Cartoon for February 9, 2009

Why not just close Gitmo now and let the detainees go? “Too complicated,” say Obama and Obama’s torturers (they’re his torturers now!).

Advertisements

17 Responses to “Cartoon for February 9, 2009”

  1. Anonymous Says:

    With the last panel of this cartoon, are you implying a Defeat in The War on Terror?

    You Mr Rall; are Un-American.

    As were George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

    Y_S
    Pakistan

  2. Jesus X. Crutch Says:

    That last panel has the ring of truth to it, didn’t something like that happen to the U.S.S.R?

  3. Greg Says:

    Bush had balls.

    When Bush invaded countries that caused us no harm and opened torture centers, he had a minority of US Congressmen, protesters, world opinion, world laws, and worst of all: cold reason to fight against.

    Does Obama think we will think less of him if reverses everything that smirking ape did? I doubt we would think worse of him even if he reversed the good things Bush accomplished…like, um, using a hemp product in the form of the Constitution to wipe his behind.

    Hemp

  4. John Says:

    Ted, the originality and coherence of your cartoons are directly proportional to your relevance as a political commentator.

  5. Hairhead Says:

    And in keeping with this, the Obama DOJ continues to assert the “state secrets” defence to cover up the genital mutilation + extra unnamed tortures worse than waterboarding which were visited on one of the current detainees (a British subject) in Gitmo.

    To twist The Who: “You’ve been fooled again!”

  6. Anonymous Says:

    I say send them back to their country of origin. Set them up all comfy there. If indeed they are bad, they will expose themselves to another solution.

  7. Anonymous Says:

    I voted for the guy…but that doesn’t mean I don’t love seeing you NOT LET UP on this subject, Ted–or him. And I get a feeling he can handle it.

    Let’s see…Ayatollah Khomeini died in ’89…Saddam was executed, and his sons…Qaddafi has been ‘reformed’…Ahmadinejad will probably lose his election this year…we DO need a new scapegoat, Ted. Reminds me of the old saying:

    It’s not a war–it’s a con job. Remember that one? Good times.

    –Daddy-O

  8. Anonymous Says:

    I hope you are not expecting Obama to be challanged by anyone in the media, particularly females (and maybe some males) are dreaming of having sex with him. Cult???? Noooooooooo…..

  9. Anonymous Says:

    I hope you are not expecting Obama to be challanged by anyone in the media, particularly females (and maybe some males) are dreaming of having sex with him. Cult???? Noooooooooo…..

  10. Y_S over here EXPLAINING SOMETHING VERY IMPORTANT ABOUT HIS ATTITUDE Says:

    Dear Susan Stark, Ted, et al. and Especially Ted’s-Fans-Who-Reply-On-This-Blog

    I would like to apologise to all of you for the tone of voice that I have used when discussing things on Rall.com. However I believe an explanation is in order. The following has been written by an Indian citizen who lives in Washington DC and teaches at a High School.

    It will explain the way Americans are perceived in much of the world.

    #

    “The US needs a completely different approach to Pakistan, and the approach requires the US to jettison its extremist ideology. Wait a minute, you will see: we’re extremists? You are either senile or stupid to say that. The Islamists are extremists, not us.
    #

    Not so fast Babaloos. Americans are the only people who think they are moderate. The rest of the world, ranging from the richest western countries to the poorest of the poor, do not see you that way. Your speech, action, intent, whatever, is absolutely extreme. Consider that Americans were the modern world’s first revolutionaries. The Founding Fathers espoused an ideology so extreme that as far as the Euros were concerned – and so too the Russians, Chinese, and Japanese, to the extent they had relations with the US – the Americans were a dangerous virus that threatened the whole world. And of course, the American ideal of mass democracy and the rule of law did threaten the world.
    #

    At some point in the first half of the 20th Century, the Americans became the reactionaries and they turned to a fight to the death with the new revolutionaries, the communists. But once the communists were finished off, Americans became religious revolutionaries. Their religion consisted of four parts: the traditional religion of God, a return to the old religion of democracy, and the new religions of human rights and consumerism. The difference between 1776 and – say 1976 was, however, a very big difference. For two centuries the Americans did not export their religion of democracy. They wanted to be left alone, and even when they got into the two world wars, it was with great reluctance and foreboding. The US involvement in both world wars was absolutely defensive.
    #

    But in the war against communism, the US assumed, for the first time in its history, an offensive posture. With the communists in the trash bin, the US decided the whole world had to be converted to its religion of democracy, human rights, and consumerism, with quite a bit of the old God stuff thrown in.
    #

    So folks, you may not think as Americans that you are extremists, but the world sees you as such. It sees you as intolerant, narrow-minded, religious zealots bent on taking over the world.”

    Y_S returning here. The Indian fellow ends with this. And may I say, as a Pakistani raised in Karachi of the ’90’s; I agree 101%:

    “To which parenthetically we say what we have always said: hurrah for American totalitarianism and world empire, because it is the only way we will have global peace.”

    Peace and Regards

    Y_S

    Pakistan

  11. Anonymous Says:

    Y_S … you’re thinking too hard. just follow the money. US military inverventions have always been to back up our business interests. Afghanistan is pipeline country.

    Speaking of following the money. I really really wish I could believe in Obama. But every indication is that he has sold out. (MORE free $$ for the bankers??) And he is still in campaign mode, carefully crafting his message so that people love him.

    come on dude, you won, stop working the camera already.

  12. Angelo Says:

    “…the only way we will have global peace.”

    like in Iraq!!!

  13. Angelo Says:

    “…the only way we will have global peace.”

    like in Iraq!!!

  14. Angelo Says:

    “…it is the only way we will have global peace.”

    OH i see, you were being clever. You mean “peace” as in final peace

  15. Anonymous Says:

    > the US decided the whole world had to be converted to its
    > religion of democracy, human rights, and consumerism

    Well ya got the "consumerism" part right …

    > So folks, you may not think as Americans that you are extremists

    The word "extremist" simply has no actual denotative meaning. It's an empty slur you can point at anybody who's sufficiently powerless that you believe you'll never have to compromise with them. "Moderate" means within the arbitrary boundaries of respectable debate, wherever you choose to draw them. "Extreme" means everything else. Anybody can use either word to describe anyone, it doesn't mean shit.

  16. Anonymous Says:

    The problem is that you can’t release the “terrorists” in Gitmo for the following reason (I’ll use Ted Rall as the example):

    Say Bush had had Ted Rall arrested. Plucked him right off the street and tossed him in Gitmo, and let him rot there for four, five, six years. No charges, no day in court, no nothing. Just picked him up, told him he’s a “terrorist” and then ran a mockery of a trial, years later, with none of the minimum requirements of a fair trial.

    Ted, of course, realizes he hasn’t done anything wrong. So Ted figures, this is all a misunderstanding that will be cleared up.

    But it isn’t. And he isn’t allowed to see the evidence against him. And he isn’t allowed to confront his witnesses. And he is basically screwed. Pure and simple.

    Ted also realizes that his friends and loved ones are going on without him. They worry about him, sure, but they still have to live their lives. They’re going out to eat, and getting married, and getting promotions, etc. Not Ted.

    Finally, Obama is elected and confronted with the question of what to do with Gitmo’s prisoners.

    From a security point of view, the best bet is to never let them go. Why?

    Take Ted. How do you think an innocent man will react to finding out that there was never any evidence against him that was credible. And that he’s lost years from his life? You think Ted’s going to be able to sue the Federal government? Nope. No chance. Ted might be able to put it all behind him, but there are quite a few people at Gitmo. At least one of them has got to have snapped. At least one of them is saying, “the second I get out of here, I’ll show you what terrorism is.”

    So you can’t let them go. But you can’t keep them either, because the pressure’s building. The rah-rah-rah of blind patriotism has begun to wear off. People are sheepishly admitting, “Yeah, this was way wrong, dude.”

    If I were Obama, I’d be praying for a hurricane to strike Cuba. And during that hurricane, all the prisoners could be executed and the bodies thrown into the ocean. Because you can’t let them go, not after what you’ve turned them into.

  17. Marion Delgado Says:

    ted i don’t normally laugh out loud at cartoons, including yours. last panel. phucking hilarious. just plain brilliant.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: