Weekly Shredder 41:
The Chicken-n-Torture Press Conference
by James Norton

So the point is the inmates in Guantanamo have never eaten better, they've never been treated better, and they've never been more comfortable in their lives than in this situation.

That's Duncan Hunter. He's a Republican member of Congress from California. And the evidence that he presented Monday to support his assertion was two plates of food.

For archives, audio, and background about the column, click here.

This is the oven-fried chicken entree. It has broccoli, it has peas and mushrooms, rice, it has pita bread, and it has two types of fruit. This is what Osama Bin Laden's bodyguards will eat several times a cycle, several times a week.

(Puts down plate, picks up new plate.)

This is lemon chicken, rice, broccoli, carrots, bread and two types of fruit.

(Puts down plate, picks up menu.)

Now if you look through the menu that we serve — and this is in fact the complete menu that we're contracted for — you will see that this isn't simply a high point in the menu, this is representative of what these killers are given every day, courtesy of the American taxpayer.

Now, again, in capsule format.

Assertion: "[The inmates in Guantanamo have] never been treated better."

Evidence: "This is the oven-fried chicken entree."

This is real. This is not a cunning "Saturday Night Live" sketch. This line of argument actually happened.

You can view Rep. Hunter's press conference yourself, if you like. Or you can read my transcript.

Either way, you'll watch one of your elected representatives telling you that in spite of nongovernmental organization and reliable press reports to the contrary, the prisoners at Guantanamo are not just healthy and happy — they're being spoiled at our expense, living in the US armed forces equivalent of Club Med.

Why? They've got the aforementioned chicken entrees (with two types of fruit), they've got prayer mats and they've got copies of the Quran.

What about all that physical abuse we keep hearing about, congressman?

There have been only a couple of instances of touching, illegal touching of these terrorists over the last several years. The most egregious of which was in July, and that was a soldier who when a terrorist took a swing at him, or when an inmate took a swing at him, he swung back, hit the inmate and that soldier was busted a grade down from sergeant to to Spec-4.

Ah. "Illegal touching." "A couple of instances."

Here's the Guardian's assessment, in brief:

A CIA analyst visited Guantanamo in summer 2002 and returned "convinced that we were committing war crimes" and that "more than half the people there didn't belong there. He found people lying in their own feces," a CIA source told [New Yorker reporter Seymour] Hersh. ... A senior intelligence official told Hersh: "I was told [by FBI agents] that the military guards were slapping prisoners, stripping them, pouring cold water over them and making them stand until they got hypothermia."

Now that's a lot of illegal touching!

Or perhaps the Guardian, the New Yorker and the CIA are too far left for you to regard as credible.

The far-right Washington Times detailed last year eight soldiers (compare that to Hunter's two) disciplined for their treatment of prisoners:

Eight soldiers had been punished by being demoted or given less serious administrative punishment for offenses ranging from humiliating detainees to physical assault, Adm. Albert T. "Tom" Church, the Navy's inspector general, told reporters at the Pentagon, according to a transcript released Friday.

But what is Hunter outraged about?

And the prayer call is broadcast over our loudspeaker system, again, gratis of the American taxpayers.

In fact, if American soldiers were given a prayer call over a loudspeaker system, it would probably be a subject of a lawsuit by the ACLU for violation of the so-called separation between church and state.

Yes. He's outraged by the fact that we don't live in a theocracy. Like Iran, only with fewer turbans, and more rolling around on the ground with snakes.

Now, before we go after the congressman in earnest, let's be clear about the terms of debate.

Some of the detainees in Guantanamo Bay really are killers. Some of them are insurgents and/or terrorists, and wouldn't hesitate to kill American soldiers and/or civilians.

The question is who among them is guilty? Who among them is innocent? Who deserves a prison sentence, the death penalty, immediate release for time served or even restitution for unlawful detention?

We don't know. We can't know, not until the prisoners are allowed some sort of due process to sort the guilty from the innocent. And right now, Republicans like Hunter are fighting due process every step of the way.

The big question, of course, is why does this matter? Why does one congressman's insane chicken-driven press conference even merit comment?

The first reason: The fact that he's able to make this kind of announcement without facing an immediate recall election indicates the current political temperature. No abuse of human rights is egregious enough for the higher-ups to indict their own.

The second: Even by current standards of political discourse, it's really stupid.

The third: It's seductive to ignorant people, who come away from the press conference thinking:

a) We're spoiling those damn terrorists!
b) The ACLU is stopping our soldiers from praying!
c) Only two terrorists were touched, because they tried to hit our guys first!
d) Man, I'd like to get some of that delicious oven-fried chicken!

The fourth and final: This isn't American. It's not American to torture and abuse prisoners, no matter who they are, and particularly if they may be entirely innocent of any wrongdoing. It's in the worst tradition of authoritarian dictatorships, which may be why Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld defended it by saying: "Does it rank up there with chopping someone's head off on television? It doesn't."

That's right, ladies and gentlemen: the Bush administration is better than the terrorists. Incrementally better. But better nonetheless. This calls to mind the defense of Alberto Gonzales-inspired conduct at Abu Ghraib, which was deemed better than what Saddam Hussein did at that same miserable hole of sin and sorrow.

If it was just one lonely congressman making this kind of statement, he'd be denounced as the immoral crank that he most assuredly is. But the wall of silence, denial and buck-passing starts at the White House, and trickles down, down through the cabinet secretaries, the senators and the chicken-slinging congressmen.

Seconds, anyone?

E-mail James Norton at jim@flakmag.com.

— graphic by Derek Evernden (derek@ocellus.net)