Unbelievable....

Okay - I'm driving to McDonald's this morning to get Darby and I some breakfast.. On the air was a congressman talking about the whole Iraq-abuse situation.. I'm in full agreement with the congressman who was saying that it was an inexcusable act.. It was unwarranted, disgraceful, and wrong.. No way how you slice it..

But the congressman didn't stop there..

He went out of his way to say that this whole thing was blown out of proportion.. (Kinda reminds you of a certain sex-scandal, doesn't it??) At least in the Clinton saga, no one was tortured, forced to do sexual acts (I do believe Monica was having fun at the time), or under duress.. So, the whole "it's being blown out of proportion" argument flies out the window in My opinion..

Then he said how it's become a political issue: well duh - so does sex apparently as long as "your guy" isn't in the White House.. It's political because - IT HAPPENED ON YOUR WATCH.. Finally, this is something the conservatives can't PEG on Clinton.. (woohoo - rejoice..)

But he stops with the 7 soldiers who are being targeted for the allegations of abuse.. Okay - why?? If we're a country predicating "high moral standards" - then accountability needs to be included in that mix.. We have a President and Secretary of Defense who is basically trying everything to wash their hands of what happened.. So much for having high moral standards.....

Then - the ultimate: "let's not forget that these people have American blood on their hands.." But he's careful to say that it doesn't justify what happened to the prisoners.. But his parting comment on that point was: "let's not forget there are two sides to every story.." How convenient..

First of all - if they are prisoners (and here's where the definitions start to show signs of blurring) then they need to be afforded the same rights and protections as a prisoner.. But if Rumsfeld is going to say that everything that was done to those prisoners over there fell within the Geneva Convention - then we are establishing a completely new set of rules for what is allowed..

Don't believe me??

What do you think this administration's reaction would be if it were an American prisoner being subjected to the same horrific scenario?? Of course we'd be outraged AND we'd be quoting the very same articles in the Geneva Convention that Rumsfeld is apparently relying on..

On a side note, I heard someone saying the other day that the Geneva Convention does not apply because it applies to a war on a country - not on an individual or group (i.e. terrorists...) I wish I would've been paying closer attention because this conversation should been awarded some "hair splitting" award for best idea..... (holy shit!!)

How much more contorted can this get??