In my previous post I attempted to explain why Dick Cheney is out on his "Justification of Torture Tour". Primarily, he is attempting to shape the debate so he can avoid going to prison for war crimes. At least his motivation, covering his own behind, is understandable. Treasonous, but understandable.
What is more difficult to pin down is why so many other people are going out of their way to justify torture. In some ways, the focus on waterboarding has made many people forget that other actions also occurred. We now know that methods such as sleep deprivation, chaining to ceilings and walls, banging heads against walls, intimidation with dogs, enforced and prolonged isolation were among the methods used in addition to waterboarding (please see ACLU website to read the torture memos in their original).
It is too easy to say that torturers and defenders thereof are sadistic. They may be, but that is not the total sum of the answer. As Stanley Milgram discovered in his classic studies on obedience, most individuals will carry out rather cruel and inhumane acts with a minimum of prodding (Milgram, 1963, 1974). However, this research demonstrates what people will do in an unexpected situation. What is shocking to me is that people are actually advocating torture after having time for reflection.
Psychologically, torturers are acting out feelings of inferiority and fear. The desire to dominate and totally control others is internally generated by feelings of fear and anxiety that results from feelings of being out of control. By subjecting the detainees to torture those who authorized, carried out and support torture are demonstrating their absolute fear of these individuals.
For more evidence of the sheer terror in which those attempting to justify torture live, witness their reaction to bringing prisoners from Gitmo to the U.S. mainland and placing them in the federal or military prison system. Hysteria surrounds this issue with politician after politician denouncing such moves. There is no rationale for this position. In a nation with over two million people incarcerated, locking people up is one of the things we do exceedingly well. If we can keep serial killers like Charles Manson and the rest of the criminal element incarcerated, then certainly we can keep religious fanatics contained. We already have Ramsi Yousef and Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman in confinement and I don't believe I have heard any concern about their incarceration endangering the country.
Torture is similar to the rage expressed by abusive parents who delude themselves that the only way to control the child is to beat them. In a similar vein, many of those defending torture engage in the self deluded notion that the only way to get the information they seek is through the means they have chosen.
Let us not leave revenge out of the equation. Just as in the movie Pulp Fiction when the character of Marcellus Wallace announces he is going to "go Medieval," on someone out of revenge, there is a tendency to support those who fight back against extreme abuse. Of course, Marcellus was a thug whose desire for control again points to feelings of inferiority.
The parallel does not end there. Just as Marcellus was emasculated by being sodomized in the backroom of the gun store, so were the members of the Bush (mis)Administration. Reeling helplessly as the nation was attacked, they sought to restore their own emasculation. Failing to protect the nation, despite their claims about what has happened since, the attacks of 9/11 rendered the nation psychologically impotent.
Torture, renditions, and contrived wars since have only served to fan the flames of the very problems that led to 9/11. Like a gangster noir film, the good guys and the bad guys seem pretty much the same.
Life is not a movie. Being guided in our actions by Pulp Fiction and 24, is insane. That's why Quentin Tarantino is not Secretary of Defense. Too bad Donald Rumsfeld, with his classic narcissistic facade, could not have become a film director.
Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67: 371-378.
Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to authority; an experimental view. Harper Collins.
Showing posts with label torture. Show all posts
Showing posts with label torture. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Cheney: The New Grand Inquisitor
The Werewolf of Wyoming, Dick Cheney, is howling again. After hiding in an undisclosed location for eight years, cloaked in secrecy to the degree that his house was blurred on Google Earth and even the attendees of his energy policy meetings are still classified, he has emerged from the shadows. The man who was not seen and who did not talk is suddenly everywhere. Classified memos must be released, he now claims, for the good of the country.
Appearing on Face the Nation, Cheney not only advocated torture, he went further in contending that any other course would "sacrifice" American lives. Bush, and all the others from his (mis)administration, must be cringing as Cheney admits to crimes against humanity. Cheney's argument, that these acts are not criminal because a lawyer told them so, is patently ridiculous. Clearly, the only reason to even seek such legal memos is to provide cover down the road when the actions are revealed.
There is a method to his seeming madness. What Cheney is attempting to do is reframe the prosecution of torture into a seeming policy debate. He would prefer that this be viewed simply as a disagreement rather than a sanctioning of crimes against humanity.
Cheney uses two lines of reasoning to justify torture. First he argues that it provides information and second that those being tortured are evil. The first argument, that of information, is not only debatable, it is also historically ignorant. Torture has been used historically as a means to make people lie, not to tell the truth. The victims of the Inquisition, the accused in the witch trials, U.S. soldiers in Vietnam who were used for propaganda purpose, all were tortured to make them confess to something they did not do and/or believe. Even thinking that torture provides reliable information is to deny its purpose and its genuine intent, which is to inflict harm.
The idea that those being tortured are bad people and somehow deserve it, is philosophically void. Rationalization to the nth degree, this is the justification of every torturer throughout history, that the tortured somehow deserve it.
I have mockingly referred to Cheney as the Werewolf of Wyoming in a number of past columns. I now see that I was being too kind to Cheney and insulting to werewolves. Cheney is a cold blooded torturer who has no moral compass. He is attempting the "Big Lie." Just keep saying over and over that you're right and that there was no other choice. Classic brainwashing, say it over and over and eventually they'll all believe it.
Like the Grand Inquisitor before him, it is clear that Cheney does not believe in the very ideals he claims to support and defend. He is now willing to undermine the nation in order to thwart efforts that could hold him accountable.
Appearing on Face the Nation, Cheney not only advocated torture, he went further in contending that any other course would "sacrifice" American lives. Bush, and all the others from his (mis)administration, must be cringing as Cheney admits to crimes against humanity. Cheney's argument, that these acts are not criminal because a lawyer told them so, is patently ridiculous. Clearly, the only reason to even seek such legal memos is to provide cover down the road when the actions are revealed.
There is a method to his seeming madness. What Cheney is attempting to do is reframe the prosecution of torture into a seeming policy debate. He would prefer that this be viewed simply as a disagreement rather than a sanctioning of crimes against humanity.
Cheney uses two lines of reasoning to justify torture. First he argues that it provides information and second that those being tortured are evil. The first argument, that of information, is not only debatable, it is also historically ignorant. Torture has been used historically as a means to make people lie, not to tell the truth. The victims of the Inquisition, the accused in the witch trials, U.S. soldiers in Vietnam who were used for propaganda purpose, all were tortured to make them confess to something they did not do and/or believe. Even thinking that torture provides reliable information is to deny its purpose and its genuine intent, which is to inflict harm.
The idea that those being tortured are bad people and somehow deserve it, is philosophically void. Rationalization to the nth degree, this is the justification of every torturer throughout history, that the tortured somehow deserve it.
I have mockingly referred to Cheney as the Werewolf of Wyoming in a number of past columns. I now see that I was being too kind to Cheney and insulting to werewolves. Cheney is a cold blooded torturer who has no moral compass. He is attempting the "Big Lie." Just keep saying over and over that you're right and that there was no other choice. Classic brainwashing, say it over and over and eventually they'll all believe it.
Like the Grand Inquisitor before him, it is clear that Cheney does not believe in the very ideals he claims to support and defend. He is now willing to undermine the nation in order to thwart efforts that could hold him accountable.
Friday, May 8, 2009
What Did Pelosi ( and Others) Know?
It was reported in the Washington Post that leaked CIA memos confirm Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) was informed about the practice of torture being used against detainees. Pelosi, in an interview in February with Rachel Maddow stated that she was only informed that these techniques had been authorized and that she had no knowledge of their use. Curiously she also stated that anything she had been told was covered by national security laws that prevented her from disclosing the details of her briefing.
Pelosi's protestations do not appear to stand up to scrutiny. Why would she have thought that she would be informed that certain methods had been authorized if there were no plans to use them? That now appears to be nothing more than a transparent attempt to cover her own behind. Now it seems abundantly clear that she was informed of the actual torture plans.
More ridiculous is her assertion that national security laws prevented her from disclosing the information to the public. Is it really her assertion that she was obligated to keep anything disclosed to her secret? If she had been told that there was a plan to engage in genocide would she have kept that secret? If she had been told that there was a plan to bomb an American city so that the flames of war could be further whipped, would she have kept that secret?
The answer to the above questions is certainly "No." As a member of Congress her duty is to the nation, not to keeping secret the violation of international agreements that ultimately caused harm to the nation through damaging its' reputation. Her duty to the nation was to inform the citizenry of the great crimes being committed in our name, even if that resulted in her being imprisoned for her actions. Yes, it was her duty, and that of the others who were briefed, to inform the nation as to the violation of our laws. In point of fact, it was only Pelosi and the other three members so briefed, who could have prevented this.
What prevented her from disclosing this information was her fear that the disclosure would be used against her politically. She, and other members of Congress, went along with torture because it was politically expedient. Like many politicians, Pelosi was afraid to challenge anything the Bush (mis)Adminiatration did for fear that they would be accused of being in league with al-Qaeda. It was just this lack of political courage that enabled the most egregious crimes For that, she bears culpability for these actions.
Pelosi has been one of the people standing in the way of investigations into the dirty little secrets of the last administration. Now we know why she seems to be holding up a thorough accounting of the acts of the Bush (mis)Administration. She is afraid her own complicity will be revealed.
Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gonzalez, Yoo, Bybee, the list goes on. To it we can now add the names of Pelosi (and Rockefeller and on and on). All those who were complicit in these actions, in both parties, must be held accountable. They placed their political careers before the nation and its ideals. At the time at which it mattered most that they fulfill their Constitutional duties, they bowed to pressure and acted primarily in the interests of their own political careers.
Pelosi's protestations do not appear to stand up to scrutiny. Why would she have thought that she would be informed that certain methods had been authorized if there were no plans to use them? That now appears to be nothing more than a transparent attempt to cover her own behind. Now it seems abundantly clear that she was informed of the actual torture plans.
More ridiculous is her assertion that national security laws prevented her from disclosing the information to the public. Is it really her assertion that she was obligated to keep anything disclosed to her secret? If she had been told that there was a plan to engage in genocide would she have kept that secret? If she had been told that there was a plan to bomb an American city so that the flames of war could be further whipped, would she have kept that secret?
The answer to the above questions is certainly "No." As a member of Congress her duty is to the nation, not to keeping secret the violation of international agreements that ultimately caused harm to the nation through damaging its' reputation. Her duty to the nation was to inform the citizenry of the great crimes being committed in our name, even if that resulted in her being imprisoned for her actions. Yes, it was her duty, and that of the others who were briefed, to inform the nation as to the violation of our laws. In point of fact, it was only Pelosi and the other three members so briefed, who could have prevented this.
What prevented her from disclosing this information was her fear that the disclosure would be used against her politically. She, and other members of Congress, went along with torture because it was politically expedient. Like many politicians, Pelosi was afraid to challenge anything the Bush (mis)Adminiatration did for fear that they would be accused of being in league with al-Qaeda. It was just this lack of political courage that enabled the most egregious crimes For that, she bears culpability for these actions.
Pelosi has been one of the people standing in the way of investigations into the dirty little secrets of the last administration. Now we know why she seems to be holding up a thorough accounting of the acts of the Bush (mis)Administration. She is afraid her own complicity will be revealed.
Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gonzalez, Yoo, Bybee, the list goes on. To it we can now add the names of Pelosi (and Rockefeller and on and on). All those who were complicit in these actions, in both parties, must be held accountable. They placed their political careers before the nation and its ideals. At the time at which it mattered most that they fulfill their Constitutional duties, they bowed to pressure and acted primarily in the interests of their own political careers.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Where Were Our Leaders?
On the same day that it was revealed that the CIA had destroyed 92 tapes of interrogation of detainees, nine (9) secret legal opinions of the Bush (mis)Administration were revealed by the Justice Department. Taken together, these reveal a culture of lawlessness, and contempt for the Constitution and the basis of common law.
George Bush apparently claimed powers not seen since King John was forced to sign the Magna Carta in 1215. In addition, his administration's obstruction of justice and destruction of evidence made Nixon's men look like a bunch of schoolgirls.
First the destruction of evidence. The CIA's torture tapes have been the source of numerous lawsuits filed by the ACLU and other groups trying to penetrate the wall of secrecy of the Bush (mis)Administration. At first denied to exist, we now find that 92 of these tapes were destroyed. If the destruction of 92 pieces of evidence is not a sign of knowingly committing wrongdoing, what is?
More frightening than the destruction of evidence, are the purported legal opinions under which the Bush-ites operated. To catalog these rulings here would be prohibitive, but just this one quote is horrifying enough, "First Amendment speech and press rights may also be subordinated to the overriding need to wage war successfully." In other words, dissent would be suppressed. Other opinions swept aside the Posse Comitatus Act, suggested that Congress had no power to limit the president, justified warrant-less arrests and domestic spying. In essence, these rulings effectively suspended the U.S. Constitution.
To believe that no one in Congress, that no one in the Justice Department, that no one at all was aware of what was in these memos strains credulity. Everyone was informed. This was official operating policy. Where was the outcry? Members of Congress, such as Nancy Pelosi, are now hiding behind the idea that to have blown the whistle would have been a violation of national security.
Subversion of the Constitution is a violation of national security. Would that politicians were as interested in preserving the principles of our nation as they are at preserving their political careers. All those who knew and did nothing: treason would seem to be the appropriate charge.
And where were the Republicans in all this? Bush, after all, was a member of their own party. It was their duty, especially as the party in power at the time, to stop him. Instead, they acted with complicity. To hear some off them howl now that they are out of power that they are concerned about the Constitution is just sheer hypocrisy. Where were they when the country needed them?
This aggression must not stand. Leaders of this nation have committed crimes against WE, THE PEOPLE. Hearings and commissions are not enough. They must be held accountable. Otherwise, the Constitution must be viewed as it has become, a nice fiction that we once made real. What hath George Bush wrought?
George Bush apparently claimed powers not seen since King John was forced to sign the Magna Carta in 1215. In addition, his administration's obstruction of justice and destruction of evidence made Nixon's men look like a bunch of schoolgirls.
First the destruction of evidence. The CIA's torture tapes have been the source of numerous lawsuits filed by the ACLU and other groups trying to penetrate the wall of secrecy of the Bush (mis)Administration. At first denied to exist, we now find that 92 of these tapes were destroyed. If the destruction of 92 pieces of evidence is not a sign of knowingly committing wrongdoing, what is?
More frightening than the destruction of evidence, are the purported legal opinions under which the Bush-ites operated. To catalog these rulings here would be prohibitive, but just this one quote is horrifying enough, "First Amendment speech and press rights may also be subordinated to the overriding need to wage war successfully." In other words, dissent would be suppressed. Other opinions swept aside the Posse Comitatus Act, suggested that Congress had no power to limit the president, justified warrant-less arrests and domestic spying. In essence, these rulings effectively suspended the U.S. Constitution.
To believe that no one in Congress, that no one in the Justice Department, that no one at all was aware of what was in these memos strains credulity. Everyone was informed. This was official operating policy. Where was the outcry? Members of Congress, such as Nancy Pelosi, are now hiding behind the idea that to have blown the whistle would have been a violation of national security.
Subversion of the Constitution is a violation of national security. Would that politicians were as interested in preserving the principles of our nation as they are at preserving their political careers. All those who knew and did nothing: treason would seem to be the appropriate charge.
And where were the Republicans in all this? Bush, after all, was a member of their own party. It was their duty, especially as the party in power at the time, to stop him. Instead, they acted with complicity. To hear some off them howl now that they are out of power that they are concerned about the Constitution is just sheer hypocrisy. Where were they when the country needed them?
This aggression must not stand. Leaders of this nation have committed crimes against WE, THE PEOPLE. Hearings and commissions are not enough. They must be held accountable. Otherwise, the Constitution must be viewed as it has become, a nice fiction that we once made real. What hath George Bush wrought?
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Obama's First Week
On Inauguration Day I decided not to comment on any decisions, pronouncements or policies until at least one week had passed. I will now join the cacophony with my thoughts on the first week. Before any evaluation of decisions I would first like to note that the sheer volume of work turned out by the Obama Administration in its first week appears to be about six months worth of policy from the previous administration of George number 2. There is so much that I have resorted to a mere listing of the various actions.
The Good:
- Begin the Closing of Guantanamo. Necessary if we are to ever begin the restoration of the moral integrity of our nation and honor our treaty obligations.
- Categorically Prohibit Torture. Adherence to the Army Field Manual and International law is beginning to be restored.
- Restore Transparency to Government. After eight years of a secretive government that classified everything including the lunch menu, this is unbelievable.
- Pay Freeze for Staff. Symbolic, but at least in the right direction. Were they going to get a raise anytime soon? They just started.
- Recognition of the Depth of the Economic Crisis. Compared to the floundering of the Bush Administration which managed to blow another $350 billion in its final days by giving it to banks with no effort at accountability, even acknowledging that the problem is serious and long term was a welcome step forward.
- Advocacy for Green Infrastructure. Needs to push for even more. Solar panels on 100 million houses and building would sure stimulate the economy and provide for a greater degree of energy independence (see previous blogs and link "The Myth of Energy Independence," to see why this won't happen).
- Al- Arabiya interview that set a new tone for American foreign policy. In a complete about face of the previous administration's policy, Obama set the stage for an effort at resolution of the long standing grievances between the rest of the world and the U.S. That's right, the whole world. Bush has turned everyone against us, even putative allies. Obama already possesses greater stature on the international stage than Bush ever had.
The Bad:
- Treasury Secretary nominee Tim Geithner, who will oversee the IRS, did not pay his taxes.
- Bill Lynn, ex-lobbyist for Raytheon, nominated to number two post in the Pentagon. Violating the pledge of no lobbyist in the administration, Lynn requires an exception to the ethics rules outlined by Obama.
- Economic Compromise: his efforts to gain GOP support for the economy recovery will only be weakened by attempting to enlist their support. As a party they have no coherent philosophy and can only result to being in opposition. Mitigating this is his "I won," statement that suggests he may impose his will upon them if they continue to obfuscate.
The Ugly:
- Bush, Cheney, and the rest of the gang at the OK Corral are still walking around free. I can't tell if Obama is just trying to stay clear of the issue and let Congress do the work of investigating the Bush (mis)Administration or if he doesn't have the will to defend the Constitution. If he believes that what they did were crimes and he does anything to prevent their prosecution, he is acting as an accessory.
- Bombing of Pakistan by CIA. Allegedly he was briefed, so it would appear he gave his consent, unless, of course, the CIA is running its own war.
& We'll See:
- Iraq: So far, just talk. When do we leave?
All in all a very good start. Clearly though, this first week, especially Pakistan, shows us that change will not be immediate or complete. However, compared to his predecessor, he is inconceivably better.
I'm sure I've missed many things. As I said it was a busy week. It good to have a President who is not an embarrassment. Above all else, this makes me proud to have Obama in office. Also sad, because I realize how much George W. Bush destroyed this country. We are now proud to simply not be embarrassed.
The Good:
- Begin the Closing of Guantanamo. Necessary if we are to ever begin the restoration of the moral integrity of our nation and honor our treaty obligations.
- Categorically Prohibit Torture. Adherence to the Army Field Manual and International law is beginning to be restored.
- Restore Transparency to Government. After eight years of a secretive government that classified everything including the lunch menu, this is unbelievable.
- Pay Freeze for Staff. Symbolic, but at least in the right direction. Were they going to get a raise anytime soon? They just started.
- Recognition of the Depth of the Economic Crisis. Compared to the floundering of the Bush Administration which managed to blow another $350 billion in its final days by giving it to banks with no effort at accountability, even acknowledging that the problem is serious and long term was a welcome step forward.
- Advocacy for Green Infrastructure. Needs to push for even more. Solar panels on 100 million houses and building would sure stimulate the economy and provide for a greater degree of energy independence (see previous blogs and link "The Myth of Energy Independence," to see why this won't happen).
- Al- Arabiya interview that set a new tone for American foreign policy. In a complete about face of the previous administration's policy, Obama set the stage for an effort at resolution of the long standing grievances between the rest of the world and the U.S. That's right, the whole world. Bush has turned everyone against us, even putative allies. Obama already possesses greater stature on the international stage than Bush ever had.
The Bad:
- Treasury Secretary nominee Tim Geithner, who will oversee the IRS, did not pay his taxes.
- Bill Lynn, ex-lobbyist for Raytheon, nominated to number two post in the Pentagon. Violating the pledge of no lobbyist in the administration, Lynn requires an exception to the ethics rules outlined by Obama.
- Economic Compromise: his efforts to gain GOP support for the economy recovery will only be weakened by attempting to enlist their support. As a party they have no coherent philosophy and can only result to being in opposition. Mitigating this is his "I won," statement that suggests he may impose his will upon them if they continue to obfuscate.
The Ugly:
- Bush, Cheney, and the rest of the gang at the OK Corral are still walking around free. I can't tell if Obama is just trying to stay clear of the issue and let Congress do the work of investigating the Bush (mis)Administration or if he doesn't have the will to defend the Constitution. If he believes that what they did were crimes and he does anything to prevent their prosecution, he is acting as an accessory.
- Bombing of Pakistan by CIA. Allegedly he was briefed, so it would appear he gave his consent, unless, of course, the CIA is running its own war.
& We'll See:
- Iraq: So far, just talk. When do we leave?
All in all a very good start. Clearly though, this first week, especially Pakistan, shows us that change will not be immediate or complete. However, compared to his predecessor, he is inconceivably better.
I'm sure I've missed many things. As I said it was a busy week. It good to have a President who is not an embarrassment. Above all else, this makes me proud to have Obama in office. Also sad, because I realize how much George W. Bush destroyed this country. We are now proud to simply not be embarrassed.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Christmas Deferred
It's January 20th and today I finally find out if I get my Christmas wish. Yes, the excitement of the inauguration of Obama adds a special lustre to the day, but his election was already a done deal by Christmas. For Christmas, I made a wish for the nation.
What I really wanted for Christmas is accountability for the Bush Administration. If I get my wish, as soon as he has taken the oath of office, Obama will order Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and a few others (Gonzalez and Yoo, for two) to be immediately taken into custody and tried for their War Crimes against the world and the American people.
Obama has talked a great deal about "moving forward," but I would argue that it will be impossible to move forward until we deal with the sorry spectacle of the past eight years. The election of Obama stunned the world precisely because we lived up to our ideals. In doing that we regained some of the authority we once had in the world.
However, in order to fully regain our moral authority in the world we must clean our own house. We have committed torture, we have engaged in acts that are direct violations of treaties we have signed. We have also admitted it. Cheney even seemed to brag about it. To let it go without prosecution is to make a mockery of our values.
Imagine the reaction of the world should we prosecute these miscreants who have sullied our reputation and made us a lawless and feared pariah on the world stage. Stating that no one is above the law, especially those in government, would allow the U.S. to once again exhibit the ideals that have drawn countless people to our shores.
Over the past eight years this nation has come as close to fascism as I hope it ever gets. If Bush and the rest of his administration is allowed to fade into history without answering for their crimes, we the people, will be the ultimate victims. Our nation will be permanently damaged and the scars will continue to grow as history begins to realize what happened in our country during the Bush II years.
Okay, so I don't really think that Obama will have Bush taken into custody at the inauguration. I will continue to let this Christmas wish be deferred for a little longer. But if we fail to act as a nation, if we do not address the wrongs, the crimes, the evil that has been committed in our name, we will NEVER be a great nation again.
In order to move forward, we must first address the past. If this is allowed to pass, no matter the success of the Obama Administration, we will forever join the list of nations that have sanctioned torture and rationalized war crimes.
In the next few days I will present the case for war crimes trials against the Bush Administration. Further, I will also establish the case for the rest of the world to act against Bush et. al should the U.S. fail to act.
What I really wanted for Christmas is accountability for the Bush Administration. If I get my wish, as soon as he has taken the oath of office, Obama will order Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and a few others (Gonzalez and Yoo, for two) to be immediately taken into custody and tried for their War Crimes against the world and the American people.
Obama has talked a great deal about "moving forward," but I would argue that it will be impossible to move forward until we deal with the sorry spectacle of the past eight years. The election of Obama stunned the world precisely because we lived up to our ideals. In doing that we regained some of the authority we once had in the world.
However, in order to fully regain our moral authority in the world we must clean our own house. We have committed torture, we have engaged in acts that are direct violations of treaties we have signed. We have also admitted it. Cheney even seemed to brag about it. To let it go without prosecution is to make a mockery of our values.
Imagine the reaction of the world should we prosecute these miscreants who have sullied our reputation and made us a lawless and feared pariah on the world stage. Stating that no one is above the law, especially those in government, would allow the U.S. to once again exhibit the ideals that have drawn countless people to our shores.
Over the past eight years this nation has come as close to fascism as I hope it ever gets. If Bush and the rest of his administration is allowed to fade into history without answering for their crimes, we the people, will be the ultimate victims. Our nation will be permanently damaged and the scars will continue to grow as history begins to realize what happened in our country during the Bush II years.
Okay, so I don't really think that Obama will have Bush taken into custody at the inauguration. I will continue to let this Christmas wish be deferred for a little longer. But if we fail to act as a nation, if we do not address the wrongs, the crimes, the evil that has been committed in our name, we will NEVER be a great nation again.
In order to move forward, we must first address the past. If this is allowed to pass, no matter the success of the Obama Administration, we will forever join the list of nations that have sanctioned torture and rationalized war crimes.
In the next few days I will present the case for war crimes trials against the Bush Administration. Further, I will also establish the case for the rest of the world to act against Bush et. al should the U.S. fail to act.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Bush: The Legacy
The legacy tour continues, as Bush, Cheney and their minions attempt to manipulate memories and reality. "It all went well, really. History will vindicate us, you'll see." Bush even claimed in his press conference that the response to Katrina was "pretty good." Delusion or lie.
A complete litany of the failures of the Bush Administration is too long to begin. Even the list of major debacles has grown so long that it becomes impossible to recite them without leaving out something obvious. The threats to our rights, and the acts of utter disregard for the Constitution and our ideals, are surely even more numerous.
The legacy of the Bush Presidency though, can be summed up by the intersection of a number of the various domains of failure perfected by this thoroughly incompetent administration. To begin, in the final week of his presidency, Osama bin Laden releases another audiotape, continuing to taunt Bush. The hunt for bin Laden, marked by all the swagger and hubris we have come to expect from the Decider, serves as a symbol of the utter incompetence of this administration.
The inability to capture bin Laden was accompanied, over the years, by an ever frantic effort to ramp up fears of future attacks, and to justify all manner of acts antithetical to the professed ideals of this country. Torture was justified and denied at the same time. The moral authority of the nation was destroyed here and abroad.
Now that Judge Susan J. Crawford, who oversees the military trials at Guantanamo, has stated unequivocally that torture has occurred at that facility, the legacy tour will continue to point out there have been no attacks since 9/11. Forget that 9/11 occurred on their watch and the anthrax attacks occurred soon after. Know that the torture at Gitmo and Abu Ghraib ended serving more as a recruitment tool for al-Qaeda than it made anyone safe.
Finally though, the legacy of the Bush Administration can be seen in the complete lack of regard for which America is now seen in the world community. Rather than making the world or America safer, he has inflamed the very soul of the world. His eight years of dogmatic, ideological imperialism have confirmed the worst suspicions about America for its detractors. His incompetence has compounded the multitude of errors. Here we are, more than seven years after 9/11 and he still hasn't caught a six feet, five inch guy on dialysis who is one of the most recognizable figures in the world.
Bush's narrow minded view of the world fostered an "us vs. them" mentality that ultimately made us all less safe. He had furthered the likelihood of violence and confrontation in the world. A strong case can be made that the current actions in the Gaza Strip are occurring precisely because Bush is about to leave office. And remember, he was going to bring peace to the Middle East.
Incompetence. Torture. World Stature Destroyed. Quite a legacy. Oh, and I forgot the economy.
A complete litany of the failures of the Bush Administration is too long to begin. Even the list of major debacles has grown so long that it becomes impossible to recite them without leaving out something obvious. The threats to our rights, and the acts of utter disregard for the Constitution and our ideals, are surely even more numerous.
The legacy of the Bush Presidency though, can be summed up by the intersection of a number of the various domains of failure perfected by this thoroughly incompetent administration. To begin, in the final week of his presidency, Osama bin Laden releases another audiotape, continuing to taunt Bush. The hunt for bin Laden, marked by all the swagger and hubris we have come to expect from the Decider, serves as a symbol of the utter incompetence of this administration.
The inability to capture bin Laden was accompanied, over the years, by an ever frantic effort to ramp up fears of future attacks, and to justify all manner of acts antithetical to the professed ideals of this country. Torture was justified and denied at the same time. The moral authority of the nation was destroyed here and abroad.
Now that Judge Susan J. Crawford, who oversees the military trials at Guantanamo, has stated unequivocally that torture has occurred at that facility, the legacy tour will continue to point out there have been no attacks since 9/11. Forget that 9/11 occurred on their watch and the anthrax attacks occurred soon after. Know that the torture at Gitmo and Abu Ghraib ended serving more as a recruitment tool for al-Qaeda than it made anyone safe.
Finally though, the legacy of the Bush Administration can be seen in the complete lack of regard for which America is now seen in the world community. Rather than making the world or America safer, he has inflamed the very soul of the world. His eight years of dogmatic, ideological imperialism have confirmed the worst suspicions about America for its detractors. His incompetence has compounded the multitude of errors. Here we are, more than seven years after 9/11 and he still hasn't caught a six feet, five inch guy on dialysis who is one of the most recognizable figures in the world.
Bush's narrow minded view of the world fostered an "us vs. them" mentality that ultimately made us all less safe. He had furthered the likelihood of violence and confrontation in the world. A strong case can be made that the current actions in the Gaza Strip are occurring precisely because Bush is about to leave office. And remember, he was going to bring peace to the Middle East.
Incompetence. Torture. World Stature Destroyed. Quite a legacy. Oh, and I forgot the economy.
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Dick Cheney: Werewolf of Wyoming
If you claim that the crime you admit to is not a crime, should that prevent your prosecution? Dick Cheney seems to think so. On the heels of a bipartisan report from the Senate Armed Services Committee that stated that the actions of Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Alberto Gonzalez and Cheney aide David Addington, "led directly" to the violation of laws and treaties such as the Geneva Conventions, most of the named parties attempted to hide behind legal interpretations designed to give cover for torture.
Cheney, give him credit for being so self defined, went one step further, admitting in a televised interview, that he condoned and sanctioned waterboarding. His cavalier attitude in this admission brushes off worldwide condemnation of the practice as torture. In admitting that he not only approved this action, he admitted to a war crime.
Waterboarding has been defined as torture since the time of the Spanish Inquisition, when the practice is reputed to have been developed. Refined over time, the United States actually prosecuted Japanese soldiers for this very action after World War II. During the War Crimes Trials at Nuremberg the defense of "following orders," was no defense at all. What about those giving orders?
If Cheney's seeming claim that nothing is a crime if you don't believe it is, is allowed to stand then every sociopath in prison could claim the same defense.
Therein lies the answer to Cheney's admission. Only a relatively small minority could imagine even attempting to rationalize torture. Only a sociopath could order it. To brag about it puts one in a whole new category.
Cheney, give him credit for being so self defined, went one step further, admitting in a televised interview, that he condoned and sanctioned waterboarding. His cavalier attitude in this admission brushes off worldwide condemnation of the practice as torture. In admitting that he not only approved this action, he admitted to a war crime.
Waterboarding has been defined as torture since the time of the Spanish Inquisition, when the practice is reputed to have been developed. Refined over time, the United States actually prosecuted Japanese soldiers for this very action after World War II. During the War Crimes Trials at Nuremberg the defense of "following orders," was no defense at all. What about those giving orders?
If Cheney's seeming claim that nothing is a crime if you don't believe it is, is allowed to stand then every sociopath in prison could claim the same defense.
Therein lies the answer to Cheney's admission. Only a relatively small minority could imagine even attempting to rationalize torture. Only a sociopath could order it. To brag about it puts one in a whole new category.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
A Good Place to Start
In the first week after his election, advisers for Barack Obama have begun to "leak" his plans to close the disgrace of a prison at Guantanomo Bay. Undoing the damage of the Bush Administration will likely be a challenge that will require supreme efforts by Obama during the next four years. Bush has screwed up so many things it is hard to know where to begin.
Closing the prison at Guantanamo is a good place to start. Guantanamo or "Gitmo," as it has come to be called, is symbolic of the utter disregard for human rights and the rule of law that has pervaded the Bush Administration. Gitmo exists primarily as a means to evade U.S. laws concerning the right to trial and fair treatment, ignore centuries of law going back to the Magna Carta as regards the right of habeas corpus, and to circumvent international law regarding the proper treatment of prisoners and prisoners of war.
When Alberto Gonzalez referred to the Geneva Conventions as "quaint," he effectively exposed the true disdain for human rights that exists within the Bush Administration. Gitmo has been a blemish on our international reputation and a stain on our collective psyche. Too many, especially those within Bush's own party, have failed to question what this aberrant approach to incarceration has inflicted upon the nation. More than any other single issue, the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba has sullied our national reputation and made the U.S. appear a hypocrite on the world stage.
As stated, closing this disgrace is a good place to start to regain our standing in the world. Beyond that, it is also a good place to begin to reclaim the values that made this country great. Standing for human rights and justice, fighting tyranny and extending a helping hand to those in need are all values once associated with this country. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration has destroyed all of these notions, both at home and abroad. To move forward, Obama must consciously undo the damage done by Bush.
Closing Gitmo is only a start, but a very good one.
Closing the prison at Guantanamo is a good place to start. Guantanamo or "Gitmo," as it has come to be called, is symbolic of the utter disregard for human rights and the rule of law that has pervaded the Bush Administration. Gitmo exists primarily as a means to evade U.S. laws concerning the right to trial and fair treatment, ignore centuries of law going back to the Magna Carta as regards the right of habeas corpus, and to circumvent international law regarding the proper treatment of prisoners and prisoners of war.
When Alberto Gonzalez referred to the Geneva Conventions as "quaint," he effectively exposed the true disdain for human rights that exists within the Bush Administration. Gitmo has been a blemish on our international reputation and a stain on our collective psyche. Too many, especially those within Bush's own party, have failed to question what this aberrant approach to incarceration has inflicted upon the nation. More than any other single issue, the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba has sullied our national reputation and made the U.S. appear a hypocrite on the world stage.
As stated, closing this disgrace is a good place to start to regain our standing in the world. Beyond that, it is also a good place to begin to reclaim the values that made this country great. Standing for human rights and justice, fighting tyranny and extending a helping hand to those in need are all values once associated with this country. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration has destroyed all of these notions, both at home and abroad. To move forward, Obama must consciously undo the damage done by Bush.
Closing Gitmo is only a start, but a very good one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
Posts
