A Second Look Rotating Header Image

January 14th, 2009:

A Second Look: Bush’s Tortured Legacy

Jan 14th, 2009
by Tom.
No comments yet

The Progress Report wrote:

Bush’s Tortured Legacy


From: The Progress Report [progress@americanprogressaction.org]
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 9:09 AM
To: tomc2322
Subject: Bush’s Tortured Legacy
RIGHT WING’S LOVE AFFAIR WITH TORTURE: As Bush and Cheney dig in their heels, the right wing has helped cement Bush’s legacy of torture by joining in stridently defending it.Last month, Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) insisted that torture “saved American lives.”MSNBC host Joe Scarborough waged a six-minute screed in defense of torture this week, mocking a critic who said torture doesn’t yield reliable information as “the silliest thing [he has] ever heard.” With this week’s debut of a new season of the Fox TV drama “24,” conservatives have new fodder with which to fan the flames of their love of torture. As The Progress Report documented, conservatives cited the show as proof that torture is effective and hailed the main character, torture extraordinaire Jack Bauer, as a national hero. “They’re trying to put Jack Bauer in jail! I’m not going to stand for it!” shouted Bill O’Reilly. “You ask the average person, is it okay to do something, rough somebody up, to save lives. You ask the person on the street, they say, ‘yeah, why not?’” insisted Fox’s Steve Doocy. “Here’s the guy who has done everything possible to keep his country safe…and these people want to throw him in jail forever for torture and so forth,” moaned Rush Limbaugh.

Abu Ghraib Torture

How can any one, right wing, left-wing, or a little of both, condone the use of torture? If the common everyday guy on the street, when asked if some torture is okay because it will save American lives, answers that it is then that person has been lied to by the right. Torture doesn’t save lives. Torture does not produce actionable intelligence. Our troops were tortured during Viet Nam and they gave no information that cost American lives. He has been told by the Jack Bower-loving-mouth-breathing-bottom-feeding-neo-nuts that torture is a “tool” we use in the war against, whatever. They go along with the lie of torture because they are told that only the loony left says torture doesn’t produce good intelligence.

You know, this country used to be pretty much of one mind on this subject but the Bush administration campaign against us being of one mind and on the side of truth. They took a horrifying, despicable act and wrapped it in the gauze of a “program” making it harmless and plausible and acceptable to those hard-nose rednecks and cowboys and evangelicals. Yes, Christians are for torture.

If not, then why haven’t they spoken up loudly and hit the streets in protest? Where is the Christian outrage? I guess if prayer doesn’t get you the information you want, you can always apply the electrodes to their genitals to speed things along.

Share

A Second Look: Bush/Cheney: ‘Most Impeachable’

Jan 14th, 2009
by Tom.
No comments yet

via Consortiumnews.com.

By Jason Leopold

January 14, 2009

House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers says President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney committed impeachment-worthy offenses which must be thoroughly investigated even after the two men leave office as a means of reaffirming U.S. constitutional principles.

Rep. John Conyers (D) MI-14

“The Bush Administration’s approach to power is, at its core, little more than a restatement of Mr. Nixon’s famous rationalization of presidential misdeeds:  ‘When the President does it, that means it’s not illegal,’” Conyers said in a foreword to a 487-page report entitled “Reining in the Imperial Presidency: Lessons and Recommendations Relating to the Presidency of George W. Bush.“

The real problem here is that the imperial President was never reigned in at all. NOW, he comes out all two-fisted and ready. Now that it’s all over and the biggest criminal ever to be elected to the White House is about to high-tail it out of town, the sheriff decides it’s time to investigate. Dennis K. had it right back then but Conyers wasn’t listening.

Conyers also seemed to acknowledge what many Bush critics had long suspected, that the Michigan Democrat evaded an impeachment battle the past two years out of concern that the political repercussions might have kept the Democrats from winning larger congressional majorities and the White House in Election 2008.

Noting that “some ardent advocates of impeachment have labeled me a traitor – or worse – for declining to begin a formal impeachment inquiry in the House Judiciary Committee,” Conyers said he disagreed with some of their political judgments but concurred with their assessments of the seriousness of Bush-Cheney misconduct.

…“They are individuals [Rep. Dennis Kucinich] who care deeply about our Constitution and our Nation, and who have stood up to fight for the democracy they love, often at great personal cost.  However, as I have said, while President Bush and Vice President Cheney have earned the dishonorable eligibility to be impeached, I do not believe that would have been the appropriate step at this time in our history.”

Look. No one is calling Conyers a traitor but he has a lousy sense of history. If not then, when?

Because someone, probably Pelosi, said, “Don’t rock the boat, John. We have to win this election first,” politics trumped justice again. Conyers is no better than John McCain when it comes to letting a party’s political gains influence and reverse your personal values. When will there ever be someone in a position of oversight in the House who is willing to stand on principles?

Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D) OH-10

Why do I keep thinking of Dennis for this job? Is it because he is perhaps the most principled member of Congress?

From Wikipedia:

“As of January 29, 2008, 24 other Congressional representatives have become cosponsors [of House Resolution 333, Kucinich's resolution calling for the impeachment of Vice President Cheney]. Six of these are members of the House Judiciary Committee: Tammy Baldwin, Keith Ellison, Hank Johnson, Maxine Waters, Steve Cohen and Sheila Jackson-Lee. In addition, Congressman Robert Wexler, supported by Representatives Luis Gutierrez and Tammy Baldwin, have begun openly calling for impeachment hearings to begin.”

It seems that this was too little too late, especially when a mover and shaker like John Conyers didn’t have your back. When Kucinich was trying to get the attention of Conyers with H. Res. 333, Conyers said he didn’t believe that it would have been appropriate at that time in our history. Well, when would it be appropriate? When Bush has left town? Coward. Fire Conyers and hire Kucinich.

Share

A Second Look: Bush Official: Gitmo Detainee Tortured, Washington Post: Saudi Accused In 9/11 Plot Severely Abused, Claims New Head Of Military Commissions – CBS News

Jan 14th, 2009
by Tom.
No comments yet

via Bush Official: Gitmo Detainee Tortured, Washington Post: Saudi Accused In 9/11 Plot Severely Abused, Claims New Head Of Military Commissions – CBS News.

(Washingtonpost.com)

This story was written by Bob Woodward.

The top Bush administration official in charge of deciding whether to bring Guantanamo Bay detainees to trial has concluded that the U.S. military tortured a Saudi national who allegedly planned to participate in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, interrogating him with techniques that included sustained isolation, sleep deprivation, nudity and prolonged exposure to cold, leaving him in a “life-threatening condition.”

“We tortured [Mohammed al-]Qahtani,” said Susan J. Crawford, in her first interview since being named convening authority of military commissions by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates in February 2007. “His treatment met the legal definition of torture. And that’s why I did not refer the case” for prosecution.

Crawford, a retired judge who served as general counsel for the Army during the Reagan administration and as Pentagon inspector general when Dick Cheney was secretary of defense, is the first senior Bush administration official responsible for reviewing practices at Guantanamo to publicly state that a detainee was tortured.

If the truth be known there would be many more than just this one on the list of torture victims. There is no recourse but to release these men. They have become victims and would be set free under U.S. law. Also under U.S. law, the perpetrators of torture would be charged and tried if this crime happened in a state.

Where to release them seems to be an issue now. Letting them go in the U.S. is not palpable just in case one or two of them are actually guilty of terrorism, but this crime is our doing and our responsibility so me may have to take them all. The UK has said they will take some. There is a story about which conditions that they would accept them in the Times Online that came out a couple of weeks ago. I think  consideration must be given on a case by case basis with each man having an advocate who can negotiate his release either to the UK or back to their home country.

The main problem here is this: if they are from Iraq then we return them there, the US military could grab them and detain them with the rest of the 20 to 30 thousand people that they hold now illegally without the right of habeas corpus. Some of the 30 thousand are women. There is another story of women prisoners here, and another here. Evidence that the US military is or has been holding women is not hard to find. Some stories tell of the US holding wives of suspects in order to get the husbands to surrender. That is kidnapping. The jailing of women and the possible maltreatment or even torture of them has been yet another fan to the flame of hatred toward Bush and yet another recruiting tool for al-Qaeda.

What are we going to do about the 20-30 thousand prisoners in Iraq? There must be an end to the kidnapping by the US military, the CIA, and Blackwater. Rendition must be stopped. These citizens, often held for no or little reason, must be released.

Share
← Earlier Posts
You are protected by wp-dephorm: