On Thursday the NY Times published a page-long editorial, The Torture Report, indicting, of course, not just the behavior of torture but the government's:
Yes, I've long wanted such a prosecutor. Who among us with a conscience could hear about what happened to US prisoners (in Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo, and black sites) without concluding it was torture? And who could read the "torture memos" themselves without feeling our country had betrayed its own ideals in addition to the Geneva Conventions?
Yet this morning, I learned something new. In a letter to the editor in response to the same editorial:
So I did a little digging. With the intention of understanding this obligation. And stumbled upon this article in the Nation, which I commend to your attention. And there I read:
And if:
Now that I've recognized our duty, I feel I must call all of us to become a chorus in this cause. I have long thought that groups should be convened throughout our nation to study the Constitution. I have believed we must make sure, in addition, that our nation sign all UN treaties it has failed to sign, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and others. But now I'm convinced our nation needs to study its own complicity in failing to not only declare human rights but uphold them - in every particular.
legally and morally bankrupt documents to justify their actions, starting with a presidential order saying that the Geneva Conventions did not apply to prisoners of the "war on terror" -- the first time any democratic nation had unilaterally reinterpreted the conventions.And the Times editorial board asked that:
[italics mine]
A prosecutor should be appointed to consider criminal charges against top officials at the Pentagon and others involved in planning the abuse.My response, when I read that editorial? Finally!
Yes, I've long wanted such a prosecutor. Who among us with a conscience could hear about what happened to US prisoners (in Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo, and black sites) without concluding it was torture? And who could read the "torture memos" themselves without feeling our country had betrayed its own ideals in addition to the Geneva Conventions?
Yet this morning, I learned something new. In a letter to the editor in response to the same editorial:
Re "The Torture Report" (editorial, Dec. 18):That line blew me away! We are obliged to hold prosecutions. We are obliged.
If we are to comply with the Geneva Conventions, political considerations will not relieve the president of his obligation to undertake prosecutions of top officials for the authorization of torture. The conventions themselves require adherents to hold such prosecutions.
This is a question of law, not politics; and those who try to politicize it are rightly dismissed as outlaws.
If defendants have legal defenses, they can raise them. Our legal system will address them, as it does all defenses raised by the accused. The country and the world can then judge the validity of those defenses and our judiciary's decisions on them.
This is the only way to restore our reputation as law-abiding citizens of the world. It has the added virtue of being the right way.
Vincent J. Canzoneri
Newton, Mass., Dec. 18, 2008
The writer is a lawyer.
[my bold]
So I did a little digging. With the intention of understanding this obligation. And stumbled upon this article in the Nation, which I commend to your attention. And there I read:
A growing body of legal opinion holds that Obama will have a duty to investigate war crimes allegations and, if they are found to have merit, to prosecute the perpetrators.I also learned:
Obama's nominee for attorney general, Eric Holder, speaking to the American Constitution Society in June, described Bush administration actions in terms that sound a whole lot more like "genuine crimes" than like "really bad policies":Wow! That really nails it!
Our government authorized the use of torture, approved of secret electronic surveillance against American citizens, secretly detained American citizens without due process of law, denied the writ of habeas corpus to hundreds of accused enemy combatants and authorized the use of procedures that violate both international law and the United States Constitution.... We owe the American people a reckoning."
And if:
Outside the Beltway, a movement to hold Bush administration officials accountable for torture and other war crimes after they leave office is gradually emerging...Please count me among them!
Now that I've recognized our duty, I feel I must call all of us to become a chorus in this cause. I have long thought that groups should be convened throughout our nation to study the Constitution. I have believed we must make sure, in addition, that our nation sign all UN treaties it has failed to sign, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and others. But now I'm convinced our nation needs to study its own complicity in failing to not only declare human rights but uphold them - in every particular.
Thus asks The Nation. And concludes:Will War Crimes Be Outed?
There are a myriad of reasons for urgently holding the Bush regime to account, ranging from preventing unchallenged executive action from setting new legal precedent to providing a compelling rationale for the immediate cessation of bombing civilians in the escalating Afghan war.I'm convinced. It is our moral duty. We cannot flinch!
But the issue raised by Bush administration war crimes is even larger than any person's individual crimes. As Thomas Paine wrote in Common Sense, "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong gives it a superficial appearance of being right." The long history of aggressive war, illegal occupation, and torture, from the Philippines to Iraq, have given the American people a moral education that encourages us to countenance war crimes. If we allow those who initiated and justified the illegal conquest and occupation of Iraq and the use of torture at Abu Ghraib and Guantánamo to go unsanctioned, we teach the world--and ourselves--a lesson about what's OK and legal.
As countries like Chile, Turkey and Argentina can attest, restoration of democracy, civic morality and the rule of law is often a slow but necessary process, requiring far more than simply voting a new party into office. It requires a wholesale rejection of impunity for the criminal acts of government officials. As Rep. Robert Wexler (D-FL) put it, "We owe it to the American people and history to pursue the wrongdoing of this administration whether or not it helps us politically.... Our actions will properly define the Bush Administration in the eyes of history."
[italics mine]
PERMALINK
This blog was requested by dickday. It took some digging! But I'm even more convinced now than I was when I left just the letter at his blog this morning.
We have a moral duty!
We have a moral duty!
Yes, we do have a moral duty. Obama, as a former constitutional law instructor understands this, so does Eric Holder.
In fact, the reason Spector is up to nefarious means to hold up Holder's nomination has nothing to do with the Rich pardon and everything to do with Holders's record on prosecuting corruption and corrupt politicians.
Holder was the one who prosecuted Rostenowski, arguably one the most crooked pols in the past decade as former chair of the Ways and Means Committee. As many know, it was Rostenowski's congressional seat that Blagojevich took and that Emanuel holds now.
Soooo, prosecution of war on terror crimes and lawyers like Yoo, would be great and it is likely that a lot of corruption in IL is going to be prosecuted too.
Look for a BIG fight over Holder's nomination and don't be surprised if along the way people meet their demise, look no further than the Connell guy who was in charge of the white house GOP alternate email system, who died in a plane crash the other day, along with how Ron Brown as well as Wellstone met their demise.
We are talking about corruption at the highest levels in the former administration and those folks are powerful.
How ironic that DeepThroat died this week.
Who will be the new millenium Twitter, I wonder.
In fact, the reason Spector is up to nefarious means to hold up Holder's nomination has nothing to do with the Rich pardon and everything to do with Holders's record on prosecuting corruption and corrupt politicians.
Holder was the one who prosecuted Rostenowski, arguably one the most crooked pols in the past decade as former chair of the Ways and Means Committee. As many know, it was Rostenowski's congressional seat that Blagojevich took and that Emanuel holds now.
Soooo, prosecution of war on terror crimes and lawyers like Yoo, would be great and it is likely that a lot of corruption in IL is going to be prosecuted too.
Look for a BIG fight over Holder's nomination and don't be surprised if along the way people meet their demise, look no further than the Connell guy who was in charge of the white house GOP alternate email system, who died in a plane crash the other day, along with how Ron Brown as well as Wellstone met their demise.
We are talking about corruption at the highest levels in the former administration and those folks are powerful.
How ironic that DeepThroat died this week.
Who will be the new millenium Twitter, I wonder.
Eric Holder's stance is, I'm sure, one of the reasons that Republicans are going to dredge up Elian Gonzalez, e.g., in the confirmation hearings.
(Elian Gonzales}
How Obama addresses torture and war crimes will say a lot about whether the U.S. will regain its moral standing, or whether we'll just fool ourselves into thinking we have, simply because Bush is gone.
(Elian Gonzales}
How Obama addresses torture and war crimes will say a lot about whether the U.S. will regain its moral standing, or whether we'll just fool ourselves into thinking we have, simply because Bush is gone.
Excellent point. I was wondering why they were going after him.
The media coverage of Holder's prosecutorial bkgrd has been overly focused on the Rich pardon, there is far more that Holder has done to prosecute federal officiials who are corrupt. But you would not know that from the way the articles are written. Gonzales and Rich are small fish in terms of the totality of his career focused on public integrity by politicians.
. He spent 12 years in the Justice Department's Public Integrity Section, prosecuting a Philadelphia judge who took a bribe, an organized crime figure who paid one, and a Florida insurance commissioner who accepted money from the industry he oversaw.
That Holder has lots of experience prosecuting corrupt public officials you can be sure has lots of former GOP officials like Yoo, Gonzales, Rove and Cheney and Dubya eager to stop his confirmation
In addition, as Deputy Attorney General under Clinton, Holder supervised all of the Department's litigating, enforcement, and administrative components in both civil and criminal matters. Under his guidance, the Department developed and issued its guidelines on the criminal prosecution of corporations (the so called "Holder Memorandum") and issued guidelines on the use of the False Claims Act in civil health care matters. A task force he created also developed the existing regulation concerning the appointment of special counsels to investigate allegations involving high-level federal officials.
Eric is the right guy to do the job that needs to be done. He has the integrity, experience and knowledge to do so extremely well.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C04E2D9113BF931A35755C0A962958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1
. He spent 12 years in the Justice Department's Public Integrity Section, prosecuting a Philadelphia judge who took a bribe, an organized crime figure who paid one, and a Florida insurance commissioner who accepted money from the industry he oversaw.
That Holder has lots of experience prosecuting corrupt public officials you can be sure has lots of former GOP officials like Yoo, Gonzales, Rove and Cheney and Dubya eager to stop his confirmation
In addition, as Deputy Attorney General under Clinton, Holder supervised all of the Department's litigating, enforcement, and administrative components in both civil and criminal matters. Under his guidance, the Department developed and issued its guidelines on the criminal prosecution of corporations (the so called "Holder Memorandum") and issued guidelines on the use of the False Claims Act in civil health care matters. A task force he created also developed the existing regulation concerning the appointment of special counsels to investigate allegations involving high-level federal officials.
Eric is the right guy to do the job that needs to be done. He has the integrity, experience and knowledge to do so extremely well.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C04E2D9113BF931A35755C0A962958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1
This a pretty piece. As I pointed out elsewhere as you touched on this subject, if the United States of America chooses the provisions contained certain treaties (treaties signed with the Advice & Consent of the Senate) that it will accept and ignores those it does not feel relevant to the advancement of its goals; treaties become meaningless. They are not worth the time, effort and examination that went into them. They are not worth the paper they are printed on.
It has been said that we are in a time of crisis. That we do not have the time or resources to look backward in time. That we need to look forward. Forgive and forget.
However as Bugliosi and others have pointed out, there has never been one criminal prosecution in the history of this country that has not looked backward in order to pursue the prosecution.
If we do nothing, then other countries who are signatories to treaties, will have no reason to comply with the terms of those treaties.
THUS SPAKE ZARATHUSTRA
It has been said that we are in a time of crisis. That we do not have the time or resources to look backward in time. That we need to look forward. Forgive and forget.
However as Bugliosi and others have pointed out, there has never been one criminal prosecution in the history of this country that has not looked backward in order to pursue the prosecution.
If we do nothing, then other countries who are signatories to treaties, will have no reason to comply with the terms of those treaties.
THUS SPAKE ZARATHUSTRA
Thanks for repeating that here, dickday. And I'm going to repeat part of it again:
if the United States of America chooses the provisions contained in certain treaties (treaties signed with the Advice & Consent of the Senate) that it will accept and ignores those it does not feel relevant to the advancement of its goals; treaties become meaningless.
I'm not a lawyer so I go to read the Constitution when I think I remember something from it. Here is from Article VI:
I don't think that leaves a lot of wriggle room for deciding which treaties to enforce and which to ignore.
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.[Bolding mine]
I don't think that leaves a lot of wriggle room for deciding which treaties to enforce and which to ignore.
Well said.
It has been said that we are in a time of crisis. That we do not have the time or resources to look backward in time. That we need to look forward. Forgive and forget.This notion (time of crisis) can, unfortunately, be used as a reason for doing, or not doing, many things. It already has been used. Chrysler and GM? You want the money? It's a crisis? Multiple industries will collapse without it? Fine. Here are the strings. And you have to abide by them, because we're in a time of deep crisis.
My hope is that Obama is at least half the individual that many around here proclaim him to be, and that he and his administration resist the temptation to use the crisis to deflect action on such an important issue as torture.
Once you recognize a moral duty, there is no turning back!
If his nominee for AG believes so, then he must be confirmed!
If his nominee for AG believes so, then he must be confirmed!
Are you going to prosecute all the members of Congress that could have stopped the "torture" and didn't? Congress was FULLY briefed by the CIA and did nothing. They had the ability to specifically ban waterboarding and decided not to.
CONGRESS HAS NOT BEEN FULLY BRIEFED BY w and his felons. Never happened. Private meetings with certain 'leaders' who were first put under oath to not divulge what was learned at the secret meeting.
Then, they were lied to anyway.
There is something in the law known as 'informed consent.'
Then, they were lied to anyway.
There is something in the law known as 'informed consent.'
I'm very familiar with the meaning of "informed consent" with respect to research using human participants, but am not familiar with it in the legal context. Can you explain?
According to the article (as quoted above in the blog), the matter seems to pertain to:
those who initiated and justified the illegal conquest and occupation of Iraq and the use of torture
I am sorry Bill. I get to hot over this. I promise you I have never thought of shooting anyone or bombing any one or any place.
It is my sincere belief that laws have been broken, laws instituted under the protections and the protocols mandated in the U.S. Constitution. However, I am not a prosecutor and I have not proven any case beyond a reasonable doubt.
I have opinions that I strenuously advocate in my capacity as the lowest of low.
I did respond to several Republican pundits this week at various sites who called the NYT a bunch of traitors because they chose to stop sitting on a story examining wiretaps, interceptions of emails and computer theft of financial records--all in violation of FISA. Oh yes and all whistleblowers who informed the NYT of these searches.
I do understand that Dems in Congress should have reacted more loudly. With the Senate deadlocked 49 to 49, the Senate could really do nothing which makes the issue moot.
The Dems should have done more and I certainly hope they do more in the future.
I sincerely apologize if I crossed a line. I really was not intending to attack you personally.
But as I look back at the reply I made, I was too sharp.
It is my sincere belief that laws have been broken, laws instituted under the protections and the protocols mandated in the U.S. Constitution. However, I am not a prosecutor and I have not proven any case beyond a reasonable doubt.
I have opinions that I strenuously advocate in my capacity as the lowest of low.
I did respond to several Republican pundits this week at various sites who called the NYT a bunch of traitors because they chose to stop sitting on a story examining wiretaps, interceptions of emails and computer theft of financial records--all in violation of FISA. Oh yes and all whistleblowers who informed the NYT of these searches.
I do understand that Dems in Congress should have reacted more loudly. With the Senate deadlocked 49 to 49, the Senate could really do nothing which makes the issue moot.
The Dems should have done more and I certainly hope they do more in the future.
I sincerely apologize if I crossed a line. I really was not intending to attack you personally.
But as I look back at the reply I made, I was too sharp.
I've no problem with ferreting out all those who are responsible. Let the chips fall where they may. Your question reeks of politics, but the question here isn't about a consensual (though adulterous) blowjob and the great coverup 'conspiracy" immediately following.
In this case we have reliable reports of torturing children's testicles in an effort to get their parents 'cooperation'. John Yoo testified before Congress that it was just too confusing to draw the line against even that. Start with Yoo and Bush (who tried to deny ANY connection to torture UNTIL the smoking gun came home to roost). Exactly who came up with, and approved such a policy IN OUR NAMES? We are left with a situation now, where there is no room for plausible undeniably and the torture enthusiasts ONLY refuge is to bamboozle folks into believing in another of their 'smoking err..ticking time bomb' scenarios. We tortured how many hundreds or thousands. How man ticking time bombs were saved by the torture of toddler's testicles? Convince me as I believe I'm as open minded as I hope the jurors are at the war crimes tribunals.
There's gotta be a lot of wanna be, up and coming rightwing bloviators, ready to ascend to positions that will soon be vacated by the current crop. Nobody lives forever. You never know when the boil that lives on Rush's ass (the one that kept him out of Vietnam) will reappear and devour him in total. Please use this space to coherently plead the defense of the administration official (Bush himself?) that directly authorized such behavior. There's plenty of space left on the internet. Don't hold back.
For what it's worth, I'd be happy in the meantime just to know exactly who ordered all the extra dog collars. Ms. England likely didn't pack them all in her travel bag. I'm curious as well, about what the bill from Victoria's Secret must have been for all the ladies panties that were involved, or were those all donated by our female soldiers? So many questions....
Enjoy.
In this case we have reliable reports of torturing children's testicles in an effort to get their parents 'cooperation'. John Yoo testified before Congress that it was just too confusing to draw the line against even that. Start with Yoo and Bush (who tried to deny ANY connection to torture UNTIL the smoking gun came home to roost). Exactly who came up with, and approved such a policy IN OUR NAMES? We are left with a situation now, where there is no room for plausible undeniably and the torture enthusiasts ONLY refuge is to bamboozle folks into believing in another of their 'smoking err..ticking time bomb' scenarios. We tortured how many hundreds or thousands. How man ticking time bombs were saved by the torture of toddler's testicles? Convince me as I believe I'm as open minded as I hope the jurors are at the war crimes tribunals.
There's gotta be a lot of wanna be, up and coming rightwing bloviators, ready to ascend to positions that will soon be vacated by the current crop. Nobody lives forever. You never know when the boil that lives on Rush's ass (the one that kept him out of Vietnam) will reappear and devour him in total. Please use this space to coherently plead the defense of the administration official (Bush himself?) that directly authorized such behavior. There's plenty of space left on the internet. Don't hold back.
For what it's worth, I'd be happy in the meantime just to know exactly who ordered all the extra dog collars. Ms. England likely didn't pack them all in her travel bag. I'm curious as well, about what the bill from Victoria's Secret must have been for all the ladies panties that were involved, or were those all donated by our female soldiers? So many questions....
Enjoy.
Fuller - Please post your "reliable reports" of the US crushing children's testicles. Thank you.
.
Oooo . . .
I notice that MiddleClassBill hasn’t posted a comment since this one.
Nice job Bill. Do you have any other illegal suggestions to make such as this incitement for others to commit an act of illegality against anyone or anyone’s property that you stated here in our public forum?
The TPM Café site does not need individuals such as you who post comments to incite violent acts such as that.
Go away.
Bye Bye . . .
~OGD~
Oooo . . .
I notice that MiddleClassBill hasn’t posted a comment since this one.
Nice job Bill. Do you have any other illegal suggestions to make such as this incitement for others to commit an act of illegality against anyone or anyone’s property that you stated here in our public forum?
--snippet— “Dickday - why such hostility? If you hate Bush so much why not just car-bomb his new house?”You’re a real piece of work.
Posted by MiddleClassBill
December 20, 2008 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
The TPM Café site does not need individuals such as you who post comments to incite violent acts such as that.
Go away.
Bye Bye . . .
~OGD~
OGD - that was a joke but you clearly don't have a sense of humor.
We are all TPM's here so this is probably over the top but TPM has stories on two of w's henchmen going to jail.
Safafian was the TOP PROCUREMENT OFFICER at the WH.
Filipe Sixto was a 'former aide' to the WH plead guilty to stealing half a million bucks from a fund set up to help Cubans. Don't you love the fact that these 'funds' are set up to aid people in a country that we really do not recognize.
Why is this relevant? Because if these prosecutions are coming now from a bunch of biased DA's with instructions to leave w's people alone, what do you think is going to happen when honest DA's are appointed and we actually have a Department of Justice once again?
There have been so many laws broken by these felons, that the court dockets will be loaded by this time next year.
Safafian was the TOP PROCUREMENT OFFICER at the WH.
Filipe Sixto was a 'former aide' to the WH plead guilty to stealing half a million bucks from a fund set up to help Cubans. Don't you love the fact that these 'funds' are set up to aid people in a country that we really do not recognize.
Why is this relevant? Because if these prosecutions are coming now from a bunch of biased DA's with instructions to leave w's people alone, what do you think is going to happen when honest DA's are appointed and we actually have a Department of Justice once again?
There have been so many laws broken by these felons, that the court dockets will be loaded by this time next year.
Very good point, DD. I also have a feeling that a whole lot more is going to come out.
Dickday - why such hostility? If you hate Bush so much why not just car-bomb his new house?
Pelosi was part of the "certain leaders" group. Show me the proof that she was "sworn to secrecy". That's so unlike her.
She's just as guilty as anyone.
TheraP - you're reasoning would imply that only Hitler is to blame for killing the Jews and not everyone else in the SS army. Makes a lot of sense.
Pelosi was part of the "certain leaders" group. Show me the proof that she was "sworn to secrecy". That's so unlike her.
She's just as guilty as anyone.
TheraP - you're reasoning would imply that only Hitler is to blame for killing the Jews and not everyone else in the SS army. Makes a lot of sense.
Looks like this blog has touched a nerve. A sign of this topic's import.
No. A sign of a rightwing troll trying to goad someone into violence against the President. I have reported the abuse. I hope he gets banned at least. I believe what he did is not only in bad taste, but possibly illegal.
I have NEVER complained about a comment in the past and I've been blogging since blogger was Pyra Labs. If I am off base here, please let me know.
Enjoy.
I have NEVER complained about a comment in the past and I've been blogging since blogger was Pyra Labs. If I am off base here, please let me know.
Enjoy.
Mr. Fuller, I believe you are correct. Indeed, I read it that way when I first read it. Yes, it's an incitement to violence. And totally out of line!
Middleclass - Why do you NOT have hostility against a regime that has killed many more people than the 911 highjackers, ruined our stature in the world, trampled on our Consitution, and lead our economy down a rat-hole, all the while using "god" as an excuse for half of the crap they have pulled, and "terrorism" for the rest of it?
If you are incapable of outrage, that says more about you than it does about this toxic administration.
If you are incapable of outrage, that says more about you than it does about this toxic administration.
Bill, No member of Congress serves in the Executive Branch, even if Cheney thinks the Constitution allows him to run a shadow government.
If you want to mount a case to prove Pelosi is a co-conspirator, you are free to do so. Nobody has to prove she's not, until you make a compelling case on the merits of your view.
If you want to mount a case to prove Pelosi is a co-conspirator, you are free to do so. Nobody has to prove she's not, until you make a compelling case on the merits of your view.
Sir, I for one will not sit idly by while you act in what I consider a rude and possibly illegal manner. For you to suggest ANY use of violence to anyone, and specially this lame duck President warrants your removal from this forum IMHO.
You must be a Republican. This thread is about the proper JUDICIAL adjudication of admitted war criminals. If you're looking for the lawlessness of the wild wild west, or attempting to goad a member into violence, I doubt you'll be effective.
Abuse reported.
Enjoy.
You must be a Republican. This thread is about the proper JUDICIAL adjudication of admitted war criminals. If you're looking for the lawlessness of the wild wild west, or attempting to goad a member into violence, I doubt you'll be effective.
Abuse reported.
Enjoy.
Well done!
The Nuremberg Charter Article 9 allowed an organization to be declared a Criminal group or Organization. The SS was so declared.
Once that declaration was made, Article 10 allowed individuals to be indicted as war criminals for belonging to a criminal group or organization.
That declared every member of the SS criminals for the crime of membership in a declared criminal group or organization, so Hitler would not have been able to take the rap for everyone else. Your effort assert the "implication" that only Hitler was responsible for the genocide doesn't fly.
Charter of the International Military Tribunal.
Once that declaration was made, Article 10 allowed individuals to be indicted as war criminals for belonging to a criminal group or organization.
That declared every member of the SS criminals for the crime of membership in a declared criminal group or organization, so Hitler would not have been able to take the rap for everyone else. Your effort assert the "implication" that only Hitler was responsible for the genocide doesn't fly.
Charter of the International Military Tribunal.
Yes nerves get touched when people just re-iterate whatever the NYTimes says and thinks it's the bible. The matter only pertains to those who "initiated and justified" - that's such a bunch of bull.
Some people on here are so far in outerspace with the hate Bush speak that it's just sickening.
Some people on here are so far in outerspace with the hate Bush speak that it's just sickening.
Nonsense.
Bwkfat - you think that Pelosi was sworn to secrecy? That's such a CYA. If you really believe that then I have some weapons of mass destruction in Iraq that I'd like to sell you
Of course she was, they all were. That's been well documented. Unlike you, apparently, I've been paying attention.
FWIW, Bill, I believe that even the oath to secrecy does not release Pelosi from responsibility. These people have a responsibility first and foremost to our Constitution which, states clearly and without any ambiguity that ratified treaties become the Law.
These people broke the law and no one in this country is above it, regardless if they have an R or a D after their name, and however high up they may be.
My comment had to do with your remark about "bush-hatred" Frankly that cliche is overused, and really nonsensical. It's like saying that Americans hate criminals because they want to see them arrested and tried for their crimes. It's sophomoric name-calling from the Rush Limbaugh's and other rabble-rousing bunkshooters that have done more to undermine the intelligence of the electorate than anyone. I don't like seeing such terms used here. There's plenty of sites you can go and use third-grade taunts to justify second-rate logic.
FWIW, Bill, I believe that even the oath to secrecy does not release Pelosi from responsibility. These people have a responsibility first and foremost to our Constitution which, states clearly and without any ambiguity that ratified treaties become the Law.
These people broke the law and no one in this country is above it, regardless if they have an R or a D after their name, and however high up they may be.
My comment had to do with your remark about "bush-hatred" Frankly that cliche is overused, and really nonsensical. It's like saying that Americans hate criminals because they want to see them arrested and tried for their crimes. It's sophomoric name-calling from the Rush Limbaugh's and other rabble-rousing bunkshooters that have done more to undermine the intelligence of the electorate than anyone. I don't like seeing such terms used here. There's plenty of sites you can go and use third-grade taunts to justify second-rate logic.
Cut the guy SOME slack. He's likely on the government dole, receiving a nickel for every nonsense rightwing post he makes on the web. The man's gotta feed his family fer chrissakes.
He's not some idiot JUST posting third grade taunts in support of his second rate logic.
By their deeds/works ye' shall know them. (I heard that somewhere and it seems to fit).
This fellow is obviously a marginally skilled sophist-in-training, working BLINDLY for his cause. Insulting him as the product of a "third grade mindset" is unfair to the many excellent third graders all around our nation and a form of AD HOMINEM slander our hopeful youth really don't deserve.
Enjoy.
He's not some idiot JUST posting third grade taunts in support of his second rate logic.
By their deeds/works ye' shall know them. (I heard that somewhere and it seems to fit).
This fellow is obviously a marginally skilled sophist-in-training, working BLINDLY for his cause. Insulting him as the product of a "third grade mindset" is unfair to the many excellent third graders all around our nation and a form of AD HOMINEM slander our hopeful youth really don't deserve.
Enjoy.
Hi, MCB, good to see you again. I admire your willingness to engage. I do agree that all of us on the left have to watch out that we don't have anger management issues after this administration. MCB, you should realize that it has left many of us completely enraged, because (if I may speak for others) it has violated almost all of our fundamental leftish values, such as fairness, compassion, equity, violence as a last resort, etc.
But you and Thera together frame this issue properly, I think. It is important not to act just in anger, and for revenge, especially with government, as you say. But it is also important to make sure that important laws will not be broken with impunity by others because no one is willing to enforce them, as Thera says.
I think the answer is to just make sure that honest, apolitical prosecutors do their jobs as they should. The big problem is, though, that when many people in a hierarchy participate, and do so under orders, prosecutors may have to go all the way to the top. This is going to be a very difficult issue.
But you and Thera together frame this issue properly, I think. It is important not to act just in anger, and for revenge, especially with government, as you say. But it is also important to make sure that important laws will not be broken with impunity by others because no one is willing to enforce them, as Thera says.
I think the answer is to just make sure that honest, apolitical prosecutors do their jobs as they should. The big problem is, though, that when many people in a hierarchy participate, and do so under orders, prosecutors may have to go all the way to the top. This is going to be a very difficult issue.
Tom - if people want to prosecute Bush that's their opinion. But we have ALOT of other problems that Obama needs to focus on right now. I don't need to list them, we all know what they are. In my opinion, if Obama and Holder are going to waste a lot of political capital on putting Bush in jail just to make the Wild Wild Left and Carl Levin happy, then you can kiss goodbye any practical progress on healthcare, energy reform, financial services reform, infrastructure, etc.
So many assumptions, so little time!
Obama will not focus on this, but he should not ignore it.
Absent other compelling issues for an AG, the AG *should* focus on this compelling issue which some hold amounts to treason and outright criminal acts by individuals in power.
Bill, if you have only extremist statements to make, there can be no dialog with you, just FYI.
Obama will not focus on this, but he should not ignore it.
Absent other compelling issues for an AG, the AG *should* focus on this compelling issue which some hold amounts to treason and outright criminal acts by individuals in power.
Bill, if you have only extremist statements to make, there can be no dialog with you, just FYI.
Extremist?? Eds - is every conservative an extremist in your eyes? I simply am sick of the majority of people on this site who say that Bush is at fault for everything. Somehow they don't view Congress as having an important role.
People on here are free to throw around adjectives such as "murderer, conspirator, liar, etc" to describe Bush but I need to make a compelling case on Pelosi?
I quote the WSJ or Fox News and people quickly dismiss it. But somehow Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann are considered centrists by people on TPM? C'mon
People on here are free to throw around adjectives such as "murderer, conspirator, liar, etc" to describe Bush but I need to make a compelling case on Pelosi?
I quote the WSJ or Fox News and people quickly dismiss it. But somehow Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann are considered centrists by people on TPM? C'mon
No, Bill, extremist arguments make you an extremist suitable only for coddling or shunning if not someone to laugh at. I happen to be a fiscal conservative by most standards, but I'm not an extremist. I happen to believe that the invasion of Iraq was immoral and illegal. I'm disappointed that more members of Congress did not oppose it or speak out against it sooner (my Conressperson Barbara Lee happens to have been one righteous voice on this), but Congress did not invade Iraq, Bush did. If you prefer "The Bush Administration" that's okay, but learn to recognize shorthand in casual commentary, please.
Nor did Congress sanction illegal activities re FISA (non-warrant wiretaps) and so on. It did not sanction politically motivated firings of US Attorneys. ... So your defense of Bush only makes you out to be ignorant or an extremist.
I hope that makes the situation clearer to you, Bill.
Nor did Congress sanction illegal activities re FISA (non-warrant wiretaps) and so on. It did not sanction politically motivated firings of US Attorneys. ... So your defense of Bush only makes you out to be ignorant or an extremist.
I hope that makes the situation clearer to you, Bill.
Is Condi Rice also ignorant and an extremist?
If you, Bill, are Condi posting here under a pseudonym, then you/she are/is an extremist or ignorant, yes.
Otherwise, it's irrelevant extremism from you, again.
Otherwise, it's irrelevant extremism from you, again.
I do not think justice is a waste of political capital.
Well then don't complain if Congress turns more partisan and important initiatives like healthcare fall by the wayside
It is important to remember that there are extremists in Congress. But we should not forget that there are also many more moderates now. Bill, your concern trolling is noted. The fact remains that Obama need not focus on this issue in order for it to be taken seriously. Only those who hate the Constitution need obstruct approaches to Justice here.
Am I an extremist because I support the war in Iraq?
Stop distracting from the topic.
Who's distracting from the topic? You, eds, throwing out names like "extremist" just because I support the US presence in Iraq?
MCB
I'll agree that immediate progress on healthcare, energy reform, financial services reform, infrastructure, etc. are all extremely important, and that carrying out widespread war crimes trials could interfere with that progress.
But I you want America to remain the country it has been, then you can't abandon the Rule of Law. That is core to everything that really makes America different from much of the rest of the world. Glenn Greenwald addressed that issue when he posted "If criminal penalties are removed, what will deter lawbreaking by political officials?."
In the longer run, nothing is more important than investigating the war crimes that have been committed in our names and penalizing the offenders. Investigating the war crimes and trying the offenders simply cannot be put on the back burner and then forgotten if we are to keep what most of us think America really is.
What needs to happen is to install an effective Special Prosecutor and then let him go to work. Avoid leaks. In the meantime, work on the immediate problems of healthcare and economic recovery from the depredations of the conservatives on America's economy, but the investigations should continue actively for about six months or longer. It'll take that long to get anything before a grand jury anyway.
But if indictments are delayed more than a year, then America is down the tubes anyway. Bush,Cheney and Rove will have won and America will simply be another unremarkable nation state of no more value than any of the rest. The great democratic experiment on the North American Continent will be over and it will have failed.
I'll agree that immediate progress on healthcare, energy reform, financial services reform, infrastructure, etc. are all extremely important, and that carrying out widespread war crimes trials could interfere with that progress.
But I you want America to remain the country it has been, then you can't abandon the Rule of Law. That is core to everything that really makes America different from much of the rest of the world. Glenn Greenwald addressed that issue when he posted "If criminal penalties are removed, what will deter lawbreaking by political officials?."
In the longer run, nothing is more important than investigating the war crimes that have been committed in our names and penalizing the offenders. Investigating the war crimes and trying the offenders simply cannot be put on the back burner and then forgotten if we are to keep what most of us think America really is.
What needs to happen is to install an effective Special Prosecutor and then let him go to work. Avoid leaks. In the meantime, work on the immediate problems of healthcare and economic recovery from the depredations of the conservatives on America's economy, but the investigations should continue actively for about six months or longer. It'll take that long to get anything before a grand jury anyway.
But if indictments are delayed more than a year, then America is down the tubes anyway. Bush,Cheney and Rove will have won and America will simply be another unremarkable nation state of no more value than any of the rest. The great democratic experiment on the North American Continent will be over and it will have failed.
Especially when witnesses can meet their demise like Connell in this article.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Programmer-who-rigged-2004-by-Larisa-Alexandrovn-081220-953.html
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Programmer-who-rigged-2004-by-Larisa-Alexandrovn-081220-953.html
MiddleClassBill,
If you think the NYT is the only one that has condemned torture's illegality you are mistaken.
Please, if you have the leisure, read some of the articles in the Washington Monthly's famous No Torture No Exceptions issue of March 2008.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2008/0801.torture.html
You will find people such as
Bob Barr
Richard Lugar
Chuck Hagel
Ken Duberstein
Richard Armitage
Rand Beers
etc. etc.
weighing in against it. Hardly a liberal crowd.
This issue is a classic of its sort and well worth all of our reading.
If you think the NYT is the only one that has condemned torture's illegality you are mistaken.
Please, if you have the leisure, read some of the articles in the Washington Monthly's famous No Torture No Exceptions issue of March 2008.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2008/0801.torture.html
You will find people such as
Bob Barr
Richard Lugar
Chuck Hagel
Ken Duberstein
Richard Armitage
Rand Beers
etc. etc.
weighing in against it. Hardly a liberal crowd.
This issue is a classic of its sort and well worth all of our reading.
Where were all those people in 2002 and 2003? How can you say in hindsight that all these people are against it BUT only Bush should be responsible for it. It makes no sense. Congress has no accountability?
No Congress has no accountability here except under the most tenuous of theories. The Alstoetter principle was applied to jurists and lawyers, not legislators.
There is very good reason to think that it will be difficult, due to the administration's careful, lawyerly approach to covering its behind, to even bringing the so-called Principals Group people to justice.
Please, if you have the leisure read this link from the legal blog Balkinization. The comments are interesting in themselves. I know almost all the participants and can vouch they know the topic thoroughly.
http://balkin.blogspot.com/2008/12/armed-serivices-committee-states.html
There is very good reason to think that it will be difficult, due to the administration's careful, lawyerly approach to covering its behind, to even bringing the so-called Principals Group people to justice.
Please, if you have the leisure read this link from the legal blog Balkinization. The comments are interesting in themselves. I know almost all the participants and can vouch they know the topic thoroughly.
http://balkin.blogspot.com/2008/12/armed-serivices-committee-states.html
That's a nice strawman, I have not seen one comment saying Bush "only" is responsible. Except from you.
If you would read some of the original comments, some people said that only the Bush administration should be punished for torture, not anybody in Congress, even though some members such as Pelosi were supposedly briefed by the CIA on what exactly was happening
Are you using the term "regime" to refer to the US military? Like Saddam's "regime" and other dictators' armies? Sounded like it.
I don't have hostility because (to your points):
1) It's not apples-to-apples to compare the deaths on 9/11 to the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. That's like saying more people died during WW2 than Pearl Harbor so WW2 was a mistake. That's also a stupid argument.
2) Ruined our stature? I disagree. Many people in the world don't like our policies but that doesn't mean they aren't the right policies.
3) Trampled the constitution - that's too long of a response. You are probably someone that illogically supports habeas corpus for terrorists fighting a war against the US.
4) Current economy - there's lots of reasons why our economy is in the mess it is from the housing bubble. But alot of that falls with Congress and the Federal Reserve just as much as Bush. You don't understand much about the economy (or economic cycles) if you think it's all Bush's fault.
I don't have hostility because (to your points):
1) It's not apples-to-apples to compare the deaths on 9/11 to the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. That's like saying more people died during WW2 than Pearl Harbor so WW2 was a mistake. That's also a stupid argument.
2) Ruined our stature? I disagree. Many people in the world don't like our policies but that doesn't mean they aren't the right policies.
3) Trampled the constitution - that's too long of a response. You are probably someone that illogically supports habeas corpus for terrorists fighting a war against the US.
4) Current economy - there's lots of reasons why our economy is in the mess it is from the housing bubble. But alot of that falls with Congress and the Federal Reserve just as much as Bush. You don't understand much about the economy (or economic cycles) if you think it's all Bush's fault.
Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres.
Like habeas corpus - Latin comes in so handy!
Like habeas corpus - Latin comes in so handy!
TheraP: I hesitate to say:
YOU HAVE THE BODY
YOU HAVE THE BODY
Jessie Ventura? I swear to god: I do not have "The Body!"
Hogwash, in large amounts.
1) It is wrong to consider Afghanistan an Iraq together. One was relatively sound (I have certain reservations about our initial moves in Afghanistan), the other was an idiotic, big-prick show off move to upstage Daddy Bush.
2) You disagree without showing why the statement is factually wrong. Instead you assert its irrelevance. Given that we need cooperation from other states it is helpful if they approve pour policies. Disapproval of policy produced 9/11.
3) Habeus corpus is the means whereby the accused asks for his asserted "terrorist" designation to be proven. You assume that because we have some guy in a cell he is a dangerous enemy. This disregards the proven prevalence of bounties paid that yielded up nobodies.
4) True that Bush does not get all the credit for our economy. His conservative policies do, and they Republican Congress left little room for Clinton to maneuver. He triangulated and was the best president the Republicans have ever had.
1) It is wrong to consider Afghanistan an Iraq together. One was relatively sound (I have certain reservations about our initial moves in Afghanistan), the other was an idiotic, big-prick show off move to upstage Daddy Bush.
2) You disagree without showing why the statement is factually wrong. Instead you assert its irrelevance. Given that we need cooperation from other states it is helpful if they approve pour policies. Disapproval of policy produced 9/11.
3) Habeus corpus is the means whereby the accused asks for his asserted "terrorist" designation to be proven. You assume that because we have some guy in a cell he is a dangerous enemy. This disregards the proven prevalence of bounties paid that yielded up nobodies.
4) True that Bush does not get all the credit for our economy. His conservative policies do, and they Republican Congress left little room for Clinton to maneuver. He triangulated and was the best president the Republicans have ever had.
Hear, Hear, Tom!
Wonderful therapy, thanks! I feel the same way. I also caught a comment from someone on Countdown with KO a couple of days discussing holding members of the adminstration accountable or torture. The comments suggested that creating a commission to look into the matter would most likely run out the clock on the statute of limitations so that no accountability would ever take place. I feel it is crucial that we find a way to unite voices to tell the Obama adminstration and our congress that we demand that the crimes of the Bush/Cheney adminstration be thoroughly investigated and that all involved be held accountable. I started looking around on the web wondering how we could create a grounded attempt to do this. All of the resources I found seemed particularly extreme and I don't think that would be helpful. I think that most americans agree that the adminstration should be held accountable but how can we truly organize to demonstrate that?
For starters writing blogs and comments. And spreading the word through emails. Next, we need to be sure Obama's designee for AG get in! Someone could also set up a website starting with Jan 20 and a counter for days elapsed till a special prosecutor is named.
How's that for starters?
How's that for starters?
"...demand that the crimes of the Bush/Cheney adminstration be thoroughly investigated and that all involved be held accountable."To respond to MCB's earlier complaints about the suposed partisan nature of this demand, I point out the "all involved" portion above and say "Yes, even Pelosi, Reid, et.al, if it is determined that they, too, were culpable in these crimes against the Geneva Conventions.
All the more reason for Obama to appoint an independent commission (or dare I suggest an independent prosecutor?) to ferret out who knew what, when? And who sanctioned these crimes? And who blithely ignored their responsibility to blow the whistle on the criminals?
Amen!
Thank you, TheraP for this post. It's true that we cannot let this be swept under the rug. The Bush officials complicit in these acts should not be excused. Our country must remain a beacon of hope and an example of respect for human dignity.
We all want change and to be happy and inspired. It will be unpleasant to fight a battle. We'll be called divisive, but to not fight it is to condone the behavior. It's not a matter of retribution but rather the reclaimation of our principles as a nation. We can't reclaim them if we condone the torture and set a precident that it will go without recriminations.
Write to MoveOn and let them know that this is a critical issue. Please folks, don't roll over on this one. Write to the papers, keep the blog posts going, contribute to the cause. The stakes are too high here, we must put the pressure on.
We all want change and to be happy and inspired. It will be unpleasant to fight a battle. We'll be called divisive, but to not fight it is to condone the behavior. It's not a matter of retribution but rather the reclaimation of our principles as a nation. We can't reclaim them if we condone the torture and set a precident that it will go without recriminations.
Write to MoveOn and let them know that this is a critical issue. Please folks, don't roll over on this one. Write to the papers, keep the blog posts going, contribute to the cause. The stakes are too high here, we must put the pressure on.
Amen, Bademus! And to underscore your points:
we cannot let this be swept under the rug. The Bush officials complicit in these acts should not be excused. Our country must remain a beacon of hope and an example of respect for human dignity. ....to not fight it is to condone the behavior. It's not a matter of retribution but rather the reclamation of our principles as a nation. We can't reclaim them if we condone the torture and set a precedent that it will go without recriminations.
....Please folks, don't roll over on this one. Write to the papers, keep the blog posts going, contribute to the cause. The stakes are too high here, we must put the pressure on.
[I corrected a couple typos and added bolds and italics]
Thanks for this excellent post, TheraP. I am in the midst of what now seems like a longstanding argument with some good friends (whose political views are largely indistinguishable from mine) who seem to think that prosecution of war crimes should not be conducted because it will prevent Obama from moving forward on much of the legislative progress that this country needs. Yes, we sure do need to move forward in so many ways, but I am simply overwhelmed by the importance of enforcing the rule of law in this case, as the soul of our country is at stake, in my opinion.
So I'm always on the lookout for more ammo, and I'm sure this won't convince them, but it can't hurt. (I love the work that Greenwald is doing on this, among others -- hope you caught him on Bill Moyers recently.)
Inspired by the letter to the editor you cited, I just casually poked a bit around the Geneva Conventions text and it sure would appear that Vincent J. Canzoneri is correct. I have no training in international law (or law, period), and my reading was not thorough, but Article 121 of Section III of Convention III just might apply:
So I'm always on the lookout for more ammo, and I'm sure this won't convince them, but it can't hurt. (I love the work that Greenwald is doing on this, among others -- hope you caught him on Bill Moyers recently.)
Inspired by the letter to the editor you cited, I just casually poked a bit around the Geneva Conventions text and it sure would appear that Vincent J. Canzoneri is correct. I have no training in international law (or law, period), and my reading was not thorough, but Article 121 of Section III of Convention III just might apply:
Art 121. Every death or serious injury of a prisoner of war caused or suspected to have been caused by a sentry, another prisoner of war, or any other person, as well as any death the cause of which is unknown, shall be immediately followed by an official enquiry by the Detaining Power. A communication on this subject shall be sent immediately to the Protecting Power. Statements shall be taken from witnesses, especially from those who are prisoners of war, and a report including such statements shall be forwarded to the Protecting Power.Supposedly the Bush administration believe they have legal arguments that defend their torture and murder of prisoners. Let's hear those arguments in a court of law.
If the enquiry indicates the guilt of one or more persons, the Detaining Power shall take all measures for the prosecution of the person or persons responsible.
I just started reading The Nation article, and I see that the authors cover (unsurprisingly) the ground of Vincent J. Canzoneri's letter to the NYT, so I now feel quite silly quoting a passage from Convention III.
Anyhoo, I can't recommend the excellent interview of Greenwald by Moyers on this topic highly enough -- well worth a half hour of listening.
Anyhoo, I can't recommend the excellent interview of Greenwald by Moyers on this topic highly enough -- well worth a half hour of listening.
Don't worry. You may be one of the few who actually followed the link!
And there's nothing like figuring something out on your own, is there? Kudos to you!
And there's nothing like figuring something out on your own, is there? Kudos to you!
I'm glad to see your post. Since when is there a rule against piling on in a demand for Justice?
Write it again. Post it elsewhere, too.
Write it again. Post it elsewhere, too.
Here is a passage from the page for Moyers look at South Africa regarding the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. A country trying to deal with the horrible past and move forward in positive way is never simple
http://www.pbs.org/pov/tvraceinitiative/facingthetruth/
http://www.pbs.org/pov/tvraceinitiative/facingthetruth/
Reviewing the case of the victims known as the Nietverdient ("Not Deserving" in Afrikaans), Moyers meets with Maria Ntuli, whose son Jeremiah disappeared in 1986. He was one of 10 young men kidnapped and put into a van filled with explosives which was then pushed over a cliff. When confronted by Ntuli over the loss of her son, Brigadier Jack Cronje, leader of the infamous death squads that operated around Pretoria, replies that he believed he was doing his duty in committing preventive assassination. "I thought I was doing the right thing," he says. Cronje's response underscores the many difficult issues surrounding the Commission's activities. To gain amnesty under the Commission, the perpetrators must also prove they were acting in the name of the government, that they were following orders. But is justice served when there is no punishment? Is forgiveness a higher form of justice, or simply a political necessity? What will it mean for South Africa's future if murderers go free?
TheraP, thanks for the post. I posted what I did above because I think we need to include in this discussion not the need for prosecution, but also punishment. In other words, what is justice in this situation.
I do have a feeling that Obama will see amnesty for most of the participants because it will help move forward. So, if they are put on trial and convicted, but then pardoned, or allowed to avoid prosecution if they come clean with what really happened, has justice been served?
I don't know where I fall on this issue. It will take some more time to reflect and to look at what and how things transpired.
I do have a feeling that Obama will see amnesty for most of the participants because it will help move forward. So, if they are put on trial and convicted, but then pardoned, or allowed to avoid prosecution if they come clean with what really happened, has justice been served?
I don't know where I fall on this issue. It will take some more time to reflect and to look at what and how things transpired.
I'm glad you posted what you did, acamus. I myself was willing to have a Truth and Reconciliation process here. But now that I see it is our moral duty to prosecute, well, that tipped the balance for me!
In South Africa, it was within one country. But we did this to people of other countries! And we did it with the full weight of national policy. Thus, I see a difference from South Africa.
I agree. This issue needs wide and extensive discussion.
In South Africa, it was within one country. But we did this to people of other countries! And we did it with the full weight of national policy. Thus, I see a difference from South Africa.
I agree. This issue needs wide and extensive discussion.
Yes, i don't think that this should be equated with what happened in South Africa. It is just an example of the difficulties that come when one seeks justice. And in this country, where so many still believe in the death penalty, I feel we have a long way to go, as a country, in our collective understanding of what justice is. This is about moving our country back to a rule of law and decency, not about quenching a desire to see the guilty "strung up" so to say (not that I think you are one of those).
Totally agree. I did not mean my comment as a rebuke. And you are right that we need further discussion here. So thanks for your links!
Great post, TheraP.
I highly recommend Jane Meyer's book "The Dark Side" for anyone who's interested in learning more about this issue. It left me speechless and, quite frankly, ashamed with this administration's behavior.
I highly recommend Jane Meyer's book "The Dark Side" for anyone who's interested in learning more about this issue. It left me speechless and, quite frankly, ashamed with this administration's behavior.
Heard her interview with Terry Gross
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92528583
Worth a listen. (But also read the book.)
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92528583
Worth a listen. (But also read the book.)
I hadn't caught this...thanks for the link.
Excellent post!
"I'm convinced. It is our moral duty. We cannot flinch!"
It sounds good. Its what I want. Its what you want. It will never happen.
Never.
This isn't the first time the US has committed acts that were in violation of the Geneva Convention in the past 40 years and it won't be the last. You can't remember the last war crimes trial in the US prosecuting Americans can you?
Neither can anyone else.
"I'm convinced. It is our moral duty. We cannot flinch!"
It sounds good. Its what I want. Its what you want. It will never happen.
Never.
This isn't the first time the US has committed acts that were in violation of the Geneva Convention in the past 40 years and it won't be the last. You can't remember the last war crimes trial in the US prosecuting Americans can you?
Neither can anyone else.
Never say never. Especially to me! :)
Hope springs eternal.
Yup.
I'm afraid I'm as cynical as you, but for the sake of argument, in the last 40 years have we had war criminals who openly admitted to the public that they had committed war crimes? This seems to take it to another level.
I would have agreed with you before I read the actual civilian death tolls from the Vietnam Conflict and about the other yearly bombings and military actions that have gone on since the end of WW2.
I think the only reason it is so in your face to us now is the internet. Many people in other nations have viewed the US as abusers for awhile now. Those same people are usually cast as some form of freedom hater by our media outlets.
You ask if anyone came out and admitted such stuff in the past 40 years - My Lai Massacre ring a bell? 3 Soldiers came forward and congressmen, the media and the military shut it up. 347-504 men, women and children slaughtered.
26 soldiers charged.
1 soldier convicted.
Time served?
4 1/2 months.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:My_Lai_massacre.jpg
Dead women and children.
Pictures
1 soldier gets 4 months.
Compare that to the torture and murder of people portrayed as terrorists ready to attack Americans in the United States. You really think that a tribunal will happen here?
I wouldn't even call it being cynical. I'd call it being realistic. There is no precedent for this country ever living up to its purported ideals.
I mean, seriously, do you not realize that what's going on in Iraq is damn near identical to what happened in the Phillipines 100 years ago?
There's two Americas. The one we pretend to live in when we vote, talk in forums like this, chat about at work, the one where we go with our kids to watch the fireworks on the 4th. Then there's the one that we really live in that we rarely acknowledge if we want our lives to have any real semblance of what we call normalcy, the one that bombs Iraqi hospitals and civilians for 10 years with depleted uranium munitions, the one that helps kill millions of Vietnamese, the one that assassinates world leaders, the one that kidnaps innocent people and sends them to other countries to be tortured then acts like nothing happened.
I'd really love for Obama to do the right thing. I'd also love for there to be world peace :)
I think the only reason it is so in your face to us now is the internet. Many people in other nations have viewed the US as abusers for awhile now. Those same people are usually cast as some form of freedom hater by our media outlets.
You ask if anyone came out and admitted such stuff in the past 40 years - My Lai Massacre ring a bell? 3 Soldiers came forward and congressmen, the media and the military shut it up. 347-504 men, women and children slaughtered.
26 soldiers charged.
1 soldier convicted.
Time served?
4 1/2 months.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:My_Lai_massacre.jpg
Dead women and children.
Pictures
1 soldier gets 4 months.
Compare that to the torture and murder of people portrayed as terrorists ready to attack Americans in the United States. You really think that a tribunal will happen here?
I wouldn't even call it being cynical. I'd call it being realistic. There is no precedent for this country ever living up to its purported ideals.
I mean, seriously, do you not realize that what's going on in Iraq is damn near identical to what happened in the Phillipines 100 years ago?
There's two Americas. The one we pretend to live in when we vote, talk in forums like this, chat about at work, the one where we go with our kids to watch the fireworks on the 4th. Then there's the one that we really live in that we rarely acknowledge if we want our lives to have any real semblance of what we call normalcy, the one that bombs Iraqi hospitals and civilians for 10 years with depleted uranium munitions, the one that helps kill millions of Vietnamese, the one that assassinates world leaders, the one that kidnaps innocent people and sends them to other countries to be tortured then acts like nothing happened.
I'd really love for Obama to do the right thing. I'd also love for there to be world peace :)
You got me. Not sure whether to (a) slit my wrists or (b) move to Canada.
Merry Christmas? I don't mean to be Danny Downer :)
How do you really reconcile all that crap and stay good American nationalistic? Its a little hard for me sometimes. I end up just rationalizing it- "every other nation does it"
How do you really reconcile all that crap and stay good American nationalistic? Its a little hard for me sometimes. I end up just rationalizing it- "every other nation does it"
We were also told that america would 'never' elect a black president. I was also told that america was not 'ready' to elect a leader as evolved as Obama. The key in this is 'us' not him. 'We' did elect him and 'we' can demand that crimes are investigaged and all of those involved be held accountable.
The entire world is watching and this tips the scale very strongly in one diretion or another as far as our character, integretiy, and credibility.
I feel that we have a responsibility because of the part 'we' have played through any complacency and lack of action on our part that contributed to what has happened to insist that there is justice.
We all need to take some responsibility to varying degrees. For my part I think of so many votes and opportunities to express my objections and to share them with others etc. and I take responsibility for not fighting harder, for not taking an even stronger stand. I can't know that it would have changed the course of what has happened but I know it is possible that if I had fought harder then others may have as well and so on and so on so it's possible. I have to prioritize and give my best effort to do all that I can. I must participate more. That is what I have learned from this... I was not idle but I did not do enough.
I will write to Keith Olberman to see if I can get the transcript from him show a couple of nights ago where they talked about a commission being futile because it would run out the statute of limitations and make it impossible to hold anyone accountable. I did not pay close enough attention to understand what the inference. This time issue is something I would like clarity about.
The entire world is watching and this tips the scale very strongly in one diretion or another as far as our character, integretiy, and credibility.
I feel that we have a responsibility because of the part 'we' have played through any complacency and lack of action on our part that contributed to what has happened to insist that there is justice.
We all need to take some responsibility to varying degrees. For my part I think of so many votes and opportunities to express my objections and to share them with others etc. and I take responsibility for not fighting harder, for not taking an even stronger stand. I can't know that it would have changed the course of what has happened but I know it is possible that if I had fought harder then others may have as well and so on and so on so it's possible. I have to prioritize and give my best effort to do all that I can. I must participate more. That is what I have learned from this... I was not idle but I did not do enough.
I will write to Keith Olberman to see if I can get the transcript from him show a couple of nights ago where they talked about a commission being futile because it would run out the statute of limitations and make it impossible to hold anyone accountable. I did not pay close enough attention to understand what the inference. This time issue is something I would like clarity about.
You're right. I'm wrong to think it could never happen. You're also right that we're all responsible and should try and if already trying, to try harder. He can do it if we make him.
We need to start a movement to press for prosecutions. We also should wait until he takes office, since it is up in the air as to whether or not Bush will issue preemptive pardons- pretty sure he will just like his dad did.
We need to start a movement to press for prosecutions. We also should wait until he takes office, since it is up in the air as to whether or not Bush will issue preemptive pardons- pretty sure he will just like his dad did.
Obama told us over and over that he could not do this alone. In order to pursue this there needs to be a tsunami of moral outrage.
This is an issue that is very easy to understand: Designers and purveyors of torture must be brought to justice.
Yes. WE. Can.
Thank you Thera. Great post.
There is someone who posts as "Mary" over at emptywheel who has practically made a cottage industry of recording info on torture in her many, many comments there for a long time. She is lawyer and a dogged follower of this issue. Some of what she posts is positively horrifying - not only in terms of what was done to prisoners (and even their family members!) but the possibility that high up members of the bush administration watched videos - as part of their close direction of these so-called interrogations.
I'm glad to see people posting other links and books such as this one. The more we amass here, the better.
I'm also thinking of posting this at change.gov. It's another way to move this issue to the forefront.
I'm glad to see people posting other links and books such as this one. The more we amass here, the better.
I'm also thinking of posting this at change.gov. It's another way to move this issue to the forefront.
Meant for Schrodinger'sCat. But karma put it here.
Karma?
So that's what it is. I thought it was a software glitch.
So that's what it is. I thought it was a software glitch.
Actually, I think I goofed... thus karma.
It's another way to move this issue to the forefront.Well, let's hope so. It's appalling to me how little attention the MSM has paid to this whole issue. Even worse is that when it is in the news, the quality of the reporting is usually terrible. I want to scream everytime I see or hear a journalist comment that "some consider waterboarding a form of torture" as if the only people who think this are a bunch of 60 yr old hippies having a sit-in in Berkeley. It's shameful.
I did just post it at change.gov - with a link to this blog and encouragement to read the comments.
You are so right that this whole issue has been made into the equivalent of a debate topic only - as if people had not died and been damaged forever!
I could see the danger from the start, when they showed all these prisoners with hoods over their heads. I thought to myself.... somebody requisitioned those hoods... this is not an accident! That's where it begins... with dehumanizing the prisoner. They literally supplied the soldiers with these hoods! There has to be a paper trail for that!
There is so much to write about this. We need folks to do vidoes too.
You are so right that this whole issue has been made into the equivalent of a debate topic only - as if people had not died and been damaged forever!
I could see the danger from the start, when they showed all these prisoners with hoods over their heads. I thought to myself.... somebody requisitioned those hoods... this is not an accident! That's where it begins... with dehumanizing the prisoner. They literally supplied the soldiers with these hoods! There has to be a paper trail for that!
There is so much to write about this. We need folks to do vidoes too.
I would have agreed with you before I read the actual civilian death tolls from the Vietnam Conflict and about the other yearly bombings and military actions that have gone on since the end of WW2.
I think the only reason it is so in your face to us now is the internet. Many people in other nations have viewed the US as abusers for awhile now. Those same people are usually cast as some form of freedom hater by our media outlets.
You ask if anyone came out and admitted such stuff in the past 40 years - My Lai Massacre ring a bell? 3 Soldiers came forward and congressmen, the media and the military shut it up. 347-504 men, women and children slaughtered.
26 soldiers charged.
1 soldier convicted.
Time served?
4 1/2 months.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:My_Lai_massacre.jpg
Dead women and children.
Pictures
1 soldier gets 4 months.
Compare that to the torture and murder of people portrayed as terrorists ready to attack Americans in the United States. You really think that a tribunal will happen here?
I wouldn't even call it being cynical. I'd call it being realistic. There is no precedent for this country ever living up to its purported ideals.
I mean, seriously, do you not realize that what's going on in Iraq is damn near identical to what happened in the Phillipines 100 years ago?
There's two Americas. The one we pretend to live in when we vote, talk in forums like this, chat about at work, the one where we go with our kids to watch the fireworks on the 4th. Then there's the one that we really live in that we rarely acknowledge if we want our lives to have any real semblance of what we call normalcy, the one that bombs Iraqi hospitals and civilians for 10 years with depleted uranium munitions, the one that helps kill millions of Vietnamese, the one that assassinates world leaders, the one that kidnaps innocent people and sends them to other countries to be tortured then acts like nothing happened.
I'd really love for Obama to do the right thing. I'd also love for there to be world peace :)
I think the only reason it is so in your face to us now is the internet. Many people in other nations have viewed the US as abusers for awhile now. Those same people are usually cast as some form of freedom hater by our media outlets.
You ask if anyone came out and admitted such stuff in the past 40 years - My Lai Massacre ring a bell? 3 Soldiers came forward and congressmen, the media and the military shut it up. 347-504 men, women and children slaughtered.
26 soldiers charged.
1 soldier convicted.
Time served?
4 1/2 months.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:My_Lai_massacre.jpg
Dead women and children.
Pictures
1 soldier gets 4 months.
Compare that to the torture and murder of people portrayed as terrorists ready to attack Americans in the United States. You really think that a tribunal will happen here?
I wouldn't even call it being cynical. I'd call it being realistic. There is no precedent for this country ever living up to its purported ideals.
I mean, seriously, do you not realize that what's going on in Iraq is damn near identical to what happened in the Phillipines 100 years ago?
There's two Americas. The one we pretend to live in when we vote, talk in forums like this, chat about at work, the one where we go with our kids to watch the fireworks on the 4th. Then there's the one that we really live in that we rarely acknowledge if we want our lives to have any real semblance of what we call normalcy, the one that bombs Iraqi hospitals and civilians for 10 years with depleted uranium munitions, the one that helps kill millions of Vietnamese, the one that assassinates world leaders, the one that kidnaps innocent people and sends them to other countries to be tortured then acts like nothing happened.
I'd really love for Obama to do the right thing. I'd also love for there to be world peace :)
My Lai was a one-off by stressed out troops and not a top down policy of operations.
The soldiers at My Lai didn't fabricate (or use fabricated evidence) to start a war against a country that had nothing to do with 9-11. There was no smoking yellowcake from Niger in My Lai.
There was no blanket capture of ALL communications, regardless of probably cause and directly in conflict with laws established exactly to prevent abuse of same.
Hope this helps you see the vast chasm of difference between the two without my going into the comparisons of dead and abused which are exponentially higher in their current iterations.
Enjoy.
The soldiers at My Lai didn't fabricate (or use fabricated evidence) to start a war against a country that had nothing to do with 9-11. There was no smoking yellowcake from Niger in My Lai.
There was no blanket capture of ALL communications, regardless of probably cause and directly in conflict with laws established exactly to prevent abuse of same.
Hope this helps you see the vast chasm of difference between the two without my going into the comparisons of dead and abused which are exponentially higher in their current iterations.
Enjoy.
Yes, this was designed and executed at the highest levels. It was "policy."
How cleverly some want to distract us. But this is a crime against our Constitution. A crime against international law. Crimes. By high officials. Who broke oaths to do so.
How cleverly some want to distract us. But this is a crime against our Constitution. A crime against international law. Crimes. By high officials. Who broke oaths to do so.
A crime against HUMANITY.
Enjoy.
Enjoy.
It's time to hold the feet of the torturers of children's testicles to the fire.
Enjoy.
Enjoy.
Sorry but we're talking about Geneva Convention/War Crimes - Torture violations not illegal wiretapping.
So you misunderstand My Lai was just one example of horrific abuse of international law and the resulting price paid by those responsible.
The evidence to start the Vietnam War was a fake attack on a US naval vessel. A very similar situation to the faked reason to invade Iraq. Not sure of what dead and abused figures you are comparing but go check out Vietnamese civilian casualties from that conflict. I don't know what figures you are claiming are currently higher.
As for illegal interception of communnications being something new - go look up the NSA's Echelon project. This surveillance is nothing new - domestic or otherwise its been here for more than a decade.
So you misunderstand My Lai was just one example of horrific abuse of international law and the resulting price paid by those responsible.
The evidence to start the Vietnam War was a fake attack on a US naval vessel. A very similar situation to the faked reason to invade Iraq. Not sure of what dead and abused figures you are comparing but go check out Vietnamese civilian casualties from that conflict. I don't know what figures you are claiming are currently higher.
As for illegal interception of communnications being something new - go look up the NSA's Echelon project. This surveillance is nothing new - domestic or otherwise its been here for more than a decade.
That second paragraph should read
"My Lai was just one example of horrific abuse of international law and the resulting price paid by those responsible."
"My Lai was just one example of horrific abuse of international law and the resulting price paid by those responsible."
You brought up the subject of My Lai, not the issue of the entire Vietnam war, which is why my post addressed ONLY that issue for comparsion.
Your sophist rhetorical leanings aside, could you answer one question for me and the group directly:
Are you supportive of the torture of toddler's testicles or are you against it? This can be done in a FOUR WORD RESPONSE. A simple reply of, I AM FOR IT or, I AM AGAINST IT. Please specify.
I realize you don't think this happened and the 'hypothetical' nature of the question hasn't been fully answered beyond Yoo's testimony in Congress that he couldn't say it would break a law if the Preznit wanted to do it. Weird how that congressman pulled such a SEEMINGLY bizarre HYPOTHETICAL(?) question of of THIN AIR isn't it?
Enjoy.
Your sophist rhetorical leanings aside, could you answer one question for me and the group directly:
Are you supportive of the torture of toddler's testicles or are you against it? This can be done in a FOUR WORD RESPONSE. A simple reply of, I AM FOR IT or, I AM AGAINST IT. Please specify.
I realize you don't think this happened and the 'hypothetical' nature of the question hasn't been fully answered beyond Yoo's testimony in Congress that he couldn't say it would break a law if the Preznit wanted to do it. Weird how that congressman pulled such a SEEMINGLY bizarre HYPOTHETICAL(?) question of of THIN AIR isn't it?
Enjoy.
I think of how in Argentina grandmothers, with pots and pans, going out week after week, eventually brought justice for torture and disappearances.
I bet people told them it was a lost cause.
All I can say is, where there's a will, there's a way.....
I bet people told them it was a lost cause.
All I can say is, where there's a will, there's a way.....
This post by Glenn Greenwald provides further background for why there must be prosecutions for war crimes by bush administration officials:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/12/20/marcus/index.html
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/12/20/marcus/index.html
Here is a comment by radiofreewillfrom a thread at emptywheel, which provides several powerful metaphors for why we must prosecute:
radiofreewill December 20th, 2008 at 9:53 am [comment #16] http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/12/20/and-while-youre-indicting-alberto-gonzales-for-lying-to-congress/ When an aircraft, particularly a small one, is rear-loaded with so much baggage that the Center of Gravity (cg) for the aircraft is behind the Center of Moment (cm - the point in space about which the plane rotates), then due to the dynamics of flight, the aircraft becomes unstable in any attitude - IOW, it will crash.
It’s like a kite with a tail that is too heavy - before the kite can struggle-up into the air, it flutters-out and falls away.
This is the situation, imvho, that Obama is inheriting from Bush - a Crash-Landed airship of state with lots of mis-handled baggage tossed in where it shouldn’t be.
To taxi out and try to take-off without a proper pre-flight safety check and re-manifesting of the cargo by the Pilot in Command would only complete the Crash that Bush started.
It would be like deciding to leave metastasizing tumors in the body because ‘now is the time to move forward’ with Our lives…
To the Moral Fiber of Our Nation, Trust and Confidence are the ‘lift’ We need to escape the danger of losing Our air-worthiness as a Nation of Laws.
Letting Bush, Cheney, Gonzo, Addington, et al ’stay on’ as legitimate baggage, unexamined - loaded behind the Center of Moment - will only cripple or kill US in Our ‘focus-forward’ dreams of a better US.
As important as the ‘hard work to be done’ in order to move Our nation forward is, it won’t be able to go anywhere - not until the hard work of ‘throwing off the cause of the problem’ to begin with is done first.
BushCo must be identified, and it’s threats to the Rule of Law ‘cut-out,’ before Our Country can heal and move forward, and fly with stability into a better tomorrow - with President Obama leading the way from the flight deck.
Any other approach will be worse than a bad dream…
OK.
I am convinced now that the approved treaty that makes America a signatory to the Hague Conventions requires that America hold war crimes trials. The constitution declares that the treaties made under the authority of the United States are part of the supreme Law of the Land.
So. What happens if Bush Pardons someone for such war crimes? Does such a pardon trump the requirement to hold war crimes trials?
I am convinced now that the approved treaty that makes America a signatory to the Hague Conventions requires that America hold war crimes trials. The constitution declares that the treaties made under the authority of the United States are part of the supreme Law of the Land.
So. What happens if Bush Pardons someone for such war crimes? Does such a pardon trump the requirement to hold war crimes trials?
Joe Biden this morning said that there is a legal question about the events we are calling war crimes. Were those just really bad decisions, or were they legally war crimes? He proposes turning that issue over to the Department of Justice.
I'm not sure what that means in terms of actions, but I find it very interesting that the question came up on the talking heads shows and that Joe did not avoid answering, even if his answer was not a "Full steam ahead with war crimes trials" type answer.
Since Bush still has a month as "President" I think that Biden's soft answer was probably appropriate. For now.
I suspect that the rats are carefully looking for escape routes to take on January 20th. As the pressure for war crimes trials builds over the next month we are going to see a lot of whining and fear in the rat class.
I'm not sure what that means in terms of actions, but I find it very interesting that the question came up on the talking heads shows and that Joe did not avoid answering, even if his answer was not a "Full steam ahead with war crimes trials" type answer.
Since Bush still has a month as "President" I think that Biden's soft answer was probably appropriate. For now.
I suspect that the rats are carefully looking for escape routes to take on January 20th. As the pressure for war crimes trials builds over the next month we are going to see a lot of whining and fear in the rat class.
Your comment about Biden's response is very telling.
Once Obama and Biden take the oath of office to the Constitution, then they are bound by the Constitution (and the signed treaties) to uphold the law. Biden's response suggests they will.
Some are calling for Patrick Fitzgerald to be appointed as a Special Prosecutor. I think that's a dandy idea.
Thank you so much for that!
I think Fitz. should be fired. All he got re Plame was Scooter. And his "trial by press conference" re Blago was practically criminal itself. If you want politicization without substantive results, Fitz. is your man.
Fitgerald reveres the law. Many revere him for it.
Could be. I don't have any reason to believe you on either count. People like the image and some were satisfied that he got Libby on technicalities. A reverence for the law does not make for competence, nor does "trial by press conference" show a reverence for due process, a key element of the law in this country.
Fitz. has done nothing on the Blago cases except bullshit in public (which Blago did in the transcripts). He politicized a corruption investigation. He settled for Libby in the Plame case. He should be fired not put in charge of bigger projects.
Fitz. has done nothing on the Blago cases except bullshit in public (which Blago did in the transcripts). He politicized a corruption investigation. He settled for Libby in the Plame case. He should be fired not put in charge of bigger projects.
Further info related to this blog (from looseheadprop at FDL):
http://firedoglake.com/2008/12/21/torture-crimes-to-be-referred-for-prosecution-be-still-me-beating-heart/
http://firedoglake.com/2008/12/21/torture-crimes-to-be-referred-for-prosecution-be-still-me-beating-heart/
116 Comments