The tortured logic of Andrew Sullivan

I try never to personalize criticism of other bloggers. Sullivan is one of those guys who was initially pretty strong in wanting to defend against the wickedness of our enemies, but he went over to the dark side after the hazings of Abu Ghraid wee turned into a torture narrative. Since then he has been hyper critical of interrogation of prisoners and the situation at Gitmo.

Ace of Spades looks at Sullivan's passive reaction to al Qaeda's torture manual.

Wretchard Predicts Preening Hysterics About "Torture" Won't Mention AQ Torture Manual; In Unrelated News, Andrew Sullivan Fails To Mention AQ Torture Manual

He does mention torture, actually -- the "torture" committed by George Tenet. So "torture" is still apparently on his mind.

But the repellent torture-porn scrabblings of human eyes being pulled out of living faces? Sullivan, predictably, has nothing at all to say about that.

Which is what Wretchard predicted. Sullivan can't even acknowledge the real thing, because it would expose his crusade against the counterfeit as childishly mendacious:

The problem with the fake is that it is always shown up by the arrival of the Real Thing. The difference between the two is often so manifest that it seems ridiculous to think that anyone could have been fooled -- even momentarily -- by the counterfeit.

The problem with the word "torture" is that it has been so artfully corrupted by some commentators that we now find ourselves at a loss to describe the kinds of activities that the al-Qaeda interrogation manual graphically recommends. Now that the term "torture" has been put in one-to-one correspondence with such admittedly unpleasant activities as punching, sleep deprivation, a handkerchief pulled over one's face and loaded with water, searches by women upon sensitive Islamic men or the disrespectful handling of Korans -- what on earth do we call gouging people's eyes out?

...

...

Isn't it funny that he's done precisely what Wrechard predicted, and undoubtedly for the reasons he's outlined? Not even the pretense of caring about real torture, because he doesn't care about real torture. His only object is the fakey-torture of red-ink menstrual-blood and belly slaps, and to even acknowledge the chthonic cruelty depicted in Al Qaeda's torture manual would expose his hysterical preening for the trivium it is.

...
There is more. Sullivan deserves this criticism as does the wretched terrorist rights organization Amnesty International. The release of a real torture manual shows where their interest really lies and it is not in complaining about real torture. It is not in the treatment of prisoners. As another captured soldier is found dead with signs of torture on his body there is no out pouring of concern for the inhumane treatment of any of our troops. We see that the logic of the torture narrative was just a convenient club for a political attack against the administration.

For more on the torture logic of war critics see Dinocrat's post on eye removal. Hat tip Larwyn.

Comments

  1. Captain USpace12:21 AM

    Good one. Sullivan has gone over to the dark side apparently. Well, if torture is part of their barbaric, sick, primitive, evil, sub-human, perverted, vile and demented culture who are we to say it is bad?
    .
    absurd thought -
    God of the Universe says
    ignore human rights abuse

    give terrorists free pass
    villify the best countries
    .

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t...
Read more

Is the F-35 obsolete?

Headline USA: Pentagon Fires Back after Musk Calls Its Most Expensive Project ‘Obsolete’ 'Yeah, as I'm sure you can appreciate, Mr. Musk is, currently, a private citizen, I'm not going to make any comments about what a private citizen may have to say about the F-35....'   ... ... Drones appear to be replacing jets for many operations.  The Russia-Ukraine war is an example of that.  Drones are often hard to detect and can be used for intelligence operations as well as for attacking enemy targets.  It would not surprise me to see drones engaging other drones in combat.  They also cost much less than manned fighters.  
Read more