Andrew Sullivan Smears the Troops

posted at 4:21 pm on June 15, 2006 by Bryan

I’m beyond fed up with Andrew Sullivan’s anti-war hysteria and dishonesty. It’s one thing to oppose a given policy or president, but another thing entirely to smear the troops. But Sullivan smeared the troops at Gitmo in this post:

According to medical records obtained by TIME, a 20-year-old named Yusuf al-Shehri, jailed since he was 16, was regularly strapped into a specially designed feeding chair that immobilizes the body at the legs, arms, shoulders and head. Then a plastic tube, sometimes as much as 50% bigger than the type commonly used for feeding incapacitated patients, was inserted through his nose and down his throat – a procedure that can trigger nausea, bleeding and diarrhea.

He’s quoting this article in his new master’s house. What Sullivan fails to give his readership is the context that is necessary to understand this passage. The sentence preceeding the passage he quoted says this:

The facility’s top physicians have told TIME that prisoners who resist are subjected to what critics call especially forceful methods.

“Prisoners who resist…” More about that resistance below. Absent any context, Sullivan’s pull-quote makes it look like our troops are just wantonly strapping detainees down and force-feeding them for no reason. But that’s not the case. Why would a prisoner at Gitmo be treated in this way, and by whom? Let me share an email we received here at Hot Air earlier this week, that may shed some light on these questions:

My daughter was in Gitmo for a year as a Master-at- Arms, E4. (*dates deleted*) She was injured several times by the inmates assaulting her physically. In addition, she knew that when she was doing her job by enforcing the rules, she was threatened by the prisoners if she had to touch them. They would get her. They mixed a cocktail of urine, feces, and semen, and let it fester for days until the right moment. They warned her that she was a target and then they got her, she was assaulted several times by loads of crap thrown at her. She had to undergo shots to prevent what diseases that she was exposed to. I don’t know why we have women guarding men, especially these animals, but that is the policy. My daughter is a tough cookie and can handle herself. In her year there she did not dishonor herself or our country. When she returned home she had a DVD of Gitmo. They made fresh bread every day!! Part of it showed how the chef’s prepared special meals for the prisoners. If a prisoner refused food the guards were happy to sample the Chicken, rice pilaf, yogurt and fresh baked pita bread, while our guys had crap food from the mess or had to buy it from Burger King.

As part of her duties, in the last month she was there, she was assigned to the hospital ward. She had to force feed those a..holes who offed themselves the other day. They were the meanest of the bunch and had to be tied down to get their food. My daughter and other personnel voluntarily submitted themselves to the force feeding procedure also so that they could do it with the least pain for the captives. It was very unpleasant for her but it helped her and others to understand how to participate in it with the least stress for the recipients. The goal was to keep them alive. She feels that the suicides would not have happened on her watch, but it was going to happen eventually. These guys are warriors. By their death they have achieved a military success in the political world. The media marches on.

Well. The prisoners being force-fed are subjected to that treatment because they are too violent to be handled any other way, and won’t eat on their own. They are assaulting our troops on a daily basis, and then Sullivan assaults them in the press. Personally, I’d as soon let them starve–they’ll eventually come around, or not, but it’s their choice. I would not subject our troops to the inhumanity and indignity of being attacked by those animals and having bodily fluids thrown on them. I certainly would not put female troops anywhere near them.

But we’ve made our policy choice, which is to keep these terrorists alive. Those that are cooperative eat better meals than our own troops. I think that’s a shame, and that our troops deserve better. But that’s the choice we’ve made. We are treating the prisoners at Gitmo as well as we can, but some earn rougher treatment. But here’s the interesting thing–the troops who are conducting the force-feedings subject themselves to it so that they understand it and can find ways to minimize the discomfort to the terrorists who would be attacking them if not strapped down.

In providing none of this context, Sullivan once again takes out his rage at President Bush for supporting the Federal Marriage Amendment, and his rage falls on our troops defending his right to smear them and by extension on the rest of our country. It’s disgraceful.

He closes his post:

This is America in the era of Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld. You can either look the other way or deal with it.

Or you can lie about it.

Update: St. Andrew of the Sacred Heart-Ache knows how to write in basically one mode: Over-the-top bluster that doesn’t stand up to the least scrutiny. Here’s a fun quote from another post of his today:

The Christianist right has done more to detach gay people from God’s love than any other force I know.

To which Allahpundit responds in email:

Presumably that includes Islamic terrorists, who not only detach gays from god’s love, they detach them from their own heads.

Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air



Trackback URL


Man, this guy is a absolute wanker. He should be sued for libel. Pity that he can’t be because of the overprotection given to the media. Perhaps we need to pass some laws or whatever to get libel redefined properly.

Free speech does NOT equal the right to libelously slander and lie and smear and defame with twisted facts and outright lies.


RobertHuntingdon on June 15, 2006 at 4:29 PM

Sullivan is a weasel.

tommy1 on June 15, 2006 at 4:31 PM

> Free speech does NOT equal the right to libelously slander and lie and smear and defame with twisted facts and outright lies.

Somebody better warn Rush Limbaugh.

schroeder on June 15, 2006 at 4:33 PM

Why bother feeding the idiots? Let them starve to death. Save everyone money.

clyde on June 15, 2006 at 4:34 PM

Sullivan is a disaster.

Clark1 on June 15, 2006 at 4:44 PM

The moment you guys started defending Ann Coulter’s right to defame, smear, and attack 9/11 widows, you openned up the pandoras box for people to criticize other “sensitive” groups, including the troops.

You folks should be proud of yourselves.

better off blue on June 15, 2006 at 4:45 PM

Sullivan’s becoming irrelevant and is screeching vicious untruths in his death throes.

darwin on June 15, 2006 at 4:45 PM

The moment you guys started defending Ann Coulter’s right to defame, smear, and attack 9/11 widows, you openned up the pandoras box for people to criticize other “sensitive” groups, including the troops.

Who here has been defending her? How many goddamned posts have I done this week goofing on her or linking to people who are goofing on her?

Answer: a hell of a lot more than Kos or the rest of your bookmarks list would ever do to criticize Michael Moore.

Allahpundit on June 15, 2006 at 4:48 PM

We are WAAAAAAAY too nice to the terrorists. if they don’t eat, it’s their own damned fault.

pullingmyhairout on June 15, 2006 at 4:49 PM

I think Coulter’s point is that the widows are being USED by the lunatic left to FURTHER THEIR ANTI AMERICAN AGENDA. What problem do you have with Gitmo?
I roll my eyes at your comments because they just don’t make a lot of sense – how is it that you feel that it is ok to try and convict our soldiers in the court of public opinion? I guess you think that the islamic jihadists who are being held at gitmo have more rights than AMERICAN SOLDIERS!!!!! un-f’n believable….
It’s ok to burn the American flag, but Katie Bar the Door if a stinkin’ Koran is flushed down the toilet (yes, I know it wasn’t true).

pullingmyhairout on June 15, 2006 at 4:57 PM

If we’re keeping score, the left’s descent into madness might be traced to its embrace of Michael Moore AFTER he declared the terrorists in Iraq to be equivalent to the American revolutionaries. And then Jimmy Carter invited Moore to sit next to him at the DNC convention. Which was AFTER Howard Dean signed on to the 9-11 conspiracy theory that “Bush KNEW.”

You lefties have a lot of nerve criticizing anyone for any rhetorical excesses.

Bryan on June 15, 2006 at 5:04 PM

I wouldn’t feed the prisoners or the trolls.

IrishEi on June 15, 2006 at 5:05 PM

blue: your side has dished it out for nearly 40 years, but you can’t take it. Too bad. We’re here, we’re in your face, get used to it.

dman on June 15, 2006 at 5:07 PM

Re: Pretty in Pink….I mean Better in Blue…

The difference with Ann Coulter is that she speaks truth.

One other point…this addressed to Allahpundit.

I have been troubled by the criticism directed at Ms. Coulter regarding her comments about the four wives in New Jersey, but it took me awhile to put my finger on it (maybe that’s why I don’t blog…I don’t think as fast as you guys) but I finally came up with it.

Ms. Coulter is attacked from the left because she has breached their defences. She sees a taboo and she breaks right through it.

The left has no problem with breaking taboos…that is what they are all about. Abortion was a taboo until 40 years ago; gay marriage was a taboo until a couple of years ago; publishing classified intelligence on the front page of newspapers was a taboo until this year; nativity scenes and Christmas carols at school,flag burning…well you see my point. Any value or tradition once held sacred can be trashed, ignored violated or whatever by the left. Any taboo can be rationalized away or minimized for whatever reason.

But conservatives are “conservative” in a lot of ways. Generally, they resist breaking taboos. It is a sense of decency that prevents a spade being called a spade (a sense of decency non-existent in many parts of the left).

So, take the four widows. (This part is not new…others have said similar things). They are able to exploit the supposed moral high ground they have been granted (not earned) by the deaths of their husbands, and they use it for partisan political purposes. Yet, they expect that very moral high ground to act as a sort of force shield to protect them from criticism.

My point is (and this is why I think Ms. Coulter is to be honoured) is that she has broken that taboo. She has breached the defences that, in the past, the left has relied upon as a defence to the multitude of spitballs they have launched at their enemies/victims. She has cleared the way…walked defiantly through the minefield if you will…to breach the walls of sanctimony. She is past their last line of defence and is still on offence.

And the left hates it. They squeal and whine and say she is mean. But like the first trip to the washroom after a night at a pub, she has broken the seal.

Now we can all speak our truth to power.

For example…the father of Nicholas Berg, who is running for the Green Party in Pennsylvania. He opposed the war before his son left, and now he is trading on his son’s murder for his own political benefit. Thanks to Ms. Coulter was can now speak honestly about what he is doing. And it feels great.

Yay Ann Coulter.

Blaise on June 15, 2006 at 5:16 PM


“…she has broken the seal.”

ROFL! Haven’t heard that since those bladder-busting college years!

IrishEi on June 15, 2006 at 5:38 PM

I’m going to send Sully a Gitmo Cookbook.

Laura on June 15, 2006 at 5:39 PM

You are right,Blaise, I tend to “turn the other cheek” or say “You may be right” when confronted with frothing libs ( I live in the SF,CA area and they are voluminous). I am glad that Ann went over the top with against their nonsense. I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to sit back quietly anymore while these closet commies try to ruin or country.

bbz123 on June 15, 2006 at 5:45 PM

Fjordman at Gates of Vienna has a very timely post up regarding the connection between political correctness and the left. Long but well worth reading.

IrishEi on June 15, 2006 at 5:46 PM

If they wanna starve, so let them starve. Then the headline will read “Gitmo Detainee Starved Himself to Death” or will it read ” Gitmo detainee Starved to Death by American Troops” ??

gary on June 15, 2006 at 5:53 PM

Maybe Mr. Sullivan would be useful for determining the most uncomfortable way to force-feed someone, because good testing procedure demands that all boundary conditions be explored.

inmanjh on June 15, 2006 at 5:53 PM

Allahpundit, your responses to Andrew, and ‘better off blue’ are to be taught in “Clear & Concise Communication 101” at high-schools and re-taught at colleges.

All bloggers/commentators – the arguments are so much stronger if gays and others are not attacked for who/what they are but for what they spew and stand for.

Better off blue, you must really like punishment.

Andrew Sullivan was for the troops, before he was against them.

Entelechy on June 15, 2006 at 6:05 PM

You may not have been defending her Allahpundit but a lot of us are. Better off Braindead is simply spewing nonsense and gobshite. We didn’t open the pandora’s box. The leftist wanker idiotarians have had that box wide open for 40 years. Ann is now just finally showing us that unless we start calling them on it they will continue to ramrod their putrescent filth down our throats. Maybe she was a tiny bit rude in the process. “BOO FREAKIN HOO”.


RobertHuntingdon on June 15, 2006 at 6:15 PM

How anyone could manage to muster up any sympathy for the animals at Gitmo is beyond me. Turn the other cheek does not mean offer up your throat to be slit.

Better Off Blue: If your logic was employed on Star Trek, Mr. Spock would have made as much sense as a Tribble.

speed647 on June 15, 2006 at 6:20 PM

Sullivan is a coward. He is just the type who needs to find himself in a foxhole with a pissed off Marine…let’s see who will save who’s ass. Most of us are sick and tired of the down calling of our men and women in uniform. If not for thier sacrifice, we would be bowing to the east 5 times a day, by now. So, do I care if those disease and lice infested cretins are tortured?? NO..I do not care…do I think they are being tortured…No I do not think they are being tortured…Sullivan is a $hit…and I hope he finds a marine to share a foxhole with, someday. Just the thought of him begging that soldier for help is enough to make my conservative heart sing.

Sandys Beach on June 15, 2006 at 7:01 PM

Darwin…death throes is correct….the knashing of teeth on the lib side is getting painful to my ears. They are being beaten back into the crevice they emerged from…and the funniest thing is that these very people whom they profess to worry about with these torture tales would be the very ones to hack his head off the first time they disagree with him….what a loon that Sullivan is.

Sandys Beach on June 15, 2006 at 7:05 PM

Woe is me… better off blue is bent — because until now, he (she?) and pals had it all sewn up. But now we have Internet bloggers, Fox, Rush AND TRUTH. Now, the lying, conniving, sniveling liberals cannot face THE TRUTH. They cannot deal with reality. Well, like it or not, things ain’t what they used to be. Get used to it! Deal with it! Because that’s the way it is.

And as far as Andrew Sullivan and his gig on Gitmo are concerned, I don’t care whether the inmates at Gitmo starve themselves, hang themselves, or bang their heads on the wall over a Quran thrown down the toilet. Who gives a damn except CAIR, the ACLU, Amnesty International, Michael Moore, Ted Kennedy and better off blue?

What he (she?), the Jersey Girls and the rest of the hand-wringing, sobbing gaggle of mourners forgets is that THE COMBATANTS AT GITMO ARE THE ENEMY! THEY WANT TO KILL US!

I’d prefer that they go first.

ForYourEdification on June 15, 2006 at 7:25 PM

Today, the Supreme Court has rejected a drug pusher’s demand to dismiss a case against him on technicality. He claimed the police forgot to knock on the door before entry so any evidences collected through this search should be inadmissable in the court of law. The court ruled that the evidences are admissable.( I wrote from memory, for detail ruling please go to google..LOL…I believe he was trying to flush the coke down the toilet but the police got in there in time to stop him)

I believe the Court claimed that the pusher’s right was not violated.

The ruling was by a 5 to 4 margin.

This case has huge implication. From now on, many criminals will not get off free again on technically!

One down for the liberals and ACLU!

easy87us on June 15, 2006 at 7:29 PM

hell, I got one better for Sullivan. I will sit in a restraining chair right beside him while the gitmo soldiers set us both up with force feeding tubes, so maybe he can see and report in context.

Wyrd on June 15, 2006 at 7:30 PM

Better Off Blue….when will you and the rest of your fellow travelers join us in reality….My current bet with a friend has it pegged 2 mins prior to the sun exploding…perhaps in several thousand years.

As to Ann, Blaise called it perfectly, and I couldn’t agree more with that conclusion. Ann may be a wee bit harsh at times with her statements, but she is never wrong nor does she create facts out of thin air…most unlike the, I mean the Left.

As to the story at hand, what most upsets me is not that we tried to keep these 3 sh*tf*ckers alive via forced feeding tube, it is the meals they are served which gets my goat. They should be given only MRE’s, with no choice as to which particular meal it is. Don’t like it well than the Gitmo Detainees are SOL. Eat what you are given or die…its that simple….Gitmo is not club med although after reviewing what the American taxpayer coughs up to provide these SOB’s on a daily basis….one might think it is.

Terlizzi999 on June 15, 2006 at 7:39 PM

When is Ann ever harsh?

RolandHall on June 15, 2006 at 8:01 PM

easy87us–yeah, it’s Hudson v. Michigan, Scalia writing.

see-dubya on June 15, 2006 at 8:29 PM

Oh what I wouldn’t give for a bath towel filled with oranges.

The Ugly American on June 15, 2006 at 8:30 PM

Better off blue is a typical leftist PAD-dy. Claiming some tiny bit of near truth, twisting it to her needs, making accusatory comments without any idea of what anyone (hotair) has really done this week, then running off to avoid true confrontation. Pad’s never answer a question, never give a complete story, and almost always twist (if not making it up entirely) the news.
They are terrified of being found out, that they really do hate. BUT I dont think they even know what bothers them, so they turn to other like minded, and stronger as a group, turn against reality. There is no other reason for idiocy as such.
PAD= Preventing Any Dialogue!

shooter on June 15, 2006 at 9:22 PM

It is kind of funny. This is a private message board. Although all are welcome to join it when the registrations open and anyone can read it, you have to be registered to post. Posting is a privaledge. Now BoB and a few others like him her, and they abuse this rare privaledge they have been given. instead of debating, and showing us their clear thinking and rational solutions to the problems BoB basicly defecates on us with nonsensical BS.

It is similer to being invited into a persons house, then taking a big dump on the kitchen table and peeing in the milk.

Freedom of speech does not divorce one from the responsibility of speaking wisely and with restraint. Some times you have to say something outragous to geta message across, but in Bues case their is no message, other then him sitting infront of a monitor while masterbating every time he thinks he has pushed someones buttons.
If the kid were actually contributing to the boards with a dissenting opinion and justifiable reasons why his/her POV is correct then I would welcome him/her 100%. As it is, flinging poo like a monkey is not a justified expression of ideas, and he should be removed from the board.

Wyrd on June 15, 2006 at 9:36 PM

sandys beach- people like sullivan and better off blue do not deserve the right to share a fox hole with a marine(or any military member for that matter!),better they share a hole with their beloved terrorist…maybe,just maybe right before they slice off their heads they would finally understand

mike hale on June 15, 2006 at 10:04 PM

Does Andrew profess to be a Christian? If he does, he cannot understand the message from Jesus: do unto others as they would unto you.

I don’t for one minute anyone who is a decent, reasonable, non-hating person could write like Andrew. Too sad, too bad.

sharinlite on June 15, 2006 at 10:41 PM

Andrew who? I seem to remember someone who used to flatulate regularly onto his keyboard, but I’ve long since stopped reading him.

Physics Geek on June 16, 2006 at 12:23 AM

The Christianist right has done more to detach gay people from God’s love than any other force I know.

What sort of faith and/or God are you working with if someone else can detatch you from it/Him? I don’t see how the likes of Robertson and Co are capable of that. Pedophile priests, yes. Homophobe preachers, no.

Pablo on June 16, 2006 at 3:47 AM

I pulled the link to his site off my blog recently because his shrillness had gotten so out-of-control that he was no longer the person he was. Because of his pet issue – gay marriage – he’s unhinged himself and become irrelevant.

DirkBelig on June 16, 2006 at 3:51 AM

I used to like Sullivan a lot, but since he got on the all gay marriage all the time screed he’s become unreadable. Anyway from what I know about Andy, he’s incapable of fidelity so why does he even bother? It’s not as though he’s going to settle down. And he really ought to know that he’s much better off with us Christianists than with fundamentalist Muslims. They’d topple a wall on him in a heartbeat.

Ellen on June 16, 2006 at 5:57 AM

..mike hale…what was I thinking? THANK YOU…you made the poing far better than I could. A marine, indeed…these two cannot even breathe the same air (I am talking Sullivan vs. Marine, now)…I find myself rightfully corrected…QUESTION…why can’t little Andy visit Gitmo his very own self and see with his beedy eyes what goes on. Perhaps he will be able to enlighten us a bit more.
And the gay marriage thingy….??? Is he kidding?…they would whack is head off in a instant…no questions asked.

Sandys Beach on June 16, 2006 at 8:00 AM

Sullivan proves my point that liberals, like gays, are born that way. No one would freely choose to be either, or in Andrew’s case, both.

Crude One on June 16, 2006 at 10:34 AM

Waging private warfare is a ***WAR CRIME*** because those engaging in it are not under control of any authority that limits their activities to lawful combat, and they can be held responsible even for activities that a legitimate combatant would not be.

They are ***NOT*** “prisoners of war”. “Prisoner Of War” is a status reserved for lawful combatants engaging in combat according to the LOAC and who are entitled to the “combatant’s privilege”.

They are not entitled to Geneva Convention rules for the simple fact that they aren’t uniformed members of a State/Nation Army” – some lesser informed individuals might perpetuate the myth that we are fighting a “new” kind of war because the Geneva Convention was written for traditional warfare between nations, when in fact the Convention DOES cover the situation of UNLAWFUL combatants.

They are lucky we have not put them in front of a firing squad as allowed by international law

If it were up to me I would feed the Gitmo War Criminals bacon 3 times a day and make sure there was plenty of Pork Gravy available.

We have become soft and worship at the alter of Political Correctness

ScottyDog on June 16, 2006 at 11:29 AM

I used to read Andrew Sullivan every morning. I thought he had an excellent mind. Then, it seemed overnight, he went from being a reasonable, interesting “male” to an hysterical, feelings-based girl. All of a sudden everything was a gay issue. I couldn’t stand it anymore. He loved President Bush one day and hated him the next….all based on the gay marriage issue. Man, I would just love to know the real reason he committed intellectual suicide.

chetthepet on June 16, 2006 at 11:45 AM

chetthepet..intellectual suicide??…it is better named intellectual PROSTITUTION.

Sandys Beach on June 16, 2006 at 12:53 PM

Good ol’ one-note Andy. For a brief moment after 9/11 he managed to pull his head out long enough to see the light, but as soon as President Bush made it apparent that he wasn’t in favor of Andy marrying his boyfriend, well, that was that.

I haven’t read anything by Sullivan for quite some time now, and don’t plan to start. It seems that his whole universe basically orbits around his genitals; everything he perceives and writes about is in one way or another filtered through that prism. Given the limited time to read during the day, there are a lot of other more interesting, informative, and – not to put too fine a point on it – psychologically balanced bloggers to pay attention to.

Spurius Ligustinus on June 16, 2006 at 12:53 PM

sandys beach- thank you,
i can not understand how such educated and inteligent people
could be so blind…(unless they have an agenda) as in anti-american ideology!!!

mike hale on June 16, 2006 at 5:19 PM

The reason I reject Sullivan’s message about “gay marriage” is that the term itself is a hallmark of Orwellian speech: it isn’t really gay marriage, but same-sex marriage.

For how does the law judge whether someone entering into “gay marriage” is even “gay” at all? Is requiring a kiss at the altar sufficient to ward off the cheats and poseurs? As far as I know Andrew is not suggesting the law actually verify that the partners getting married are in fact gay before they grant marital sanction (or we are forced to do the same with our tax liabilities).

So thank you, Andrew Sullivan, for expanding the rights of the rest of us to marriages of convenience with our pals, the rights of Bill or Fred to marry Jose to speed him along toward naturalization while the rest of us debate the immigration issue, and the money to be made in the cottage industries sure to follow.

All I want to know is: when’s the “Russian Groom” website coming on line?

RD on June 17, 2006 at 5:12 PM

[from above] … (or we are forced to do the same with our tax liabilities).

Obviously given the “marriage penalty”, the prototypical scenario may not be two individuals on W-2 income. There are other scenarios where it is convienient to have a “tax spouse” – a spouse for tax purposes. Same-sex marriage and civil unions open up doors previously kept locked. (“It’s no longer fraud, it’s the law…”)

[St. Andrew] Then a plastic tube, sometimes as much as 50% bigger than the type commonly used for feeding incapacitated patients, was inserted through his nose and down his throat – a procedure that can trigger nausea, bleeding and diarrhea.

A good whack in the face with the vile substances wielded by the Gitmo terrorists can trigger nausea, bleeding and diarrhea…

RD on June 17, 2006 at 5:25 PM