EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Looking at America
There are too many moments these days when we cannot recognize our country. Sunday was one of them, as we read the account in The Times of how men in some of the most trusted posts in the nation plotted to cover up the torture of prisoners by Central Intelligence Agency interrogators by destroying videotapes of their sickening behavior. It was impossible to see the founding principles of the greatest democracy in the contempt these men and their bosses showed for the Constitution, the rule of law and human decency.
It was not the first time in recent years we've felt this horror, this sorrowful sense of estrangement, not nearly. This sort of lawless behavior has become standard practice since Sept. 11, 2001.
The country and much of the world was rightly and profoundly frightened by the single-minded hatred and ingenuity displayed by this new enemy. But there is no excuse for how President Bush and his advisers panicked - how they forgot that it is their responsibility to protect American lives and American ideals, that there really is no safety for Americans or their country when those ideals are sacrificed.
Out of panic and ideology, President Bush squandered America's position of moral and political leadership, swept aside international institutions and treaties, sullied America's global image, and trampled on the constitutional pillars that have supported our democracy through the most terrifying and challenging times. These policies have fed the world's anger and alienation and have not made any of us safer.
In the years since 9/11, we have seen American soldiers abuse, sexually humiliate, torment and murder prisoners in Afghanistan and Iraq. A few have been punished, but their leaders have never been called to account. We have seen mercenaries gun down Iraqi civilians with no fear of prosecution. We have seen the president, sworn to defend the Constitution, turn his powers on his own citizens, authorizing the intelligence agencies to spy on Americans, wiretapping phones and intercepting international e-mail messages without a warrant.
We have read accounts of how the government's top lawyers huddled in secret after the attacks in New York and Washington and plotted ways to circumvent the Geneva Conventions - and both American and international law - to hold anyone the president chose indefinitely without charges or judicial review.
Those same lawyers then twisted other laws beyond recognition to allow Mr. Bush to turn intelligence agents into torturers, to force doctors to abdicate their professional oaths and responsibilities to prepare prisoners for abuse, and then to monitor the torment to make sure it didn't go just a bit too far and actually kill them.
The White House used the fear of terrorism and the sense of national unity to ram laws through Congress that gave law-enforcement agencies far more power than they truly needed to respond to the threat - and at the same time fulfilled the imperial fantasies of Vice President Dick Cheney and others determined to use the tragedy of 9/11 to arrogate as much power as they could.
Hundreds of men, swept up on the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq, were thrown into a prison in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, so that the White House could claim they were beyond the reach of American laws. Prisoners are held there with no hope of real justice, only the chance to face a kangaroo court where evidence and the names of their accusers are kept secret, and where they are not permitted to talk about the abuse they have suffered at the hands of American jailers.
In other foreign lands, the C.I.A. set up secret jails where "high-value detainees" were subjected to ever more barbaric acts, including simulated drowning. These crimes were videotaped, so that "experts" could watch them, and then the videotapes were destroyed, after consultation with the White House, in the hope that Americans would never know.
The C.I.A. contracted out its inhumanity to nations with no respect for life or law, sending prisoners - some of them innocents kidnapped on street corners and in airports - to be tortured into making false confessions, or until it was clear they had nothing to say and so were let go without any apology or hope of redress.
These are not the only shocking abuses of President Bush's two terms in office, made in the name of fighting terrorism. There is much more - so much that the next president will have a full agenda simply discovering all the wrongs that have been done and then righting them.
We can only hope that this time, unlike 2004, American voters will have the wisdom to grant the awesome powers of the presidency to someone who has the integrity, principle and decency to use them honorably. Then when we look in the mirror as a nation, we will see, once again, the reflection of the United States of America.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

78 Comments so far
Show AllI guess the editorialist forgets the drum-beating of that murderous dwarf Thomas Friedman, it's lying Bushwhore Judith Miller, the quashing of the spying on all Americans because they were asked ever-so-kindly not to spill secrets before the 2004 farcelection.
The NYT merely publishes the demurrals of a few columnists as part of the charade that either speech or the people's will matter to the publisher, his pals & their advertisers & mass murdering corporations.
Ah - not much forgiveness for the NYT here, but come on - this is an ardent effort, no? except for the punch it's aimed at delivering, but finally pulls. There's a remedy for high crimes and misdemeanors committed by the executive branch, and it's not called "election."
Why is it that azgirl8 and people like her believe that 75 percent of america doesn't believe the "official story" of 911? It's not even hard to believe. It's a lot harder to believe ridiculous conspiracy theories about 911. This type of nonsense is what absolutely DESTROYS the credibility of the left.
Let's think straight for a moment, if I may be so bold. The NYT didn't torture anyone, the Republicans did. The Dems didn't do it, Bush did it. Now, how do we get rid of power behind Bush and more like him?
Two alternatives: incrementalism or radical change. Many thought a socialist revolution would happen before WWI and many socialists thought they could stop the war with a general strike. They failed. In the sixties, we talked of revolution, and we had a social revolution, but not a political revolution. The iron grip of the corporations has proved difficult to break.
In the last century, generations of progressives attempted to win change. One great success was the New Deal. From that, we got social security and some other progressive changes that the right wingers are still trying to repeal. After WWII, the big changes in standard of living came about because of union organizing. The corporations have pretty much undone that.
Now that we are in the second Guilded Age looking back, what has worked? The revolutions didn't win much. The organizing of the New Deal and the unions achieved a lot.
Just a thought.
No, it WASN'T hard to believe, till we came out of the fog and put our thinking caps back on. BushCo stonewalling an investigation to begin with (an investigation he promised on the night of 911), is enough for me. No oath, no recording, no notes of "testimony" by Bush and Cheney? Don't the authorities always split up witnesses to question them? I guess they didn't have their standard 'state secrets/national security' excuses polished up yet. The official story has never been proven, nor anyone prosecuted. The only PROOF we have is a pile of dust. And pools of molten metal burning for weeks on end. HUH? The fuel was burned up in a flash. And, we sure have spent a lot of money NOT to catch BinLaden. I have no set "conspiracy theory", just lots of unanswered questions that some refuse to answer.
What hypocrisy!!!They are part of the machine.
The failure of the Congress to pursue impeachment of Cheyney and Bush will be a precedent for illegality on the part of future White House occupants. The present occupants have flaunted their complete disregard of and for our constitution. The press should lead the way in providing informing the country of the magnitude of their acts and the price that the country is being called upon to pay. The politicians in Washington too often spend too much time looking toward the next election.
NYT re-writes history.
Iraq was about OIL. NOT terrorism.
The 911 tragedy was used by Bush (the American people) to secure supplies of oil, remove a threat to Israel, payback for a threat against papaBush and the global strategic aim of installing military bases in the region.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._presidential_election,_2004
total who voted in 2004
122,267,553
voting age population in the US
221,285,099
http://elections.gmu.edu/Voter_Turnout_2004.htm
bur some people were ineligible to vote because they commtited felonies etc. which leaves the voting eligible population at:
202,746,417
So only about 60% of those in the voting age population actually voted in 2004
Approximately half of those who voted, voted for Bush so approximately 30% of the people of voting age eligible to vote in America voted for Bush.
A group like Move on is so reviled by the right..because they get new voters and thats why Obama is so intereting as a candidate... because he might pull in new voters.
And thats why people look so carefully at the negatives of a candidate..because if there is enough hatred people will come out to vote against a candidate.
But underlying all of this is that Americans are not aware and are not voting.
I personally am thankful for the NY Times editorial, because they have confirmed what I have been saying for several years. Now when people ask me, "why have you left America?" I can just hand them that editorial.
Ddell, you've hit the nail on the head. Kristol and editorial honesty don't mix.
Mistakes were made on all fronts: Bush and Co. lied, the MSM went along with it, as did most of the other politicos, and so did a lot of the American people.
We're all complicit and we all need to admit our mistakes, instead of simply saying it's all the fault of the other guy.
Maybe the first thing we need to do is say to ourselves: "War is wrong, and that's the bottom line, so let's not listen to our leaders when they try to tell us it's a good thing."
Sure, sometimes (very rarely) war is a necessity, but even when it is, it's a horrible necessity, one to be undertaken with great reluctance and sadness, so when one of our leaders tries to glorify it as a noble cause we should know right away that we're being conned. And painting the Iraq War as a noble cause is exactly what Bush and Co. did. And so many of us fell for it.
quousque: "...Howsoever, if America does have a future in which historians look back honestly on these times, without any doubt they will deem our failure to impeach any of Bush's criminal cabal, and especially The Decider himself, as the most important reason why our Noble Experiment died."
John Conyers has been sitting on the impeachment bill for 18 months now. Listen to his interview at Democracy Now! where he ADMITS that he won't go forward on it because FOX news will spin Cheney and Bush as the victims in all of this.
http://www.democracynow.org/shows/2007/12/20
Agree with all the comments about NYT's dishonesty. With no mentioning of its own culpability in the stolen election, advancing false pre-war intelligence, and otherwise enabling the entire neoconservative agenda, this editorial comes as way too little, way too late.
Also, the piece's failure to call for impeachment hearings, and its attribution of the Bush cabal's activities post-911 to "panic" rather than a premeditated grasp for political control and financial consolidation, renders the entire editorial worthless.
If the NYT's can't say "2+2=4" who in the mainstream media will ?
yes, this from the homenest of libby soulmate judith miller, and now as you guys point out a source of income and power for warmonger kristol!
still if such a neocon haven as the NYT writes this it means they have the next neocon successor in the bag. they must be thinking hillary is the likeliest and safest for them, but there are so many others, giuliani, mccain, and soforth and soforth
the NYT is looking for integrity like cheney/bush are looking for democracy
New Year's eve Party, Denver CO 2007
It sure looked like America
All colors of skin, religions and attitudes.
With most people content not to cross the lines.
What will be new about 2008?
When going up against concentrated wealth/power, direct democracy is the best weapon.
It is sure comforting that at 11:59 of the year 2007, the Times has developed a sense of national morality. This is, of course, right after they hired the greatest, most ignorant, singly the most wrong war-monger to their editorial staff, William Kristol. Am I the only one who finds this incongrous and repulsive? Mr Kristol thought the invasion of Iraq was our greatest decision of foreign policy, that torture is good, that lies to cover up a legion of failures in Iraq were justified, that bombing Iran is an even greater idea, that Abu Garib was not a problem, and that displacing 15% of the Iraq population from their homes is good, that reducing a thriving Christian population of 1.2 million under Sadam, to around 250,000 or so today, left to fear daily for their lives, is a good thing. Mr. Kristol also thinks that we are not spending enough yet on defense or the Iraq war and haven't sent enough troops into Iraq yet. Surely a paper who hires such geniuses can be trusted with the moral fiber of America!
bowarm,newsflash,you are living and thinking in a warm,fuzzy bubble in some other dimension.nice place to visit and we all wish we could live,there.
too little & too late ..
too little:
where's the logical call for impeachment for that list of crimes?
too late:
where was the NY Times when .. (you make the list)
Good comments. Given the degree of obfuscation BY media like The Times, it's a wonder so many recognize something's gone awfully wrong. It's not like the FACTS are really getting out, except on the Internet and thanks to a few well placed courageous journalists like Bill Moyers. IMAGINE if THE PEOPLE really knew what was going on in their names? Imagine if the good fundamentalists who think one who respects 'god' is in the White House got to see footage of the destruction of a million lives? Any with any souls left intact would have to experience a spiritual disconnect bordering on schizophrenia to look themselves in the mirror and see the monster they helped to sponsor.
As for those who blame Americans, again, if the truth is not known by too many, if they trust "the voices of authority" on TV or at their jobs or at church, this large group is unaware of what's missing. They THINK they are in the know, but that "know" as we realize is Orwellian by design. Until the deception bubble is burst, the nation still totters on.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company
'nuff said...
what happened to the stupid article on "Crowning William Kristol" at the NY Times? I guess even Common Schemes has a corporate master?
We can only hope that this time, unlike 2004, American voters will have the wisdom to grant the awesome powers of the presidency to someone who has the integrity, principle and decency to use them honorably.
Wisdom from American voters? Good luck with that...
Elected? Yeah right!
Can anyone say Bilderberg Group?
And you expected more from an admin that stole the election from someone else who had actually won it?
Re Bilderberg group, cf. www.bilderbergbook.com or www.bilderberg.org.
Pretty right-wing raving sites, but apart from the hah!-toned conclusions lacking presentation of alternative solutions to global cooperation, full of factual info.
The main problem with the annual Bilderberg-conferences is not that they happen, but their near-complete lack of transparency. This kind of forum for "the rich and powerful" should be arranged by the UN, with an openly acknowledged, egalitarian agenda. But at some point maybe the global cooperation the Bilderberg-participants establish, with the Counsil on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission, can be taken over by "We the people of the US" (all of 'us' - globally)"...in order to ... establish Justice, ... promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty" for the benefit of "freedom, equality and solidarity".
We're all one – the one that's us living things – and we better work out how that 'one' is both us and the others, confusing as that may be on the way there.
The participants of the Bilderberg-conferences - diverse as they are and deluded by greed and control-need as they may be - are actually up against the same common challenge of understanding how we're all us.
After negligently disregarding the warnings and other vital signs leading to 9/11, this nation allowed this unelected president to use his undeserved popularity for pursuit of his disastrous policies and sellouts. Who is to blame?
quousque I don't it's a spine per se, as someone else said they want to counter balance the truth with a substantial enough portion of lies.
Ullnern: When's the last time a Bilderberg paid attention to someone who actually knew those answers? Would they even recognize such a person?
Their primary charge is how to retain/increase their wealth and power.