Cheney Throws Down Gauntlet, Defies Prosecution for War Crimes
U.S. courts have long held that waterboarding, where water is poured into someone's nose and mouth until he nearly drowns, constitutes torture. Our federal War Crimes Act defines torture as a war crime punishable by life imprisonment or even the death penalty if the victim dies.
Under the doctrine of command responsibility, enshrined in U.S. law, commanders all the way up the chain of command to the commander-in-chief can be held liable for war crimes if they knew or should have known their subordinates would commit them and they did nothing to stop or prevent it.
Why is Cheney so sanguine about admitting he is a war criminal? Because he's confident that either President Bush will preemptively pardon him or President-elect Obama won't prosecute him.
Both of those courses of action would be illegal.
First, a president cannot immunize himself or his subordinates for committing crimes that he himself authorized. On February 7, 2002, Bush signed a memo erroneously stating that the Geneva Conventions, which require humane treatment, did not apply to Al Qaeda and the Taliban. But the Supreme Court made clear that Geneva protects all prisoners. Bush also admitted that he approved of high level meetings where waterboarding was authorized by Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, John Ashcroft, Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld and George Tenet.
Attorney General Michael Mukasey says there's no need for Bush to issue blanket pardons since there is no evidence that anyone developed the policies "for any reason other than to protect the security in the country and in the belief that he or she was doing something lawful." But noble motives are not defenses to the commission of crimes.
Lt. Gen. Antonio Taguba, who investigated the Abu Ghraib scandal, said, "There is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes. The only question that remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account."
Second, the Constitution requires President Obama to faithfully execute the laws. That means prosecuting lawbreakers. When the United States ratified the Geneva Conventions and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, thereby making them part of U.S. law, we agreed to prosecute those who violate their prohibitions.
The bipartisan December 11 report of the Senate Armed Services Committee concluded that "senior officials in the United States government solicited information on how to use aggressive techniques, redefined the law to create the appearance of their legality, and authorized their use against detainees."
Lawyers who wrote the memos that purported to immunize government officials from war crimes liability include John Yoo, Jay Bybee, William Haynes, David Addington and Alberto Gonzales. There is precedent in our law for holding lawyers criminally liable for participating in a common plan to violate the law.
Committee chairman Senator Carl Levin told Rachel Maddow that you cannot legalize what's illegal by having a lawyer write an opinion.
The committee's report also found that "Rumsfeld's authorization of aggressive interrogation techniques for use at Guantánamo Bay was a direct cause of detainee abuse there." Those techniques migrated to Iraq and Afghanistan, where prisoners in U.S. custody were also tortured.
Pardons or failures to prosecute the officials who planned and authorized torture would also be immoral. Former Navy General Counsel Alberto Mora testified to the Senate Armed Services Committee in June 2008 that "there are serving U.S. flag-rank officers who maintain that the first and second identifiable causes of U.S. combat deaths in Iraq - as judged by their effectiveness in recruiting insurgent fighters into combat - are, respectively the symbols of Abu Ghraib and Guantánamo."
During the campaign, Obama promised to promptly review actions by Bush officials to determine whether "genuine crimes" were committed. He said, "If crimes have been committed, they should be investigated," but "I would not want my first term consumed by what was perceived on the part of the Republicans as a partisan witch hunt, because I think we've got too many problems we've got to solve."
Two Obama advisors told the Associated Press that "there's little-if any - chance that the incoming president's Justice Department will go after anyone involved in authorizing or carrying out interrogations that provoked worldwide outrage."
When he takes office, Obama should order his new attorney general to appoint an independent prosecutor to investigate and prosecute those who ordered and authorized the commission of war crimes.
Obama has promised to bring real change. This must be legal and moral change, where those at the highest levels of government are held accountable for their heinous crimes. The new president should move swiftly to set an important precedent that you can't authorize war crimes and get away with it.
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
148 Comments so far
Show AllI wonder whether we'll have to pursue Cheney, Bush & al to Paraguay? I heard recently that Bush has bought a huge tract of land there. Reminds me of Martin Bormann & the heirs of I.G. Farben.
Let our leaders know we don't want Dick to go untried for his crimes, sign the petition and watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmdQSnnh5UY
Another great hide-out is Puerto Montt, way down there in the Chilean Patagonia. Apparently there is still quite a Nazi enclave there.
Marjorie Cohn writes "Why is Cheney so sanguine about admitting he is a war criminal? Because he's confident that either President Bush will preemptively pardon him or President-elect Obama won't prosecute him."
Not only would that be illegal, as Cohn says, that would amount to suicide for any decent impulse in the Obama administration and for the safety of our country. Cheney is very special, but he is just one man within a vast supportive system. He is provides a living illustration of the teflon that will protect those powerful men and a few women who plan to continue breaking the law.
Despite the Bush / Cheney record, 46% of voters still went Republican. Many top elected Democrats have also "gone Republican" on issue after issue for 8 years, in addition to the disastrous the de-regulation that started with Reagan and continued under Clinton. The last several decades in the US have been characterized by failure to use common sense and failure to abide by basic laws of the modern world. We have invaded country after country that had not attacked us. We have tried to destroy and undermine the UN rather than helping it to be better. We do not sign treaties for the environment, against cluster bombs, for world court, etc. We have allowed our jobs to be shipped abroad to people working in substandard conditions, and in many cases have rewarded the companies that do so.
Most of us have lapsed into moral torpor while those energetic crazy old rich white men have gone to town.
I agree that Cheney's current arrogance means he feels immune from prosecution.
In addition I strongly suspect that he and his posse do not plan to step down, but plan to continue from behind the scenes scheming and undermining everything in our country on issues ranging from wildlife to torture, from war contracts to banking fraud, from union busting to domestic "containment" camps. If nobody stops them, they will continue and get much worse. After bringing the country to further ruin, they will then be able to point to Obama and take over the government with every shred of opposition destroyed.
People with a low level of morality and a habit of doing whatever they please understand only consequences. They must be brought to justice. Now. You can see what evil they can accomplish in 30 or 60 days. How long will they be allowed to operate without being stopped?
It is not a waste of time. If we don't insist on the rule of law, everything else will soon become a calamity the likes of which the world has never seen.
Joe
Despite the best efforts of several fascists who are promoting doing nothing and wringing thir hands about how impotent they are, the bottom line remains the same: Either you put these monsters in the docket in The Hague--where the Bosnian butchers were small potatoes compared to these guys, or
YOU deserve to be in that docket.
I find it really morally repulsive how no one in the US is ever responsible for anything wrong that he or she does, or which is done in his or her name.
Fairies and pixies and duendes are running the place, spying on each other, murdering more than a million Iraquis, countless Afghanis, bailing out their buddies and telling everybody else to bend over and take it.
We can do something about this mess. It will take time, but it can be done. However, we need to get our power back to control what is happening in Congress: http://www.thoughts.com/RedNeckPossie/blog/a-way-to-give-power-back-to-the-people-184665/
There is considerabledoubt that Obama will act. But there areforces in Congress and the grass roots that may be able to force action.
As for Bush issuing pardons. Pardons present several problems.
1. To accept a pardon one tacitly admits guilt.
2. Once pardone, the person would have to testify. S/he can no longer invoke the Fifth Amendment as s/he can no longer incriminate her/himself.
3. Pardons would not be recognized by the International Criminal Court. Once pardoned, a person could not safely travel to any country which might arrest by claiming universal jurisdiction.
So there is hope, but Obama will have to be pushed.
Bring America Back !!!! Luv this analysis by Marjorie Cohn of an insolent war criminal.........but as samosamo says below........lets get out of the torture chamber, and...
.......Remember that innocent lil fella who conducted War Games on 9/11/01,
which sent NORAD jets out into the Atlantic Ocean ???? What a darn coincidence that same day two perfect jumbo jet imprints were made into the World Trade Center twin towers; a much smaller imprint into a construction wall of the Pentagon, and a supposed jumbo jet crash in a Pennsylvania farmland.
Duh, thats right, his name is Richard Cheney, too !! So if he is conducting NORAD War Games, how then is he on record as physically resisting and screaming at the US Secret Service who were forcibly taking him to the underground emergency operations center ???? And, simultaneously, in Sarasota, Fla the same US Secret Service allows the Big Guy==the reigning President of the USA to idly
sit, smiling for a full 10 minutes in front of an elementary school class reading the story of 'My Pet Goat'. Later, the Goat turns out to be Saddam H.
If we are not insulted by actual facts, folks, then no President will ever be
held accountable to the people again, ever again !!!! The key and the lock is not in the Torture Chamber, folks, but in the Neocon holiday known as 9/11 !!
As Kucinich screamed out at the Convention: WAKE UP AMERICA !!!! FOUR TIMES !
And on January 20, 2009 Barack Obama will become a co-defendant.
This country hasn't had a good tar and feathering in a long time.
Cheney will get a preventative pardon.
Obama will do nothing.
Congress won't impanel a commission to investigate him.
The spineless European nations won't arrest Cheney if he travels there - for fear of retaliation from the US rogue state.
There is no justice in this dark and hollow world.
---USAn---
Btw, being a peace loving liberal, i stand now before my peers and ask, am i wrong for wanting Barbara Bush to be held down so that the victims of Katrina can shit in her mouth???
Ouch. Is this supposed to be funny or some kind of venting? I must be getting old as I sense I'm missing something here. Peace be with you and peace be with Barbara Bush.
You mean where her "beautiful mind" is?
She's also the reason the current president was brain-damaged: Fetal Alcohol Syndrome.
His use of alcohol and coke didn't help either.
No, it did not. But Fetal Alcohol Syndrome predisposed him to abuse drugs and alcohol.
Bush also admitted that he approved of high level meetings where waterboarding was authorized by Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, John Ashcroft, Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld and George Tenet.
So they should all hang. Put it on network television and it'll be the most highly rated show in history of all television. But first allow the public to pass by them one by one and spit and piss on them.
Lets also make one thing perfectly clear, Bush and Cheney are not evil. They may aspire to be so, but they are just the perfect example of little dorks that were picked on in school, and grew up never forgiving and forgetting and then took it out on the world. Just snot nosed little punks that needed a good ass kicking. Nothing more.
Egad! Where is Vlad the Impaler when you need him?
There was a man who would never put up with these evil-doers.
We need a man like the Prince of Wallachia but all we get is (Eric) Prince and Wasilla.
The importance of the prosecution of the w & dick show, along with their equally culpable sidekicks and now along with what appears to be most of the SEC for turning their heads on repeated attempts to inform them of the huge fraud madoff was carrying out, is MOST essential. Not doing so will let it be known that any criminal mind is welcomed here in america to do his/her worse without fear of accountability and prosecution. As a matter of fact, this is what our economy for the last 8 or more years has been, a criminal economy because there has essentially been no transparency, regulation or oversight. There is not a clearer definition of what an 'unfettered market' produces, it gathers the crooks together to take what they want without fear of being caught and thrown in jail.
While we are at it, those 5 members of the supreme court that stopped the recount because it would 'do irreppreable harm to the petioner(w)', because gore had pulled within 154 votes of w is a criminal act. Prosecute them.
Then there is the matter of 9/11 which very much needs investigating by responsible parties not beholding to republicans or democrats. Investigate and prosecute.
No matter how ugly it turns out with who is responsible for any of this, it would be more harmful to do nothing and let those guilty remain living in our societies. Seems like w kind of said something like that about invading Iraq. Around about the 'smoking gun in the form of mushroom cloud' time. The only thing left to make it that bad is for us to be nuked because as broken as our economy is, w & dick have done more than any terrorist in destroying this economy and its people, with what they were purported to have been preventing with their criminal running of the country.
Grappa
I don't think any politicians has the guts to try and charge that bunch of racketeers from the White House. I believe the best chance for taking them to trial would be through the World Court in the Hague.I wouldn't look for them to actually allow themselves to be taken into custody, and most likely would be tried and convicted in absentia. It would kind of be a house arrest, as long as they stay in the good ol US they would be safe. They may be at risk if they venture outside of this country.
Sen. Levin as indicated he would like to set up a commission charged with bringing back a report showing wrongdoing if it so supported such findings on the possible breaking of international treaties through the use of torture. I just don't thing that will go very far. President elect Obama doesn't want to get caught up in these type of maters,side tracking him from his economic priorities. Its understandable on one level, but what does doing nothing say about the importance we the American people put on the rule of law?
I'm surprised nobody’s commented on the strategy here, which we've seen many times.
First there's denial and stonewalling and more denial.
Then there are lies, and more denial.
Then there are redefinitions of terms and laws and relationships and timelines and reality becomes liquid and hard to hold onto. But even so, everybody knows the truth, even the people who don't know consciously.
Then when some small truth that is linked to the big truth leaks out, after more denial and stonewalling there is "well yes that's true but only that and none of the big truth is true and there's no connection between the 2 and it’s not important anyway because the real reason we did it is..."(for mothers everywhere or to protect puppies or !support the troops!) (or "the real important thing is...", or some such diversion from the small truth that is linked to the big truth...
Then more truth comes out, and it is clearly seen by everyone who can still see that the small truth IS linked to the big truth.
Then there are more lies and denials and stonewalls, and then some larger part of the truth is admitted, probably never the whole truth, but it seems like it, and there's discussion about the truth and the definitions and the liquid reality and then some other lie comes out and the next day when you bring up the original story the liars and the pundit liars and everyone who could do anything all say
"why are you bringing that up? that's old news. get over it."
And then it starts again with the new lies.
Marjorie has stated what King O'Bama should do. Can you leftist radicals please be satisfied with that? Never mind that the royal chimp will do the complete opposite. Let me explain the mindset of REAL Americans and maybe you will "get it" like Common Dreams wants you to. Another article posted today on Common Dreams titled "America - The Whole Package" describes well what makes America truly great, and I quote: 'Stevens recounts the couple's astonishment at the quality and variety of food. At an Italian bakery in the East Village, Ina was "almost in tears when she saw the pastries displayed."' So you see it is not respect for the rule of law that is important in the USA, but rather the variety of pastries available as compared to lesser places like Russia. And the serving sizes in the restaurants, the lights that illuminate the Manhattan bridges, and so on. You should be able to get it, I think, and adopt the value system that will take you farthest in the 'good ol USA'. Can we auction the national parks to the highest bidder now?
Yeah, I hate to be the cynical pessimist, but I don't think Obama has it in him. He was bought years ago.
I hope he proves me wrong.
After watching Obama's frightened, cya appointments following election day, I have zero faith that he'll go after the Bush administration for war crimes. Zero.
I knew he was another Chicago pol. I didn't know he was JUST another Chicago pol.
The cover of a recent gossip rag stated an inkling about the Obamas that I had after watching Frontline on the eve of the election: that it's Michelle that "wears the pants" in the family. With Barack's appointments, especially Warren for the inaugural invocation, he appears to be going overboard with some kind of Lincoln like make nice nice. He also appears to be becoming extremely comfortable being the Grand Poo Bah of the US's most elitist Greek order, where they like to call names but never truly dump on their own. So I doubt he'll push war crimes.
However, if he does go after war crime recognition on some level I side with Detroit area activist legend Bishop Thomas Gumbleton and his statement that for the world court to become effective some level of amnesty would have to be given. Considering that 90% of US citizens were all for the obliteration of 30,000 or so "Taliban" members via cluster bombing, I'm all for giving Bush/Cheney a pass if clear recognition of past US war crime behavior came about, with amends to the Iraqi/Afghan people, and a wooden stake to the heart or silver bullet, whatever it takes, to expose and denounce and bury the catastrophic mind set and behavior of American Exceptionalism.
Warning, please do not use any microwave emitting devices around pacemakers.
Has this den of thieves stopped traveling in Europe? If not, why doesn't some other country arrest them?
I like that solution. The whole world could see that somebody else had to clean up our mess. This country deserves to be ashamed.
So , if federally run organizations in the united states , like Infragard ,CIA , IAFF, FBI , ATF, are practicing gang stalking domestic torture 24/7 surviellance, and using DEW's ( Directed Energy Weapons) against Americans that are innocent of crimes during a time of War, are they not guilty of WAR Crimes.
BornFreeMen
Domestic torture victim by Government sponsored agencies.
I am still confronted on a regular basis by people who believe Bush and Cheney are the heroes and Obama is the dangerous one. The neocon pundits are still preaching Obama's association with "socialists", "elitists" and "terrorists".
Prosecuting the Bush administration would encourage this divisiveness. Its time to move forward and start correcting the mistakes. So many mistakes! So much to do! No time for infighting.
If by "it's time to move forward" you mean in denial of the primary responsibility of a nation of laws, then please make an effort to see that, despite your natural aversion to being labeled divisive or stuck in the past, this is neither correcting mistakes nor moving forward.
bbr-001:Are you suggesting "move forward and start correcting the mistakes" instead of prosecuting war crimes and violations of the law? Go see the other related articles on this site.
'
NeoCons or NeoNazi, they're all the same........WAR CRIMINALS.
Bush, Cheney, and a long list of NeoCons should be tried at the International War Crimes Court at the Hague. They must be held responsible for their crimes.
Then and only then, can Justice and Truth, start to be restored to a ravaged world.
.
"Second, the Constitution requires that President Obama faithfully execute the laws."
Assuming that that will not happen and that Congress will wimp out as well, what recourse is left? I think the answer to that is why Cheney can be so smug. Ain't nothin gunna happin, unless an outraged citizenry DEMANDS justice! unfortunately I see little outrage; some disgust and wringing of hands, but not much else.
Real Change is what Obama based his entire campaign on. If he does not investigate and prosecute these war criminals it would be a great injustice not only to Americans, but to the entire world. I feel he may mean well, but I see in him a person whom can and probably will be intimidated by the invisible puppeteers. Some of the things he has stated his administraition would do would be beneficial, however "REAL CHANGE" is going to take more than a few new policies and the removal of troops in the Middle East. If his administration were to investigate & prosecute, it would send a powerful message to those who think they are above the Law. It can be done, through public pressure. Let's see to it that these crimes do not go unpunished.
James E. Libby
"Attorney General Michael Mukasey says there's no need for Bush to issue blanket pardons since there is no evidence that anyone developed the policies "for any reason other than to protect the security in the country and in the belief that he or she was doing something lawful.""
Wow. And this guy claims to be a lawyer? Ever hear the term "ignorance of the law is no excuse"? If good intentions were the standard for jurisprudence, there would be no criminals at all. Gee Judge, I really believed that murder was legal! How can you send someone to jail who thought they were acting within the law?
Mukasey should join them all in the docket at the International Court of Justice at the Hague. He is every bit the terrorist that the rest of these monsters are. He sat before the Senate confirmation hearings and claimed that he was unable to render a judgment on whether waterboarding was legal. I believe he indicated that he would get back to the Senators on that. HE LIED, UNDER OATH. It's called perjury, and it is a felony. It's also contempt of Congress, which is an impeachable offense. HE NEVER GOT BACK TO THEM. Which is his way of saying, waterboarding is legal. And, since it is NOT, he needs to be tried for war crimes as well as the rest of them.
Once most Americans finally realize we live in an OUTLAW ROGUE STATE, what will their response be?
"When is 'American Idol' on?"
Maybe I'll be surprised.
Yeah, right.
I won't be surprised.
A nation of sheep--and that was in the 50s.
Believe it or not,I think there are somethings that will.But this is speaking as if it is all about psycho babble and we no longer control the remote.I use to think america would end up like Russia after they tried invading Afghanistan.Now I worry we will have Chinese telling us what to do and prison camps for us like the one for Tibetans.Oh well,why worry,be happy.It use to be so easy catching criminals now it seems criminal acts acts are the only ones for surefire sucess in this navive country.
Of course Marjorie Cohn is absolutely correct and of course such prosecutions won't happen--in the United States by the U.S. government. However, a change of venue from the U.S. to the World Court in the Hague, Netherlands, could certainly assure a fair and unbiased trial. But then again we know that will never happen either don't we?
As long as the U.S. seeks to make itself an exception to the laws it expects others to follow, it will remain, by definition, an outlaw state.
Poet
Poet:good comment. You read the article. It's amazing how many seem to be commenting without relating to the article and its contents.
I think should we not push for a hague court tribunal,one day we will have another country's army occupying our land because of the crooks we let run the place today will send us further up the yang river.
Things happen the way they do for a reason.
Maybe you are supposed to PAY (read suffer) for your crimes?
Naw, that's too simple....
Cheney already knows that the Obama/Biden administration will do to the Bush/Cheney gang what Clinton/Gore did to the Raygun/Bush gang, NOTHING ! Hell, I won't be surprised if Obama even gives Dubya a pardon !
"I would not want my first term consumed by what was perceived on the part of the Republicans as a partisan witch hunt, because I think we've got too many problems we've got to solve."
Well now, it's not exactly a witch hunt when they openly admit to it. (Maybe he'll change his position?) Besides aren't the criminal actions of our highest officials one of the many problems we've got to solve?
Can't wait to see what other issues will be determined not important enough to address in light of other issues.
Change takes courage Obama-- time to grow a pair.
Cheney made suckers out of all of you when he did 9/11.
Then he rubbed your noses in it.
What are you people made of--shopping bags?
I love it! Shopping bags! Yes! EMPTY shopping bags!
"frank1569 December 19th, 2008 3:08 pm
As I've said before, The Decider and his team of sadists surely have their "defense" prepared for deployment when, I mean if, necessary: The Congress never declared "war" on either Afghanistan or Iraq."
BASED on what I've read a few times over the past recent months, the Congress authorized the war on the Taliban and hence Afghanistan, given we couldn't expect less, and only one female Congress member of California opposed.
As for Iraq, there was no legitimate basis upon which to authorize recourse to war on Iraq on any conditions, so the authorization they did give is equivalent, much.
Congress never authorized war. Congress authorized the "use of military force against Iraq". The word "war" never appears in HJ 114. Congress has not authorized war since WWII.
No ones running the show.Obama says he's to busy to mess with investigations during his first year in office and the dems did not want to start impeachment because elections were to near.Who says Bush can't have the best of both worlds?
"countcoup December 19th, 2008 1:42 pm
The very simple fact that is missing from these, very poignant comments is this.
The "People of the United States" have all of the power they need. They can either take action, or not. They can assure themselves and even the Great Grandchildren of their Great Grandchildren (now that is projecting isn't it?), that these crimes that VP Cheney, so arrogantly admitted to * will never occur again."
BULL! It's "hollywood fantasy"!
Unfortunately, all they have to do is make people afraid and all this rightfully expressed concern goes out the window. We're a cowardly lot by nature.
You sure are a cowardly lot.
I told you folks more than once on this site how to end this government.
Without initiating any violence, too.
But what did you do?
Obviously you DID nothing, but a couple of cowards posted that it was a bad idea because a few people might get killed by the US military.
My grandmother used to call folks like that "chickenshits".
She was way too kind.
(Yawn)
Keep yawning--you need to do it a million times--once for every Iraqui butchered in your name.
The mean bitter gringa is at it again.
Right. Nobody has a right to remind YOU that YOU murdered 1 million Iraquis--so far.
I spent 2 nights in jail protesting this fucking war back in early 03, you fucking cunt. So don't say I killed anyone, because I've marched, written letters, been arrested, screamed, cried, and alienated 1 sister and a few friends over this fucking war.
You are such a cunt.
If you spent two days in jail it's because of your obscene violent mouth.
Back in the 60s we all went to jail in San Francisco, and we all left California because of what Reagan was doing to gut the higher education system there--and it affected all of our academic careers and we (or at least I) felt it was a small price to pay.
But we did stop the war.
You didn't--so until you do, I think you know what you can do with your dirty MISOGYNIST language.
That's right, gringa. You stopped the Vietnam War all by yourself, and I, I am personally responsible for the entire Iraq War and the hundreds of thousands causalties and millions of displaced persons.
Put down the crack pipe, you vile troll.
Ah, you ave no arguments but you can libel other posters by calling them junkies and masturbators.
YOU are really going to bring peace to the planet, you hypocritical little punk.
There will never be peace so long as you gringos keep spewing dirty language at everybody who doesn't kiss their rear guards.
And I believe I used the word WE in my post.
And yes, I hold you personlly responsible for the Iraq War. You are trying your best to start one right here on this site.
."And yes, I hold you personlly responsible for the Iraq War. You are trying your best to start one right here on this site."
Funniest thing Ive read in days, thanks for it. You are the single poster here who has been at war with diverse opinions from your first post here. You are about as blind to your annoying triviality as anyone I've ever encountered. You are in an endless state of war with sanity . with reason, with logic and with civility.
I bet you always bring out the best in folks, huh? I cannot imagine you ever having been effective in anything you have ever attempted. Except maybe isolating yourself from all of humanity in some mud hut in rural Mexico, driven there by having alienated the last person who cared at for you or was willing to listen to what you said.
If you are really concerned about the fate of this planet you would do the single most effective thing to help; leave us alone to work things out.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
I see, only gringos have rights.
So long as I hold a US passport, my rights to criticize the US and its vacant "citizens" are no fewer than yours. Get over it.
Disagreeing is not a warlike posture. Civilized folks--a category to which you clearly do not choose to belong--routinely disagree. It's called PLURALISM, and it is healthy. Forcing consensus is called FASCISM, and it is the posture of the US which has destroyed this planet. It is unhealthy.
Calling someone--this poster, in fact, a fucking cunt, insane, an ass, a crack addict and a vile troll because she diasagreed with your hypocritical zionist promotion of genocide and your refusal to accept responsibility for YOUR actions ARE warlike postures.
And you can shove your racism (everyone in Mexico lives in a mud hut now, do they?). Tell us about your Park Avenue penthouse--along with your non-existent doctorate and license in clinical psychology.
What I find most unacceptable about you, and other fascists like you, is that you still believe, after creating the majority of the disasters that threaten life on this planet, that only YOU have the right to "work things out". There are several billion people on this planet, and you (plural) gringos--eliminating Native Americans and any folks other than white folks, of course--leaves a little over 200 million who believe that THEY are the only ones with rights to "work things out". Right. The basic arithmetic goes against you. And the more you belligerantly maintain your racist imperialist attitude, the more ACTIVELY we will all go against you.
You are really doing a great job working things out in Iraq and Afghanistan and Guatanamo and bankrolling the working out of genocide in occupied Palestine.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
.You really need help. Mexico has universal health care, why not avail yourself of the opportunity.
Oh and I believe it was you, in an earlier post who claimed to live in a small village , probably many structures made of adobe, thus mud hut...you are such a clown. As far as that list of epithets the only one applying to me is the insane part, and you prove the accuracy of that assessment with each posting.
Noone claimed rights only for "gringos", that must have been the voice ( or one of them ) in your head, but several here have rightly expressed their revulsion for your diatribe and immaturity. Further you wretched and revolting failure of a political commentator, I defy you to find one single post of mine in which I advocate any of the insane charges you level at me, or at anyone else here for that matter.
This is exactly the reason that you are so unwelcome here, you subtract rather than add to any discussion on which you post. Now I am sorry that your parents let you down so badly, but Ive no more time for such a useless contributor as yourself. Rage on lady, but do it unread by me.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Racist:
Just because I live in a small village in Mexico, doesn't mean that I live in a mud hut--or that anyone else here does. Actually, we have a normal 3 bedroom brick home with a large patio, a small 2 room studio at the back of it, a large orchard with a river running through it--and we also have about 300 acres of a rancho in the cerro.
As to mud huts, I lived for 10 years in Santa Fe, NM--where those mud huts sell for 5 or 6 million dollars. More than you could scrape together.
When you are eating catchow and living in the back seat of a 1972 Barracuda, remember that you are white and privileged and your government loves you--and that you once OWNED a plastic progressive website called Commondreams where you were The Decider of who was WELCOME and who wasn't.
What a complete crock.
.You are playing directly into her illness with such responses. It would not surprise me find that she has only one way to obtain sexual release, through the insults you offer. Why help her obsession?
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Ah, the primary school princess plies her infantilism yet again.
Now libeling me with sex-talk.
As I've said before, The Decider and his team of sadists surely have their "defense" prepared for deployment when, I mean if, necessary: The Congress never declared "war" on either Afghanistan or Iraq.
No war, no prisoners of war, no war crimes. One of any number of friendly GOPathological judges will agree and dismiss all charges.
Plus, Team Torture most certainly has enough dirt on their Dem enablers via their illegal wiretapping 'program' to keep the leashes short and tight.
Move on, folks. Nothing to see here...
Here's a stinker of a cartoon to contemplate:
Scene: cold block room w/single light bulb. An interrogation room. A “detainee” being waterboarded. The agent pouring the water says, “OK, Abdul, Who set up 9/11?”. Abdul: “blubDickblubblubblubCheneyblubblub”. Second agent with a clip board, to a third rookie agent with the video camera: “Eh, that’s what they all say the first few times…”.
The little mouse in the corner says, “Must be a conspiracy”….
Hopefully, the following words are suitable only for fiction, an int'l intrigue movie, or conspiracy freaks, but...In light of recent revelations* (guesses?), there seems to be a very dark and sad, but plausible case to be made that the secrecy and torturing was not to make the war less dangerous or shorter for our troops or safeguard national security, but to cover up, ferret out and neutralize evidence or anyone who had first hand knowledge of who the perps are and how the whole thing unfolded. Can anyone come up with a way to connect the dots that is less painful to patriotic sensibilities? I hope so, because if this tends toward non-fiction, thoughts of such deep treachery and treason are hard to bear. If it is possible (1%?) that well-meaning, courageous, patriotic soldiers and interrogators have been mis-used, it must be investigated.
*In "Shock Doctrine", Klein tells how torture is used to destroy minds.
*Ray McG and others have hinted that raw results of 'interrogations' went right to the top, and orders went from there down. Interesting info would be if different levels/stages of interrogators were talking to each other. And where which detainees were sent to become babbling idiots...IF that ever happened.
*One or two years ago Foreign Affairs mag had an article buried in the back in which high level brass (Powell, too) signed off their oath to obey legal orders only, saying that because in "the conditions of modern war" only the CIC could make that determination. Same as Nixon saying, "...if the President does it, that makes it legal...". as above. It was a sad day in Arlington Cemetery when they penned that.
I just think that this Nation and the people who have died to preserve our ideals deserve better.
P.S.:Dick, if you did not work out with a nod and a wink a quid pro quo w/King S for the Sep surprise, my apologies. We’re just trying to find out what happened to Lady Liberty.
The really depressing aspect of the matter is the niggling, persistent notion that Dick Cheney is the true face of America, the basic prototype.
>>The really depressing aspect of the matter is the niggling, persistent notion that Dick Cheney is the true face of America, the basic prototype
Dick Cheney becomes the TRUE face of the United States of America, if there is a failure to prosecute him for his crimes.
The failure to prosecute WILL define The United States of America.
pk
Lets not be surprised if he leaves office with a Presidential pardon in his pocket.
He most assuredly is not.
If he is NOT the true face, then who IS the true face of the US?
I say he is the archetype of the Smugly Impune Gringo Bully.
Those darn ole Gringos, just when you think you've stamped them out......
they pop right back up, wearing their Cheney masks and trolling sites like this plastic progressive site libeling progressive leaders and promoting the neocon agenda.
And calling themselves Thomas More and Liberty.
I see our friend Serena is with us Gringos again. ( I just love optimistic commentators.)
Serena does make some excellent points from time to time. It just that her methods leave much to be desired. (That is a deliberate understatement)
I believe in proceeding with what Gramsci called "pessimism of the intellect and optimism of the will".
And my methodology in proceeding thusly is none of your business--oh promoter of free speech.
Tell us how effective YOUR methods have been at bringing about meaningful change.
Don't be modest, put it out there.
She's a troll. Straight up. A bitter, mean gringa here to stir up dischord.
Nope, a Native American who will not let youpalesfaces forget what you did to my people and what you conitnue to do to any non-gringos on this planet.
The word, sir, is DISCORD--as in The Apple of Discord (google it).
For any REAL CHANGE to happen among the lotus-eaters in gringolandia there must be MASSIVE DISCORD.
Passive acceptance (bending over and taking it) has created nothing but larger rectums.
.One should have more sympathy for one so obviously ill.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
ardee: Cut it out! It's time to stop using all forms of epithets in re crazy, "obviously ill" when disagreeing with somone politically. It's old. It goes back at least to Lincoln's time, as in David Herbert Donald's "We Are Lincoln Men:", 2003. It's cheap shot and does harm to mentally ill/disabled by furthering stereotypes. It's called ableist language.
Good holidays.
.In my own opinion she IS mentally ill, and I reserve the right to an opinion. Ignore me if you choose.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Thanks, NY. She was just pissed because I called her on her hypocrisy. The goody two shoes (both would fit in some of the violent mouths on this site) always show their true colors when called on their bogus behavior.
The problem is that on this supposedly "progressive" site, nobody accepts being told to their face that what they have done to other people, other species and to this planet is criminal.
They mumble about "some good points" and complain about being told straight out--they believe, apparently, even at this juncture--when the excrement has hit the fan--that they DESERVE receving their "truth" with big doses of sugar.
In the REAL world, it isn't going to happen.
serena:I don't remember ever agreeing with you. I object to calling someone crazy or mentally ill, because one disagrees politically, as I said in my comment to ardee. I notice you are good at answering offensive language to you, on a recent comment.
Right, hypocrites.
I have NO sympathy for YOU--you did it to yourselves, and just because you think you are hot spit, you did it to the rest of the planet, too.
The sole of my haurache to you.
Dick Cheney is the most evil man in the world and as such a lying sack of shit deserves any and all punishmeent for his crimes. I sincerely hope that he is hauled up before the World Court and tried, convicted and hung for his crimes. It is proven that he does not have a conscience.
The World Court has no jurisdiction. Lets go for our own Courts. From your description you must have met him.
Thomas you are mistaken.
The world court does have jurisdiction.
To bring the Bush administration to trial in any other forum besides the "ICJ", would be a travesty of justice, since he would never receive a "fair trial" in that the sentences received in U.S. Courts would eventually be appealed to the Supreme Court which would be expected to be exceptionally lenient.
Mr. Bush handed Saddam Hussein over for trial in Iraqi courts knowing full well that the jurisdiction should have been the "ICJ", since those crimes were committed against all of humanity, and cannot be considered "local".
For a comparison, Richard Nixon's crimes were against the American People, no one lost their lives for their philosophical, religious, or political beliefs. Had he gone to trial, it would have been proper to try him in the U.S. System.
You have often made the "ill placed point" that America would "never give up is sovereignty", but this would not be a case for that argument. Jurisdiction is determined not by the "location" as much as the "nature" of the crime. One small example: If a person(s) transports stolen goods from Okla, to Tex, the jurisdiction goes to Federal level, since state lines were crossed. Then the individual states have "second forum jurisdiction". This is why people are often charged with the most severe crimes first in Fed, then the less severe in state, so as to avoid 'double jeopardy', a Constitutional violation.
In addition, the U.S.A. when standing in judgement over the Nazi and Japanese offenders at Nuremberg and Tokyo, established precedence, and would be bound legally, to follow suit with even their own President and his Administration, for Trial for the same crimes they stood in judgement of others for.
I understand your love of/for your country, but you should not let 'blind love" lead you to make statements that would not hold argument in matters of jurisprudence. No matter how much you wish it to be, it will not happen.
If you do not yet believe that the U.S.A. is part of a "World Community", then you might wish to "pay off" the loans that the U.S.A. has incurred from China in this latest illegal war of aggression, which includes the costs for the crimes mentioned by Mr. Cheney. Then, go to Iraq and begin compensating the entire nation for the death and destruction created by that illegal war of aggression.
Send your check or money order to the Peoples Republic of China, they will be most happy to "cash it". That would most likely be one trillion U.S. Dollars and counting.
Why not spend your energy to a more productive end, since you cannot have a sovereign nation that participates in the international forum, then commits crimes against individuals of other nationalities, on foreign soil, with borrowed money from another nation. Aside from being exceptionally arrogant, it is ridiculously absurd.
join the Americans who are joining forces to bring these criminals to justice in the proper court of jurisdiction, the International Court of Justice.
nurembergrevisited@gmail.com;
you will be welcomed with open arms and minds.
"And the World will be a better place, for you and me" (John Lennon)
countcoup
"You have often made the "ill placed point" that America would "never give up its sovereignty"
Thats a point we disagree on. My point is that I can't concieve of the circumstances (I'm trying to never say never) when the United States of America would cede any part of her sovereignty to a foreign power, a foreign body, court, etc. Nor any governance over her citizens. So my point is that unless America agrees to it, no other entity has any power over our country or our citizens.
The example you used was our law. It does not transpose power to another entity.
"For a comparison, Richard Nixon's crimes were against the American People, no one lost their lives for their philosophical, religious, or political beliefs. Had he gone to trial, it would have been proper to try him in the U.S. System."
I would say a lot of my friends lost their lives because of this SOB and we are certainly in agreement he should have been tried in our courts.
"the U.S.A. when standing in judgement over the Nazi and Japanese offenders at Nuremberg and Tokyo, established precedence"
That would be one view, but you must take into account that these were defeated countries that surrendered unconditionally. Quite a difference I'd say.
China is certainly not part of any world community. They need us a lot more than we need them remember. It wasn't long ago that everyone was saying the Worlds economies are delinked to America, no one needs America anymore, but it hasn't turned out that way at all. Oops! If they want us to pay them off, I say print it up and send it to them! I'm only half joking.
Do you believe if the ICJ has jurisdiction because they say they do? Do they say they do? Thats why I would say that its not blind love that makes me say this, it is simply a fact of jurisprudence.
But...if you can work it out, some how spirit them out of the country and put them on trial, I'll not say a word.
They have sullied our countries honor, caused untold suffering and misery, approved torture when they didn't even have the guts to serve their country, they are not on my Christmas list.
Can we ever compensate Iraq and the Iraqi for this? I doubt it.
I understand what you are saying and its a admirable goal, I just don't see it happening in our lifetime.
Pax
.Quite an eloquent dialogue and passionate as well. You Texans never fail to surprise.
For anyone interested in the facts of the matter:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Court_of_Justice
The United States withdrew from compulsory jurisdiction in 1986, and so accepts the court's jurisdiction only on a case-to-case basis. Chapter XIV of the United Nations Charter authorizes the UN Security Council to enforce World Court rulings, but such enforcement is subject to the veto power of the five permanent members of the Council. Presently there are twelve cases on the World Court's docket.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Court
The International Criminal Court (ICC or ICCt)[1] was established in 2002 as a permanent tribunal to prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression, although it cannot currently exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression.[2][3] The Court came into being on 1 July 2002 — the date its founding treaty, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, entered into force[4] — and it can only prosecute crimes committed on or after that date.[5]
As of November 2008, 108 states are members of the Court;[6][7][8] A further 40 countries have signed but not ratified the Rome Statute.[6] However, a number of states, including China, Russia, India and the United States, are critical of the Court and have not joined.[citation needed]
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin