Everybody Remember Ari Fleischer?

He’s still a douchebag! I know you’re all relieved:

The events sparked a debate on CNN last night, prompting former Bush White House press secretary Ari Fleischer to defend his former boss’s decision to open Gitmo to begin with. “We have it because these people did not even follow the law of war, let alone the rule of war,” he said, adding, “These people didn’t even wear a military uniform. They engaged in battle against America as terrorists, a violation of the laws of war. That’s why Guantanamo got invented.”

But most legal experts say detention practices at Gitmo violate international law.

“This country fought Adolf Hitler. And I don’t really believe that Osama bin Laden and his group are worse or more dangerous than Adolf Hitler,” CNN legal expert Jeffery Toobin countered Fleischer, adding, “We managed to defeat Adolf Hitler by following the rule of law.”

Backed in a corner, Fleischer then went a bit off the rail:

FLEISCHER:They [the Germans] followed the law of war. They wore uniforms and they fought us on battlefields. These people are fundamentally, totally by design different. And they need to be treated in a different extrajudicial system.

How does not wearing a uniform make Gitmo okay? And even if you buy that okay, these people are special supervillains who need a special prison that is not in America, how does it then follow that that prison needs to treat them inhumanely?


8 thoughts on “Everybody Remember Ari Fleischer?

  1. I know a guy who knew Ari in undergrad. He said he was always like that, only with hair.

  2. Funny, I think there’s a gathering right now of folks talking about armed insurrection against the US government if they don’t get their way on gun regulation. Few of these people wear a uniform (no, camo is not a uniform). I assume Ari considers these folks worthy of being shipped to Gitmo, right?

  3. I’m guessing the uniform comment comes from the WWII movie trope that uniformed combatants were protected by the Geneva Convention, but non-uniformed combatants could be arrested as spies and had no protections.
    I have no idea if any of that is true now or ever was true, but it was a common belief 35 years ago. It might explain why a lot more people went along with this who might not otherwise–because they thought that’s “how it’s always been done”.

  4. The justification for Guantanamo has been and always will be bullshit. The Vietnam War was a clusterfrack but the US won global praise for their legal treatment of the Viet Cong. They didn’t wear uniforms, conducted terrorist bombings, and were part of no recognized state and still were treated as POW with full rights when captured by the US. We did this in part because we knew if we turned them over to South Vietnam they sure as shite would have been tortured. And why NOT treat the enemy with a modest level of respect? Isn’t the entire point to make less enemies?

  5. “…the WWII movie trope that uniformed combatants were protected by the Geneva Convention, but non-uniformed combatants could be arrested as spies and had no protections. ”
    It was true then and true now, the Geneva Conventions being still in existence if not actually universally honored. During WWII the same rules applied but they were followed unevenly mostly for reasons of expedience.

  6. If you actually go and read the Geneva Conventions, you find that there is an exception to the “wearing a uniform” thing, when the person is fighting IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY.
    Like, I dunno, Iraqis fighting off foreign invaders.
    And yes, the Gitmo justifications were always bullshit from beginning to end, and Bush, Cheney Rumsfeld, etc, are all war criminals.

  7. It was horseshit anyway; Josef Mengele wasn’t a uniformed combatant, and he was obviously a war criminal. Obama’s refusal to treat war crimes as war crimes will go down as one of first of the many massive disappointments of his failed presidency.

  8. If someone would just make a nice poster of what the uniform of “Terror” is, we could know if someone is fighting on the side of what we’ve declared war on when properly attired or not.

Comments are closed.