President Bush says Amnesty International's charges are absurd. Or was it the word "gulag" that was absurd?
The questions we citizens should ask ourselves are: Are we treating the detainees as we would want our soldiers to be treated? Are we forgetting that the detainees are only accused? Are we teaching the principles of freedom and democracy by the way we have treated the detainees?
Given the charges about how we treat detainees, why are there no serious and open investigations by our government? Finally, why do we appear not to care about the answers to these questions?
It is silly to wave our flag or the Bible if we do not support the values for which they stand.
L.A. Marquardt
Stevens Point
Yes, sir/mam, the word "gulag" was absurd, and Amnesty International admitted it was over the top hyperbole and that no one was bring starved or forced to work. In fact, these enemies of America have it better than they have probably ever had it in their lives. They have shelter, regular meals (better than I normally eat), and they even get their own shiny new Koran. (Check out Lee P. Butler's great editorial; The Disneyland of Gulags).
Secondly, are we treating detainees as we would want our soldiers treated? Let's look back on the past few years of captured Americans. If supposedly urinating on the Bible or blarinf Afghan's equivalent of Christina Aguilera was the worst Americans were getting, then this may be a valid point. However, I seem to reall a BEHEADING or two (or has it been dozens?) and some contractors burned and their bodies desecrated. Yeah, L.A., not their bibles, but their actual bodies. Which is worse?
Personally sir/mam, I think it is silly to waive your quaint idealistic leftist comapssionate world view at the terrorists we have detained while you fail to do the same for the American's who are protecting you life.
