Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Will Obama Back 'Truth Commission' to Probe Bush Practices?
WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama and Congress are locked in a stare-down over how much to expose or punish Bush administration employees for any abuses they committed in waging the war on terrorism.
Obama, after critical rhetoric on the campaign trail, has sent mixed signals about how far he's willing to go. His concerns are grounded in pragmatism and politics.
Politically, pursuing Bush administration abuses could bog Obama down in partisan warfare with Republicans over the past, endangering his agenda for the future. Pragmatically, intelligence agency veterans have warned the new administration that investigations into the Bush administration's practices of interrogation, rendition and surveillance could damage U.S. intelligence efforts, lower morale in the intelligence community and expose the nation to greater danger.
At the same time, some Democrats in Congress are calling for a "truth commission" to expose such practices, one that might offer immunity in exchange for testimony. Others want criminal prosecutions.
Democrats also are pressing Obama's Justice Department to make public a report, which began under the Bush administration, on the officials who crafted the legal justifications for controversial interrogation methods. Democrats also have proposed legislation tightening the terms of what presidents can claim as "state secrets."
Congressional Democrats can't achieve much by themselves, however. They'll need support from Obama and probably at least some Republicans. Obama also hasn't yet said whether he'll support a truth commission.
"If it was opposed by the White House, you're not going to get any legislation of any sort through, because it would be extraordinarily easy for every Republican to say no and a number of Democrats to say no," said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., who's among those who are calling for a truth commission. "That's kind of realpolitik."
Republicans, meanwhile, say that if Obama pushes for a truth commission or prosecutions over the Bush administration's practices, they'll read that as an abdication of his promised bipartisanship and a declaration of political war.
"I don't think the Obama administration would want to have a truth commission to go back after he leaves office and the Republicans (regain) control, to see what he did," said Sen. Kit Bond of Missouri, the top Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee.
"That's Third World country-type stuff," Bond said, "where you go in and prosecute; if you lose an election you get prosecuted. That has never been the American way. I think that the people of America would understand that that's not how this country is supposed to work."
Bond also argued that any wide airing of interrogation details and any broad threat of prosecutions would be devastating to future intelligence-gathering, would embolden terrorists and could be unreliable.
"Immunizing one person to get them to rat flows over to everyone else who isn't the rat and doesn't give you reliable information," Bond said. "If they tried to bring in people from the (CIA) who were actually involved in interrogations, who were operating under the guidelines of the Office of Legal Counsel, the shock and the impact on the intelligence community would be severe.
"If somebody disagrees with the (Office of Legal Counsel guidelines) and says, 'Well, the opinions were wrong, therefore we're going to prosecute them,' that would shut down - that would absolutely cripple - the intelligence community."
Because Republicans, if united, can block Senate action, any movement may have to come from the House of Representatives. There, Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., wants a commission or hearings that could yield prosecutions, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has left the door open for such developments.
However, the House leadership has yet to agree on a strategy, aides said, and many Democrats are reluctant to clash with their new president because that could weaken party solidarity and damage prospects for other legislation.
Liza Goitein of the Brennan Center for Justice, which advocates investigation, concedes that for now prospects for criminal prosecution are "a nonstarter unless a smoking gun comes out," such as a new inspector general report.
"The details of a commission would be very important," she said, "but I think in some ways people are not engaging yet because we're still at the point of 'Should there be a commission or not?' "
Many Americans do want more information about - and some accounting for - any intelligence abuses. A USA Today-Gallup Poll earlier this month found that 38 percent of Americans favored a criminal investigation into possible torture of terrorism suspects and 24 percent favored establishing an independent panel to look into it.
Leahy said that Bond might be right about resistance to looking back, but "I hope he's not. I think we would miss all the illegalities that went on. It would be a serious mistake."
Leahy recalled the intelligence revisions that resulted from a 1970s congressional investigation into abuses.
"I'm not doing it with the idea of lining up a lot of prosecutions," Leahy said. "I'm doing it so that neither this administration nor the next administration will ever make the same mistakes."
Leahy said he'd try to persuade Obama to support his effort. "I will sit down with the president," he said.
Leahy's truth commission concept is gaining support. On Thursday, a broad coalition that included a former FBI director, a former undersecretary of state and a retired military general as well as various civil liberties groups issued a statement urging Obama to appoint a nonpartisan commission.
Since Obama took office, he's changed some administration practices but not others. He's ordered the end of CIA secret prisons and the closure within a year of the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, but he hasn't yet said what will happen to the detainees who are there.
He's told family members of victims of al Qaida attacks that he'll consider keeping a modified military-commission system to try terrorism suspects, which human rights activists oppose.
While they haven't ruled out investigations or prosecutions related to allegations of torture, wiretapping and renditions, the president, Attorney General Eric Holder and CIA director Leon Panetta have signaled that they're not eager to dig into the past.
In a recent court case in San Francisco, Obama's lawyers stunned civil liberties advocates by continuing the Bush administration's claim that state secrets require blocking detainee lawsuits.
They're also reserving the right to continue detainee renditions to third-party countries, and in extreme cases to hold detainees indefinitely or to use interrogation methods that aren't in the Army Field Manual.
Civil liberties activists say they're torn between their gut-level disappointment over some of these moves and appreciating the strong steps that Obama has taken on issues such as Guantanamo. They also say that he deserves some benefit of the doubt, since he's been president for only a month.
"The more generous interpretation is that they're not organized yet and they're just letting things play out," said Caroline Fredrickson, the director of the Washington legislative office for the American Civil Liberties Union. "We don't know."
Said Goitein of the Brennan Center for Justice: "I'm disappointed by some of the things that he's done and I'm also very happy about some of the things he's done, and on other things the jury is out."
Bond said he was generally pleased and not that surprised: "Campaign rhetoric meets national security reality."
Two U.S. intelligence officials told McClatchy that former CIA director Gen. Michael Hayden, and John Brennan, a former director of the National Counterterrorism Center who's now an adviser to Obama on counter-terrorism and homeland security, persuaded Panetta and other incoming administration officials that investigations into the Bush administration's anti-terrorism practices could open a Pandora's box.
"They convinced the administration that investigations and truth commissions would do more harm than good," one of the officials said.
The two officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they aren't authorized to talk to the news media, said that Hayden and Brennan argued that legal action against former officials would be pointless because a parade of opinions from the White House counsel and the Justice Department had authorized their actions. They also argued that inquiries such as truth commissions would damage the careers and reputations of lower-ranking intelligence officers who, they said, never acted without approval and legal opinions from their superiors.
Panetta and Brennan couldn't be reached for comment.
In the executive branch, the CIA's inspector general and the Justice Department already are empowered to dig into what went on in the previous administration. Such investigations are under way in the Justice Department.
Bond said that route avoided political showmanship: "If they believe there was torture, then they would investigate it, and if they find evidence of it they should prosecute it."
76 Comments so far
Show AllDream On!!!
Obusha label says it all.
Dream is a must better than someone who don't dream..
Alpujarras Hotel
Christopher Bond a republican senator from the same party that impeached President Bill Clinton for lying about a sexual matter, is now calling for no investigations and prosecutions for illegally wiretapping Americans, taking this Country to war based upon intentional lies, torturing, and disregarding Congressional legislation with profuse signing statements, is hubris to the power of ten.
If Mr. Obama is so concerned about his personal legacy that he places his place in history above the Constitution, then he has already failed and will be rendered to the scrap heap of presidential history. There is no more important job that a president can do than defend the Constitution. There is no greater lessen to be taught to the oligarchs than a few of their own going to prison.
Is he not the person that said he can do more than one thing at a time? If Obama does not support investigations then Citizens should do it themselves. Why not!
of course, if obama wanted to cement his place in history, rather than being one more dreary cog in an ever expanding machine, he'd support investigation and prosecution, right?
"Two U.S. intelligence officials told McClatchy that former CIA director Gen. Michael Hayden, and John Brennan, a former director of the National Counterterrorism Center who's now an adviser to Obama on counter-terrorism and homeland security, persuaded Panetta and other incoming administration officials that investigations into the Bush administration's anti-terrorism practices could open a Pandora's box."
A shake up of the intelligence community is just what we need! a shake up of the government too.
It looks like the new attorney General is pointing in the direction of being brave to face Racism but be cowardly about any Government injustice. We are a nation of cowards but not about race any more but cowards about justice for Government War Crimes!
And Look what the War on Drugs has done for racial equality.
Justice denied is not going forward, it is Hell.
Stone rightly states that:
"There is no more important job that a president can do than defend the Constitution. There is no greater lessen to be taught to the oligarchs than a few of their own going to prison."
If Obama does not prosecute the Bush crime family, then he is tacitly condoning its criminal deeds, and, given that many of these deeds are crimes owing to their being transgressions, violations of the laws set down by the Constitution itself, he is thereby not defending the Constitution.
The message to the entire world and to the citizenry of the land would be loudly and clearly that the highest offices in the United States of America do not even respect the nation's own Constitution, that the United States is no longer a lawful political entity, one that can be trusted to abide by its very own laws.
And what is an unlawful political entity, if not a rogue nation?
Those are the logical consequences that one must draw from the refusal to prosecute the members of the Bush junta on the Obama administration's part.
It is not more complicated than that.
Samuel Clemons' 'Tom Sawyer' had a lot to say about whitewashing fences.
This article describes the politically conservative rational for non-starters. That is because there are no progressive thinkers in D.C., the government or our so-called elected 'officials.'
It is another article to disenfranchise all of us who may not be in a more privileged and informed level of society.
It is the paternal equivalent of 'a good talking too.'
It reads like letters in email form I received from my Ms. Senators and Congresspersons here in California on the primary issues for the last 10 years.
Could it be any more condescending?
And just for the record... Obama gave all the indicators to us dumb electorate that it would be 'business as usual.'
Sorry.
Told ya so.
the mighty xzorloc calls upon all who wish to awaken from the nightmare of history to soar above this tangled web of fairy tales and spinning narrative. Free your mind.
ALL ARE PUNISHED NOW. The center cannot hold, the falcon cannot hear the falconer.
You are in a bardo realm of lies, and lies about lies, and truths about lies about lies, and half truths about truths about lies about lies. it is a hall of mirrors, a fun house without the fun. Remember "Song of the south"? The tar baby? That is your TRUTH COMISSION, it's a trap. A courtroom circus wired to explode.
Our truth comission needs to be in the public forum, like "American Idol" or Judge Judy. But really... hasn't the ship left the dock?.. really? Don't we all know the truth? BUILDING SEVEN.
Is amerikkkkkkkkkkka willing to look at it's face in the funhouse mirror? I dunno.
BUILDING SEVEN. Are we willing admit to ourselves how poisonous we are to the rest of the planet?
Are we willing to see that our obeise, angry, frightened, ignorant population has willingly supported murder, and pointless wasteful genocide for the sake of the fatcat petrolium industry? For a cheap tank of gas?
That we have willingly blinded ourselves to the false flag "reichstag" 911? Because we just cannot psychologically manage that kind of nastyness? BUILDING SEVEN.
I don't think so.... I think you are all too chicken McNuggets to get present to your own horrible face, and too lazy to dig your brains out with a spoon (though your head is obviously soft enough).
But don't you worry, Xe will happily do it for you, while whatever Wackenhutt is calling herself will stifle your cries with a towel. Welcome to the wonderful world of privatised martial law.
BUILDING SEVEN.
It is more than mere mirrors, no matter the number. But it is about the 'finessing' of the language to deceive, twist, obfuscate, deny, tangle in knots, re-define, as all good lawyers do.
Now, since the vast majority of these jerks are lawyers, those mirrors become parallel universes where our perceptions, having previously been mined, are now like a broken window, except we are looking into a black hole rather than our own atmosphere.
I second that, mighty xzorloc.
Quote: "Liza Goitein of the Brennan Center for Justice, which advocates investigation, concedes that for now prospects for criminal prosecution are 'a nonstarter unless a smoking gun comes out."
Is Building 7 a big enough smoking gun for you, Liza? That's forty-seven stories of smoking gun, falling to the ground faster than a sandcastle swept away by the tide.
"changeyeswecanhopetobelievein!!!!"
A nation that condones lawlessness is a lawless nation. The lame excuses of Senator Bond actually show how much we need an investigation into much of the illegalities and constitutional violations committed by the Bush administration. Further, that investigation should not exempt Democrats as well..
If this is swept under the rug it will fester and rot, ultimately weakening our democracy.
"Most people would sooner die than think, in fact they do so." Bertrand Russell
I think its enough for the Obama administration to just move forwad and change policy. Internal investigations and depositions from primary sources would be great, but appointing special prosecutors or commissions and going public with reporters following every twist and turn would be a disaster.
They also need to keep the records of the Bush administration intact so the Karl Rove types won't be free to rewrite history.
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of
patriots and tyrants. ....Thomas Jefferson
If it was your child or wife had been murdered, maimed or driven from their own home would you feel the same? This happened innumerable times as the result of invading two nations under false pretenses. Justice is justice. It does not depend upon priorities.
It's a nice thought, but "to just move forwad and change policy" is exactly like setting down a nice new sheet of blank paper and handing the history rewriters a pen.
One can't refuse a cake and eat it too.
· Yr Obd't Servant
You are all forgetting:
"Congressional Democrats can't achieve much by themselves, however. They'll need support from Obama and probably at least some Republicans."
Read and re-read that sentence, because it's important.
"Republicans, meanwhile, say that if Obama pushes for a truth commission or prosecutions over the Bush administration's practices, they'll read that as an abdication of his promised bipartisanship and a declaration of political war."
Okay, now do you get it? Do you want "political war"? What would that accomplish?
We are facing some of the greatest challenges in our nation's history. Now is not the time to tear the country apart.
"If there's no official investigation of crimes, there cannot be repudiation."
Your statement in factually wrong. There was never a truth commission for torture or even an investigation, yet Obama has fully repudiated Bush's policy of torture. Understand? We can move forward without forming lynch mobs.
Thanks, but of course Joe will be back on another thread, ABSOLUTELY IGNORING the evidence you just showed him.
Perhaps we can take his lack of a tangible response as
[_____ AGREEMENT of his error ? _____]
Yes, I know rendition is still legal. But it does not amount to torture. Considering Obama has explicitly banned torture, that should be obvious.
J O E
What part of the following do you not comprehend :
"secret abductions and transfers of prisoners to countries that cooperate with the United States..."
These other countries that the prisoners are rendered to, are those that do the TORTURE "for US" ( 'cooperate' with our needs ), and then pass us the info.
OMG. Joe, consider the purpose of rendition please! Why transfer suspected terrorists to Egypt, Syria etc., if not to avoid restrictions on methods of extracting intel?
Please, Joe, I beg you, try harder to contribute here, I welcome opposing views and ideas but not when posted at an abysmal level of childishness.
"Most people would sooner die than think, in fact they do so." Bertrand Russell
I suggest you all read Glen Greenwald. Rendition does not equal torture.
… and reading doesn't equal comprehension.
Tell me then,Joseph, what is the purpose of rendition? Why on earth do you post such stuff as this?
"Most people would sooner die than think, in fact they do so." Bertrand Russell
The Republicans will play nice if you appease them. It's never worked before, but this time it will be different because Obama's doing it. Honest.
A 'Truth Commission' to probe Bush practices would reveal Democrats as being co-conspirators, so the answer is NO. Next question?
Are the conspiracy sites full?
PL; a closed mind is a wasted mind.
Or to put it another way: The mind is like a parachute, it only works when it is open!
that's … _ f u l l y __ O P E N
CF; correctomundo; the dems were complicit in these crimes, the repubs made sure they klnew ahead of time. they will not throw themselves under the bus.
But the dems have an out: they can pretend they believed Bush's lies about WMD and all the rest. Even if it's not true, it could work, legally speaking.
Oregoncharles
They could .... but they won't. Would you rat on your bosses?... in the midst of an economic catastrophe? with a million dollar mortgage to pay? and your spouse's Mercedes to maintain? .. not to mention the ivy league schools for your kids.
If we want something like this done, we have to have a large political movement that can force it down their throats. Can we do that? (once the Obama drug wears off? any idea how soon that might be?)
Sorry, Dems don't have an out. Their complicity goes beyond just WMD, they were in on each and every of Bush's crimes, torture (Pelosi knew), non-bidding contracts, illegal wiretapping, you name it. Bush and his cadre knew they were safe and would be safe, for eternity. Even the transfer of power to Dems last November was carefully staged.
There wasn't really a transfer of power, just a cosmetic retouch on the principal players. And millions were fooled. Many posting here, I can see.
Oregoncharles
This is exactly what my rep in Congress told me. The Dems are just as complicit in the so-called Bush administration's lawlessness. An investigation would expose the whole lot of them. The good cops and the bad cops.
So everyone here favoring Bush being scrutinized by a Truth Commission would want to see 9-11 and Cheney under an electron microscope also?
Have that inside job turned right-side out?
I'm down. If people knew Dick helped, it might wake them up.
Joe.
AZJOE; do you know me, or do i know you from somewhere.
Yes, azjoe, yes to your questions. Turn it right-flippin-inside-out. Which, considering how the Bushistas turned the world inside out, would be simply bringing it back to some semblance of normality.
"That's Third World country-type stuff," Bond said, "where you go in and prosecute; if you lose an election you get prosecuted. That has never been the American way. I think that the people of America would understand that that's not how this country is supposed to work."
No, I don’t understand how Mr. Obama can left a murdering thief past administration get away with its crimes. Mr. Obama is acting like the USA is a third world country where the previous criminal administration gets a wink and a nod so that the oligarchy can continue unabated.
Truth is that the USA political system is rotten and corrupt to the core. A truth commission will be just another white wash of the crimes of the previous administration.
Don't worry, sir. We'll be a third world country soon enough, and there will be less cognitive dissonance around government corruption.
"Christopher Bond a republican senator from the same party that impeached President Bill Clinton for lying about a sexual matter, is now calling for no investigations...."
Yep. Sounds like the republicans to me.
Clinton gets a special prosecutor and impeachment for a blowjob and the Bushites get a slap on the wrist for killing millions and putting our economy in the crapper.
Dem liberals are not the ones to let Repugs off the hook. Dem conservatives are.
Cons of a feather stick together.
Aside from Kucinich and maybe Feingold, I can't think of any that vote consistently liberal. Others only appear to be liberal relative to the Repug troglodytes. They seem to vote for liberal issues as long as it doesn't hurt them politically or financially.
I don't see our new president doing anything to forward an investigation of the malfeasance of Idiot Bu$h and his cohorts. Certainly Republicans will do everything possible to halt such legislateion. They are truly the Villains of the past 8 years.
There's nothing to be happy with about the new Obama administration; not yet, not if we wish to honestly and thoroughly consider everything the administration has and hasn't done. It's already guilty of criminal military strikes (aggression) and multiple times in Pakistan, killing plenty of civilians through the reckless firing of missiles in civilian areas; this hegemonious, hypocritical beast of apocalyptic ends, the USA and presently administered or commanded by Obama et al.
A truth commission is a fine enough idea, but for one to be truly honest, it should or would need to also include the Bill Clinton administration, for it was and remains guilty of criminal bombings of Iraq, which means acts of military aggression, so of war, supreme international crime, and is definitely guilty of war of aggression in Kosovo; besides other crimes the administration is guilty of or for.
Those are crimes that are certainly worse than criminally abducting innocent people and keeping them criminally detained for years without any true process of law that is just; even with the additional criminal torture that was applied. The latter don't or doesn't constitute supreme international crime; instead, it's a crime that's incidental in or to the process of committing the supreme international crime.
They speak only of the criminal abduction, detention and torture, and mainly torture, of people during the Bush-Cheney administration, while silently treating the supreme international crimes of the administration, which include the wars on Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as the act-of-war coup d'etat against the Haitian govt and people; well, those are being silently treated as matters to be disregarded. They clearly are deliberately disregarding the supreme inernational crimes, it's obvious that they are. After all, they definitely know of these crimes and make sure to not mention them at all. Some don't yet realise that the war on Afghanistan is a war of aggression, but others do and they are deliberately staying silent about this; other than for the members of Congress, the few of them, who have spoken out on this topic.
It's a complete and sick joke to focus on the administration's crime of torture while ignoring the supreme international crimes the same administration is guilty of commanding, committing, criminally trying to justify, and so on. But it's also a sick joke to focus on the Bush-Cheney administration while treating the Clinton-Gore administration as if they're not extremely guilty too, as if they also shouldn't be indicted and prosecuted.
The excuses presented or described in the McClatchy article are SICK. The whole damn govt is damn SICK and ... evil. They are just going to continue commanding and committing supreme international crimes replete of or with intolerable but nevertheless incidental crimes that also must not be tolerated; just that the supreme crime is key to focus on for investigation and for prosecuting the guilty or responsible parties.
Worse than the crime of torture and renditioning to countries where govts torture detainees, including some who were declared innocent by the U.S., worse than this are the over one million Iraqis and the many thousands of Afghans who've died and been killed because of these wars, and the several million Iraqis who are and remain really forced into becoming internal and external refugees without receiving any order of humane assistance as international laws and/or conventions, and plain morality, require of the aggressing and occupying forces, especially the main guilty party(ies). MILLIONS of innocent people are in these extreme circumstances, dead, or refugee in extremely bad, unjust conditions, starving, etcetera, all criminally and brutally forced into these circumstances and deliberately kept there; deliberately, given that international law and/or conventions are deliberately ignored, very clearly so.
The prosecutions could be useful, though won't happen, and if they did, then, and again, it'd be criminal to not also apply the same process to the Clinton administration; while additionally requiring the Obama administration to fully stop the war in Afghanistan (and Pakistan) and to withdraw all U.S. and coalition ally forces from that country as well as Iraq, where the U.S., including under the Obama administration, continues to be guilty for the criminal imprisonment of thousands of Iraqis who, additionally, are criminally treated. If not done integrally, then it'd be with hypocrisy, deceit, ....
The crimes the two administrations since 2000 are guilty of are already and very numerous, and all incidental to the supreme international crimes that without which the incidental crimes would not have happened and would not be continuing to begin with.
It's a CIRCUS ACT govt of hegemony, hypocrisy, corporatism, fascism, colonialism, imperialism, etcetera. They'll come up with all sorts of excuses to not and to never lead by example; they don't care about international laws, conventions and treaties. They do NOT.
Absolutely, this is the same point i made in a different thread here today, but your concise concept ties it up neatly:
The Obama administration retains the right to commit the supreme international crime.
Everything else is just everything else, compared to this.
"Truth Commissions" that expose the truth are Anti-American.
In order to fight the never ending military war on terrorism,to free country's that are soaked in fear and have informants on every corner and torture cells in their prisons,
We The People of America, have allowed our government to use fear mongering propaganda, torture on anyone when they deem it necessary, while standing by watching them take our civil liberty's away by conducting warrant less surveillance.
No checks and balances, the Judiciary and the Legislature are content in taking monetary kick backs while relinquishing their duties of oath to protect the constitution that protects Americans from being victimized by a military industrial complex dictatorship working with lunatic right wing war mongering religious fanatics.
YOU ARE EITHER WITH US OR AGAINST US.
FREEDOM ISN'T FREE.
UNITED WE STAND.
SUPPORT THE TROOPS.
AGREE WITH US OR BE LABELED ANTI-AMERICAN.
Apparently , in America, the only God we have belongs to the war mongering lunatic right wing.
The non-war left wing wacko God has no place in America.
The self-righteous "we will never forget crowd" can not take the time to ask why 9/11 happened. They are willing to accept the premise that middle eastern people just hate us for our life style.
By now, anyone can plainly see that they really don't have much knowledge of our life style, and when they learn of it, they want it.
No , the sad truth is American capitalism has been abusing middle east country's for years by propping up evil dictatorships like Saddam Husein while buying oil resources on the cheap.
Intellectualism is dead, and the pen and diplomacy is not mightier than he sword.
President Obama,I a raise a call to intellectual arms, the Truth commission can not damage us politically or globally, the rest of the world already knows what we have done, and the damage has already taken its tole, here and abroad.
If you are going to make speeches about responsibility, then its time to clean the slate, and all involved, Republican and Democrat must pay the price for TRUTH.
And thats the rub, isn't it, the Dems don't want to get caught with their hands in the cookie jar of deceit over the last 7 years.
Well, either we have checks and balances or we are now a fascist dictatorship.
My vote is for intellectual Truth,Constitutional checks and balances, civil liberty's and democracy.
I support the truth commission, which means guilty people in the government, the military industrial complex and the wall street need to go to JAIL.
Only intellectual discourse can repair the damage done to Americas physique, guns ,bullets and war can not.
BornFreeMen
Honor our troops and their family's.
Bring home our Troops, they have already served and paid a huge price for for our Leaders intellectual dishonesty.
bornfreemen: I could not agree more, but the question: How do we get the people in jail that belong in jail and are guilty of the most egregious, treason?