Thursday, March 28, AD 2024 6:36am

Fitting

MAD-Magazine-Trading-Private-Bergdahl_538e1730c295a6_07331124

 

I think it is more than fitting that the most biting commentary on the Deserter for Five Terrorists swap comes from Mad Magazine.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
79 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
J.S.Person1
J.S.Person1
Wednesday, June 4, AD 2014 7:20am

I enjoyed reading your response to the article I posted about Gosnell a little ways back…so I would like to try my luck again :). What is your take on the points brought up in this article?:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/06/bowe_bergdahl_and_negotiating_with_the_taliban_why_the_deal_to_free_this.html

J.S.Person1
J.S.Person1
Wednesday, June 4, AD 2014 7:35am

what about the whole “The United States and practically every other nation that’s ever fought a war have made these sorts of exchanges for centuries. In recent years, American officers have turned over hundreds of detainees to the Afghan government” business?

T. Shaw
T. Shaw
Wednesday, June 4, AD 2014 9:14am

J.S.P.: Simply type in, “I voted for Obama and I would do it again.” That is all I need to read.

Pat
Pat
Wednesday, June 4, AD 2014 10:31am

After the years of this administration’s ‘handling’ of any, probably all, underpinnings of the origin (defined in the Constitution with regard to life, liberty and the pursuit) of this particular country and its countrymen, the fact of the report by Mad Magazine illustrates how outrageously conditioned the public and how outrageously successful the intent by it. It is a mad, pathological world.

Michael Paterson-Seymour
Michael Paterson-Seymour
Wednesday, June 4, AD 2014 10:41am

Donald M McClarey wrote, “If the Taliban are not terrorists the term is devoid of meaning”

Could one not say that they were an insurgent or revolutionary movement in Afghanistan that succeeded in establishing a (rather precarious) government in that country and were recognized as such, notably by Pakistan and Saudi Arabia?

Unlike the typical “terrorist organization,” in 1991, they were, or could reasonably claim to be, state actors – the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan; a not insignificant distinction.

T. Shaw
T. Shaw
Wednesday, June 4, AD 2014 11:24am

Pat: President Taliban is the president that the 1974 VietCongress charged was Richard Nixon. Only difference: Nixon was trying to advance America, President Taliban is accomplishing the reverse. CNNMoney poll 59% of respinents say the “American Dream” is out of their reach; one-in-six males ages 25 to 54 are out of work; 11 million are out iof the labor force as disabled; [sigh] Hope and Change!

MP-S: State actors that stone to death women because they were raped; that slash the throats of 6,000 Herat tribesmen and boys; . . .

Michael Paterson-Seymour
Michael Paterson-Seymour
Wednesday, June 4, AD 2014 1:02pm

T Shaw wrote, “State actors that stone to death women because they were raped; that slash the throats of 6,000 Herat tribesmen and boys; . . . ”

Many governments have behaved deplorably. Did the Armenian massacres make the Sublime Porte a terrorist organization? Did the Belgian Congo atrocities make King Leopold a terrorist?

State actors without number have committed war crimes and crimes against humanity, but that does not mean there is no valid distinction between state actors and terrorists.

Paul W Primavera
Paul W Primavera
Wednesday, June 4, AD 2014 1:05pm

Every time I see the face of that godless man of sin and depravity, I want to scream and yell. I am sorry that I have nothing constructive to contribute other than to say that I concur with Don’s post and would go far further. This Narcissist President – the “N-President” – is a murderer of unborn babies, a sanctifier of sexual filth, a thief of the public treasury and a despoiler of the morals of the nation. That he would free cut-throat Islamic mass-murderers in exchange for a traitorous deserter is par for the course. This is what evil men do! He will one day stand before God almighty. Yes, we all will stand before that Great White Throne of Judgment and Heaven have mercy on us sinners. But two sets of people are held to higher standards than the rest of us. One set are our shepherds – Priests and Bishops. Ezekiel 34:1-10 stalks about them. The second set are our leaders – Kings, Queens, Presidents, Premiers, Governors, Senators, Congressmen, Justices, Judges, etc. Sirach 10:1-5 talks about them:

1 A wise magistrate educates his people,
and the rule of an intelligent person is well ordered.
2 As the people’s judge is, so are his officials;
as the ruler of the city is, so are all its inhabitants.
3 An undisciplined king ruins his people,
but a city becomes fit to live in through the understanding of its rulers.
4 The government of the earth is in the hand of the Lord,
and over it he will raise up the right leader for the time.
5 Human success is in the hand of the Lord,
and it is he who confers honor upon the lawgiver.

Lord have mercy on Barack Hussein Obama and his godless idolatrous wife Jezebel, for the sake of the nation before their wickedness brings upon the head of guilty and innocent alike God’s judgment.

J.S.Person1
J.S.Person1
Wednesday, June 4, AD 2014 1:07pm

hold on there….criticizing the President is one thing, but insulting the First Lady like that was not called for

slainte
slainte
Wednesday, June 4, AD 2014 1:50pm

Can anyone explain to me why American troops are in Afghanistan and Iraq?

slainte
slainte
Wednesday, June 4, AD 2014 5:02pm

The last war that was officially declared by the consent of the U.S. Congress as required by the U.S Constitution was World War II.
.
Conflicts thereafter have been some variation of “police actions” usually with U.S troops acting under the leadership of the United Nations. Does this change the status of persons held in detention ie., those in Guantanamo Bay?

slainte
slainte
Wednesday, June 4, AD 2014 5:23pm

Mr. McClarey writes: “POWs would be POWs under international law no matter the mechanism used to authorize the war..”
.
Are you not concerned about a war being declared by virtue of a Presidentiial Executive Order alone?
.
I am not familiar with this subject so please pardon my errors…but the Geneva Convention, to my recollection, provides guidelines on the rights of prisoners. By holding prisoners at Guatanamo without trial, are we (the US) not in violation of the the Geneva Convention and rights accorded “prisoners of war”? We cannot just hold them indefinitely.
.
Pardon if I don’t respond back quickly…must leave for several hours. Thx.

Elaine Krewer
Admin
Wednesday, June 4, AD 2014 9:07pm

Off topic but news I know most of you will welcome for a change: Joni Ernst has won her GOP U.S. Senate primary in Iowa with 56% of the vote, more than enough to avoid a run-off and put her in good position to take the seat of retiring Democrat Tom Harkin.

As this story from Hot Air notes, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee is already attempting to paint her as “the Sarah Palin of Iowa” — evidence that they are running scared and can’t think of any other strategy:

http://hotair.com/archives/2014/06/04/ernst-wins-big-in-senate-primary-dscc-attacks-as-the-sarah-palin-of-iowa/

Michael Paterson-Seymour
Michael Paterson-Seymour
Thursday, June 5, AD 2014 1:36am

Slainté & Donald M McCleary
The governing legislation is to be found in Articles 2-4 of the Third Geneva Convention of 12 August 1949. Articles 43 & 44 of the First Protocol of 10 June 1977 clarifies the status of members of guerrilla forces. The majority of Publicists regard the Commentary of the ICRC of 1960 as authoritative.
Article 3, which deals with Conflicts Not of an International Character represents new law and earlier writers must be read subject to its provisions. Otherwise, commentaries on the Tenth Hague Convention of 1907 and the Geneva Convention of 1929 remain applicable. The provisions of Articles 43 & 44 of the First Protocol embody customary International Law, but must now be read in the light of Article 3.
A vexed question and one on which there is no consensus is the status of prisoners of war on the termination of hostilities.

Barbara Gordon
Barbara Gordon
Thursday, June 5, AD 2014 4:16am

Michael Paterson-Seymour,

I plan to copy your very correct comments above in a permanent position on my Facebook page. May I credit you with the comments there?

Barbara Gordon
Barbara Gordon
Thursday, June 5, AD 2014 4:25am

AGAIN Obama has violated duly passed federal law in order to accomplish his political agenda. He has violated federal law EVEN THOSE HE SIGNED INTO LAW HIMSELF LIKE OSAMACARE ( I wrote Osama on purpose since our prez is a Muslim.). He is ruling as a king/dictator literally–in doing so Osama has not only violated his oath of office repeatedly–he has also caused the greatest constitutional crises in my life time by making Congess’ constitutional authority completely irrelevant. When the Republicans retake the US Senate in November, Osama must be impeached by the US House & removed from office by the US Senate–for the purpose of maintaining our constitutional Republic!!

Michael Paterson-Seymour
Michael Paterson-Seymour
Thursday, June 5, AD 2014 4:58am

Barbara Gordon asked, “May I credit you with the comments there?”

By all means, if you wish. I would only add that I have no particular expertise in Public International Law.

the Old Adam
Thursday, June 5, AD 2014 7:25am

Hard to tell which 5 are the Taliban.

T. Shaw
T. Shaw
Thursday, June 5, AD 2014 10:29am

OA: I see six taliban.

Sign in gun store, “Will trade Obama to Mexico ” for jailed Marine. “Leave no man behind.”

The taliban: “We are inpsired to kidnap more.”

Law Prof: ‘Prez has assumed king-like powers.”

Finally, Poll: Obama less competent than Bush.

slainte
slainte
Thursday, June 5, AD 2014 1:49pm

Don McClarey writes. “..As long as hostilities continue we certainly can..”
.
If a single one of those prisoners is innocent, our Catholic faith and our profession tells us that a grave injustice is occurring. No man should be held indefinitely without being charged and tried by a military tribunal.
.
The likelihood of a timely resolution to middle eastern hostilities (which date back to antiquity) is nil. More than 13 years have passed since we invaded Afghanistan and there is no end in sight.
.
You have often described our first president George Washington as a leader whose character was defined by integrity and fair mindedness. Washington, in my opinion, would not lock up men for what could be a lifetime without administering due process or its military equivalent. His sense of fair play continues to define what it means to be an American.
.
It is during times of war and crisis that it becomes most urgent to administer (military) due process and refuse to suspend these protections. For those prisoners found guilty, punish accordingly.

slainte
slainte
Thursday, June 5, AD 2014 2:52pm

Of the 19 terrorists who engaged in the horrific acts of September 11, 2001,
.
15 were citizens of Saudi Arabia,
.
2 were citizens of the United Arab Emirates,
.
1 was a citizen of Egypt (Mohammad Atta),
.
1 was a citizen of Lebanon.

Osama Bin Laden, the leader of these depraved lunatics, was a native of Saudi Arabia who spent time in Ethiopia and his last days hiding in Pakistan.

Some or all of the 19 hijackers allegedly received their training in Afghanistan; Colorado Springs Co. (Doss Aviation Inc.); and an air flight school in Florida.
.
We have not invaded the countries of origin of the terrorist hijackers, except for Lebanon. Iraq who is not alleged to have any connection with the September 11 bombings was also found not to have weapons of mass destruction.
.
The source of terrorism appears to be the countries of origin of the hijackers…Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the Arab Emirates, and Lebanon.
.
Why then are we still in Afghanistan and Iraq, etc.? Too confusing for me to answer.
.
A military tribunal should thus charge and remand for trial all prisoners held in Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere. The nature of “police actions” under the United Nations is that of protracted engagements which span many, many years. (ie., Vietnam). Because of the long duration of these hostilities, it is especially important to proceed properly under American and International Law and not suspend due process rights for prisoners of war and those charged with war crimes.
.
Integrity counts.

TomD
TomD
Thursday, June 5, AD 2014 3:15pm

slainte, the U.S. Supreme Court during the administration of John Adams upheld the congressional authorization to attack French naval forces in the Quasi War as “an imperfect declaration of war”. Consequently every congressional resolution authorizing military action has been seen constitutionally as a declaration of war, even if the word ‘declaration’ is missing from the authorization.
If it were easy for Vietnam War dissenters to get the courts to declare that war unconstitutional it would have happened. The Court decision over the Quasi War goes very far to explain why this didn’t happen.

Art Deco
Thursday, June 5, AD 2014 3:36pm

We have not invaded the countries of origin of the terrorist hijackers, except for Lebanon.

1. The U.S. had some troops in Beirut for a brief period in 1958 and then for about 18 months between the summer of 1982 and the spring of 1984. We never ‘invaded’. They were placed there for policing functions with the assent of the public authorities therein.

2. The governments of Saudi Arabia and Egypt were not implicated in anything Atta et al ever did and both countries have a history of co-operative dealings with the U.S. Why would we invade?

slainte
slainte
Thursday, June 5, AD 2014 4:18pm

Afghanistan is an Islamic state which has never achieved nor will it ever accept modernity. Neither will it freely acquiesce to a cram down of liberal democracy or western culture. The Afghanis are a people long entrenched in Islamic hierarchical ways and they will revert to to that age old culture upon our departure. To assume otherwise is to refuse to acknowledge reality. Maintaining troops there will merely delay but not stop this process.
.
Recall the Soviet Union’s battle with Islamic Chechnya which was led by Osama Bin Laden whom we supported at that time. That conflict demonstrated the Chechnyan people’s unrelenting determination to resist foreign intervention and occupation. Chechnya became a thorn in the Soviet Union’s side that depleted its state revenues and contributed to its implosion. Afghanistan’s determination to maintain its Islamic identity and resist strangers is not unlike Chechnya’s.
.
No more American soldiers should be injured or lose their lives because of an ideological struggle over political hegemony that is an illusive dream.
.
We cannot and should not remain in the middle east long term. Islam will not bow to liberalism; know thy enemy.
.
As to prisoners, it is counter-intuitive to keep Islamic prisoners of war detained for decades; it makes prosecuting actions impractical as evidence and memories dissipate. Holding prisoners cannot be justified under any liberal reading of the Geneva Convention. I agree that we need an effective end strategy for these prisoners.
.
God bless the American soldiers who have freely and bravely sacrificed and given their lives to fight terrorism and the poor victims of the September 11 tragedy and their families.

slainte
slainte
Thursday, June 5, AD 2014 4:39pm

Art Deco,
.
I would submit that an optimal solution to 911 would have included using our superior intelligence capabilities to track down those responsible for terrorist acts and removing them with surgical precision wherever they may be.
.
The Special Forces and the Rangers are specially trained for these sort of protocols.

slainte
slainte
Thursday, June 5, AD 2014 5:17pm

Mr. McClarey,
.
We should have avenged 911 immediately by taking out Bin Laden.
.
On the second issue you raise…Fundamental transformation of a people requires an internal change of hearts and minds that cannot be accomplished through a military intervention or a top down cram-down strategy.
.
Recall the historically ineffective efforts of England to annihilate all things Catholic in Ireland. Oliver Cromwell’s military intervention and that of King William of Orange served to unite Irish Catholics against a common foreign enemy and caused them to embrace Catholicism with great vigor.
.
Intervention from outside one’s culture forges alliances between internal groups who otherwise would not be united. The transformation to upgrade the status of women in Islam must be from the ground up, from within the psyche of Islamic men and women. Guns and bullets will not effect the beneficial changes you rightly demand for women and minorities.

T. Shaw
T. Shaw
Friday, June 6, AD 2014 7:07am

Mac and Slainte,

The only reason President Taliban allowed UBL to be wasted was politics: re-election. The official lies about Benghazi allowed his majesty to dishonestly boast that AQ was “toast.”

President Taliban is serious about getting Americans and Afghans killed. Imagine you are an Afghan working with NATO/the Americans. Your life insurance agent is suicidal.

J.S.Person1
J.S.Person1
Friday, June 6, AD 2014 7:27am

Don:

Ehhh….If a prisoner at GITMO admitted they were members of the Taliban, then yes, they are POWS and we are at war till they surrender or a peace is made (Im not saying one should be, but you get the idea). Someone admits they are part of another terror cell, then yes, since we are at war with that cell till its destroyed, they are POWS. But then are those who claim innocence.

My understanding is that part of how we got GITMO prisoners included bounties, so people had monetary reasons to turn in the innocent. I have no doubt that there are at least a few innocents in GITMO. I get that not even everywhere in the West practices Trail by Jury, but however you define it, all non-POWS get the right to a fair trial by virtue of being human beings. How you define one for the GITMO guys? I defer to the US Supreme Court (Im glad about their rulings in Hamdan and Hamdi), plus im curious about what experiments one could conduct in alternative “fair by not by jury” trails. But I would honestly prefer Skype jjury trails…given them a US trail with defense attorney, 12 member jury drawn from the United States, etc…But with the twist that the jury sits in a room on US soil where they can see the trail going on in GITMO. How do you deal with protecting witnesses? Im sure a workable system can be, well worked out.

As far as the danger that a jury could let a bad guy go? That risk is always there in the trails we have. Plus…If giving them a jury trail was going to get me killed, I would honestly accept death happily and with patriotic pride. For those who accuse me of being callous, well, the precedent of standing on moral principle no matter the cost (even on matters not related to faith per se) has precedent in Catholic dogma…see our instance on no abortion, even if the result is letting a woman die.

J.S.Person1
J.S.Person1
Friday, June 6, AD 2014 7:53am

“Actually what constitutes current Western notions of what constitutes a fair trial is unknown in most of the world and is a fairly recent development in the West.”

Maybe, but that does not change the fact that it is right.

“My concern would be rather what would happen as a result of the endless appeal process.”

So they end up being held at GITMO while the appeals process goes on. So they are still there for a long time.

“Good of you. I am rather more concerned about other people who might die if some of these individuals are released while the War is ongoing.”

What is your response to my point about abortion?

J.S.Person1
J.S.Person1
Friday, June 6, AD 2014 8:23am

Regarding being released pending appeal….given security concerns and the unique situation…I would say there is no problem with keeping them in GITMO.

I admit I am not sure what your main point is regarding most of humanity not using trail by jury. As I have said, I get that you can have a fair trail different ways, but my own personal preference is the jury trail (I admitted as such) We all have the right to a fair trail, and given that these men are being held by the USA…it feels appropriate to use the American system.

My point with the abortion thing was to respond to your concern about the damage terrorists could do. Yes, we take risks that affect others on principle. Do you ultimately deny that the Church’s position is that, when the chips are down and the situations is such that all other options have been used up, we do say, in effect, let her die?

J.S.Person1
J.S.Person1
Friday, June 6, AD 2014 8:46am

While that is true….since we are in unprecedented territory with the GITMO individuals, could not one argue that in this circumstance, we could establish it as a rule that they will stay there?

I was claiming a fair trial is a human right.

In terms of POWS…what I would argues changes is when they claim innocence. When someone is captured in war, its usually easy to tell they are enemy soldiers, so there is no doubt about their status. Not always true with people in GITMO.

One more thing about abortion comparison…do you deny that my point is true and we do ultimately condemn women to death over it? In all of the great debates over this issue, I have never heard anyone answer directly the question of “would you let women die?”

TomD
TomD
Friday, June 6, AD 2014 9:13am

slainte, you wrote “Recall the Soviet Union’s battle with Islamic Chechnya which was led by Osama Bin Laden whom we supported at that time. That conflict demonstrated the Chechnyan people’s unrelenting determination to resist foreign intervention and occupation. Chechnya became a thorn in the Soviet Union’s side that depleted its state revenues and contributed to its implosion.”

This is factually incorrect on many counts:

The fighting in Chechnya began in December 1994, a full four years after the dissolution of the USSR.

Chechnya was always a thorn in the side of the USSR, and as such was a fairly minor irritant to Moscow. Recall that Moscow had no trouble shipping a half million Chechens to Siberia in 1944.

Estimates of Chechen manpower in the First Chechen War (1994=1996) total 315,000 of which only 5,000 were foreign fighters. Osama bin Laden not only didn’t do any leading, he and al-Qaeda had almost no influence on events in Chechnya outside of the issuance of propaganda.

TomD
TomD
Friday, June 6, AD 2014 9:35am

J.S.Person1, you are really confused.

POWs are considered innocents under international law unless they have been charged with a war crime. A POW is not ipso fact a criminal. Warfighting by itself is not a crime.

Civilians may be held as POWs, even if they are not combatants. Nothing in international law says that they must be shown to be combatants. They may be held even though they are ‘innocent’ in your use of the word if the belligerent power deems their holding to be necessary. Innocence is immaterial, the violation of which is another evil of war.

One war crime is for a combatant – military or civilian – to be an unlawful combatant. We all know that al-Qaeda and some Taliban fall into this category. International law requires a tribunal hearing to determine the unlawful status of a POW. This is one place where the G.W. Bush administration can be faulted: such tribunals were never established due to bureaucratic dithering and due to the fact that al-Qaeda personnel can be prejudged (yes, the word prejudicial applies) to fit this category. The Taliban are a different case: unless they were shown to be complicit in a war crime, including the sheltering of al-Qaeda, then they should have been classed as legal combatants.

TomD
TomD
Friday, June 6, AD 2014 9:57am

J.S.Person1:
Nearly all of the U.S. Supreme Court’s rulings on the Gitmo prisoners can be challenged. In Hamadi the Court merely substituted it’s own criteria to hold the prisoner instead of that used by the Bush administration. Justice Scalia’s dissent was right on the money: unless Congress suspended habeas corpus Hamadi should have been freed.

The Boumediene decision was the worst of all. The Court ruled that civilian rules on the use of evidence in a military tribunal against the enemy must be followed, which in turn means that civilian rules on the gathering and preservation of evidence must be applied to the battlefield. This is not only militarily foolish, but it is a flagrant intrusion on the president’s constitutional power to conduct war. The Justices crossed a constitutional boundary in this case: they determined that they have a supreme power over the president in the use and disposition of military forces on the battleground. This is obviously unconstitutional and if our times were truly desperate (thankfully they are not) this decision should have resulted in the majority Justices’ impeachment and removal from office.

J.S.Person1
J.S.Person1
Friday, June 6, AD 2014 10:07am

Its not inappropriate. The WHOLE point of the Supreme Court is to determine when Congress and/or the President and/or the States cant do something. I know some founding fathers had different ideas, but I consider it ABOSUTLY necessary to have a Court with the power to reign us in. We don’t like something they say? Unless they literally are physically or mentally incapacitated, a constitutional amendment should be the only real way to stop them.

TomD
TomD
Friday, June 6, AD 2014 10:15am

One underlying syllogism on this runs like this:
A) The United States has captured Islamic militants and must hold them as POWs
B) International law allows the holding of a POW until the end of a conflict
C) Islamic beliefs hold that conflict with infidels will end only with
conversion, death, or subjugation (though the last is debatable)
D) It is wrong to hold a POW for the end of a conflict which will never happen
E) Therefore, we need to find a way to release these POWs before the conflict’s end

How to find such a way?
1) Deny the truth of C
2) Deny that the threat is global (al-Qaeda in Iraq is not al-Qaeda in Somalia, etc.)
But of course, never, ever allow anyone to deny the truth of D

People are in such denial as to the ruthlessness of our enemies and as to the level of ruthlessness that will likely be required of us to survive. Since 9/11/2001 failed to fully awaken people, we will likely have to await a nuclear attack before we fully wise up.

Discover more from The American Catholic

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Scroll to Top