May 6, 2004 by s.z.

Rush Sets Us Straight From Yesterday's show RUSH: A lot of people now starting to sort of buzz now, by the way, underneath the surface -- a'bzz bzz bzz bzz bzz -- about the woman doing the laughing and the torturing and so forth. The question, "Okay, thought the women supposed to soften up the military." There are some people out there, I just want to warn you, blaming this abuse on the fact that it was women involved in these simulated sex acts and forced masturbation. The fact that women were there, the male members of the guard team got a little excited because the women were there and it was all part of a -- in other words, if the women hadn't been there this wouldn't have happened. There's some people trying to set that up. You know, some people like Linda Chavez (see the Townhall Review of yesterday).  But it's also -- does it not represent the coarsening of America women? Does it? I don't know -- let's ask Peggy Noonan: The most distressing of the scandal photos is, to me, the one of an American woman, a GI, who is laughing, holding a cigarette and aiming her fingers as if comically shooting or aiming at a group of prisoners, presumably Iraqi. They are naked and hooded. She looks coarse, cruel, perhaps drunk. And as I looked at her I thought Oh, no. This is not equality but mutual degradation. Can anyone imagine a WAC of 1945, or a WAVE of 1965, acting in this manner? I can't. Because WACs and WAVEs were not only members of the American armed forces, which responsibility brought its own demands in terms of dignity and bearing; they were women. They apparently did not think they had to prove they were men, or men at their worst. I've never seen evidence to suggest the old-time WACs and WAVEs had to delve down into some coarse and vulgar part of their nature to fit in, to show they were one of the guys, as tough as the guys, as ugly at their ugliest. So, yup, it does represent the coarsening of women.  And that's WAY worse than the fact that American soldiers were torturing and abusing Iraqi prisoners.  Imagine, a woman holding a cigarette, and aiming her finger like a gun!  I think Peggy has proven that women should not be in the military, should not work outside the home, and shouldn't vote, because such things take away from their dignity and coarsen their natures, which God intended to be finer and purer than those of men. Now back to Rush: Would you want to marry one of these babes? Might maybe date 'em for a couple days, but would you want... (laughing)  I'm sorry, folks. I'm sorry. Somebody has to provide a little levity here. This is not as serious as everybody is making it out to be.  Yeah, it's FUNNY, people.  It's just some babes and guys letting off a little steam.  And they're just doing their jobs, softening up prisoners who "more than likely have attempted to kill Americans."  Hey, it's no worse than a frat hazing.  It's just a fact of war.  It's just kinky fun, like a Britney Spears contest.  So, lighten up, everybody -- humiliation, sexual abuse, torture, and murder are no big deal.  Anyway,  they attacked us on 9/11, so we have the right to do whatever we want! Anyway, the only reason that people are getting worked up about this business is that they're feminized wimps: RUSH: While women are being masculinized, I contend to you that men are being feminized. CALLER: I agree. RUSH: Men are not staying masculine to meet up with this new masculine female. CALLER: Absolutely. RUSH: They are being feminized. I think a lot of the American culture is being feminized. I think the reaction to this stupid torture is an example of the feminization of this country.   So, there you have it.   Only girly-boys care about this kind of stuff.  I mean, it happens to Rush all the time, but you don't hear him whining about it. 7:29:08 AM

Press Briefing We learned during President Bush's interview with Alhurra Television that the first time he saw those infamous photos from Abu Ghraib was on TV (probably not on "60 Minutes II," though --more likely on a Fox News spot, or an "In the News" break between cartoons). Q When did you learn about the -- did you see the pictures on TV? When was the first time you heard about -- THE PRESIDENT: Yes, the first time I saw or heard about pictures was on TV. However, as you might remember, in early January, General Kimmitt talked about a investigation that would be taking place about accused -- alleged improprieties in the prison. So our government has been in the process of investigating. Then in yesterday's press briefing, the intrepid reporters tried to find out from Scott McClellan just when the President was briefed on allegations of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib -- but instead just got lectures on what we believe in America (we believe in goodness): Q Have you been able to find out when the President first learned of allegations of prisoner abuse in Iraq? MR. McCLELLAN: [BS snipped] Secretary Rumsfeld informed the President about it at a later time, and let the President know that there were allegations of prisoner abuse in Iraq and that the military was taking action to address it, launching investigations into the matter to find out exactly what had happened and who was responsible so that we could take actions to address it. The exact time period I'm not sure of, but it was some time after Secretary Rumsfeld became aware of it because he was the one who informed the President about the situation.   Q I'm just wondering, why can't we put even a month on it? The President of the United States can't remember when he first heard that soldiers under his command may have tortured Iraqis? He doesn't remember that? MR. McCLELLAN: [Blah, blah, blah, the photos are "abhorrent", etc.] ...Q Why didn't he hear about it until it became public with a television broadcast? Why -- wouldn't he be concerned that he was, in effect, the last to know of the seriousness of this, that it had to become public before he became aware of how serious it is? MR. McCLELLAN: Well, as I said, Bill, obviously, as the investigation process moves forward, more information is going to come to light. You're going to learn more about the precise nature of what occurred. Yes, you're going to learn more about the precise nature of what occured when CBS and Seymour Hersh tell you about what happened -- they're good that way. The question about when the President learned that American soldiers had abused Iraqi prisoners is asked about ten more times, but apparently the President doesn't know when it happened so it's a mystery that the press needs to solve, like they would a game of Clue: MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I don't know the exact time when Secretary Rumsfeld became aware of it, you can direct that question to him, but it was sometime after that. Q So we'll ask Secretary Rumsfeld when Rumsfeld knew, and then that will give us a clue as to when the President knew, because the President doesn't know? Scottie finally specifies that Bush heard something about it from Rumsfeld (possibly no more than "the military is investigating allegations of inproprities in the prisons") sometime between mid-January and a week or two ago -- but  he "learned more about the precise nature just within the recent days" (probably this week -- after somebody watched "60 Minutes" on tape and told him about it).  Scottie reminds the reporters that it was only over the weekend that the Taguba report "came to light" (you know, when Hersh and the New Yorker brought it to light) -- the report is still "working it's way up the chain of command," and will presumably hit the President's office in 2007.  And Bush only got actively involved in the situation, telling Rumsfeld to investigate stuff, on Monday.  But hey, this isn't how we do things in America.  Scottie says that 99% of U.S. soldiers don't torture Iraqis being held at Abu Ghraib (which is news to the reporters), and adds that the photos didn't make the President happy. MR. McCLELLAN: He is not happy about what occurred in these images that people saw last week. And he wants to make sure that strong steps are taken to stop that from happening again, and that those responsible are held accountable. And that's what the military is doing. And that's where the President's focus is. Then Helen Thomas gets to ask a question. Q In that connection, has he issued a worldwide alert that all military prisons under U.S. control are not participating in such abuse? And does he know -- how about Guantanamo? Is it clean? MR. McCLELLAN: Helen, our military adheres to high standards of conduct. And when -- and when there is a bad behavior -- Q We don't need that lecture. We know that. We believe in our country. Way to go, Helen! MR. McCLELLAN: Well, the way you phrased your question doesn't make it sound like you do -- What about Helen's question made it sound like she doesn't believe in her country?  Is it that she didn't have blind faith in the non-abusive way that Guantanamo is being run? Q I'm asking you if he is looking into other military prisons that we have control over, as to whether there -- MR. McCLELLAN: I think the Pentagon has talked about how they are looking at their entire prison system and making sure that -- Q This new man at Abu Ghraib also believes in interrogation, of keeping the lights on, no sleep and so forth. MR. McCLELLAN: There are international accords under the Geneva conventions that we are committed to adhering to. We are committed to treating prisoners humanely and committing [sic] prisoners with dignity and respect, and I think that our military has made that clear, as well.    Well, the WashPost still has some questions about that commitment.  Here are a few paragraphs from an editorial laying the ultimate responsibility for the atrocities on Rumsfeld (it also mentions the procedures which the "new man in Abu Gharaib" put in place in Guantanamo): The lawlessness began in January 2002 when Mr. Rumsfeld publicly declared that hundreds of people detained by U.S. and allied forces in Afghanistan "do not have any rights" under the Geneva Conventions. That was not the case: At a minimum, all those arrested in the war zone were entitled under the conventions to a formal hearing to determine whether they were prisoners of war or unlawful combatants. No such hearings were held, but then Mr. Rumsfeld made clear that U.S. observance of the convention was now optional. Prisoners, he said, would be treated "for the most part" in "a manner that is reasonably consistent" with the conventions -- which, the secretary breezily suggested, was outdated. [...] Much of what has happened at the U.S. detention center in Guantanamo Bay is shrouded in secrecy. But according to an official Army report, a system was established at the camp under which military guards were expected to "set the conditions" for intelligence investigations. The report by Maj. Gen. Antonio M. Taguba says the system was later introduced at military facilities at Bagram airbase in Afghanistan and the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, even though it violates Army regulations forbidding guards to participate in interrogations. The Taguba report and others by human rights groups reveal that the detention system Mr. Rumsfeld oversees has become so grossly distorted that military police have abused or tortured prisoners under the direction of civilian contractors and intelligence officers outside the military chain of command -- not in "exceptional" cases, as Mr. Rumsfeld said Tuesday, but systematically. Army guards have held "ghost" prisoners detained by the CIA and even hidden these prisoners from the International Red Cross. Meanwhile, Mr. Rumsfeld's contempt for the Geneva Conventions has trickled down: The Taguba report says that guards at Abu Ghraib had not been instructed on them and that no copies were posted in the facility. So, yes, there are the Geneva Conventions to which we are committed to adhering, except when we say that they don't apply, like during a War on Terror.    Okay, possibly it's because of Scott McClellan's woeful inadequacy as a spokesman, but I get the feeling that nobody -- not the military, not the White House, nobody --thought the prisoner abuse story was that big of a deal.  Even after they got word that "60 Minutes" was going to do a segment on it and that Hersh had a copy of the Taguba report, they still didn't seem to react.  Which, as I said before, makes one feel less than confident about both their competence and their morality. 6:13:07 AM

Happy National Day of Prayer! Some info from The Washington Post: President Bush's participation in a National Day of Prayer ceremony with evangelical Christian leaders at the White House will be shown tonight, for the first time in prime-time viewing hours, on Christian cable and satellite TV outlets nationwide.      For Bush, the broadcast is an opportunity to address a sympathetic evangelical audience without the risk of alienating secular or non-Christian viewers, because it will not be carried in full by the major television networks. Frank Wright, president of the National Association of Religious Broadcasters, said more than a million evangelicals are expected to see the broadcast. Some civil liberties groups and religious minorities charged that the National Day of Prayer has lost its nonpartisan veneer and is being turned into a platform for evangelical groups to endorse Bush -- and vice versa. Yeah, here's Bush's big chance to tell his evangelical base his secret plans to usher in Armageddon while all the secularists are watching the Friends series finale. Anyway, the National Day of Prayer was instituted in 1952 -- it was a day designated "to be set aside for common prayer," which sounds fairly innocuous.  But, per the Post, "Since the mid-1980s, the ceremony has been organized by the nonprofit task force headed by two prominent evangelical women: Vonette Bright, widow of Campus Crusade for Christ founder Bill Bright, and Shirley Dobson, wife of Focus on the Family founder James C. Dobson."  The Post doesn't explain how the evangelicals got to be in charge of the ceremony for a "national" day with White House and congressional observances, nor how we might impeach them, but as it now stands, the Task Force, centered at Focus on the Family Headquarters, is setting the agenda for this Day, which President Bush apparently supports, since he's speaking at their prayer meeting. And what is that agenda?  The Post quotes Mark Fried, the spokesman for the Task Force: Fried said this year's theme is "Let Freedom Ring." He described it as the evangelical response to efforts to remove the words "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance and keep the Ten Commandments out of public buildings. "Our theme is, there is a small group of activists unleashing an all-out assault on our religious freedoms. They are targeting the Christian faith," he said. Shorter theme: Pray that God strikes down the ACLU and the secularists. Per the National Day of Prayer website (on the page What to Pray For -- Freedom Five), we should also pray for the five following "centers of power": Government The government establishes and implements policies that have far-reaching consequences. Pray that the Lord would grant wisdom, discernment and boldness to those who serve in authority over us, from city council members at the local level to the President of the United States. I'm all for God granting more wisdom and discernment to all levels of government, but doesn't praying for "bolder" goverment violate a basic conservative tenet? MediaWhether it’s news broadcasts, movies, television sitcoms or Internet sites, the media is the most influential center of power in America. Pray for journalists to be fair and accurate and for entertainers to conduct themselves in a responsible manner. We can also pray for the Christian individuals in the news and entertainment industries, asking the Lord to grant them strength and perseverance as they endeavor to let their lights shine in what is often an environment hostile to those who voice their belief in Christ. So, pray for Fox News and the soul of Jack Kelley.  Also pray that Janet Jackson keeps her boobs from being exposed, and that Mel Gibson has the strength to keep letting his light shine.  Got it. EducationMany of our schools and universities are minimizing traditional subjects such as history and math, and are instead promoting a radical social agenda. For example, some schools begin teaching homosexual propaganda to kindergartners. As a result, our children are entering the "real world" knowing more about politically correct ideas than they do about reading or science! Pray that your schools will get "back to basics" when it comes to educating our children, instilling the leaders of tomorrow with a respect for the Judeo-Christian values upon which our nation was founded. I.e., pray that the schoools teach nothing but the basics: reading, history, math, creationism, and intolerance towards non-Christians and gays. ChurchThe Church is in a position to impact communities for eternity as well as influence social change. Pray for your churches and their leaders, asking God to grant us the wisdom and vision to make the Church a vessel for healing and revival in America. Maybe this is a good place to interject some more info from the WaPo story: She [Vonette Bright] also made no apologies about the exclusion of Muslims and others outside of the "Judeao-Christian tradition" from ceremonies planned by the task force on Capitol Hill and in state capitals across the country. "They are free to have their own national day of prayer if they want to," she said. "We are a Christian task force." [,,,] But the exclusion of religious minorities has led to protests in several cities. In Salt Lake City, Mormons have complained that they are not allowed to lead prayers during the local observance So, pray for your church to "impact social change," but only if it's an approved National Day of Prayer church, and the right kind of social change (regressive). FamilyThe traditional family is the most immediate of the five centers of power and is truly one of America’s greatest assets. Pray daily, not only for the institution of the family as a whole, but for individual families within your circle of influence that may be struggling.  Unless, of course, those individual familes that may be struggling are non-traditional -- God only helps nuclear familes. To further lend a non-partisan, unifying aspect to our National Day of Prayer, the Task Force selected an appropriate honorary chairman: Oliver North.  He will "provide the keynote address at the national event in Washington, DC" and will be "joined by representatives of the three branches of government and the military."    "To say we are honored by Col. North's partnership with our ministry would be an understatement," NDP Vice Chairman Jim Weidmann said. "He is a man of integrity and faith who has conducted himself with tremendous personal strength and grace during some very difficult circumstances. With this year's theme and because of the Colonel's recent war coverage for FOX News, we couldn't be more pleased to have him as our Honorary Chairman." "Difficult circumstances" would include "being convicted of a felony in connection with his Iran/Contra activities."  And doing war coverage for Fox News lends luster to any honoree on a non-partisan National Day where we ask God for stuff.  And here's a bit more about the Day, from the The Christian Science Monitor:  Across America on this official National Day of Prayer, those who normally pray behind closed doors are going to great lengths to be seen and heard by their fellow citizens. Tens of thousands of believers will get plenty of notice as they pray on radio airwaves over Tampa, Fla.; on mountaintops near San Francisco; and on the steps of courthouses, capitols, and city halls from Columbia, S.C., to Carson City, Nev. Which, of course, calls to mind Jesus's admonition. "And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men." Mixing politics and prayer can be problematic, as John of the Market Street Baptist Church points out, when those assembled can't agree on the clear moral imperative. What's more, events that bring elected officials and their religious constituents together for prayer at public buildings can feel exclusivist to the nation's 30 million nonbelievers, according to Ellen Johnson, president of American Atheists. "It makes [the prayer rally] look like a government activity," she says, noting that all 50 governors and President Bush have issued proclamations recognizing this year's National Day of Prayer. "When government gets involved in endorsing religion, the rest of us feel marginalized." Well, like Ms. Bright said, if you are a non-believer or a believer in one of the non-approved religions, you should just have your own National Day of Prayer (or Non-Prayer).  In some other country, of course.  3:14:14 AM