Commentary: "Global Values" WTF???

Amnesty International in a 308 page report has branded and the ACLU has accused the USA of: Assaulting "Global Values," the "Gulag" of our time. The Gulag title came about with Stalin's 400 concentration camps, possible deaths in these camps approximately 20 million. These wingnut groups using this analogy to describe the US are in essence just giving misleading, misinformed, "righteous" fuel for terrorists and Leftists to burn and ignite further hatred toward the US and her troops. To be fair, though, they do mention other countries in their press release:

At a national level governments betrayed human rights at terrible cost to ordinary people. Russian soldiers reportedly tortured, raped and sexually abused Chechen women with impunity.

**Addendum** Note how they use the word "reportedly," no mention of "by whom." No mention of Muslim Chechen rebel terrorists taking small school children hostage, starving them, not allowing them to use restrooms, making them drink their own urine, sexually abusing them - and then shooting them in the back when they had a chance to escape - we KNOW that happened.

They do, however, tersely mention the government of "Mad Bob" Mugabe:

Zimbabwe’s government manipulated food shortages for political reasons.

"Manipulated food shortages?" How about "seized private land that was productive and then did nothing with it, causing food shortages?" How anybody can take this group seriously is beyond me.

WTF are "Global Values"???

Is it that the US is attempting to maintain human rights regardless of the flack being directed at them by the MSM, ACLU and others? Amnesty International states "maltreatment" of Gitmo detainees and cite as examples hunger strikes and "sexual assault" from a female guard fondling a male detainee's genitals. Are these "Global Values," a major human rights issue? At best the prisoners choose to starve themselves and can start eating at anytime, and a male being fondled by a woman guard (if true) may not be appropriate but can hardly be considered an assault on "Global Values" - whatever those are.

What's misleading about the report is that they don't distinguish between civilian crime statistics and acts carried out as a matter of government policy. Example: AI's claim of Australia having a high rate of domestic beatings is also factored into their human rights violation figures of what they refer to as an assault on "Global Values." I am not aware that domestic violence is an abuse conducted directly as a matter of Australian government policy, so to include figures such as those alongside statistics of hangings and beheadings that ARE a matter of government policy in Iran is as ludicrous as it is dishonest.

What are"Global Values?": Religious intolerance? terrorism? genocide? forced starvation? moral equivalence? seizure of private property as a matter of nationalization reform? and an apathetic blind eye turned to all? - yeah, maybe we ARE against "Global Values." If these detainees should be treated in accord with those "Global Values" then they are being treated with a greater respect than they deserve.

All prisoners kept by the US in Gitmo and other camps are actual or very reasonably suspected terrorists, most of whom were captured on the battlefield in Afghanistan directly involved with the Taliban in actions against coalition troops or individuals that have admitted that they support or have ties with the Taliban or al Qaeda or other terrorist groups. They do not represent any particular government or nation, but rather an ideology, so they are not prisoners of war in the traditional sense. They are guerilla thugs engaging in war-like acts, however - acts of terror and violence specifically targeting and directed at mainly innocent civilians (and often against our troops), yet groups like Amnesiac Insertion and the American Criminal Liberation Union would have them treated like they were guests in somebody's home.

Terrorists or "enemy combatants" do not warrant the respect due an enemy soldier fighting in a uniform, honorably and openly for their country. An example that comes to mind is the tremendous respect that developed between many of the Kiwis and Aussies and their Turkish opponents during the horrific struggle at Gallipoli where tens of thousands of lives were lost. The Commonwealth and Turkish troops were often only a few meters apart for days and weeks at a time in the trenches there. For the most part, both sides treated each other's wounded and captured with respect and dignity because they both fought with bravery and honor. The same can hardly be said for the scum being held at Gitmo or Grab-an-Arab.

In essence Amnesty International is stating that the US is the terrorist. The ACLU is stating that the US government is turning a blind eye to detainees and some of the detainees alleged abuse, along with the alleged abuse of the Holy Koran. Yet the ACLU does not have a problem with the American flag being burned or treated with disrespect.

Ask yourself how many people are going to die now with further rioting and protesting? Ask yourself, why is it the Islamic faithful are the only ones to react with murder for the alleged abuses to the Koran when they (Islamics) have for centuries desecrated and destroyed many religious icons of different faiths? How did the respect for the Koran become a "Global Value?"

The worst the US can be blamed for is individual Americans committing violations against a few, but that is NOT the US Government performing atrocities against the masses. The US is not perfect; it is not Utopia, but unlike much of the rest of the world, we usually do a pretty good job of policing ourselves, as well as police them.

The easiest way to avoid criticism is to do absolutely nothing while criticizing others who ARE doing something - another "Global Value" we don't need.

**UPDATE**
The Washington Post has a story from the AP that makes this halfhearted attempt at describing Stalin's gulags, making sure they mention that the gulags were a holdover from the deposed czarist regime, deflecting some culpability from the Communists, another word they chose not to use. Note "thousands" is used instead of "millions." To be accurate and state "millions" would make their analogy that much more fellacious. They also don't mention how many were simply executed en masse.

The use of the term gulag refers to the extensive system of prison camps in the former Soviet Union, many in remote regions of Siberia and specifically designed to hold political prisoners. The Soviets took over the system from the czarist government and expanded it after the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution. Untold thousands of prisoners of the so-called gulags died from hunger, cold, harsh treatment and overwork.

Certainly, though, we know the poor detainees aren't freezing to death in Cuba...