Asymmetrical Information

I'm hoping, hoping, hoping that was MaryScott's idea of satire. Otherwise, she is one sick babe.

Addendum: Actually she's also pretty sick if she thinks that's satire.

Zonitics lists fives cases where Marshal promised bombshells and never delivered.

I stopped reading JMM once it became apparent that Alcoa supplied the material for his hats.

For some context, Seymour Hersh of the New Yorker had spoken at a benefit a short time before and said he'd seen or heard the tapes she described. Since he had broken the Abu Ghraib story, people thought it was only a matter of time before he would follow up with the story he had alluded to in public.

She didn't invent the story or imagine what she would have wanted to see--she was referring to a piece of evidence a reputable source had described and promised to reveal.

It's up to the individual to decide if she was motivated by a prurient interest--or if she WANTED this to have happened, rather than wanting it to have been documented for proof if it DID happen so the perps could be strung up. There are multiple possible explanations here. People who want to assume the worst, will.

Today's Washington Post reports that the military has in fact substantiated one sodomy by an American soldier of an Iraqi detainee, something that had long been rumored to have been found by Sy Hersh.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A27048-2004Aug23.html

It's a nasty comment from this woman, but if she's someone who wants to "rage against the lying of the right", I'm fairly sure she means she's hoping to see the soldier/s brought to justice, not that she wants Iraqis raped.

I have a feeling she doesn't care a whit for the little Iraqi boys, and doesn't much care if a hundred prisoners are beaten to death with rubber, er, marital aids, if she can point at the administration and howl, "look at those monsters!"

Marshall got scooped on his "tectonic-plate" shifting story.

IIRC, the big story involved the source of the forged Niger Uranium documents. Marshall wrote a post outlining what he had uncovered after he got scooped (sorry, I can't find the post right now), and it broke down basically as follows:

An asset for the Italian intelligence services was released from their payroll (though not REALLY released, just as far as the other spooks were concerned) and was later leaked a thick stack o' sooper-seecrit papers that contained those pesky forgeries Marshall seems to think are so damning.

Again, IIRC, Marshall strongly implied that the individual to which these were leaked was given instructions to get these docs into the hands of someone who would eventually turn them over to the Brits or the Americans.

Sorry for the sketchy details (and I don't guarantee this is all accurate, it's been at least a month since I read it), but that's the gist.

I remember thinking at the time that Joshy has a very, VERY different idea of Earth-shattering news than I do...

Wait a sec, Mindles.

You're going to have to explain your reasoning to me, here. It appears that Mary Scott is alluding to Sy Hersh comments that implied that there is videotape of a whole range of horrors we have not yet contemplated. Certainly when I read his comments (from a speech, I think), I came away believing that he might be referring to some combination of (a) the rape of young boys, and (b) acts done to terrorize relatives. She's got a weird description of that set of possible horrors, but it seems clear that's what she's talking about.

Assuming that she and I have read Sy Hersh right, and that he's accurate (let's politely say I trust him more than this Administration), then why wouldn't you want a story about that to come out? Jeebus, I'm all for putting America first, but I really don't want anything but jail time and worse for people who rape in our name (or who just direct or videotape it). And I (like Jefferson, I think) trust a free press a hell of a lot more than I trust any specific Administration. I'm pretty confident that you agree with me on these two points, so I don't understand what your complaint is.

Oh I think it's pretty clear what the woman hopes for, and the adjective
"sicko" applies.

Remember that she's seen no evidence and yet she wants to believe.

Further I have no idea how many times a day some child is sodomized
somewhere, and I'm sure it's a significant number, so the woman gets
that part of her wish everyday, but we all understand it's more than
this that the woman wants, even the disingenuous among us, and what
specifically the woman is wishing for and why.

Sorry to interject among all the toddler-rapin' fun...but I finally found the Marshall follow-up post that I alluded to earlier:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_08_01.php#003235

In case anyone's still interested.

"Today's Washington Post reports that the military has in fact substantiated one sodomy by an American soldier of an Iraqi detainee, something that had long been rumored to have been found by Sy Hersh."

IIRC from an earlier story on the topic, the abuser was an Egyptian translator working under contract, not a soldier, although the witness describing the incident said that it was videotaped by a woman.

I'll endorse some call me Tim's comment above; if this happened, those who allowed it to happen should be held responsible.

Tom -
Ah - I read "one of his captors" in the story - lazy use of language by the WaPo, since an Egyptian translator is not what comes to my mind when I hear "captors".

Have you no shame?

Have you no shame, SomeCallMeTim and Tom?

Quote:

"I will hope it has something to do with United States Military Personnel
videotaping the anal rapes of little Iraqi boys in front of their mothers.

Maryscott O'Connor -- Rage, rage, against the lying of the Right."

The woman is hoping for a vicious scandal -- something that can be used against
the Bush administration. It has nothing to do with concern about someone
being raped.

I just can't get people like you two. You're the pure incarnation of
Joseph McCarthy and there are so many like you that I despair for the human
race.

It's up to the individual to decide if she was motivated by a prurient interest--or if she WANTED this to have happened, rather than wanting it to have been documented for proof if it DID happen so the perps could be strung up. There are multiple possible explanations here. People who want to assume the worst, will.

Sure, just like some people jumped all over Bush for the 'trifecta' comment, and some jumped all over Den Beste for his 'nuke Berkeley' jest, and still others cussed out Jane/Meagan when she dared to suggest a 2x4 might be a suitable pre-emptive weapon against a looter.

Back to Ms. O'Connor: After someone pointed out to her that Sy Hersh and not JMM would be responsible for such a story (correspondingly, note Britain33's comment above in this thread), the woman followed up with "But I said...'Hope.' " Make of that what you will. Maybe she was just hoping JMM would get the scoop on that story, or maybe she was just hoping that the perpetrators of illicit deeds would be brought to justice, or maybe she's just a little sensitive to the very idea since she has a young son herself (and thus overreacted).

Still, those were some pretty dark thoughts to even be having, let alone expressing on a public forum. My reaction to an allegation of such a story would be "I hope that didn't happen," then wait for proofs showing otherwise. A presumed-reliable party 'claiming' to have seen them is not good enough; we've already had an instance of someone trying to pass off Russian pay-pr0n as abuse images. So unless someone was predisposed to believe US military servicemen would readily engage in child sodomy, or was simply desiring it to have happened for purposes of political gain -- either of which is reprehensible on the part of that person -- I have difficulty imagining someone otherwise making a comment like that unless s/he was very, very stupid.

Looks like her hopes have been by and large fulfilled, Mr. Dreck. While we're on the subject of sickos:

"An Army investigation into the Abu Ghraib prison scandal has found that military police dogs were used to frighten detained Iraqi teenagers as part of a sadistic game, one of many details in the forthcoming report that were provoking expressions of concern and disgust among Army officers briefed on the findings.

"Earlier reports and photographs from the prison have indicated that unmuzzled military police dogs were used to intimidate detainees at Abu Ghraib, something the dog handlers have told investigators was sanctioned by top military intelligence officers there. But the new report, according to Pentagon sources, will show that MPs were using their animals to make juveniles -- as young as 15 years old -- urinate on themselves as part of a competition.

" 'There were two MP dog handlers who did use dogs to threaten kids detained at Abu Ghraib,' said an Army officer familiar with the report, one of two investigations on detainee abuse scheduled for release this week. 'It has nothing to do with interrogation. It was just them on their own being weird.' "

Well, that's reassuring -- although, as the New Republic and Slate have pointed out, so far we haven't heard a peep about whether the coming reports investigate the claims that such forms of prisoner abuse frequently happened in OTHER places besides Abu Ghraib. And in that connection, the article goes on:

"Speaking on the condition of anonymity because the report has not been released, other officials at the Pentagon said the investigation also acknowledges that military intelligence soldiers kept multiple detainees off the record books and hid them from international humanitarian organizations." Strictly on their own initiative, no doubt.

And the grand finale: "The report also mentions substantiated claims that at least one male detainee was sodomized by one of his captors at Abu Ghraib, sources said."

And, no I wasn't hoping that this sort of thing would happen. (Particularly since it significantly increases the chances that a Pakistani A-bomb will get smuggled into an American city before this is all over.) But at this point, I'm afraid that I was expecting it.

Forgot to mention the source. Sorry: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A27048-2004Aug23.html

Comments are Closed.