Idiotic Phrase II – “Close Guantanamo”
This phrase is so stupid I should just end my commentary here.
The coefficient of delusional hatred for this phrase is almost 1; meaning, there is an almost perfect correlation between those who hate President Bush and those who speak or write this phrase.
“Oh, if Bush wants it open, aarrgghhh!!, I hate him so much, close Guantanamo!” We all know people this delusional. We all know people this unglued.
Simply, I can find no other explanation for closing the prison.
What, close Guantanamo and let the prisoners free?
Close Guantanamo and move the prisoners to another prison? Oh, it’s a symbolic thing; now I get it. Maybe we could build a brand new prison with cable TV.
Close Guantanamo and what? If anyone can tell me what we are supposed to do with the prisoners at Guantanamo after we close it, I’d love to hear it.
Or, is one man’s torture another man’s “aggressive interrogation technique”? There has not been one substantiated claim of torture at Guantanamo. Yes, it makes for great headlines for the pro-terrorist lobby (al Fedaban Americans and the liberal media), but torture is simply not happening at Guantanamo.
Take the case of Mohamed al-Qahtani, the 20th hijacker, who should have been on Flight 93. There is no doubting that Qahtani was(is) given IVs. The Pentagon’s story was(is) that Qahtani was(is) on a food and beverage hunger-strike and they were(are) simply trying to keep him alive (I’ll concede the motive was(is) two-fold: to get more information from him and to avoid the damage done in the court of public opinion and in the all-important, "international community" if he died in custody). The liberal media’s position was(is) that the IVs were(are) provided to speed along the pace at which Qahtani would be forced to urinate all over himself; oh, the barbarism!
I’ve written it a thousand times: people believe what they want to believe. I want to believe the U.S. government knows the international outrage it would incur if Qahtani dies in custody. Liberal extremists who hate their country want to believe we torture innocents picked up in the wrong place (the battlefield!) at the wrong time (during a battle!).
People will find evidence to support what they want, but I think you have to be delusional to think the 350 remaining prisoners at Guantanamo are not immediate threats to the security of Americans and the United States of America.
"Poems from Guantanamo" has such a romantic sound and feel (See my Post of August 7, 2007 as well as the accompanying Comments). Only 19 shopping days left to get your loved one a copy before 9/11.
This phrase is so stupid I should just end my commentary here.
The coefficient of delusional hatred for this phrase is almost 1; meaning, there is an almost perfect correlation between those who hate President Bush and those who speak or write this phrase.
“Oh, if Bush wants it open, aarrgghhh!!, I hate him so much, close Guantanamo!” We all know people this delusional. We all know people this unglued.
Simply, I can find no other explanation for closing the prison.
What, close Guantanamo and let the prisoners free?
Close Guantanamo and move the prisoners to another prison? Oh, it’s a symbolic thing; now I get it. Maybe we could build a brand new prison with cable TV.
Close Guantanamo and what? If anyone can tell me what we are supposed to do with the prisoners at Guantanamo after we close it, I’d love to hear it.
Or, is one man’s torture another man’s “aggressive interrogation technique”? There has not been one substantiated claim of torture at Guantanamo. Yes, it makes for great headlines for the pro-terrorist lobby (al Fedaban Americans and the liberal media), but torture is simply not happening at Guantanamo.
Take the case of Mohamed al-Qahtani, the 20th hijacker, who should have been on Flight 93. There is no doubting that Qahtani was(is) given IVs. The Pentagon’s story was(is) that Qahtani was(is) on a food and beverage hunger-strike and they were(are) simply trying to keep him alive (I’ll concede the motive was(is) two-fold: to get more information from him and to avoid the damage done in the court of public opinion and in the all-important, "international community" if he died in custody). The liberal media’s position was(is) that the IVs were(are) provided to speed along the pace at which Qahtani would be forced to urinate all over himself; oh, the barbarism!
I’ve written it a thousand times: people believe what they want to believe. I want to believe the U.S. government knows the international outrage it would incur if Qahtani dies in custody. Liberal extremists who hate their country want to believe we torture innocents picked up in the wrong place (the battlefield!) at the wrong time (during a battle!).
People will find evidence to support what they want, but I think you have to be delusional to think the 350 remaining prisoners at Guantanamo are not immediate threats to the security of Americans and the United States of America.
"Poems from Guantanamo" has such a romantic sound and feel (See my Post of August 7, 2007 as well as the accompanying Comments). Only 19 shopping days left to get your loved one a copy before 9/11.
posted by Zack at 6:21 AM
4 Comments:
Another confounding phrase-
"I support the troops, but not the war". Huh?
ROC,
I covered "support the troops" back on June 9, 2006. Please go back and re-read that Post; of course, I think it's pretty good.
Also, for everyone else, you would do yourselves a favor by reading all my Posts from June 2006. I just did and they're all pretty good. June 13 and June 23 cover Guantanamo and current events at that time. Also, there's some lively Commentary.
Not exactly within the scope of your usual subject matter, but the phrase that fits the bill and seems to me to be most commonplace is -- "he/she gives it 110%".
Conscience- I agree, it's absurd. I actually won the coveted "110% Award" in high school for giving it all (and apparently "then some") to my designated sport!
Post a Comment
<< Home