To all the Fascist apologists.


"Grouping enemies into a unified cause is not uncommon in humanity itself, so this alone is not that bad." (do I even need to comment on this one?)

"you're not forced to display flags or any other patriotic paraphernalia" (You're refuting a point that was never made, it's not about being FORCED into nationalism)

"Abu Ghraib was an anomaly, not the norm." (hmm renditions, secret detention camps, Gitmo, seems pretty normal to me)

"Islamonazis are not a fictional creation" (well they kind of are, but jews weren't fictional either and they were used by the Nazis to excuse their actions fiction/truth has no bearing)

"Socialism is just fascism with a smile." (actually, philosophically they're at opposite ends of the spectrum)

"Controlled Mass Media - Not with the internet." (most people don't consider the internet MASS media, but you may have a small point here (although they are TRYING their best to control it))

"Obsession with National Security... Common to all governments at all times." (You don't know much about other countries do you?)

"Modern labor unions have used up the goodwill of their members and the buying public. Greed is greed." (Actually labour vs top management wages even in unionised environments has been widening since the '50s. Unionised employees are the only class of employees to see their adjusted (for inflation) income remain stable, others have been on a steady decline while top management has increased tenfold.)

"Who do you think pays for state-funded kollijes?" (actually that as many of the other comments are referring to society as a whole)

"Our death row scum more often die from old age." (and the USA is one of two countries in the world that executes minors and the mentally handicapped)

"America has one of the LEAST corrupt governments" (is this just wishful thinking? I see nothing in evidence that backs you up)

"It's only a fraudulent election if Democrats lose" (or if the supreme court "decides" what the final vote says in spite of facts to the contrary)

"This administration, bad as it is, doesn't seem much more corrupt than the last one." (the essay is about the state of affairs generally, but I'd have to say on any scale the bushies are way more corrupt than the clintonians, what you have a phony real estate scandal that was created by the right wing fiction machine and a few blow jobs vs engineering a massively wasteful war because your family happens to have a lot of shares in the Carlyle group, Halliburton etc. and stands to profit in a big way from a long drawn out war.)

"Favoring big business is a fairly common economic strategy" (yes but allowing corporate corruption to the degree of Ken Lay at Enron and then giving him a slap on the wrist (Clinton) which never even took effect because he was pardoned before he could be punished (Bush))

God I could go on and on. Suffice to say that if you actually did any research and tried to back up your arguments on facts you'd find that the video essay is actually very accurate. The USA is currently a Fascist state. Now quit turning a blind eye or apologising for it and DO something about it.

Hitler maintained his power through exactly the same kinds of attitudes in his population, look at what you've said and apply it to Germany in the '30s-'40s, do you honestly believe that people weren't making the same excuses then as you are now?

I dislike Bush and all, but to believe this is fascism requires a massive leap and you're really just letting your bias get the best of your common sense. I'm going to critique this opinion, because I'm tired of being a liberal and having other liberals making my position look bad by their flawed stances.

1. Nationalism is not in and of itself a bad thing.
2. This one only comes off looking strong because it shows pictures of Abu Ghraib, an isolated incident. Though arguments could be made for *some* things that have happened in America, they would be *highly* debateable and not anywhere near what could be considered "disdain" for human rights.
3. Grouping enemies into a unified cause is not uncommon in humanity itself, so this alone is not that bad.
4. This is definitely true. There is far too much military spending.
5. Rampant sexism? WTF? Silly, moving on...
6. Fox News is one media station. The government does not control the mass media. Media slams Bush all the time, and there is certainly no one stopping people from going on the internet to make videos like this to slam him.
7. This is true, but not without reason. Though it is taken overboard.
8. Religion and government are no more intertwined than they have always been. Bush being a religious man himself does not meet this criteria, as much as the video creator is trying to stretch it to. If you actually pay attention to politics and not just your own rampant delusions, Bush actually doesn't talk about religion all that much in an official capacity.
9. Favoring big business is a fairly common economic strategy and although I disagree with it, in no way indicates someone is fascist.
10. Labor power is suppressed? What? Moving along...
11. Disdain for intellectuals and the arts?!!! Intellectuals and the arts are just fine. Just because Bush isn't that good at forming a complete sentence doesn't somehow imply we are a step away from executing intellectuals.
12. Obsession with crime and punishment... The patriot act was enacted with a time limit, at which point it would be voted upon once more. It exists because the representatives of the people allowed it to. It is not the doings of a fascist dictator.
13. Cronyism and corruption... with a picture of Dick Cheney. I suppose he blew by this point so fast because he couldn't think of any good examples, and decided showing Cheney was enough. This administration, bad as it is, doesn't seem much more corrupt than the last one.
14. Fradulent elections. It was an extremely close election, and unless you have evidence it was fradulent, don't just assume that it was and think you made a point.

Sorry guys, but I'm tired, once again, of trying to focus on real issues as a liberal, then some losers spout off "BUSH IS A FASCIST" and makes it look like I'm on the side of a bunch of 10 year olds. Stick to the issues, eh?

Dude that is supposedly an expert that this guy mentions said that all 14 traits are common to all dictatorships, and this administration makes like 4 or 5 if you *really* want to stretch your imagination.

A vague and flawed premise, but what the hell!

1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism - In America, you're not forced to display flags or any other patriotic paraphernalia, nor are you required to attend "pro-government" rallies where your absence results in punishment. A greater concern would be the large numbers who are openly anti-patriotic, with little cause.

2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights - Liberals want foreign invaders (as well as illegal aliens) to automatically be protected by American law. Abu Ghraib was an anomaly, not the norm.

3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - Islamonazis are not a fictional creation. As for the rest of the tags, yeah, if you oppose the principles of the Founding Fathers, which do NOT include "free" health care, education, etc., then you're something else besides loyal to the Constitution. You're not a bad egg but you're not a capitalist, either.

4. Supremacy of the Military - The Constitution provides for the common defense but not for Health-Education-Welfare, but we waste an equal amount or more on the latter.

5. Rampant Sexism - We've got a woman prez candidate who's a bigger fascist than all the men combined. Socialism is just fascism with a smile.

6. Controlled Mass Media - Not with the internet.

7. Obsession with National Security - "Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses." Common to all governments at all times. Excessive fear is bad, but not healthy fear. If anything, half the nation is clueless that there is a very real War on Terror being fought every day.

8. Religion and Government are Intertwined - USA is not a theocracy, but was generally founded on Judeo-Christian principles. "Love thy neighbor" is not unique to any one religion. It's the "freedom FROM religion" crowd that has the problem with perceived theocratic rule.

9. Corporate Power is Protected - All power that has power is protected, to some degree. The Department of Education should be scrapped yet it's still around. Power is power.

10. Labor Power is Suppressed - Modern labor unions have used up the goodwill of their members and the buying public. Greed is greed.

11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - "Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia." What about open hostility to free markets and free ideas by Marxist academics? Who do you think pays for state-funded kollijes?

12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment -
Our death row scum more often die from old age.

13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption -
Corruption is the grease of democracy - Alex Hamilton. America has one of the LEAST corrupt governments (they do all their stealing openly).

14. Fraudulent Elections - It's only a fraudulent election if Democrats lose.

I think some people who try to dismantle the pro-choice movement by applying the choice argument to other, real if you will, offenses need to give a second thought to the reason why women look to abortion.

In earlier posts I've seen the thought that prematurely born babies should be terminated aswell as the fetuses women choose to abort.
"I'm sure if I wanted to, I could find a few pro-choicers who would like to extend the law to allow the termination of prematurely born babies. After all, they're the same age as those in the womb normally right?". Wrong, but that's not the point.
To me, this looks like a person who haven't really considered why women decide to abort, and this person also doesn't seem to fully grasp the difference between a prematurely born baby and an undeveloped fetus, so let me try to explain my point.
A prematurely born baby is saved and kept alive because the mother did not have an abortion, obviously, but also because it's wanted and have developed enough to have a chance at surviving. You'll be surprised to know there are some fetuses who are so prematurely born that they're unable to survive no matter how much the parents would want it to. A woman having an abortion usually does so for a reason, of which there are plenty good enough to stop a life from starting.

Consider the reason before anything else, like the offspring of a rape, the parent/s being unable (for a plethora of reasons) to support the child in any or all ways. For these reasons women will have abortions regardless of the law, which makes it toothless and in effect meaningless unless of course you want to legislate morality (in which case we could come up with lots of fun laws).
In conclusion, I feel having a baby is a huge undertaking, and writing off abortion as murder is to me completely unacceptable. To make a similar stupid generalisation for everyone to ponder, torture comes in many more forms than just the ones used in Abu-Ghraib, like for instance raising a child in an unsafe, financially- and emotionally barren enviroment. I guess the sanctity of life ends when the child is born, eh?

I'm sure you'll be happy to know your post has made quite a little stir at the Netscape pages.

http://news.netscape.com/story/2007/07/02/abu-ghraib-interrogator-describes-torture-tactics-he-used-videosift/

Though I did thoroughly enjoy the post, it didn't seem to be about Abu Ghraib at all. Is it possible the wrong embed code was used, or they changed the YouTube video?

Well it is often said that everything the Americans do we end up doing later (and often in an even more half-assed way!)

Beyond the horrible things they are taking pleasure in doing the thing that goes through my mind whenever I see a video like this or the Abu Ghraib photos is that some complete moron thought it would be a good idea to take a picture or a video. Why - as some sort of memento?(!) If you are that stupid you deserve to get caught (whether you get punished is of course a completely different matter - cynical? Me? lol). The other thing that these videos or pictures makes me think about is how much is goes on that didn't get filmed because the perpetrators had more sense? Thinking of it that way we should perhaps let them all take their video cameras and mobile phones with them!

Condoned torture of prisoners:
The evidence below shows that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Gonzales are guilty of violating "Federal Torture Act" Title 18 United States Code, Section 113C, the UN Torture Convention and the Geneva Convention by ordering and condoning the use of torture. Many prisoners have died as a result.

1. 1/25/02 - White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales wrote a memo advising the President of "the threat of domestic criminal prosecution under the War Crimes Act," a federal statute, for torturing prisoners. He advised Bush to invent a legal technicality --declaring detainees in the "war on terror" to be outside the Geneva Conventions --which, he said, "substantially reduces" the chance of prosecution. Gonzales was later promoted to US Attorney General. [Nation]
2. 2/7/02 - Bush took Gonzales' advice and signed an order declaring that members of Al Qaeda and the Taliban are not covered by the Geneva Convention. The memo requires that "detainees be treated humanely and, to the extent appropriate and consistent with military necessity, in a manner consistent with the principles of Geneva." While seeming to call for humane treatment, it is carefully worded to allow for violations of the Geneva Convention when necessary.
3. Bush moves prisoners to Guantanamo Bay in Cuba and holds them for years without charges, trials, or access to lawyers. This is ruled illegal by a Federal Judge on Jan 31, 2005.
4. Bush sets up secret prisons run by the CIA in foreign countries to escape US laws against torture. Rice claims European countries supported this plan. [WashingtonPost] [CNN] [FindLaw]
5. 9/26/02 - Canadian Maher Arar was arrested at JFK airport and sent to secret prison in Syria for torture under "extraordinary rendition" program. He was released a year later without charges. He sued the US government but the suit was dismissed by a federal judge David Trager on 2/17/06 citing the need for secrecy. He wrote, "One need not have much imagination to contemplate the negative effect on our relations with Canada if discovery were to proceed in this case and were it to turn out that certain high Canadian officials had, despite public denials, acquiesced in Arar's removal to Syria." Thus the reason for the secrecy is not for national security but simply to avoid embarassing guilty parties in government. This sets a dangerous precedent that may allow Bush to kidnap and torture anyone he pleases. On 1/26/07 the Canadian government apologized and awarded Arar compensation. [Wikipedia]
6. Dec '02 - Alberto J. Mora, the general counsel of the United States Navy, tried to halt what he saw as a disastrous and unlawful policy of authorizing cruelty toward terror suspects. His 2004 memo details his unsuccessful struggle with the White House to stop the torture. [NewYorker]
7. 12/31/03 - German national Khaled al-Masri says he was abducted by the CIA arrested in Macedonia and flown to Afghanistan. He was then tortured for five months and released. CIA has admitted making a mistake in this case.
8. April 2004, photos of prisoners being tortured at Abu Ghraib prison make headlines around the world. Low ranking soldiers are convicted of torture charges, falling on their swords for the White House. [Wikipedia] [NewYorker]
9. 5/24/04 - Seymour Hersh releases article detailing how Rumsfeld's program encouraged torture. "President Bush was informed of the existence of the program, the former intelligence official said." [NewYorker]
10. October 2005, Senator McCain adds an amendment to a defense bill that would outlaw torture by the United States. Bush and Cheney fight this tooth and nail to block this amendment but eventually give in after the McCain amendment is weakened by the Graham-Levin amendment. When Bush signs the bill he adds a signing statement that basically says he can ignore the prohibition against torture under his powers as "unitary executive" and "Commander in Chief ".
11. 6/29/06 - Supreme Court rules in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld that the Geneva Convention applies to prisoners at Guantanamo.

Abu Ghraib.....they had one of those signs up there that said., "Unless you are at least this[ ] high, you must be detained elsewhere"...

I hate the way that the US will never let its troops be held to account for their actions by any foreign country or international institution - even if it is one of their closest allies. It's the same kind of exceptionalism that can be seen in America's refusal to sign up to the International Criminal Court. Americans are not above international law!

The Army never release the evidence, cover-up the evidence, and normally won't comment. When they are compelled by huge international or domestic pressure to have an internal investigation they end up convicting low ranking troops - without ever going after the incompetent leadership at the top of the chain of command - look what happened over the prison abuse at Abu Ghraib.

Transcript of tape:

Here are extracts from a transcript of the Sun video.

The aircraft is an A-10 tank buster aircraft, call sign Popov36. A second jet involved has the call sign Popov35. The call signs Manila Hotel, Manila34 and Lightning34 are three US Marine Corps forward air controllers on the ground attached to British units. In the video the pilots are heard becoming upset and swearing as they realise the mistake that has been made.



Popov36: Hey, I got a four ship. Looks like we got orange panels on them though. Do we have any friendlies up in this area?

Manila hotel: I understand that was north 800 metres.

Manila hotel: Popov, understand that was north 800 metres?

Popov35: Confirm, north 800 metres.Confirm there are no friendlies this far north on the ground.

Manila hotel: That is an affirm. You are well clear of friendlies.

Popov35: Copy. I see multiple riveted vehicles. Some look like flatbed trucks and others are green vehicles. Can't quite make out the type. Look like may be Zil157s (Russian made trucks used by Iraqi army).

.....

Popov 36: OK. Right underneath you. Right now, there's a canal that runs north/south. There's a small village, and there are vehicles that are spaced evenly there.

Popov 36: They look like they have orange panels on though.

Popov35: He told me, he told me there's nobody north of here, no friendlies.

.....

Popov36: They've got something orange on top of them

Popov35: Popov for Manila 3, is Manila 34 in this area?

Manila Hotel: Say again?

Popov35: Manila hotel, is Manila 34 in this area?

Manila hotel: Negative. Understand they are well clear of that now.

Popov35: OK, copy. Like I said, multiple riveted vehicles. They look like flatbed trucks. Are those your targets?

Manila hotel: That's affirm

Popov35: OK

.....

Popov36: I want to get that first one before he gets into town then.

Popov35: Get him - get him.

.....

[Sound of gunfire]...

Lightning 34: Roger, Popov. Be advised that in the 3122 and 3222 group box you have friendly armour in the area. Yellow, small armoured tanks. Just be advised.

Popov35: Ahh shit.

Popv35: Got a - got a smoke.

Lightning 34: Hey, Popov34, abort your mission. You got a, looks we might have a blue on blue situation.

Popov35: Fuck. God, bless it.

.....

Manila 34: We are getting an initial brief that there was one killed and one wounded, over.

Popov 35: Copy. RTB (return to base)

I'm going to be sick.

.....


Popov35: Did you hear?

Popov36: Yeah, this sucks.

Popov35: We're in jail dude

.....

Popov35: They did say there were no friendlies.

Popov36:Yeah, I know that thing with the orange panels is going to screw us. They look like orange rockets on top.

Dark & twisted political comedy (as usual!) from Monkey Dust...

Omar, Abdul and Shafiq, the useless terrorists

Omar is a fanatical Islamist and a member of a terrorist organization he calls 'The International Revolutionary Jihad for the Liberation of the Islamic Republic of Great Britain'. His cell is based in West Bromwich in the West Midlands in the UK and is bent on "unleashing a reign of terror the like of which the world has only dreamed about in its foulest nightmares." Omar has recruited two teenage boys, Abdul and Shafiq, to carry out suicide bombings in the name of Allah, but through various comical misadventures, their plans always fail.

The effectiveness of their terror campaign is somewhat undermined by the fact that they seem to take their jihad for granted and treat it with the same offhandedness as the mundane details of their daily lives such as sport and television.

Omar is the privileged son of a wealthy family and a public schoolboy (he attended Charterhouse, but failed to get into Oxford or Cambridge and had to settle for Bristol). His vehement rhetoric calls for the swift and merciless destruction of the infidel, however he is careful to leave all the dangerous aspects of their activities to the two boys and keep himself out of harm's way as much as possible.

Abdul and Shafiq are thoroughly typical English youths in nearly every way. They are avid supporters of West Bromwich Albion F.C., spend a great deal of time watching mindless pop-entertainment television programmes such as Stars in Their Eyes and Pop Idol, and eat processed junk foods, i.e Bernard Matthews' turkey drumsticks with barbeque beans, or Findus' crispy pancakes. Their plotting often takes place in Shafiq's home where Shafiq's mother, Mrs. Khan, brings them drinks and snacks and seems untroubled by what they're up to: "You can leave your Jihad 'til after dinner!"

In the conclusion of Series 3, Omar sends Abdul and Shafiq to Iraq, while staying in the UK himself because "he couldn't change his dental appointment" but goes down the pub instead. The boys complain that terrorist training is "worse than PE". They meet a friend and fellow West Bromwich fan among the British soldiers who detain them before being captured and imprisoned in Abu Ghraib by American troops ("This is the best holiday I've ever had!").

It's possible the inspiration for this depiction of radical Islamicist ideology in the midst of otherwise normal modern British life comes from the detention of the so-called Tipton Three at Camp X-Ray. In Monkey Dust's sketches, Omar the ringleader is said to come from Tipton, where the jihad is taken "dead serious". - Wiki

I've seen it before, so...pass.

Would anyone care to speculate why our Abu Ghraib/Guantanamo culture is obsessed with torture lately (Saw, Hostel, etc.)?

Must be the new tortuhmmm... I mean "interrogation" technique at Abu-Ghraib

@Farhad2000: You're partially right, partially wrong. This experiment does NOT show that people NEED to be given permission from a higher authority in order for them to commit inhumane acts, it simply shows that WHEN people are commanded by a higher authority to follow orders and thus commit inhumane acts, they do so almost invariably.

That being said, I think it is clear that in cases like Abu Ghraib, the accused were certainly influenced to a large degree, if not outright instructed, by superiors and contractors to treat prisoners in inhumane ways.

I also agree with your statement that in cases where it matters most, there is a huge effort to keep people subservient to authority. Of course, an efficient army could not do with the chain of command, but this experiment clearly shows that a ranking officer must take responsibility if he orders his men to act in a certain way while these orders are clearly morally wrong. It is sickening to see superiors allow their soldiers to take the heat when really the soldiers believe they are simply following orders.

I'm still having trouble submitting my full writeup, but it should certainly be noted that the Milgram experiment was designed to see whether Adolf Eichmann of the Nazi SS actually had a valid argument or not when he made his defense that he was also "merely following orders". People may make their own conclusions, but the facts remain that:
1. The Holocaust occurred in part due to every single Nazi soldier involved allowing it to take place and participating in the process of genocide.
2. The Milgram experiment repeatedly demonstrated that 60%-65% of the test subjects would run the experiment to completion (meaning certain death for the patient), and around 90-93% would inflict potentially permanently-damaging or lethal shocks.
3. Eichmann was eventually found guilty and executed. His last words were: "Long live Germany. Long live Austria. Long live Argentina. These are the countries with which I have been most closely associated and I shall not forget them. I had to obey the rules of war and my flag. I am ready."

I think it's obvious that we can't really rely on our military or government to train our citizens and soldiers to question authority when necessary. That is not what the military or government wants, nor is it their job to train them to question authority. I would suggest that LadyBug and other parents with her mindset are perhaps our best defense against a second Holocaust or Abu Ghraib.

Some food for thought.

The Battle of Algiers (in Italian, La Battaglia di Algeri) is a 1966 black-and-white film by Gillo Pontecorvo based on the Algerian War of Independence from 1954 until 1962 against the French occupation. The film has been critically acclaimed for it's realistic and evenhanded portrayal of both sides of the conflict. It remains as one of the best cinematic discourses on struggles for independence.

In 2003, the film again made the news after the US Directorate for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict at The Pentagon offered a screening of the film on August 27, regarding it as a useful illustration of the problems faced in Iraq. A flyer for the screening read:

"How to win a battle against terrorism and lose the war of ideas. Children shoot soldiers at point-blank range. Women plant bombs in cafes. Soon the entire Arab population builds to a mad fervor. Sound familiar? The French have a plan. It succeeds tactically, but fails strategically. To understand why, come to a rare showing of this film."

According to the Defense Department official in charge of the screening, "Showing the film offers historical insight into the conduct of French operations in Algeria, and was intended to prompt informative discussion of the challenges faced by the French." The 2003 screening lent new currency to the film, coming only months after U.S. President George W. Bush's May 1, 2003 "Mission Accomplished" speech proclaiming the end of "major hostilities" in Iraq. Opponents of President Bush cited the Pentagon screening as proof of a growing concern within the Defense Department about the growth of an Iraqi insurgency belying Bush's triumphalism. One year later, the media's revelations regarding the Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse scandal lead critics of the war to compare French torture in the film and "aggressive interrogation" of prisoners in Abu Ghraib prison.

Journalist: M. Ben M'Hidi, don't you think it's a bit cowardly to use women's baskets and handbags to carry explosive devices that kill so many innocent people?

Ben M'Hidi: And doesn't it seem to you even more cowardly to drop napalm bombs on defenseless villages, so that there are a thousand times more innocent victims? Of course, if we had your airplanes it would be a lot easier for us. Give us your bombers, and you can have our baskets.

Journalist: The law's often inconvenient, Colonel.

Col. Mathieu: And those who explode bombs in public places, do they respect the law perhaps? When you put that question to Ben M'Hidi, remember what he said? We aren't madmen or sadists, gentlemen. Those who call us Fascists today, forget the contribution that many of us made to the Resistance. Those who call us Nazis, don't know that among us there are survivors of Dachau and Buchenwald. We are soldiers and our only duty is to win. Should we remain in Algeria? If you answer "yes," then you must accept all the necessary consequences.