« Don't Miss | Main | Freshman GOP Senators Call on Durbin to Apologize »
June 18, 2005
Non-Apology Apology
Vietnam vet Dave St. John offers some perspective on Gitmo and Dick Durbin, who has issued a lame "sorry if you're offended"/"up yours" "apology":
Mark my words, somewhere, a military planner or strategist for al Qaeda or whatever new group of thugs is emerging is watching this drama unfold. They are making careful notes and calculations regarding just how long it will take for the brave efforts of our military to be eclipsed by the rantings of these self-serving politicians. They know that the efforts of those who view war and the sacrifices those who wage it incur through some out-of-touch, intellectual prism, and use their right of free speech without regard for its consequences, will always provide them with a ray of hope that their twisted cause will prevail. So they labor on, committing atrocities, killing the innocent, claiming their rights have been violated when captured, deflecting and obfuscating the truth because they know they have found comrades firmly embedded in our government who by word and action will support them.
Meantime, John Hinderaker says Durbin's "is not much of an apology":
First, Durbin notes that more than 1,700 soldiers have been killed. This is a good reason to interrogate enemy combatants, hardly an argument to the contrary. But Durbin leads with it to create the illusion that this is somehow his concern. Next he says that his statement was "critical of the policies of this Administration." But saying that American soldiers are indistinguishable from Nazis and Communists isn't being "critical of the policies of this administration." This administration has not, in fact, condoned torture of detainees; as we have pointed out over and over, the administration's policies have been humane to a degree that is probably unprecedented in world history during wartime. When abuses have occurred, as at Abu Ghraib (which Durbin irrelevantly drags into his "apology"), they have been in clear violation of the administration's policies.
Finally, Durbin tells us that he has just now learned that comparing our soldiers to Nazis, Communists, and Pol Pot-type crazies "can be misused and misunderstood." Misused? What does that mean? By whom? Presumably Durbin means that al Jazeera et al. can "misuse" his statements to trumpet the claim that high-ranking American officials have conceded that the U.S. is just as bad as Nazi Germany. I'm not sure that's a "misuse"--it is what Durbin said--but if he has just now figured out that his statements can be used as propaganda by the enemy, he is much too stupid to be a United States Senator.
Finally, Durbin "sincerely regrets" if what he has said has "caused anyone to misunderstand his true feelings." I think, on the contrary, that what Durbin regrets is that he inadvertently expressed his true feelings for his constituents to see.
This, of course, is the classic example of the non-apology apology. Note that he doesn't retract a word of what he said. He says that he regrets if others misunderstood his "true feelings", not that what he said was wrong and historically inept. Basically, this is the translation one is meant to hear:
I'm sorry you were too stupid to understand me.
If this is the best that Durbin can do after comparing the men and women of our armed forces to Nazis and Stalin's goons, as well as comparing Islamofascist terrorists to Japanese-American victims of WWII detention centers, then he's a bigger idiot than I thought.
It'd be a mistake to let Durbin off the hook. He still doesn't give a damn.
Posted by bill at June 18, 2005 08:14 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.citizen-journal.net/cgi-bin/mt-316/mt-tb.cgi/182
