Gil Week of Tortured Logic

On Gil's ever weakening, redundant and irrelevant blog, he's had an interesting assortment of topics in the past week. He's made over 45 different posted topics, with little variety and fewer comments. He got only 19 comments total. His biggest hit rate came on the topic of ME with 13 comments.

By far his biggest bugaboo this week was Torture. He had 11 different postings defending it, all filled with lies, half-truths and misrepresentations.
Cheney's calling for the declassification of two cherry picked memos claiming torture was a success. Yea, human rights violations!
This flies in the face of recent reports and conclusions that the most fruitful information came BEFORE the torture and that the information obtained through torture wasn't worth it.

Gil falls to "shock our conscience" with his attempts to defend and redefine torture. Gil tries to equate the "training" we give our soldiers with the experiences of a captured prisoner undergoing 183 waterboarding sessions in one month.

Gil defends the Bush lawyers that clearly violated the ethical standards of their profession in rubber stamping legally unsupported justifications for torture and violations of the Geneva Conventions and our own laws and Constitution. These ARE war crimes. We've prosecuted, convicted and executed for far less.

Gil even goes so far as to compare torture with abortion. If you aborted the same baby 183 times in one month, then Gil might have a point (besides the one on top of his head).

About having a reasonable definition of torture, "shock the conscious" is too vague, since Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, ... and Gil, haven't shown they have a shred of conscious.
First of all, some techniques have not only been designated as torture for centuries, but are frequently used as examples in the definition. Waterboarding is already defined as torture. Second, these actions violate our own Constitutional prohibitions against inflicting cruel or unusual punishments. Third, the United States has prosecuted or gone after foreign governments for using these techniques on US soldiers, or their own dissidents. Finally, is it acceptable to Gil if these techniques are applied to our captured soldiers without punishment to their captors? I would hope not (but Gil and the other armchair warriors were eager to sent them into harm's way without body armor and keep them there after their tour of duty).

The rest of Gil's postings covered his continuing denials of global warming and his misguided faith that nuclear power plants will solve everything (except if Iran has any). He got his panties in a bunch about the Tea Parties, but had me choking with laughter when he claimed: "Dems Scared of Tea Parties". Those weak-ass parties are the gift that keeps on giving by showing how the GOP idea machine threw a rod, just as it ran out of gas.

Gil's seems awfully defensive about Miss California and anyone else against gay marriage being portrayed as bigots. Gee, I wonder why. :-)

The rest was the usual rotation of anti-Obama, Clinton, Pelosi, Murtha and Sean Penn with a little anti-Sebelius and Napolitano thrown in for seasoning.

Most of Gil's posts are links to some far right-wing blog or opinion piece. No surprise there. Gil's intellectually lazy, seems incapable of genuine research, and treats opinion pieces as actual news.

It's no wonder Gil's site is such a deserted wasteland.