Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiHow Obama Excused Torture
Former Reagan Justice Department official Bruce Fein writes that Obama's decision to release CIA memos without prosecuting Bush administration officials flouts his constitutional duty.
On Thursday, April 16th, in response to a lawsuit initiated by the American Civil Liberties Union, President Barack Obama released four redacted Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) memoranda from the Bush administration to the CIA justifying torture or cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment. (The CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques were modeled on the Chinese Communist coercive brainwashing program against Americans captured in the Korean War to induce false confessions). Each memorandum hedged its conclusions with substantial caveats, such as the absence of judicial precedents and concessions that reasonable persons could dispute their exculpatory conclusions. The memoranda were later renounced as bad law.
Obama, however, promised non-prosecution of all CIA personnel complicit in torture who relied on the flawed OLC advice. He further pledged to defend them from criminal investigations initiated by foreign jurisdictions and to indemnify them if they are held liable in damages for constitutional or statutory wrongdoing. Obama is similarly defending former OLC Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Yoo against a torture suit initiated by Jose Padilla, convicted of terrorism in 2007 after the government dropped charges that as an "enemy combatant" he plotted to set off a "dirty bomb." The Yoo memoranda on torture have also been renounced and discredited. Obama also promised to follow the Bush-Cheney duumvirate in claiming secrecy for alleged national security secrets because "the world is dangerous." Indeed, he did not voluntarily initiate release of the four OLC memoranda, but responded to a Freedom of Information Act suit. And President Obama has echoed the Bush-Cheney state secrets arguments to block lawsuits challenging the legality of spying on Americans without warrants in contravention of the Fourth Amendment or federal law, or seeking damages for torture. Moreover, Obama has been unable to recite a single instance where transparency proved more dangerous to the liberties of the American people than has secrecy, the birthplace of COINTELPRO, Shamrock, Minaret, Abu Ghraib, and torture of 14 so-called "High Value Al Qaeda" detainees in secret prisons abroad (according to the International Committee of the Red Cross).
On the same day Obama was excusing torture and promising more secret government, The New York Times published a front page story disclosing the National Security Agency's apparently illegal interceptions of emails and phone calls of American citizens in the United States without individual judicial warrants. The interceptions exceeded even the sweeping group warrant authority to spy on persons reasonably believed to be outside the United States that were authorized in amendments to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) enacted last September. President Obama has declined to sanction a single official implicated in the latest apparent violation of a statute he supported as a senator. He has similarly chosen non-prosecution for former President Bush, former Vice President Cheney, and high level officials at the National Security Agency (NSA) and CIA who authorized more than five years of FISA felonies: namely, warrantless NSA spying on American citizens on American soil in flagrant contravention of FISA, about which more anon.
The evidence is now undeniable. President Barack Obama is flouting his unflagging constitutional obligation enshrined in Article II, Section 3 to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." He is also reneging on his signature campaign promise to restore the rule of law, transparency, and accountability to the White House. He is displaying the psychology of an arrogant Empire as opposed to a modest Republic in continuing and escalating the Bush-Cheney duumvirate's global and perpetual war against international terrorism heedless of foreign sovereignties or the lives of civilians.
Even more disappointing, Obama has proven a political coward dangerous to the Republic. Before April 16, he had decided against any criminal investigation of the Bush-Cheney duumvirate or their inner circles for their boasted complicity in torture, i.e., waterboarding, which Attorney General Eric Holder has declared is torture. He has similarly declined investigations of extraordinary renditions that have occasioned, among other things, the indictments and in absentia trials of 26 CIA operatives in Milan, Italy, for the kidnapping and torture of Egyptian cleric Abu Omar.
Obama made no effort to square his refusal to investigate credible and substantial evidence of felonies with his constitutional obligation to faithfully execute, not sabotage the laws. He relied solely on politics, as though law was nothing more than a constellation of political calculations with ulterior motives. Obama insisted that investigations of Bush-Cheney would disturb the Toscanini-like symphony he had promised to the political class in the corridors of power. Comparable political calculations explain why Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai declines to prosecute the countless officials implicated in staggering corruption, inefficiency, and subjugation of women-all of which are deplored by President Obama.
In sweeping the Bush-Cheney lawlessness under the rug, Obama has set a precedent whitewashing White House lawlessness in the name of national security that will lie around like a loaded weapon ready for resurrection by any Commander-in-Chief eager to appear "tough on terrorism" and to exploit popular fear. Obama urges that the crimes were justified because the duumvirate acted to protect the nation from international terrorism. But Congress did not create a national security defense to torture or commit FISA felonies.
President Obama should have invoked his pardon power if he believed circumstances justified the crimes by Bush and Cheney and the CIA's interrogators. A pardon or lesser clemency properly exposes the president to political accountability, as Bush discovered with Cheney's chief of staff Scooter Libby and President Ford with former President Nixon. More significant, a pardon does not set a precedent making lawful what was unlawful. It acknowledges the criminality of the underlying activity, and acceptance of the pardon is an admission of guilt by the recipient. Pardons leave unsullied the doctrine of Ex parte Milligan (1866):"The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men at all times and in all circumstances. No doctrine involving more pernicious consequences was ever invented by the wit of man than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government."
Obama can be summoned against his own non-prosecution policy, secrecy, and non-accountability. In releasing the four OLC memoranda on April 16, Obama asserted: "Enlisting our values [like the rule of law or transparency] in the protection of our people makes us stronger and more secure. A democracy as resilient as ours must reject the false choice between our security and our ideals [like the rule of law or government in the sunshine]... I believe strongly in transparency and accountability... The United States is a nation of laws."
These words should be taken cum granis salis. Bush and Cheney also insisted that everything they did was constitutional and indispensable to thwarting another 9/11. Obama's promise of change has proven nothing more than verbal jugglery.
55 Comments so far
Show AllThe United States is a nation of laws -
-----correction-----
The United States WAS a nation of laws!!
NO, the laws are still there, including the power to shut the multi-trillion fraudalent bankster$ down.
It is better understood as viewed by our Constitutional Founders as, a Country either following the
R U L E _ of _ L A W
or
R U L E _ of _ M E N
Namaste
And maybe some one can get a writ of Mandamus to compel Mr. Obama to arrest and put on trial the malefactors.
"The purpose of mandamus is to remedy defects of justice."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandamus
Let's make Keith Olbermann of MSNBC own new spokesperson, with his
Special Comment to President Obama, You're Wrong on Torture Prosecutions
( see video ) :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTLi7j0T9HQ&feature=player_embedded
… sticks and stones will break my bones,
but _ H O P E _ will never help me …
Namaste
There another more subtle here.
If citizens of the United States of America feel that the law will protect them against being tortured by their Government in that those that commit such crimes will be punished, Bush and Obama have made it clear.
Such can NOT be counted on. All they need do is use the same rationale here.
As has been pointed out before, it not required that they DO carry out tortures, all that is needed is that threat of "yeah we MIGHT do it and we WILL get away with it".
Obama is breaking a lot of promises. The first step is to show this to the so called progressives who voted for him. Tell everyone about the movie "The Obama Deception" by infowars, see obamadeception.net.
It chronicles a lot of the broken promises and continuation of the Bush - Cheney era in a way that a grade 12 or 1st year college person could understand.
The middle of the movie does focus a lot on who controls the shadow government but I make allowances for this.
They could be wrong, but food for thought.Some news reports in Russia claim that the reason Obama will not uphold the law and prosecute for torture is that he was told by the CIA that Evo Morales, in Bolivia would be assassinated if he decided to prosecute and whether true or not, there was try on his life and they claim Obama warned him. It just may be Soviet propaganda, but nothing would surprise me.
The defense of obeying orders was disallowed at Nuremberg and remains impermissable for good reason; there will always be leaders who seek to extend and abuse their power, and without willing accomplices their nefarious plans would remain conspiracies and not acts.
All involved must be held accountable, and no reasonable, educated person could have believed that these acts were lawful.
According to the novel, unorthodox legal theories of Obama and Holder (nearly as perverse as those of Bybee, Yoo, Gonzales and Haynes), Lynndie England and Charles Graner are owed an immediate pardon.
The lynchpin ( how appropriately named ) for EVERYTHING, revolves a constellation of justifications, all of which are pinned to :
"O b a m a _ u r g e s _ t h a t _ t h e _ c r i m e s _ w e r e _ j u s t i f i e d
b e c a u s e _ t h e _ d u u m v i r a t e _ a c t e d _ t o _ p r o t e c t _ t h e _ n a t i o n
___ f r o m ___ i n t e r n a t i o n a l _ t e r r o r i s m ___"
What courageous people MUST DO,
is realize that not only has the " s m o k i n g _ g u n " been visible for quite a while,
but now we also have the _ 9 _ ! _ ! _ disaster's " l o a d e d _ g u n "
_____ that the WTC demolitions of 11th Sept 2001,
_____ had little if anything nothing to do with
_____ " international terrorism" ( other than creating it ).
There is categorically scientifically peer reviewed proof of large masses of unexploded nano-thermite residue in the WTC dusts, which is completely impossible to explain away as being the work of " international terrorists" living in caves.
These red-colored millimeter and smaller sized explosives particles are still TODAY as powerful as dynamite, almost a decade later, and were definitely internally formed and created using the world's most sophisticated nano-miniature technology.
We are talking about physical fabrication of structures one millionth of one millimeter in size and the production and placement of possibly 100 tons of this material --- prior to the impact of the planes. There is only one possible source of this material ( LLL ).
This is the " l o a d e d _ g u n " that not only pointed AND FIRED at the the WTC towers, but also FIRED the head of every American.
An immediate, thorough, and international panel of independent experts must be assembled to bring bush and chenney to trial for war crimes, and treasonous conspiracy against the USA citizens and Constitution -- as well as the mass murders of thousands of Americans.
W E _ M U S T _ S O O N _ R E M O V E _ T H E _ L I N C H P I N ,
or the ponderous weight of this almost unimaginably wicked crime of all time -- will drag us down into the gutters of history.
Namaste
Mr. Fein offers an acerbic, unsparing, and in my view appropriately unforgiving commentary indicting Obama for simply hanging an "Under New Management" sign on the Constitutional Cafeteria built by the departed Bush crime cartel.
It is simply ludicrous to argue that Obama's enthusiastic concordance with his predecessor's pathological centralized authoritarian executive power structure, including a high tolerance for a security state on steroids, must be discounted on the possibility that he is executing a secret "long game" strategy that requires him to take two steps back and conserve Political Capital during his FIRST term.
It is absurd to advocate that citizens of a supposedly rational, and NOT mystical or monarchic/messianic, government should suspend judgement out of trust and loyalty to an elected official.
Furthermore, I'm offended by the implicit ends/means argument; like bedbugs, ends/means arguments are making a comeback. They thrive like larvae in the standing pools of pragmatism.
So I refuse to countenance the idea that Obama (or any elected official) governs, or ought to govern, like a quarterback with a fat playbook in a huddle. In that universe, We the Spectators bought our tickets, and there's nothing left but to root, root, root for the home team-- at worst, somebody throws a shoe and gets taken away by security.
On the other hand, We the Spectators can still have a rich and fulfilling experience watching the trick plays-- from the slack-jawed novices who don't get any of it to the Inside Football mavens who'll tell you EXACTLY what the QB is up to.
The dwindling Obama apologists' bi-directional exhortations to hold Obama's feet to the fire while simultaneously clapping harder are at best a paradoxical curiosity.
· Yr Obd't Servant
We got what we deserve when we elected a coward. Many pointed out that he was black, intelligent, educated, black, but nobody pointed out that he was a coward. Black was good enough. Next time Americans are imprisoned and tortured abroad remember, the coward, he is the one responsible for all that befalls Americans civilians and otherwise. Cowards are famous for the fact that disaster always follows their actions or lack of same. For the next hundreds of years (if the US lasts that long) Obama will be remembered as the coward. The first Black person elected to that high office was a distinct failure as a leader and he was BLACK!!
This is to protect the Bush-Cheney administration from justice, especially those with Israeli passports.
AIPAC has foist another Likud Lacky on the American public.
Oh nose! The Joos are controlz America!
Try reading and explaining this one
Adding Insult to Injury - Powerful Jewish Groups Demand Case Against Accused Spies Be Dropped
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/182141-Adding-Insult-to-Injury-Powerful-Jewish-Groups-Demand-Case-Ag...
Including such evocative tails of "anti-semitism" as :
"Jonathon Pollard (working as an analyst for US Naval Intelligence) was caught pilfering and then selling to America's "bestest buddy" in the whole world - Israel - close to 1 million pages of material with the highest classification that exists in the US intelligence community. Shortly after the theft of these secrets (an act making the Rosenbergs' treason appear like mere petty thievery of two small-time Gypsy pick-pockets by comparison) the Jewish state then did what any "bestest buddy" would do to a friend who has supplied her with billions of dollars yearly and stood as the only barrier between her and a sea of oppressed, grieving Arabs who (for justifiable reasons) would love to see her wiped off the map - she sold them, to the Soviet Union of all places, America's "worstest enemy" in the whole wide world. "
and
"BATTA BOOM!! - Two MVPs from AIPAC, the most powerful Jewish group in the US are arrested by US authorities and charged with - hold on to something heavy here - spying. Specifically, the two (Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman) were charged with passing information pertaining to Iran they knew to be highly-classified onwards to "home, sweet home" - meaning to the Jewish state - through one Naor Gilon, resident spymaster at the Israeli embassy in Washington DC working in tandem with Benjamin Netanyahu's current National Security Advisor, Uzi Arad, who stands as person non-grata in Uncle Sam's neighborhood as a result of his "likelihood" to "commit sabotage" against the US.
Their arrest by the FBI was the result of a pre-9/11 investigation that (understandably) was kicked into high gear after hundreds of Israeli spies were captured following the terrorist attacks of September 11th, some in circumstances as incriminating as being strategically-placed to film and celebrate the destruction of the Twin Towers, while others were apprehended driving explosives-laden vans towards vulnerable spots in New York City such as bridges and tunnels while dressed as Arabs.
Predictably, in typical wiseguy fashion the entire discussion surrounding the treacherous activities of the 2 spies working for that same Jewish state that "does not spy on America" was immediately changed from being a case of continued betrayal and espionage against America to one of - surprise, surprise - bigotry and persecution. Like Al Capone alleging his arrest and indictment were all the result of "anti-Italianism" rather than the fact he was personally responsible for the murder of dozens of people and all the well-known political corruption he personally cultivated, likewise Jewish groups in America immediately engaged in a similar campaign of "Can we talk about something else here people?" When asked for his reaction concerning the arrests, Abe Foxman ("capo di tutti capi" of the Mossad-linked ADL) with quivering lip, panicky eyes and shaky voice affected a look of great emotional distress as if a holocaust were about to erupt any moment and stated with a straight face that the USDOJ investigation and subsequent arrests had nothing to do with Israel spying on America but rather the fact that "One out of three Americans believes American Jews are more loyal to Israel than to the United States", finishing his verbal defecation by saying the Justice department's actions were all the result of "classic anti-Semitism"."
and so very telling :
"Now however for exact reasons unknown, both the ADL and the American Jewish Committee have decided to throw their 2 shekels into the kitty and are also calling for the US Justice Department to drop the charges leveled against the two spies. Continuing the aforementioned chorus begun with the Wall Street Journal and Washington Post, AJC Executive Director David Harris recently issued a statement saying "The prosecution creates a chilling effect on legitimate speech and we hope the Department of Justice will take a close look at this case and reconsider whether it should be pursued further." Following on the heels of the AJC statement, the Anti-Defamation League released a statement of its own in a letter previously (and privately) sent last September to the deputy attorney general to "review the charges, the investigation, and the prosecution of this case" saying the "prosecution of this case endangers core First Amendment protections". In typical patronizing, condescending fashion, the ADL (an organization created in the interests of protecting the "good name" of a Jew - Leo Frank - convicted of raping and murdering a young girl) then ended its letter with "We fully support our government's need to protect sensitive national security information. This prosecution, however, is not necessary for such protection" as if it were some special branch of the US Supreme Court tasked with deciding what actions are and are not necessary when it comes to the national security interests of the United States.
It is quite interesting to note that the very same ADL now found wringing its hands in fear over the dangers to "free speech" and "protecting the 1st Amendment" when it comes to prosecuting spies for Israel - is at the same time at the very forefront in pushing laws aimed at curtailing "free speech" in America when that "free speech" threatens Jewish issues. Although having been defeated time and again, nevertheless like a nasty virus that hangs around week after week the same ADL busted for wiretapping the phones of American citizens has made it priority numero uno to criminalize freedom of expression in America when such threatens the well-being of that same country that does not spy on the US, Israel. "
More even juicier stuff in article.
Namaste
During much of 2008 this Common Dreams website was a huge brownnoser for candidate Obama.
I not only expected but predicted several times that the brownnosers were buying an imperialist wolf in sheepskin.
I am nevertheless stunned by the immense turnaround of this website. The number of impanicked Obama defenders is nearing zilch.
RE: "How Obama Excused Torture"
Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis elaborated in Olmstead v. United States (1928): "In a government of law, the existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for the law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy."
John Lewis-Dickerson, Atlanta
Right wing conservatives joining their left wing counterparts in a more radical than thou effort to chastize Obama? Maybe. But thanks for the push anyway. He needs it.
I'm gonna defend Obama on this one. I don't care what you think, he's 10x smarter than you and me put together. Put yourself in his shoes. Let's say you have an aggressive domestic agenda you want to get accomplished. If you went after Bush like we all want to, that agenda would come to a grinding halt. The economy would grind to an even greater halt. And we'd end up with no domestic accomplishments, the economy in complete ruins, AND no Bush in jail. And besides that, you'd no longer have an intelligence organization at your disposal for forgeign matters - they'd be in open revolt.
NOW, look at what Obama did: he absolved the CIA but at the same time released the memos. Isn't that one of the best ways to get whistleblowers to come forward? And if he truly wanted no action on this, he and Holder could easily have found a way to completely stonewall and not release a single memo. Yet he didn't - he released them all. To me that signals that he wants the ACLU, or whomever, to take the lead. This way, he essentially gets to have his cake (his agenda) and eat it too (get Bush).
-he's 10x smarter than you and me put together
more's the pity
-If you went after Bush like we all want to, that agenda would come to a grinding halt
Obviously "we all" clearly don't want to go after bush. most notably, the politicized US justice dept.
But, if they did, here is how it is done in democratic countries... so called "prosecutors" investigate and then prosecute crimes, no need for presidents to worry their little heads about it at all.
-The economy would grind to an even greater halt
errrr...yeah because torture is the linchpin holding together the US economy?
-we'd end up with no domestic accomplishments
"we'd"? Who is we? anyway Obama doesn't seem to think justice dept cases will get in the way of his "accomplishments", just ask the illegal NSA wiretapping whistleblower, Obama is investigating.
-you'd no longer have an intelligence organization at your disposal for forgeign matters - they'd be in open revolt.
Well the way we handle this in democracies is what we call "the rule of law", namely all government departments do their job under the laws of the land. If any military or spies tried open revolt, they would end up in prison obviously.
-he absolved the CIA but at the same time released the memos. Isn't that one of the best ways to get whistleblowers to come forward
As I already mentioned, Obama is not interested in whisleblowers coming forward, google "Thomas Tamm". He tried to do the right thing, like some people thought Obama would do. He is now under investigation (funny how that doesn't derail Obama's "accomplishments") Tamm's government career is over, meanwhile the criminals are still on your payroll.
-he released them all. To me that signals that he wants the ACLU, or whomever, to take the lead
Trouble with your argument here is that Obama didn't appoint anyone at the ACLU to be justice secretary did he? So how exactly are they to "take the lead" now anymore than when Bush was on the throne? You are a country without laws. Alternatively, laws, capriciously applied, are no laws at all.
As a Lawyer Mr. Obama has the duty to see that justice is served. No exceptions, no pardons. Ass for the CIA members who tortured, even 'under color of law', I would refer you to the 2nd Nuremberg Trials held exclusively for the Lawyers and Judges who allowed the Nazi Regime to violate accepted law by "ruling their actions exempt from legal scrutiny". This is the same duality that the USA has exhibited from the begining, and the arrogance of the Bush administration, along with the CIA and the Military participants is the example of the past-- not the new beginnings or change the Obama presidency claimed. This will of course lead others to follow the example, which may put a "new king" into power that would make Bush look like an amature.
Every point you make in this posting reflects the same thought patterns that set the stage for the offenses.
But then, I personally do not expect the Americans to do what is "right"----they never have before. The USA currently is the most arrogant nation on the planet, and along with the corruption at almost every level of society---they cannot be anything but doomed to failure.
As for Mr. Obama being 'smarter' than you---you may be right there fella. But then how 'smart' would he have to be?
Good Luck America, you really need it.
The ACLU and related groups should bring pressure to bear to prosecute anyway. The president stacks the deck by appointments, but he doesn't altogether rule by fiat.
-The president stacks the deck by appointments, but he doesn't altogether rule by fiat.
Where does it say that? In the US constitution? HaHaHa!! How quaint.
A large number of people in the US don't know or care anything about any of this. Their simple-minded, spiteful formulation is,"if you are a terrorist, you don't deserve any rights". This assumes that all of the people directly and indirectly deprived of their rights were/are terrorists, that the term "terrorist", has a coherent legal definition, that privacy is unimportant in our current "information society", that fundamental legal rights and liberties are "technicalities" used by crooked lawyers to protect terrorists and criminals, and that the government can and should exercise arbitrary and capricious authority over, well, everybody.
Many Americans are quite content to live under authoritarian rule; maybe a majority. It makes them "comfortable". What the heck? They still might win on "Who Wants to be a Millionaire?"
It's our of our hands now. We have been safely marginalized. The eternal present can continue, eternally. The imperial prerogatives of the financial elite/national security state must be protected and enhanced at all times. That is the primary purpose of politics in America.
Map your fire exits folks,
Shalom
Mr. Fein must be talking about a "figment" of his imagination, the USA has used its "constitution" simply as an instrument of convenience, from the begining to the present.
I have always found it very entertaining that the US Legal system/community insists on using an archaic language---Latin----which is all they need for a "resume" as to their validity. And after their founding the Supreme Court still does not have enforcement power.
Obama cannot excuse the crimes committed by the USA, there are no statute of limitations----a "delay" in answering for those many crimes perhaps---but no reprieve----no "free walks".
The USA has more to answer for than any other nation in existence today.
Its simply a matter of time.
The irony is that the 'fall' will most likely come from within, and probably initiated by the 'conservative Christian/Zionists element', and ignored by the "progressives"...............
If "Conservatism" is defined as "to maintain the status quo" (and it is) then it is a deadly flawed doctrine because the 'believers' 'believe' themselves to be exempt from the lessons/mistakes of history, and that dooms them to repeat those mistakes.
America is committing all of the same mistakes other 'empires' have---and--many of the same they have made in the past---- they will answer for it.
It really is that simple.
Good Luck America, you really need it.
jlocke,
UK Terrorism ACT 2006 ring a bell? Habeas Corpus? You think the UK did not cooperate with extraordinary renditions? Oh what about the BAE Systems/Prince Bandar scandal? Remember Tony Baloney Blair? The UK has the most surveillance cameras per person and square mile in the world. Yes I am comparing the two countries and the similarities are striking! So, my cousin from accross the pond, I humbly suggest you look into this, as you could very easily appear hypocritical
I understand what you are saying, gringoflamenco.
-extraordinary renditions
Yes, I would put that under the "coalition of the willing" rubric. disgusting.
-Tony Baloney Blair
He never fooled me, neither did Obama.
-the similarities are striking
Ok the similarities are striking, at the same time for two reasons I focused on the US.
One, the US is a far greater danger to the world than is the UK. Just as (forgive the comparison) Nazi Germany was a greater threat to the world than Italy, even though they were both abysmal examples of civilization, and worked in concert. The US and not the UK, has the means motive and opportunity to expand its criminality abroad.
Two, this is a US site focusing on US politics which understandibly affect the entire world. Things in Kenya are not going so hot either by the way but as the article is about the US president protecting international war criminals I was not expecting that my words might "appear" as you say, hypocritical.
-Let's not get too high on any hypocritical horse here
Yeah the US rot has infected many countries, and under Obama, it will continue to spread. This concerns me. I had hoped (don't you just love that word, thanks a lot Obama) that we would see by now some signs of American democracy but alas... Are you sure you want to compare Britain and US on issues like this, ...habeus corpus, anyone? Regardless I think Spain is doing a better job of dealing with it's coalition of the willing hangover. They tossed out the crooks, pulled the troops out of the occupation and now are going after war criminals, both south and north american.
I agree with you that SPAIN is setting a much better less ambiguous example of RESPONSIBLE global citizenry than is the USA....So what else is new?
might as well free Bernie Madoff...why dwell on the past?
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats
Obama: Change You Can Beg For On The Street Corner
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats
Speaking of flouting the constitution, on a related note, there is a good interview on Democracy now about two new prisons called "little guantanamos", one of them in Obama's home state.
You guys live in one sick puppy of a nation.
jlocke,
"you guys"? where you from? The UK? Let's not get too high on any hypocritical horse here.
So, the Nürenberg-trials were a waste of time, as most of the defendents hadn't shed any blood either and the other guys were just following orders. Forget about the US joining the ICC and becoming a partner in this world's affairs, that's just for wimps I guess.
Way to go, US; change we can believe in.
Obama, Bush with a thesaurus.
"Even more disappointing, Obama has proven a political coward dangerous to the Republic".
Amen, and a liar to boot.
What does one expect in a two party, winner takes all, 100s of millions of dollar corporate media directed, un-regulated free-for all elections? Best democracy money can buy.
If one reviews the 92 Campaign with Clinton vs. George Sr. the political discourse is surprisingly similar: Change this Change that etc.
Same this time and same next time: you will have two choices: Obama or Gingrinch/Palin take your pick and fegeddaboudit. Very close to a de-facto one party state.
As Howard Zinn said "I voted for Obama not because I supported his policy platforms, I voted for him because the corrupt two-party system left me no choice"
Oregoncharles
According to Howard Zinn, he changed his mind about voting for Obama and instead voted for Ralph Nader. Noam Chomsky voted for Cynthia McKinney.
Look it up, he thought better and then changed his mind. Ask him yourself.
I also recommend reading the latest edition of Peoples' History, where he explains at length the problems with our elections and voting system.
I hate to argue with you however you are mistaken, read this interview and note the date.
http://www.alternet.org/rights/130949/howard_zinn:_obama_%22is_going_to_need_demonstrations_and_protes...
He also said this in an interview with Amy Goodman on DNOW!
It does not surprise me that Obama is doing this. He only gives further credence to the fact that presidents are controlled by elite interests and a shadow government.
You are correct. What possible other explanation is there? What threat(s) is/are used by those powerful elites in the shadows to arm twist whoever is the President into doing what they decide must be done or not done?
Sioux Rose
As the world watches this breach of justice those who also found themselves full of hope feel equally betrayed. And those who were profoundly trespassed against by America's macho militarism and acts of injustice now see no hope for redress. In my mind that means there WILL be forces that coalesce to teach this lawless nation some lessons.
Since many people are not of the spiritual calibre capable of deep forgiveness, we can expect vengeance to motivate clever actions like those taken on 911. (I believe the perpetrators had LOTS of help from domestic insiders to pull that off.) The example 911 set was that conventional weaponry is not needed to bring a nation down, or interrupt its "business as usual."
To the family members of the estimated one million killed in Iraq as a result of a war/occupation engineered on the basis of completely false evidence, to whatever numbers have been mercilessly killed in Afghanistan, down to America's covert complicity with Israel taking the same arrogant stance in firing weapons at citizens in Lebanon last year and Palestine this year... there must be MILLIONS prepared to come up with some form of retaliation or payback.
Every time an American leader chooses aggression instead of negotiation, the odds of the U.S. paying for such deeds increases. Very little has been learned since Vietnam; and since America has had a virtual free pass to continue conducting itself as a lawless bully for decades, when the rebound hits it will not be pretty. My hope is that those of conscience who did what they could to work FOR justice and FOR peace and FOR honest global solutions will be situated far from the next ground zeros.
The best and most cost-effective defense is DOING THE RIGHT THING!
>>Every time an American leader chooses aggression instead of negotiation, the odds of the U.S. paying for such deeds increases. Very little has been learned since Vietnam; and since America has had a virtual free pass to continue conducting itself as a lawless bully for decades, when the rebound hits it will not be pretty.
Siouxrose, tghis history of aggression and war before negotiation goes right back to the founding of the United States of America.
in 1776 they went to war to get Independence. I would point out that Canada in contrast NEGOTIATED for Independence from the British crown and in fact was the first colony of all the major Imperial powers to do so.
In 1812 the British wanted to negotiate with the USA rather then fgo to war and in fact at meetings agreed to all the terms of the USA, yet the USA chose war.
Yet we still have people who claim the US not all that Militaristic.
Where Canada sent out the RCMP to negotitate land claims with the Aboriginals before the settlers moved west with many of those claims negotated by a single police officer entering villgaes alone, the USA chose to use Miltary force.
In 1848 they agaion chose Miltary force to steal a third of the territory of Mexico, refusing to negotate with the same.
There was then the Civil war, once more war over negotation. There was the Spanish American war. Again the Spanish had no desire to go to war but the USA decided the Spanish empire right for the plucking.
The civil war was negotiated over many years. It did not happen overnight, on the spur of the moment. It happened because all those negotiations and compromises ultimately failed.
Canada did not negotiate its independence overnight , nor were all treaties signed with the natives overnight.
Yes some things take TIME , but if it takes more in the way of time to neogotaite away differences, is that not a better choice then going to war?
If the USA had given The Taliban TIME to turn over Bin laden as the Taliban offerred to do.....you would not still be fighting there 10 years later.
Superficially you of course are correct, but why were so many positions so adamant and intractable ?
Who gained, and by what ?
The central banksters and their agents are the underlying casual connection that threads all of the facts onto a common string, and that then cumulated in Lincoln's assassination.
Thank you Sioux Rose. It just sickens me that Obama and Holder would have the nerve to waffle around the simple task of holding the torturers accountable and then giving the CIA a major victory all the while sucker punching his base by saying "See, I released the memos !" and only after the ACLU was finally able to get Obama to do so. You mentioned that America puts aggression before negotiation first. That got me thinking that here we have a president telling us to make him do it. Like our last president, nothing seems to be negotiable unless we make him do it and even then, it's like a rip-off scam. Pretend to throw us a bone all the while cheating us. With the way Obama's doing a sneaky job of cheating the public, I could laugh at those who voted for him or even Mccain for that matter and yet given all the tragedies in Iraq and Afghanistan, Obama makes my blood boil in anger. I don't want to call those voters cowards but I'm afraid they voted for such cowardly leadership. :.(
I don't think that the people who voted for Obama are cowards; but they are narcissistic gullible people. They had nothing but faith that Mr. Wonderful Obama would do the right thing.
And I don't believe many of them will admit their stupidity or change their opinion.
"These words should be taken cum granis salis. Bush and Cheney also insisted that everything they did was constitutional and indispensable to thwarting another 9/11. Obama's promise of change has proven nothing more than verbal jugglery."
Agreed. When even constitutional lawyers don't see the need to uphold the law, the law becomes irrelevant. Of course, this has been the case for the government for a long time now.
Apparently we've exchanged one gang of thugs with a more intelligent, better-spoken gang of thugs.
Screw 'em all.
I SECOND THAT! All those in favor, raise your hand. The motion carries.
Oregoncharles
My hand is raised!
Affirmed as well.
Good piece by Bruce Fein.
For those of us who were suspicious that Obama was a fraud, our suspicions have now been validated. He is perhaps MORE corrupt that Bush, something I thought was impossible.
His actions yesterday make the pardon of Scooter Libby to be almost morally tenable.
Perhaps the dynamic of the right and left being disenchanted with Obama is powerful enough to initiate Impeachment proceedings for violating his Oath of Office and the Constitution.