I realize that the title of this article looks like I've gone soft on the Taliban. This is not the case. However, unlike the US government, I do still feel that they are human beings. I believe that all human beings deserve certain rights, and that a nation that prides itself on being the enlightened and democratic leader of the free world has no business treating prisoners as they have treated the Afghani prisoners.

Now, despite the fact that the United States is and was a country founded on blood, one that had just as much right to carry out some of its actions as bin Laden had to drive planes into populated buildings (not at all, for the sarcasm impaired in the audience) there is no reason that we should fall truly into that heritage by refusing to grant human rights to prisoners. But we're gonna. And here's how.

First off, we've never formally declared war on Afghanistan that I recall. On terrorism, yes. On Afghanistan, no. Consequently, these people are, through an amazing act of legal prestidigitation, not prisoners of war, and therefore not subject to the Geneva Convention. Translation: The US gets to do what they want.

And, as it turns out, what the US wants, is apparently to warehouse these people in Cuba until they drop dead of old age.

Because, as long as they're not on the US mainland - and if anyone can tell me how the fuck we've retained control of a sizeable chunk of Cuba I'd like to know - they don't exist.

I was in a class at Evergreen called People of The Triangle. It was about the people that the Nazis put triangles on - homosexuals, Jews, Gypsys, Communists, etc. There was a very important performance component to the class. A friend of mine and I decided to do a piece on the power of propaganda. We drew up a list of about a third of the class and read that list at the start of our performance. The people whose names we called - including one of the teachers - were sent to the back of the room, where we barricaded them off with a roll of chicken wire. They were forced to stand there, while we went back up to the front of the room, gave our performance - and sat down again. We put those people at the back of the room, and ignored them from then on. Among the audience comments, people said that they had forgotten that people were missing.

This is what's going on with the Taliban prisoners. Now, before I get a lot of misspelled emails calling me a right wing fascist, I'd like to point out that I have NO love whatsoever for the Taliban. I do not have any interest in John Walker, except insofar as he might make an attractive dart board. I am not the least bit convinced that the current government of Afghanistan is a good thing either, and I don't sympathize with bin Laden and the rest of his sheep.

But that's not what I'm talking about here. I'm talking about us. It makes me feel somewhat less than human to realize that every time the Smiler says "My fellow Americans...", I'm included in that statement. I don't like being included in anything that goes so fundamentally against everything I've ever been taught or thought was right.

I do not think that warehousing prisoners on foreign soil, prisoners who cannot be monitored under the Geneva Convention, since there's not a state of war existing between the US and Afghanistan, and that generally building up sympathy for bin Laden through the persecution of these people is right. My parents taught me the difference between right and wrong, and this is wrong.

This puts us in the same league as the "Axis of Evil", who are also not noted for their human-rights records. This helps bin Laden - after an Arabic website published the phone numbers of the families of some of the prisoners, the families were deluged with sympathy calls. This gives entirely too much attention to the United States, even as it takes that attention away from the prisoners. Why do these people need to be hidden away on foreign soil? Does this act - by our duly elected government - make ANYONE feel better?

Since the Smiler's got an approval rating of something like 80%, I guess it does. And I think anyone who approves of his actions since September 11th needs to examine why it makes them feel better.

One of the causes of domestic violence, frequently stated by batterers when asked why they abuse their spouses, is that it makes them feel in control, with the implication that they are not in control of the rest of their lives. Frequently these people are unemployed and poorly-prepared for the job market - hitting someone makes them feel like they are in control of something again.

I think that the Smiler's approval rating is merely national domestic violence. Our economy has turned into two economies, one for the rich and one for the poor. Our credit card spending is insane, with tremendous amounts of personal disposable income committed to it. Our unemployment rate is nothing short of ridiculous, and we've been traumatized by an act of war committed upon us.

It seems to me that approving the bombing of another country - with the implication of more to follow - and the maltreatment of people who, whatever their political convictions, are still people (and we wouldn't be dealing with them if it wasn't for the fact that bin Laden is basically unfindable - we shouldn't have ever gone to war against Afghanistan*) and as such, deserve better than to be filed away on a military base in Cuba until we get around to convening tribunals which will, I fear, mainly rubber-stamp death warrants, is just our way of making ourselves feel better.

Are we that weak as a people that the only way we can feel good is to batter?

No rights for the Smiler,

Channon

*15 of the 19 people on those planes were Saudi. Are we bombing Saudi Arabia?