Now that United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan has said that the U.S. should close its detention facility for terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay, I’m just wondering if he also has asked China, Cuba, Iran, Syria, Zimbabwe and other nations which incarcerate and torture political opponents to close down their detention facilities.

UPDATE: I had wanted to maintain the terseness of this post because, as I tend to write rather lengthy pieces, I was delighted that a number of people complimented me on saying so much in so few words. But, after returning from a pleasant dinner with a friend (and seeing the delightful movie The Matador), I decided to do a few google searches to see if I could find out if Mr. Annan had called for closing down any prisons in the tyrannies mentioned above. While I found evidence of torture in an Iranian prison, I could only find one piece of evidence that the United Nations Secretary General spoke out on Iranian prisons–he had written a letter to Iranian President Ahmadinejad asking him to release imprisoned journalist Akbar Ganji (but not to close down the prison where he was held). I have as yet found no evidence that he asked Iran to close down any of its prisons.

If you have information that Annan has requested that prisons in Iran, North Korea or any other non-Western nation be closed, please e-mail me so I can update this post accordingly.

UP-UPDATE: Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld says that desipte what Kofi says, “The Pentagon will not close its Guantanamo Bay prison for terrorist suspects.” Calling the Secretary-General “just flat wrong,” the Defense Secretary said that the facility “is being run as well as any detention facility can be run” and that the prisoners have been “trained to lie” (Via: Lorie Byrd at Polipundit).

UP-UP-UPDATE: Deroy Murdock shows why Kofi is wrong and why we should not close the facility at Guantanamo Bay. He points out that when released, a number of former Gitmo detainees, returned to violence, some taking up arms against the U.S. So, instead of having me summarize the piece, just read the whole thing!

Earlier today while watching FoxNews, I heard Eleanor Clift describe the Vice President’s delay in contacting the media after his hunting mishap this weekend as a “defining moment” for him. Ms. Clift did get something right. This story is a defining moment, but not for the Vice President, as she claims. It is instead a defining moment for the mainstream media.

On Hugh Hewitt’s blog, Mary Katharine Ham describes the press reaction as “Making a Bazooka Outta Some Birdshot.” On Valentine’s Day on Fox, National Review’s Kate O’Beirne said this was another example of the conspiracy mind-set of the MSM.

MSM mavens claim this is yet another sign of this secretive Administration, yet have yet to make a serious suggestion of what the Vice President might be covering up. They don’t seem to be satisfied that the local sheriff’s office “closed its investigation” of the matter, issuing a “report that supports Cheney’s account of the weekend accident.” Kenedy County’s sheriff, Ramon Salinas, III, is, by the way, a Democrat.

This hasn’t stopped other Democrats — and their allies in the MSM — from seeing this as a sign of the Administration’s secrecy. Although she withheld documents from investigators and delayed turning over evidence to authorities, Hillary Clinton rants that this is just another disturbing sign of the administration’s refusal “to level with the American people on matters large and small” (via Michelle Malkin).

Despite Mrs. Clinton’s angry accusations, in his interview with Brit Hume on Fox News, the Vice President leveled with the American people, taking responsibility for his errors. After watching excerpts of the interview last night on Fox, I agree with Polipundit’s Lorie Byrd that his “explanation [is] quite understandable” even though I still think he should have gone to media earlier. He was concerned that the Harry Whittington’s family know that their relative had been shot before the accident had been made public and did not wanted to go public until medical personnel had an accurate picture of Whittington’s condition.

Watching the Vice President and listening to his words, I can better understand one of the reasons he offered for his delay in contacting the media. My Dad’s wife wondered about Cheney’s personal trauma, that is, what he went through as he realized that his own error may have cost a friend his life. Naturally, in such a state, he would want to have better knowledge of his friend’s condition before going public. Indeed, the Vice President acknowledged as much in his interview, notably his comment that he will never be able forget the image of Whittington falling. It was, he said, “one of the worst days of my life.”

Like the president, I could tell that the Vice President had been “profoundly affected” by his mishap. Far from being secretive, he was being human. That the MSM has dwelled on this, as if there were a cover-up, is another sign of the MSM’s prejudices towards Republicans in general and this Administration in particular. They see scandal in every mishap or policy difference and cover-up in every failure to treat the Washington press corps precisely as these reporters expect to be treated.

The MSM’s reaction to the Vice President’s hunting mishap — and his delay in contacting the media — is indeed a defining moment for them. In his latest post, Nick noted out of touch the media are with reality. And once again we see how suspect they remain of the Bush Administration and the GOP — no matter how slight the evidence.

-Dan (AKA GayPatriotWest): GayPatriotWest@aol.com

UPDATE: In an excellent post which I ***HIGHLY*** recommend, D.J. Drummond observes, “Simply by being who he is, the Vice-President has once again revealed the dirty laundry which is the MSM’s daily wardrobe.” Exactly.

Oh come on, I couldn’t pass up this gem. It is scary to realize how difficult it is to tell which is the real thing and which is the wax dummy. I’m not sure which one I’d rather run for President…. not that it matters, really.

Hillary Clinton Immortalized In Wax – AOL.com

I just wonder how Madame Tussaud’s configured Bill’s hand going up her back and into her mouth? The really sick thing is that the museum has a Vince Foster figure lying next to a wax tree a few feet away. That’s just wrong!

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

I was watching the news today and on a break from pilorying Vice President Cheney for having “covered up” his hunting accident this weekend, a piece came up about the new Abu Ghraib photos, implicating even worse treatment of terrorists at the infamous Iraqi prison.

What purpose does the release of more photos of an old story serve? Clearly, I thought, this will only further incite America-hatred among those in the region (and in fact, here at home) who opposed the liberation of Iraq from Saddam. After all, the “bottom’s been gotten to” as the old lady who used to baby-sit me would say, and people have been held accountable. Not much more could be constructively gained.

Apparently what’s clear to me isn’t clear to Australian media outlets. As the CNN piece continued (I can’t find the transcript, but if you can, I’d love to receive it), some guy from SBS, the Australian news outlet which released the photos addressed the issue of further endangering coalition troops (yes, including Aussies) by making the images public.

His reaction to the suggestion they were likely exacerbating the danger the troops face was (paraphrase): American and Australian troops are daily in tremendous peril. I don’t see how the publication of a few photos like this would put them in any further danger.

Oh really? I don’t know if SBS is following it, but nut-jobs around the Muslim world are trying to destroy everything in sight because somebody published cartoons that they consider to be insulting to Muhammad. With the story of riots and killings over something as innocuous as political cartoons still making the news daily, does this guy really believe what he says?

It’s clear many on the left have lost their sense not only of proportionality, but also any sense whatsoever. It doesn’t take a genius to predict what’s going to happen “on the Arab street”, as they say. To deny this (and worse, to actually think people will believe you when you do) demonstrates a clear separation from reality.

It’s almost as nuts as, say, going to the Jeddah Economic Forum during a time of war and going on and on about how bad America is. Who’d be so crazy as to do that?

I originally intended this post to be a simple report on a new survey of the Iraqi population, as reported by Jeff Weintraub.

Although some people still try to pretend otherwise, it has long been clear that in 2002-2003 most Iraqis (unlike most non-Iraqi Arabs, most Europeans, and many others) favored the war to overthrow Saddam Hussein & his regime, however ambivalently. Non-Iraqi Arabs, in particular, wanted Iraqis to sacrifice themselves to the last Iraqi for Saddam, but Iraqis overwhelmingly felt otherwise.

They have now said this again. In a poll conducted in January for WorldPublicOpinion.org by the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) at the University of Maryland, Iraqis were asked, among other things

The results at face value are encouraging.

Asked, “Thinking about any hardships you might have suffered since the US-Britain invasion, do you personally think that ousting Saddam Hussein was worth it or not?” 77% say it was worth it, while 22% say it was not.

Overall, 64% of Iraqis say that Iraq is heading in the right direction, while just 36% say it is heading in the wrong direction. This represents a sharp upward movement from when the International Republican Institute asked this question in November 2005 and just 49% said that Iraq was headed in the right direction and 36% said the wrong direction.

Ah, but then this caught my attention:

Sunnis, though, are overwhelmingly pessimistic. A remarkable 93% say the country is headed in the wrong direction.

Jeff comments: “To some extent, reactions of this sort are unsurprising for a formerly dominant minority that has suddenly lost its ruling position and fears for its future security.”

And it struck me. The American Democrats and to some extent the liberal media outlets are America’s non-violent Sunnis. In this case, they were in the majority for decades — either in literal government power or holding a monopoly on the news. And any poll since the year 2000 shows that Democrats (sans the first 8 or so months after 9/11) are repeatedly more pessimistic and thinking our country is moving in the wrong direction.

So the next time you see Ted, Barbara, Hillary, or Howard on TV ranting and raving… feel sorry for them. After all, their spiritual leader is on trial in Iraq for crimes against humanity and they too apparently long for his return to power. I only judge based on their words and deeds as leaders of the American Democrat/Sunni Party. Prove me wrong.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)