Bush Will Veto Human Rights
By Anthony Levensalor
Thursday, July 21, 2005 at 10:10 PM
President Bush will veto the new defense spending budget if it includes provisions against torture.
According to the AP, the White House threatened to veto the $442 Billion defense spending bill if it means they can't torture people any more. More after the jump.The AP article tells how the administration, which has been accused of all kinds of kick-ass nastiness against vaguely brown people of possible middle-eastern descent, put lawmakers on notice it did not want them "legislating on the issue".
The White House said such amendments would "interfere with the protection of Americans from terrorism by diverting resources from the war."
I'm sorry, I really am. Torturing people does not make us safer. Torturing people makes us less safe, and I'd like to make a quick case as to why.
Let's say we get invaded by, I dunno, China, right? So we get invaded by China, and of course Americans start fighting this occupying force, even though it may have freed us from the Christiano-Fascist regime of BushCo.
And then, China starts capturing the people fighting them in the US, and we start seeing reports on TV of our people being tortured, the men and Women of the US being tortured, with pictures and everything.
What would you do? China thinks they're liberating us, and can't understand why we're angry. The bulk of us think China needs to get the fuck out, and call it a day. But they torture our people to try to find more of us that don't want them here.
Hmm.... that's a toughie, innit? Well, evidently it is if you're our president. He'd just roll over for whatever occupier came along it seems, give them whatever information they wanted, and not be the slightest bit upset about people being raped with chemical lights.
But pretty much everyone else with an IQ over six would be like "hey, wait a minute! You haven't given Bob a trial! Not even charged him! And you're fucking him with a flashlight! Fuck that!"
And we'd fight. And we'd get more people to our cause the more they tortured, until they became the focal point of evil in our lives. We would blame everything on them, villify them, and do our damndest to take them out of the game any way we could.
So, in the scenario outlined above, torture increases insurgency, terrorism, guerilla warfare, whatever we would have to do to them.
Why do we expect it to be different when we do it? Why are we ok with torturing people as long as it's us doing the torturing?
Well, we're really kinda not. But the "president" is. He's not just ok with it, he's going to veto a massive defense spending bill if we're not allowed to fuck people with flashlights, or hold them without a trial, representation, contact with the outside world, anything.
Ghost detainees and making people piss themselves is more important than actually defending this nation to our "president". That's the only conclusion I can draw from a move like this.