Convention Against Torture.

Got that? You catch an Al Qaida fighter on the battlefield, you can't keep him unless you charge him with a crime, which is patently illegal under the Geneva Conventions. Nor can you repatriate him to his own country, which Senator Leahy insists is a patent violation of the Convention Against Torture.

Meanwhile, Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-W[B.G.]Va), the senior Dem on the Intelligence Committee, has this to say about Gitmo conditions: "horror stories' have emerged from the "scandalous' interrogation camp that the U.S. is operating in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.' The Hill May 10, 2005. If you disagree, just don't tell this right wing lapdog, which thinks conditions are pretty durned good, all considering. Keep in mind, Jay Rockefeller is *the* leading Dem on the Senate Intelligence Committee - he's the man with access to all the sensitive information. Yet he never bothered to look into Gitmo himself, and apparently disbelieved everything that the military told him. Evidently, he believes the NY Times and CNNi and MoveOn, but not an array of generals and intelligence professionals that passed before his committee... oh well, who are you going to believe... me, or your lying eyes?

When you look at the facts, Karl Rove was basically right. He shouldn't have tarred all liberals with the same brush - just the influential liberals in national leadership positions. There are plenty of honorable liberals who want to defend this country. It's just that very few of them serve in Congress.

Until the Democrats get serious about protecting the country, I cannot in good conscience vote for them. It's not that they disagree with President Bush about what the proper strategy is; it's that they carry on as if there wasn't even a problem. They are dangerous, and cannot be trusted to keep us safe, at least not at this point in time.

Except for Joe Lieberman. Him, I like.

Posted by Blackavar at June 29, 2005 11:00 PM | TrackBack
Postscript:
First time visitor to House Hraka? Wondering if everything we produce could possibly be as brilliant/stupid/evil/pedantic/insipid/inspired as the post you just read? Check out the Hraka Essentials, the (mostly) reader-selected guide to Hraka's best posts, and decide for yourself.
Comments

If they are to be held the length of the Afghan war, it should be evident by now that any intelligence they had is years out of date.

So why "interrogate" them? It must be for recreation, since it can't be for information.

Posted by: Scorpio at July 2, 2005 04:41 PM

"Recreation"? Hello, Fallacious Argument! Long-time, no see! Is the Taliban still actively fighting US forces and Afghan forces in Afghanistan? If so, then the conflict isn't over, and it is hardly uncommon to continue to detain active combatants who would only return to the battle.

Don't let the facts get in the way of your self-righteous defense of active combatants, though. I'm sure that, once released, they'll be ever so thankful to you. You should send them your snail mail address so they can thank you in person. Fight the power!

Posted by: mns at July 4, 2005 10:26 PM
Post a comment Note: Comments with more than two dashes per line will be blocked as spam.









Remember personal info?