take a peek at spadoman's- full article there
Wednesday
Monday
Where's the Pro-Israel Group?
My first post here, and it's a short one:
This bothers me. Why is it that although the people of Israel voted for the peace process and although peace between Israel and the Palestinians will make life better for both nations it's still common wisdom to call a fringe group of fascists a pro-Israel group? Doesn't the Baltimore Sun read the news? Don't they know the only pro-Israel group in Annapolis is the one negotiating for peace?
Tuesday
The Sutras of Abu Ghraib: An Interview With Conscientious Objector Aidan Delgado
The topic below was originally posted in my blog, the Intrepid Liberal Journal, as well as the Out of Iraq Bloggers Caucus, the Independent Bloggers Alliance, the Wild Wild Left and Worldwide Sawdust.In 2001, Aidan Delgado was twenty-years old and in need of a life anchor. Delgado had primarily grown up abroad in far away places such as Cairo, Egypt, Thailand and Senegal due to his father’s career as a diplomat. While attending college in Florida, Delgado felt culturally out of place and adrift. Having led an “ivory tower” existence of academia and privilege, Delgado opted to join the United States Army Reserves for a different perspective.
By sheer coincidence he signed his enlistment contract on September 11th. Those closest to him questioned the wisdom of Delgado's choice. The terrorist attacks convinced Delgado he made the correct decision as the country underwent a surge of patriotic feeling and rallying to the flag. At the time he was proud of having decided to join the United States Reserves before September 11th. Delgado didn’t know it yet but the next three years of his life would transform his entire being.
To calm his nerves prior to reporting for basic training at the end of October 2001, Delgado read about Buddhism. He concluded that Buddhism was like “coming home” and suited his outlook on life even as he prepared for war. Initially, Delgado embraced the Samurai ethos that blended Buddhism with the warrior spirit to justify his participation.
He was trained as a mechanic and assigned to the 320th Military Police Company in 2003. Initially, Delgado served in Nasiriya, the Southern Part of Iraq for several months before being redeployed with his unit to Abu Ghraib. Since Delgado knew Arabic from his adolescent years in Cairo, he was frequently utilized as a translator on missions. On these missions he witnessed horrific abuse committed by Americans against Iraq’s civilian population. He told Bob Herbert of the New York Times in 2005 that,
“Guys in my unit, particularly the younger guys, would drive by in their Humvee and shatter bottles over the heads of Iraqi civilians passing by. They'd keep a bunch of empty Coke bottles in the Humvee to break over people's heads."That sort of gratuitous violence was a harbinger of things to come. During this period in 2003, Delgado experienced an internal crisis. The warrior ethos was not compatible with his sensibilities as a Buddhist and he opted to apply for an honorable discharge as a conscientious objector.
The army tried to persuade Delgado to apply for non-combatant status instead and still complete his duties as a mechanic. It would’ve been the path of least resistance and Delgado rejected it. As far as Delgado was concerned, applying, as a non-combatant was a half-measure and he wanted to make a moral statement.
The path Delgado chose was a long tough road of bureaucratic struggle, taunts, bullying and peer abuse. The army hoped to provoke Delgado away from pacifism, make him feel ostracized and humiliated. Many considered Delgado a coward and a traitor as he continued to fulfill his duties while the application process went forward.
Delgado’s application for conscientious objector status had not been resolved when his unit was redeployed to Abu Ghraib in November 2003. Shortly after he arrived, a prison riot against the miserable conditions there resulted in a fatal shooting of four detainees who threw stones. Delgado told Bob Herbert how he confronted a sergeant who claimed to have fired on the detainees:
"I asked him if he was proud that he had shot unarmed men behind barbed wire for throwing stones. He didn't get mad at all. He was, like, 'Well, I saw them bloody my buddy's nose, so I knelt down. I said a prayer. I stood up, and I shot them down.'"When Delgado initially arrived at Abu Ghraib he assumed most of the detainees were hardened insurgents and terrorists. He later learned while working as a radio operator for the Abu Ghraib headquarters brigade that most detainees were either petty civilian criminals or completely innocent. Ultimately, Delgado concluded that regardless of why they were there, American behavior could not be excused.
Delgado’s unit was dismissed after completed its duty in March 2004. He received an honorable discharge after returning to America in April 2004. Currently, he’s an antiwar activist as a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War and the Buddhist Peace Alliance. Delgado captured his spiritual journey and experience in Iraq with his recently published memoir, The Sutras of Abu Ghraib: Notes From A Conscientious Objector In Iraq (Beacon Press)
It’s not fully possible to grasp what soldiers like Delgado went through and witnessed. What does it mean to read that serving in Abu Ghraib is hell or living through mortar attacks is scary? Is it really possible for mere words to convey how soldiers such as Delgado are torn between loyalty to the uniform they wear and their humanity? How can one truly understand without having lived in the shoes of someone like Delgado himself?
Those of us who haven't been in that position can't truly understand. Nevertheless, Delgado skillfully puts the reader in the front row of his year in Iraq, the friends and antagonists he interacted with, the near death experiences he endured and the torturous battle waged within his soul about right and wrong.
Delgado agreed to a podcast interview with me over the telephone about his book, experiences inside Iraq and Abu Ghraib in particular. We also discussed how racism towards Arabs and the Muslim world helped facilitate the crimes committed against Iraqis and his spiritual journey as a Buddhist and anti-war pacifist. Our conversation is approximately fifty-six minutes and took place on Sunday, November 18th. Please refer to the media player below.
This interview can also be accessed for free by searching for "Intrepid Liberal Journal" at the Itunes Store.
Please note that Aidan Delgado only had access to a cell phone for this interview. The sound quality is quite good most of the time and the passion of his convictions comes through. Also, I made a couple errors during the podcast I would like to correct. In introducing Aidan I referred to his unit as the 320th Military Police “Academy” instead of “Company.” I also listed Kuwait among the countries Aidan lived in while growing up when in fact he only visited there.
Saturday
why peace is elusive
and other such musings by betmo :) i haven't felt much hope, lately, that the human animal can change. the ones who rise to the top are usually the ones who like to send the rest of us to war for their gain. we, apparently, haven't caught on to their game and continue to be pawns. i have seen some glimmers of hope though- and the reasons behind why folks hate other folks or want to use them for profit- are fear and greed. no brainer. until we become the peace we seek and encourage others to be also- we won't see positive change. i know- let's all sing kumbaya now :) i think more and more folks are realizing that there is work to be done and we need to do it. the 1960's led the way towards change through abrupt change. this change we face today probably won't be- but hey, who knows? all we can do is work on being peaceful in our own lives and cause the ripple effect. each person we touch can be led towards peace through communication and example. peace has been elusive because it takes hard work. hard work isn't something that modern folks are used to- and we all know our communication with one another has broken down. we must fix the system and make it work- and violence does not defeat violence. let's start today reconnecting with ourselves and doing the work necessary to be the peace we seek. namaste.
Sunday
Conservatives Have No Clothes: An Interview With Greg Anrig
The topic below was originally posted in my blog, the Intrepid Liberal Journal as well as the Independent Bloggers Alliance, The Peace Tree, Wild Wild Left and Worldwide Sawdust.To paraphrase former President Ronald Reagan, conservatism is not the solution to the problem; conservatism is the problem. In the recently published book, The Conservatives Have No Clothes: Why Right-Wing Ideas Keep Failing (Wiley & Sons), policy expert and journalist Greg Anrig indicts right-wing ideology and examines their legacy of insipid governance.
It’s a familiar tale of woe for liberals at this point. The conservative method over simplifies problems such as terrorism with misguided fear mongering about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Domestically conservatives will distort the root causes of why inner city schools fail by demonizing the entire public school system or make false claims that Social Security is poised for imminent collapse. In terms of obtaining and holding onto power the conservative method of marketing distortion has been highly effective in most national elections since 1968.
The consequences for the country have been disastrous. Even when Democrats have prevailed, the radical trend of privatization was only slowed temporarily to the detriment of workers and consumers alike. From healthcare, to the gutting of FEMA and the misguided pursuit of empire have left Americans economically insecure and isolated in a dangerous world.
In a sober analysis, Anrig, the Vice President of Programs at the Century Foundation, a progressive think tank and regular contributor to the liberal blog tpmcafe.com, critiques the conservative record. Specifically, Anrig evaluates the degree that policies championed by conservatives have delivered on their promise to make America stronger and safer and our government smaller and more efficient.
E. J. Dionne, syndicated columnist for the Washington Post praised Anrig’s book and noted:
“Ending the conservative era requires organizing, yes, but also hard thinking and shrewd analysis. When progressives of the future look back at how they triumphed, one of the people they'll thank is Greg Anrig. Drawing inspiration from the work of the early neoconservatives who demolished public support for liberal programs, Anrig casts a sharp eye on conservative ideas and nostrums and shows that many of them simply don't work because they are rooted more in ideological dreams than in reality. Facts are stubborn things, Ronald Reagan once said, and Anrig makes good use of them in this important and engaging book."Anrig agreed to a podcast interview with me over the telephone about his book and issues such as education, Social Security, national security and the Democrats ineffectiveness at challenging the conservative paradigm. Please refer to the media player below. Our conversation is approximately forty minutes.
This interview can also be accessed at no cost via the Itunes Store by searching for the “Intrepid Liberal Journal.”
Friday
Can We Please Get On With the Capital Crimes Trial of George W. Bush?
via The Existentialist Cowboy
...before Bush starts World War III! Word is Israel is planning to strike Iran. That takes the heat off Bush while giving him the war he wants in the Middle East. Scenario: Israel strikes Iran. Iran retaliates. The US joined Israel and Bush get his jollies watching mushroom clouds from afar! Gog Magog, my ass! Bush his psychotic.
The debate about whether "waterboarding" is or is not "torture" is another GOP red herring. Anyone who denies waterboarding is torture should prove it's not by public submitting themselves to it! That just might end another stupid obfuscation by the GOP. Then again, it doesn't really matter what it's called --especially by the liars of Bush's illegiimate regime. By any defintion, it is a violation of Due Process of Law and the various international conventions to which the US is bound.
I have yet to find anything in the US Constitution, the Bill of Rights, or the various treaties to which the US is bound by law and convention that gives anyone in the US --including persons who call themselves "President" --a right to violate Due Process of anyone. There are numerous laws, however, which bind the US to the Geneva Convention despite unconstitutional attempts by both Bush and Congress to exempt Bush from Geneva but only after he had already violated it! The statute, in effect at the time Bush committed the crime, makes Bush a war criminal, subject to prosecution for capital crimes. Congress may change the law but the Constitution forbids they "back date it".
No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
--Article 1, US Constitution
Now --can we please get on with the capital crimes trial of George W. Bush?
Bush is a Bigger Threat Than "Terrorists"!!The charges against Rumsfeld are a good first step! My goal is to see the lot of them in the dock ---Rumsfeld, Bush, Cheney, Gonzales, Ashcroft!!! Americans: let me put this bluntly. The Bush administration is not a legitimate administration. It is a crime syndicate, in office because the GOP helped them steal two elections. Being illegitimate, nothing done by this gang is legal or has the force of law. Let me put this yet another way: a criminal occupies the White House and presumes to rule by decree. In the words of Che, the peace must be considered "already broken".
The World Wide Campaign to
Bush's arrest for his a seemingly endless list of crimes and outrages is long overdue.
The right not to have one's person violated arbitrarily in the absence of probable cause or evidence, is a crime against humanity. There is, moreover, no evidence, that anyone tortured by George "Torguemada" Bush or his minions in crime, has ever been connected with terror at any time, in any way. Show me some evidence! Show me a single "terrorist" that Bushco has ever brought to justice! Show me something other than bullshit!
And --today --we learned that the cowardly Democrats have confirmed yet another "torturer" as Atty General. Democrats, this is not good enough. How about the American people boycott this election and hold an alternative election? How about the people form a legitimate government under the law. At present, a lawless gang occupies Washington. What do the Democrats in Washington proposed to do about it. I learned early in my broadcasting career that one was either a part of a solution or part of the problem. The cowardly Demos are quickly becomming a part of the problem, if not co-conspirators!
Now from the department of "Big Frickin' Deal"!!!
The AP reports, "Under pressure to support the troops but end the war, House Democrats said Thursday they would send President Bush $50 billion for combat operations on the condition that he begin withdrawing troops from Iraq." The proposal, "similar to one Bush vetoed earlier this year, would identify a goal of ending combat entirely by December 2008.
"The Politico notes Speaker Pelosi "told reporters yesterday that the new proposal "would leave a small force in the country to pursue Al Qaeda, protect US interests and train Iraqi security forces." The New York Times says the plan "is certain to be opposed in the House by many Republicans as well as some strongly antiwar Democrats who want tougher restrictions on the president." The Hill notes Republicans "attacked Democrats for going to the well once again with votes calling for a withdrawal of troops." The measure "also caught many Democrats off guard. In the early afternoon, most legislators interviewed said they hadn't seen the legislation, even some who were actively trying to obtain a copy."
...I am unimpressed! Democrats could have ended this war but haven't. The attitude is typified by Hilary who obviously believes that "Anti-war nut jobs" have no place to go.
In the meantime, it's time for Bush's criminal regime to put up or shut up! It's time Democrats grew a spine! It's time that the people of the US overthrew this government and replaced it with a lawful one under the Constitution.
In the meantime, Democrats have helped Bush get another torturer appointed to Attorney General. Bush will not have improved his horrible, criminal record with his appointment of 66 year old Michael Mukasy can be expected to follow the the example set by John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales, two liars remembered for their contempt for the laws they swore to enforce and uphold. Congress has failed to find redemption.
Mukasey, 66, a former federal judge from New York, told senators he considers waterboarding "repugnant," but he could not categorically say whether the technique amounts to torture, which U.S. and international law bans.
(CBS) Waterboarding, a controversial interrogation technique that simulates drowning, dates back to at least the Spanish Inquisition, and has been used some of the world's cruelest dictatorships, according to Human Rights Watch.Forms of waterboarding vary but generally consist of immobilizing an individual on his or her back - head inclined downward - and pouring water over the face to induce the sensation of drowning.
Other techniques include dunking prisoners head-first into water, as was used by Chadian military forces in the mid 1980s. The Khmer Rouge, responsible for the deaths of approximately 1.5 million Cambodians during the 1970s, strapped victims on inclined boards, with feet raised and head lowered, and covered their faces with cloth or cellophane. Water then was poured over their mouths to stimulate drowning.
Waterboarding, long considered a form of torture by the United States, produces a gag reflex and makes the victim believe death is imminent. The technique leaves no visible physical damage.
Republican presidential candidate John McCain, who was tortured as a prisoner of war in North Vietnam, considers waterboarding a form of torture. McCain has been quoted as saying that waterboarding is "no different than holding a pistol to his head and firing a blank."
--CBS News, Waterboarding: Interrogation Or Torture?
The single shread of good news:
U.S. Hawks Dive For Cover
Dennis Kucinich didn't vote for the 2002 resolution to invade Iraq. Several Democratic senators who voted for that resolution and who are currently presidential contenders for the 2008 election have expressed regrets; the only candidate who has not done so is Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, amazingly the current Democratic front-runner. ...
This move by Kucinich puts more heat on Democrats than on the GOP. We know the GOP to be crooked war whores but we expected more from Democrats. Perhaps we should not have. We were taken for granted by a party that drinks from a poisoned well, a party that thinks we have no place to go.
Thank you,
thepoetryman
The debate about whether "waterboarding" is or is not "torture" is another GOP red herring. Anyone who denies waterboarding is torture should prove it's not by public submitting themselves to it! That just might end another stupid obfuscation by the GOP. Then again, it doesn't really matter what it's called --especially by the liars of Bush's illegiimate regime. By any defintion, it is a violation of Due Process of Law and the various international conventions to which the US is bound.
I have yet to find anything in the US Constitution, the Bill of Rights, or the various treaties to which the US is bound by law and convention that gives anyone in the US --including persons who call themselves "President" --a right to violate Due Process of anyone. There are numerous laws, however, which bind the US to the Geneva Convention despite unconstitutional attempts by both Bush and Congress to exempt Bush from Geneva but only after he had already violated it! The statute, in effect at the time Bush committed the crime, makes Bush a war criminal, subject to prosecution for capital crimes. Congress may change the law but the Constitution forbids they "back date it".
No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
--Article 1, US Constitution
Now --can we please get on with the capital crimes trial of George W. Bush?
Bush is a Bigger Threat Than "Terrorists"!!
The World Wide Campaign to
Bring Bush's War Criminals to Trial
Bush's arrest for his a seemingly endless list of crimes and outrages is long overdue.
The right not to have one's person violated arbitrarily in the absence of probable cause or evidence, is a crime against humanity. There is, moreover, no evidence, that anyone tortured by George "Torguemada" Bush or his minions in crime, has ever been connected with terror at any time, in any way. Show me some evidence! Show me a single "terrorist" that Bushco has ever brought to justice! Show me something other than bullshit!
And --today --we learned that the cowardly Democrats have confirmed yet another "torturer" as Atty General. Democrats, this is not good enough. How about the American people boycott this election and hold an alternative election? How about the people form a legitimate government under the law. At present, a lawless gang occupies Washington. What do the Democrats in Washington proposed to do about it. I learned early in my broadcasting career that one was either a part of a solution or part of the problem. The cowardly Demos are quickly becomming a part of the problem, if not co-conspirators!
Now from the department of "Big Frickin' Deal"!!!
The AP reports, "Under pressure to support the troops but end the war, House Democrats said Thursday they would send President Bush $50 billion for combat operations on the condition that he begin withdrawing troops from Iraq." The proposal, "similar to one Bush vetoed earlier this year, would identify a goal of ending combat entirely by December 2008.
"The Politico notes Speaker Pelosi "told reporters yesterday that the new proposal "would leave a small force in the country to pursue Al Qaeda, protect US interests and train Iraqi security forces." The New York Times says the plan "is certain to be opposed in the House by many Republicans as well as some strongly antiwar Democrats who want tougher restrictions on the president." The Hill notes Republicans "attacked Democrats for going to the well once again with votes calling for a withdrawal of troops." The measure "also caught many Democrats off guard. In the early afternoon, most legislators interviewed said they hadn't seen the legislation, even some who were actively trying to obtain a copy."
...I am unimpressed! Democrats could have ended this war but haven't. The attitude is typified by Hilary who obviously believes that "Anti-war nut jobs" have no place to go.
In the meantime, it's time for Bush's criminal regime to put up or shut up! It's time Democrats grew a spine! It's time that the people of the US overthrew this government and replaced it with a lawful one under the Constitution.
In the meantime, Democrats have helped Bush get another torturer appointed to Attorney General. Bush will not have improved his horrible, criminal record with his appointment of 66 year old Michael Mukasy can be expected to follow the the example set by John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales, two liars remembered for their contempt for the laws they swore to enforce and uphold. Congress has failed to find redemption.
Mukasey, 66, a former federal judge from New York, told senators he considers waterboarding "repugnant," but he could not categorically say whether the technique amounts to torture, which U.S. and international law bans.
(CBS) Waterboarding, a controversial interrogation technique that simulates drowning, dates back to at least the Spanish Inquisition, and has been used some of the world's cruelest dictatorships, according to Human Rights Watch.Forms of waterboarding vary but generally consist of immobilizing an individual on his or her back - head inclined downward - and pouring water over the face to induce the sensation of drowning.
Other techniques include dunking prisoners head-first into water, as was used by Chadian military forces in the mid 1980s. The Khmer Rouge, responsible for the deaths of approximately 1.5 million Cambodians during the 1970s, strapped victims on inclined boards, with feet raised and head lowered, and covered their faces with cloth or cellophane. Water then was poured over their mouths to stimulate drowning.
Waterboarding, long considered a form of torture by the United States, produces a gag reflex and makes the victim believe death is imminent. The technique leaves no visible physical damage.
Republican presidential candidate John McCain, who was tortured as a prisoner of war in North Vietnam, considers waterboarding a form of torture. McCain has been quoted as saying that waterboarding is "no different than holding a pistol to his head and firing a blank."
--CBS News, Waterboarding: Interrogation Or Torture?
The single shread of good news:
U.S. Hawks Dive For Cover
Dennis Kucinich didn't vote for the 2002 resolution to invade Iraq. Several Democratic senators who voted for that resolution and who are currently presidential contenders for the 2008 election have expressed regrets; the only candidate who has not done so is Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, amazingly the current Democratic front-runner. ...
This move by Kucinich puts more heat on Democrats than on the GOP. We know the GOP to be crooked war whores but we expected more from Democrats. Perhaps we should not have. We were taken for granted by a party that drinks from a poisoned well, a party that thinks we have no place to go.
Thank you,
thepoetryman
Sunday
HOW TO BE FREE via the Existentialist Cowboy
How to be free when all about you are enslaved by an evil, GOP machine
Political "evil" allows people to assuage their consciences in numbers. A person who might never lynch a man himself, might do so in a mob. Lynchings and torchings of black people were most often done by groups -not by individuals. The Holocaust required a "Reich". The Reagan regime required only an increasingly bourgeois populace only too willing to believe the lies it told itself. No member of such a group is truly free. No "good Republican" is free! No member of a mob is free. No group is free!While psychologists may diagnose individuals as "psychotic", the more harmful effects are sustained when a group exhibits symptoms and acts upon them. There are no un-motivated choices. Motivation follows from our very existence which precedes essence, in this case, the manifestation of character, the gestalt of our choices. I propose that we choose to be free. We become free when we accept responsibility for what we make of ourselves.
Hollywood script-writers say that motive precedes character. Many, perhaps most, will act upon what is believed, in good faith, to be true but others will act knowingly upon a lie. Bertolt Brecht addressed in-authentic" people when he said: "A man who does not know the truth is just an idiot but a man who knows the truth and calls it ia lie is a crook!". To act knowingly upon a lie is to act upon bad motives. Jean-Paul Sartre would call it
mauvaise fois.
For if indeed existence precedes essence, one will never be able to explain one's action by reference to a given and specific human nature; in other words, there is no determinism – man is free, man is freedom. Nor, on the other hand, if God does not exist, are we provided with any values or commands that could legitimize our behaviour. Thus we have neither behind us, nor before us in a luminous realm of values, any means of justification or excuse. – We are left alone, without excuse.
That is what I mean when I say that man is condemned to be free. Condemned, because he did not create himself, yet is nevertheless at liberty, and from the moment that he is thrown into this world he is responsible for everything he does. The existentialist does not believe in the power of passion. He will never regard a grand passion as a destructive torrent upon which a man is swept into certain actions as by fate, and which, therefore, is an excuse for them. He thinks that man is responsible for his passion.
Neither will an existentialist think that a man can find help through some sign being vouchsafed upon earth for his orientation: for he thinks that the man himself interprets the sign as he chooses. He thinks that every man, without any support or help whatever, is condemned at every instant to invent man.--Jean-Paul Sartre, Existentialism Is a Humanism
In some cases, a lie may not be a true motivation, but only a "cover" for a truth that dare not be revealed. In such cases, there is the "truth" that is acted upon, and the lie that is publicly professed. The intention is to deceive. The GOP is, thus, enslaved by its own web of lies --the lies it tells the world, the lies it tells itself. Only those who can accept the truth of their own existence and take responsibility for it are truly free. The GOP is the party of blame, a party for whom everyone but itself is blamed for its failures at home, in Iraq, throughout the world.
In some cases, the lie is told oneself as well as the world. A second lie, a cover story, is often told the world. Trickle down theory is just such a lie --a falsehood of convenience told publicly to justify unfair economic policies purposefully intended to enrich but a few while impoverishing many.
It is often possible to convince oneself that a lie is true and, in those cases, truth is forever covered up. It is a rare culprit who accepts his own villainy. Most will excuse a crime with a lie. "I was only righting the wrong that had been done me". "I was mistreated as a child". "The money should have been mine".
"Republicanism" itself is a gestalt of lies. Republicans embrace "trickle down theory" not because it is true but because it conveniently justifies piggish, even criminal behavior. There are perhaps two kinds of people in this corrupt White House -those who really believe the lies and those who know them to be lies but cite them, in bad faith, disingenuously in order to promote the agenda. Motives so assiduously disguised cannot be benign.
It is easy enough invoke a blanket "political motive" ie, if Bush had been honest and up front about the many ways in which his cronies would be enriched by war with Iraq, the nation would never have backed the war. But many would have backed the war and would have espoused the same specious arguments and for the same reason. Bush lied about WMD because he other, hidden reasons to wage war. Evil, and the hypocrisy it inspires, springs from a deep well. Hypocrisy and mass psychoses are only mechanisms by which evil objectives are achieved. Dr.
Gustav Gilbert, the American psychologist charged with keeping the Nuremberg criminals alive until they could be duly hanged, identified evil with the primary symptom of "psychopathic personalities" ie, the "utter lack of empathy".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
LinkWithin
