Does anyone remember the "outrage" over Pfc. Lynndie England and Abu Ghraib?

Now that President Bush admits to secret CIA prisons and use of "alternative methods" of interrogation as an important tool used to obtain information from terrorists as well as his demand (and now agreement) that the government be provided with all the "tools necessary" to complete our mission in Iraq (whatever that may be... but that's another thread) by allowing the CIA to circumvent the Geneva Convention, I was wondering...

Does anyone remember the "outrage" over Pfc. Lynndie England and Abu Ghraib?

I just heard that the majority of Americans believe we should use torture as a method of interrogation. And the government recently came to an agreement with Bush on the use of torture.

Was there some sort of mass hypnosis over the public, media and government which totally reversed how we feel over the use of torture?

Does this mean that Pfc. England was right all along that they were given orders from their superiors to torture and humiliate prisoners? IMO she's innocent (not that what she did was ok) and should be cleared of all charges, no?

[edit on 28-9-2006 by mecheng]

Who? What? England? I thought they were our allies?

I don't know what you're talking about, but it must have something to do with Clinton trying to get attention in that interview the other day. I thought we got rid of him a long time ago! Just let Bush do his job, he is so good at it.


Sorry, what were we talking about? I forgot.

Oh wait, American Idol is coming around again soon! Time to watch some re-runs.

Yeah, that's exactly what I mean. See what a full season of American Idol does to people?

Or. perhaps it's the sinking gas prices... see torture works!

[edit on 28-9-2006 by mecheng]

So say you're in prison and the jailers are going to torture you. Who would take the naked pyramid over having body parts cut off?

Fine, but England had charges brought against her, all the while arguing that they have were given orders to humiliate and "torture" (depending on your definition) the prisoners. The administration denied it up and down.

Now not only does Bush want the laws changed so the CIA can do what "is necessary" and circumvent the Geneva Conventions but also wants those laws grandfathered so that the people who gave those orders in the past can't be charged.

Bush is a two faced liar.

Very true. How does this leave her case? Or more interestingly(To me anyway) is WTF happened to the values and morals of the average American in that time? Agreeing with torture.. I mean really give your head a shake.

Here's an interview with Lynndie England.

Edit: Caution... Sexually Explicit.
A Soldier's Tale

"Yeah, I thought it was weird," England says eventually. She's describing the human pyramid that was built in the hallway of Abu Ghraib and then photographed. As she talks, she's watching Carter play with a picture book. "We were told we were supposed to do those things. They said, 'Good job. Keep it up.'"

"She told me their job was to keep them awake: Let them sleep a little bit and then wake them back up. I said, 'Are you allowed to do that?' And she said, 'Oh yeah, that's what we're told to do,'" says Hardy. "She told me the officers were involved; they knew what was going on. There were a lot of what she called 'OGAs.'"

Officially, OGA stands for "other government agency." But everyone in the army knows it means the CIA. It also means, don't ask questions.

"It's a different situation than just working at McDonald's," says Jessie. "If you're told to do something by someone who's higher-ranking in the military, you do it. If you don't, you're going to be court-martialed. Lynndie basically found out you're damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Just another pawn in this whole corrupt system. It should be Bush in jail, not her. Of course now he's passed laws to protect him and his administration from ever being incriminated.

[edit on 12-10-2006 by mecheng]