Unfortunate timing

...aaand because of when I decided to start doing this, one of my first posts has to be about a rather unfortunate subject.

I know it's not literally a 'torture bill', but nevertheless...

I read a lot of American leftwing politics blogs, and consequently know rather more about USAnian politics than I do my own, simply because of the higher volume of high-quality blogging from there compared to from here. I will also admit that my knowledge is consequently somewhat second hand, but nevertheless it's reasonably easy to form your own opinions.

For example, everyone knows that the occupation, if not the invasion, of Iraq was and is a colossal, weapons-grade, high quality, gold medal of a disaster, and it's pretty much a non-moving target for those who wish to aim at the Bush administration (possibly not moving cause it's a dead horse). But reading the output from those on the ground (in America) also brings the knowledge that the Bush crew are screwing up in home affairs as well, such as pensions, immigration, etc, and it's hard not to characterise him as the worst president ever. The idea of giving him more power to decide what they can or cannot do to their randomly imprisoned captives is just shocking, especially when those pushing the legislation more or less admit they think the Geneva Conventions are outdated and inadequate.

So it's not a bright day for human rights, especially when you look at the linguistic squirming some of the advocates of the bill used. I can't find links to the exact quotes, but the bit that appalled me was something along the lines of "well, 'inhumane treatment' is so vague isn't it, what does that actually mean, you can't really say anything is or is not 'inhumane treatment', so we're creating a bill that allows us to define what it is based on what we want to get away with doing to people we don't like."

Ugh.

I read that and I thought: "Well, here's a pretty easy definition. 'Would you want it to happen to you', you soft, callously sadistic worm?"