Brand told 60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley what he did wasn’t torture, it was his training, authorized and supervised by his superiors. So how is it he was charged with assault, maiming and manslaughter?
"I didn’t understand how they could do this after they had trained you to do this stuff and they turn around and say you’ve been bad you shouldn’t have done this stuff now they’re going to charge you with assault, maiming and 'unvoluntary' manslaughter, how can this be when they trained you to do it and they condoned it while you were doing it," says Brand.
2006-03-06
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
What does this guy want bush to do--take responsibility for his policies? Sorry, but that's why God made dog soldiers.
I consider the turture issue to be a major mistake by Bush, and a severe disgrace. It is anti-democratic, unenlightened, backwards, retarded, and uncivilized. It is counter-productive in the kind of war Bush is waging. One of the seemingly reasonable Sudanese leaders has said, "I will build my civilization, then I will forgive those who have humiliated me." I don't know if this guy exemplifies his beuitful words, but Bush is making a big mistake trying to punish suspected tyrants during the turmoil of drastic social change. I think that the Bushie's must practice the sort of forgiveness that Nadir opposes for the honkies in Zimbabwe. The alternative is eternal war.
I have no problem with forgiving the honky farmers in Zimbabwe. Numerous plans for land redistribution have failed there over the past 25 years of independence - including Mugabe's last resort - violent seizures. Neighboring Mozambique has actually offered land to evicted Zimbabwean farmers with 80 year leases, but the government retains ownership of the land. That form of eminent domain is fair to me because the terms are clear up front.
This has little to do with the Bush regime's deplorable policies of torture, however.
Nadir: Here's what I think torture has to do with Mugabe's land plan. Bush wants to punish people who have committed atrocities, and take from them the benefits of their past attrocities. This is somewhat similar to Mugabe's plan. I call for Bush to give up on punishing the wicked (to a great extent), and focus on moving forward, with a new set of rules. The quest for cosmic justice leads to eternal suffering and even punishing of the innoccent. Better for Bush's goals that 100 guilty go free than 1 innocent get punished... especially if turture is involved. Should the US, as an example of democracy, pride iteslf merely on torturing less harshly than the baathists?
Post a Comment