Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiThe Massive Expansion of America's "Hard Left"
Jesse Ventura was on CNN with Larry King last night and this exchange occurred, illustrating how simple, clear and definitively non-partisan is the case for investigations and prosecutions for those who ordered torture (video below):
VENTURA: I don't watch much TV. This year's reading, I covered Bush's life. I covered Guantanamo and a few other subjects.
And I'm very disturbed about it.
I'm bothered over Guantanamo because it seems we've created our own Hanoi Hilton. We can live with that? I have a problem.
I will criticize President Obama on this level; it's a good thing I'm not president because I would prosecute every person that was involved in that torture. I would prosecute the people that did it. I would prosecute the people that ordered it. Because torture is against the law.
KING: You were a Navy SEAL.
VENTURA: That's right. I was water boarded, so I know -- at SERE School, Survival Escape Resistance Evasion. It was a required school you had to go to prior to going into the combat zone, which in my era was Vietnam. All of us had to go there. We were all, in essence -- every one of us was waterboarded. It is torture.
KING: What was it like?
VENTURA: It's drowning. It gives you the complete sensation that you are drowning. It is no good, because you -- I'll put it to you this way, you give me a waterboard, Dick Cheney and one hour, and I'll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders.
Let's just repeat that: "I would prosecute the people that ordered it. Because torture is against the law." That is the crux of the case for investigations and prosecutions. That's it. Can anyone find a "liberal" or ideological argument anywhere in what Ventura said? It's about as far from a partisan or "leftist" idea as one can get. Yet our establishment media has succeeded (as Digby recently argued) in converting this view into a "Hard Left," "liberal" or "partisan" argument because that's the only prism through which they can understand anything, and that's their time-honored instrument for demonizing any idea that threatens their institutional prerogatives and orthodoxies (only the Hard Left favors this).
Ventura himself, like the argument he's advocating, is also about as far from being a "leftist" or partisan as it gets. He was elected Governor of Minnesota by running as the ultimate non-partisan, as a poorly-funded independent who defeated both the GOP and Democratic establishment candidates on a largely libertarian platform and on what he called "fiscal conservatism," including large tax rebates. Unlike the establishment-revering, prosecution-opposing pundits who are the true partisans -- loyal spokespeople who fiercely defend Beltway culture and legal immunity for political elites above all else -- Ventura is doing nothing more than expressing definitively independent and non-ideological political principles, ones that were quite obviously ingrained in him over the course of decades as an American and a veteran: torture is wrong in all cases; it is illegal; and those who do it should therefore be prosecuted.
Former aide to Condoleezza Rice and former 9/11 Commission Executive Director Philip Zelikow yesterday became the latest to join Ventura by calling for investigations into torture, telling Laura Rozen: "When there is this kind of collective failure, we need to learn from what happened." Gen. Barry McCaffrey two weeks ago pointed out that numerous detainees were "murdered" in U.S. custody -- which is unquestionably true -- and called for criminal investigations of the top-level political officials who sanctioned torture. Gen. Antonio Taguba previously stated that "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." Colin Powell's former Chief of Staff, retired U.S. Army Col. Larry Wilkerson, this month endorsed both investigations and prosecutions for Bush officials who broke the law. Bush 41 ambassador Thomas Pickering and Reagan-appointed FBI Director William Sessions wrote in The Washington Post that an independent investigation was a pre-requisite to moving beyond the torture era. Ronald Reagan vehemently insisted that torture is inexcusable in all cases -- no exceptions -- and that those who do it must be prosecuted.
These are the people -- Gen. McCaffrey, Gen. Taguba, Col. Wilkerson, Philip Zelikow, Jesse Ventura, Ambassador Pickering, Director Sessions -- that our little David Ignatiuses deceitfully dismiss as "liberal score-settlers" and that our David Broders and Jon Barrys accuse of lying by masking their Hard Left thirst for partisan vengeance with false pretenses about a belief in the rule of law and contrived disgust at torture. Our media stars have a script from which they mindlessly read -- anyone who believes that political leaders should be held accountable for serious crimes must be a member of the "Hard Left" when the lawbreaking political leaders in question are Republicans -- and they recite it over and over no much how evidence piles up in front of their noses proving how untrue it is.
Our media stars accuse everyone with any actual beliefs -- and especially any beliefs that deviate from Beltway establishment orthodoxy -- of being motivated by ugly "partisan" impulses because that's the only way they are capable of seeing the world. It's the ultimate act of projection. That's how the most non-ideological and non-partisan principles (e.g.: government leaders who commit serious crimes should be held accountable; torture is wrong; Presidents shouldn't eavesdrop on Americans without warrants where the law makes doing so a felony) are transformed into partisan, "ideological" views of the Hard Left, even when they are plainly nothing of the sort. As commenter DCLaw1 wrote in explaining the media's sudden obsession this week with whether Nancy Pelosi was briefed on the CIA's interrogation program even though that issue has been known for years:
I want to point out that the main reason, if not the only reason, for this overwhelming media view is because the only lens through which they can see this issue - like every issue - is the Republican/Democrat or conservative/liberal lens. When one's entire point of reference for even issues of egregious lawbreaking goes no further than fixating obsessively over the identity of the people and parties to the "controversy" and the issue's putative effect on partisan politics, whether a leader of one party was informed of the crimes of the other takes on a meaning perversely greater than the evil of the underlying conduct itself.
Our establishment media simply cannot get beyond this stultifyingly narrow framework. It is pathological. Additionally, this staunch avoidance of anything approaching a substantive assessment of the actual illegal conduct, in favor of a petty fixation on the partisan "helps or harms" game, helps only the "side" that has committed the crimes and wrongdoing. No wonder our discourse is so unbelievably misshapen.
Few things better illustrate how warped our political discourse is than the media's claim that advocating investigations and prosecutions for political lawbreakers who commit serious crimes, who torture, who illegally spy on Americans with no warrants, is the province of partisans on the "Hard Left," even when people who are as far away from that as possible prominently advocate exactly that.
* * * * *
Beltway mavens are eager to declare that the torture controversy is ending, but these crimes are far too significant to sweep under the rug, no matter how unified the political and media establishments are in that effort. In addition to the Ventura interview and the Zelikow call for investigations yesterday, here are some headlines just from the last 24 hours:
Interrogation Probe Should Include Congressional Leaders, Hoyer Says
US lawmakers to hear from Bush 'torture' dissenter
Top US Democrat under fire over 'torture' briefings
US lawmaker: Public needs all facts on alleged torture
Ire Over a Columnist, an Author of Torture Memos
Speaker Under Fire on Torture ("With a series of torture investigations already in the works . . . the issue simply isn't going away").
It's difficult to avoid the conclusion that the President's apparent contemplation of reversing himself on whether to release 60 new photographs showing brutal American abuse of detainees (outside of Abu Ghraib) is part of an effort to tamp down what is still, quite obviously, the growing political pressure not to simply "move beyond" the serious crimes that were committed.
* * * * *
The call for prosecutions from the newest member of America's rapidly growing Hard Left:
65 Comments so far
Show AllWe had a cowardly draft dodger three presidents ago. We had a cowardly deserter last time around. This time we apparently just have a coward in a suit. Like the other two, he seems afraid of his own oath of office which states almost no obligation as president except one -- DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION.
Signed: Lawlessone [for more irreverence, see resistence-is-possible.blogspot.com]
"clovis May 13th, 2009 5:44 pm
I'm all for prosecuting the torturers and those who gave the orders, but am I the only one noticing that this has become a red herring? That unprovoked, aggressive war is the larger issue under which these abuses occurred? ..."
INDEED, and no, you're certainly not the only person; there are others who share the same view, including myself, and I've posted this many enuogh times already. SiouxRose, somewhere a little further below, agrees with you as well, but between the first post appearing and yours, hers is the only one I saw mentiong agreement with you, or anything like you said. Like yourself, this all has me sort of mindboggled and rather angry, mad, and very disappointed in people.
It's difficult to believe that most people can so readily and regularly "forgetting" about the whole damn wars of aggression to begin with. Incredible absent-mindedness, to say the least!
And it's disappoing that Glenn Greenwald is "blowing the same horn" and that Jesse Ventura skipped the whole matter of these damn wars being totally criminal from the very first day they were even thought of, let alone the very first day they were mentioned publicly. For the Iraq War, I'm referring to 2002, when recourse to war on Iraq was first publicly mentioned; or if it was mentioned earlier to the public, then I wasn't aware of it until 2002.
How the hell do people forget such supreme international crimes? How the heck is it that torture is worse than the supreme international crimes of wars of aggression; or the massacres of wedding celebrations in Iraq and Afghanistan; or the massacre of well over 100 Afghan civilians in their village very recently and the use of white phosphorous on that village, beside its use on other Afghans over the past several years; or ..., etcetera?
Incredible!
Where have you been Jesse? Great to have you back!
"Few things better illustrate how warped our political discourse is than the media's claim that advocating investigations and prosecutions ... is the province of partisans on the Hard Left,"
Glenn is trying to equate "Hard Left" with "contemptible", which is impossible. Hard left is where the people's universalist principles are. There isn't any arguing with universalist principles. Glenn must be on the elites' side in which case, hell, anything goes so, yes, after you shove the people's voice down into the noise then the hard left is contemptible and the earth is flat, etc.
What I fail to understand is President Obama's drive at being at cross purpose. On one hand the President is the one who released the Torture Memo's to the American People and said he would back having additional photo's of folks being tortured. Now he has reversed his decision on releasing the Photo's. What is going on? It seems that he wants a public outcry over torture and then again it seems he doesn't...I just don't understand where Obama stands and why he doesn't want those who authorized the torture to be held liable for breaking American and international law?
Torture, like murder, rape, molestation, and desecration, is always wrong. But saying that isn't saying much. And it still leaves open the issue of whether and under what circumstances infliction of pain on prisoners is justified to elicit information from them. To date, no one has satisfactorily established that infliction of pain beyond the pain attendant to mere incarceration and questioning works. I think it might be justified in very rare, emergency situations. However, to my knowledge, the law to date hasn't allowed exceptions for emergencies. The "torture memos" weren't written by lawmakers, who are the only ones who could enact laws allowing such exceptions. So why haven't those who, for example, waterboarded, been prosecuted?
There are thousands of prosecutors, grand juries, and law enforcement agencies. If prosecutions for improper interrogation techniques are in order, what's preventing these people and agencies from starting the prosecutions?
Maybe the problem is that no one has yet articulated persuasively exactly what laws to ground the prosecutions on, in what venues and jurisdictions, and against what defendants. The initial step in a prosecution is usually the filing of a criminal complaint, leading to a warrant for arrest obtained from a court, followed by arrest and indictment. Those clamoring for prosecution need to figure out who has the power to do these things, and demand that they explain why they're not doing them. The explanations by those with power to act of why they aren't doing it would be very interesting.
I'm all for prosecuting the torturers and those who gave the orders, but am I the only one noticing that this has become a red herring? That unprovoked, aggressive war is the larger issue under which these abuses occurred? And that the catalytic events that changed the mindset of the nation and ultimately, and under false pretenses, served to justify this illegal war, i.e., the attacks of 9/11/01, and the ensuing anthrax attacks, remain for the most part uninvestigated? The simple fact that Zelikow has thrown himself so visibly behind those calling for prosecution for the torturers, while being the principal author of the ludicrous 9/11 investigation report, should raise a thousand red flags...
Sioux Rose
CLOVIS: Right on! We're constantly seeing side issues pop up to create a loss of focus on what really matters and what's been at stake. Another example are the obscene bonuses to the CEOs of the various banking houses that essentially gambled and lost and now expect taxpayers to pick up the tab. The focus is on the millions in bonuses, rather than the failed strategy (and psychology) of handing BILLIONS to the CON artists who engineered the whole debacle in the first place, and not a move to re-instate intelligent regulations starting with a return to Glass-Steagall. There are so many egregious trespasses against decency, ecology, justice, and the economy that one can almost go MAD trying to keep up! And then they bring on the side shows to make SURE that no one can keep track of the endless parade of incomprensibly blatant illegalities. Ownership of the press, the power to mold public opinion, so many at fault as to create a fraternity that effectively protects its own, why should they worry about a silly thing like consequences? Alas, when all else fails, the agents of karma pick up the tab; but they're not quite so conspicuous (or costumed) as "Dawg, the Bounty Hunter."
Red herrings, red flags... neither of which are any redder than my own ass over the mega-travesties you itemize.
It's like one of those hideous bowling-pin-like Russian dolls that are hollow, with a series of smaller dolls nestled inside.
I've exhumed a ripe old bit of pop culture which has at least a kernel of truth: Future Shock.
I haven't read Naomi Klein's "Shock Doctrine" yet, so I don't know if she references it. "Scandal fatigue" may be part of this.
Unfortunately, there ARE so many heinous deeds and policies arising in this century that it seems impossible to even sort out an optimal method of organization to systematically address, much less redress, this morass of heinous wrongdoing and evil.
Especially since our criminal government-- past AND present-- is resisting the pursuit of truth and justice with all its might.
· Yr Obd't Servant
You are dead right! "...there ARE so many heinous deeds and policies arising in this century that it seems impossible to even sort out an optimal method of organization to systematically address, much less redress, this morass of heinous wrongdoing and evil."
And THAT is exactly the goal and I have to say it again: This empire’s doctrine is not SHOCK DOCTRINE anymore. The NEW DOCTRINE could be called ATTRITION DOCTRINE: It infiltrates citizen’s life, threatens family bonds, perverts democracy, drains all progressive energy, stalls change and leaves the populace in a PERPETUAL STATE OF STRUGGLE. People are out of their depth to comprehend, to really be able to make sense of something extremely elusive, impalpable and indescribable, BECAUSE REALITY IS SOMETIMES TOO HORRIFIC TO BE TRUE.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Read Collateral Damage part I and II
www.scribd.com/people/documents/2169400-ep-heidner <<<<<<<<<<<
This is why people have a hard time believing that I am a conservative - but 'conservative' used to mean one had a strict moral code and embraced the principle of 'law and order' - everyone being subject to the same laws, and no one being 'above the law' - not that I don't think some Lefties are out for 'vengeance' - but we must re-establish the rule of law, or we are all doomed. Now that you've heard it from
Jesse Ventura, do you see why I am so vehement about prosecuting those who would endorse torture? It's all about control - not information, as Jesse made clear!
By the way, I'm all for subjecting Cheney, Bush, Yoo, and all the rest to 'waterboarding' - after all, a lot of people have had to go through SERE training - it's a very old program - so there is no reason NOT to give the torture-enablers a taste of what they're promoting. Everyone should have to know what it feels like to drown. (I already know, in case any of you are wondering - and it used to be my worst nightmare.)
It Sure Looks Like Only A Mass Uprising Will Bring Us Change We Can Believe In
"Why?"
"Playing by the establishment rules is getting us nowhere."
"Anything else?"
"Time's running out."
"Based on?"
"Perpetual war + global warming + economic collapse = doomsday."
"America's rapidly growing Hard Left"
This is the most absurd statement I've read in years. Hilarious. Glenn is living in a Dream World, a fantasy, where wishes become reality.
I believe the phrase "America's rapidly growing Hard Left" is used sarcastically to point out that what pundits may refer to as a "Hard Left" viewpoint is actually quite in the mainstream of American thought. Another example would be single-payer health care. Sixty percent or more of the population favors it, but it is typically portrayed by these same pundits as a "Hard Left" position.
"Our establishment media simply cannot get beyond this stultifyingly narrow framework."
Actually, they could if they so desired, but, as any good storyteller knows, black and white is the most popular, easily ingested form of drama - hence, there has to be an "us" versus "them," a "good" versus "evil," etc. Grey areas that require actual thinking is ratings poison.
The establishment media does not give a flying f@#k about this - or any - country. By law, their job is to make money for their enabling shareholders. Period.
Key phrase - "By law"
Alexander Cockburn said several years ago that all American presidents, beginning with Washington and excepting Cleveland have committed crimes against humanity.
And as Maimonides wrote in the 12th C.E., torture is worthless for obtaining useful information and is wrong.
Do we stop with torture or prosecute all crimes against humanity?
There is nothing new. Jesse is right: prosecute and punish them. Do we begin with the most recent, Obama, or the oldest, such as Carter?
Do we also prosecute "journalists" who support torture? And members of congress who vote for it and finance it? Let's not stop with investigating our behavior in South America, let's also look at our behavior in Palestine/Israel. Is one reason we torture and kill indescriminately so that Zionist Israel won't stand out as the criminal enterprise that it is?
The House passed and the Senate is now considering a bill titled "Hat Crimes Act of 2009" In it added to hate crimes would be proposing action that might cause bodily harm: "attempts to cause bodily injury to any person because of ....religion, or national origin"
and in Section 249 (B) (iv) has the following language:
`(iv) the conduct described (above)
`(I) interferes with commercial or other economic activity in which the
victim is engaged at the time of the conduct; or
`(II) otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce.
Could calling for the boycott of Israel be prosecuted as a hate crime under
HR 1592/S. 909?
Could criticizing Israel or its officials be prosecuted as a hate crime?
"Attempts to cause bodily injury" will have to be defined. Could it be so defined that calling for sanctions against Israel would meet a definition of "attempting to cause bodily harm"? Could calling for prosecution of Israel and its officials for war crimes become a "hate crime"?
Just some thoughts.
"Do we also prosecute "journalists" who support torture? And members of congress who vote for it and finance it?"
Do we prosecute the taxpayers who finance all of it. It could be stopped. It could be stopped today. But the means necessary are "illegal". And we are a nation of laws aren't we? Be sure to vote.
Conversely could support for Israel be prosecuted as a hate crime? After all, Israel has certainly caused bodily injury to countless Palestinians and has certainly interfered with the economic activity of Palestinians. Has the blockade of Gaza not affected foreign commerce? I can see where this law, if passed, could cut both ways in the example given.
When the US has a Left of any kind--hard or soft--let me know.
I'll drink a mezcal to it.
As I've said before, if we investigate and prosecute the crimes of torture commited during W's tenure we should also investigate and prosecute all those complicit in torture throughout the last several decades. All those who were involved in torture training at the SOA, as well as those that were involved in torture regimes in the Southern Cone in the 70's - to provide two examples. Our use of torture as a means for geopolitical ends did not begin in 2001 and we should not pretend it did.
"All those who were involved in torture training at the SOA, as well as those that were involved in torture regimes in the Southern Cone in the 70's - to provide two examples."
Ah, yes, the U.S. operated "School of the Americas". Trainers of torturers and death squads. I wonder when the mainstream media will address this component of our foreign policy. I become more ashamed to be an American every day.
I bought a packet (150) of SOA newsletters and distributed them to the ministerial alliance in my home town, then took copies to two local universities. Also gave copies to other religous organizations as well as veterans groups. Most stated they thought it was a bit too extreme: when I asked them to explain, they couldn't, or wouldn't. Fact is - they were sickened by what they feared was the truth. Most know - few admit. That is why things don't change. This country has lost whatever bit of soul it may have had. Now, just as the system always wished - we have evolved into selfish, self-seeking independent bits of inhumanity without an eye or ear for justice and decency. We are, in other words, exactly where the system wants us to be. Impotent.
We must continue the struggle. That is what they fear most.
Sure, we don't have a problem with that. However, by starting with the most "recent" criminals will make it easier to prosecute the more "historical" criminals.
But nobody even mentions the "historical" crimes. They literally don't exist for, I'd venture to say, at least 98% of the population. My feeling is if we concentrate on just the past 8 years, the aforementioned 98% will feel like the "problem" of torture will have been addressed and they will never be encouraged to see the historical context. If there was no SOA there would have been no Guantanamo Bay, in my humble opinion.
Jesse Ventura may be a reform party guy but he looks more liberal than Obama himself. Maybe JV would make a better president in 2012.
This country's political leanings have gone so far to the "right" that our lefties are to the right of Europe's righties. No one in this country would recognize an actual leftie if one came up and beat them in the face.
We have gotten perverted in the extreme by the right wing. To think that insurance companies HAVE to profit at the expense of everyone in the nation's health shows that we have drifted to the point of money being the be all and end all of everything. To think that profit must be above everything else is just sick. And that is what is wrong with "conservative values". The ONLY thing the right values is money, lives and futures be damned.
I for one would welcome some voices from the left. Someone wanting corporate responsibility and accountability for those in power. Someone who actually thinks that human lives are more important than some exec's pocketbook. Someone who actually believes that we deserve to be treated like human beings rather than just bottomless pockets for industry to pick. Someone who thinks that corporations should be treated like businesses and NOT like humans, and in fact, given MORE rights and power than humans.
Gee, does giving a damn about humans make me a "far left" advocate? Does actually expecting the gov't to follow the laws they have passed and live up to the treaties they signed make me too radical for this country? If so, then I think it's time for me to leave. Apparently asking for the country to live up to it's stated ideals is just too much any more. Too bad, we had such promise, too bad that it only took one side a quarter century to destroy the whole thing, with the other side refusing to stand up for it enough to even TRY to defend it. What a shame.
"To think that profit must be above everything else is just sick."
This is called "CAPITALISM".
"Someone who actually thinks that human lives are more important than some exec's pocketbook. Someone who actually believes that we deserve to be treated like human beings rather than just bottomless pockets for industry to pick. Someone who thinks that corporations should be treated like businesses and NOT like humans, and in fact, given MORE rights and power than humans."
This is called "SOCIALISM".
"Gee, does giving a damn about humans make me a "far left" advocate?"
Apparently. Welcome to the human race.
"Does actually expecting the gov't to follow the laws they have passed and live up to the treaties they signed make me too radical for this country?"
No. It just makes you a dreamer.
"Apparently. Welcome to the human race."
I've been there a LONG time. I was first made aware of corporations and their power at around the age of 10. That was 40 years ago, and I've been against their power ever since. It's caused me a lot of problems over the years. And I still haven't changed my mind about it, nor will I.
"To think that profit must be above everything else is just sick."
Very true.
"This is called "CAPITALISM".
I beg to differ, I'd call it Business run amok. Business that was able to buy government deregulation and oversight. What we've had for 12 years at least is NOT Capitalism. Thats been our problem.
Wrong again. This has been going on for much longer than 12 years, Thomas. Where have you been? Oh, that's right--Dreamland, USA.
Lots longer than 12 years. Have you read Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine"? Think
Argentina's Dirty War. Think Chile under Pinochet. Think about Venezuela's and Bolivia's disastrous economic times before Chavez and Morales. Think about Russia's
downfall under "disaster" capitalism. We've had our filthy big hands in all of it.
All of you will stop bickering after reading: www.scribd.com/people/documents/2169400-ep-heidner Read Collateral Damage part I and II.
You will be sickened. Not many know - few will be able to digest. That is why things don't change. This country has lost whatever bit of courage it may have had. Now we have evolved into selfish, self-seeking, meek, consumers without an eye or ear for justice and decency because we have been fed a plastic culture far removed of what is reality. We are bogged down with attrition, exactly where the system wants us to be.
"-- I'll put it to you this way, you give me a waterboard, Dick Cheney and one hour, and I'll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders."
How about doing it to get him to admit to war crimes?
"How about doing it to get him to admit to war crimes?"
45 seconds, tops.
I saw a video of a reporter who made a bet he could withstand - I think it was 30 seconds - of waterboarding. The interrogator just shook his head. He placed a ball bearing in the reporter's hand and said when he'd had enough to drop it. Then it started. The reporter lasted less than 4 seconds before dropping the bearing, and was clearly very shaken. He said it felt like a death experience.
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
From the mouths of WWF wrestlers...
Just having spine enough to call a spade a spade in the current era of doublethink makes you radical.
"In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act."
George Orwell - becoming truer every day.
one of the things that I have troubled with when reading the constitution, is the apparent lack of a process for replacing troubling members of congress, or justices...
if one accepts as a given that the three branches of our current government are not providing 'checks and balances' at all, but are, rather:
acting in collusion
enabling the corruption of our government and citizenry by abstaining from such, and allowing things to move forward unchecked and unbalanced...
what recourse does the average citizen have if their representatives will not enforce the Consititution, and all lines of potential investigation and prosecution lie through the stinking, oily morass of these three entwined branches??
A new revolution every 20 years or so (which back then was a generation) was Jefferson's recommended answer to your quandry.
Poet
I always appreciate your comments. Pre Revolutionary war defiined revolution as guns. I don't get how to revolt today. Marching, calling, writing leaves me feeling stupid. I tried the 'get involved in your local Democratic' party'. Seems what they want is money, not participation. Local neighborhood group is working on a Farmers' Market (great), but no word on torture.
There are so many of us and up to now there are no great ideas on how to revolt. I live 3000 miles from DC. Hard to get there.
Sounds like you're stuck in a rut. I know how it is.
The first step to Revolution is psychological. The next step is action.
Creative initiative is sometimes more effective than fighting and it doesn't have to involve exhausting politics; or anything that hurts anyone. The Powers of Fascism want us to be too depressed, isolated and tired to do anything but sit in front of the TV and consume. Check out the Bureau of Public Secrets "The Joy of Revolution" ("Nothing undermines authority like holding it up to ridicule") it's one of my favorites - and don't forget to have fun.
Two words:
boycott and picket-line.
It took Montgomery AL Blacks about 6 months to integrate the buses and about 13 months to integrate downtown businesses. It took 10 years of agitating to get a former segregationist cracker Senator named President Lyndon JOhnson to make sure that landmark civil rights legislation passed.
Things have not changed--we have. (I include myself in that critique)
Poet
Divide and conquer...
Indeed......
"Facts have a well-known liberal bias."
---Stephen Colbert
The Washington Post is now reporting that Obama, that staunch defender of liberal values, is now reconsidering releasing the torture photos. It appears that Obama's spine is about as rigid as that of a jellyfish but with much more moral vacillation than that of that non political sea creature. Perhaps Obama is being influenced by Senator Joe Lieberman who is claiming that the U.S. is totally wrong in releasing photos which dare to show that the less than benevolent United States does indeed torture people.
Okay, McCaffery (Mr. "Patriot for Profit") and Zelicow (winner of the Alan Dulles award for fantasy creation for his work on the 911 Commission Report) are broken clocks who have both arrived at those two serendipitous moments that occur every 24 hours when they happen to be correct.
Hoyer, Wilkerson, Sessions, and Pickering are politically motivatred opportunists. Taguba and Ventura are honorable men.
As for Broder Ignatius, or Barry, (or younger protege's like Evan Thomas, Dana Millbank, or Chris Matthews) they are empty droids who long ago ceased to have any original thoughts and whose opinions seem determined by whoever can pay whatever fee their employer-pimps demand.
Glenn Greenwald is correct that the story "has legs" as they used to say among newspaper reporters. Whether "they" are able to cut the legs out from under this story (or single-payer healthcare or the proposed robbery of Social Security and Medicare to pay for wars, Wall Street bailouts, and such) remains to be seen.
Poet
Actually a broken clock is right twice a day. That is, if it's a standard analog clock; a military clock would be right once a day. (What this has to do with anything, I'm not so sure.)
That is exactly what I said:
"...who have both arrived at those two serendipitous moments that occur every 24 hours when they happen to be correct."
Poet
Hey there, Elainem,
You have to consider that McCaffrey is a military guy, so it would be once a day. Which only shows that those in the military are right half as often as normal people...
"Hard left" is the conservative buzz word that to the rest of the world means "rational" and "law abiding."
I view "rational and law abiding" as centrist characteristics.
When I think of "hard left" I think of France in 1793 where royal heads rolled down the streets.
"Hard left" today would require two guillotines operating 24/7 for several weeks to take care of the riff raff complicit in destroying the US middle class during the past 30 years.
Two Comments:
1) Couldn't help but notice Larry trying to stop Jesse from criticizing Bush. God forbid we hear the truth Larry!
2) Can't agree with Jesse or anyone praising Powell. He lied us into this war, plain and simple. No better than the rest of them.
3) Agree - prosecute them all.
4) If torture is a against the law and our President is a constitutional lawyer........
5) Not too early to comment on Obama. Don't have to wait 2 years. He's pretty much more of the same.
In his column yesterday at Salon, Glenn Greenwald made a lock-tight case that Obama has committed a war crime by intimidating the British government to conceal details of Binyam Mohamed's brutal beating (torture)
CD did not post this column.
I urge you all to read it:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/05/12/obama/index.html
* No mention of this story on Olbermann or Maddow either.
I just finished reading this article and my response to it is a palpitating heart and the repetitive thought, " When is it ever going to end? ". Pretty soon reality will return, though, and I'll know the answer.
You ain't seen nothing yet.
HERE is something which will make your heart palpitate:
www.scribd.com/people/documents/2169400-ep-heidner
Read Collateral Damage part I and II.
I read this yesterday - had to turn the computer off, take a walk, feel the sun. Thom Hartmann (talking about the 4th ammendment/NSA) said the founders knew that 'without trust of government there can be no civil society'.
No trust in the reporting of government is double whammy. I feel like I live in the final scenes of 'The Invasion of the Body Snatchers'.
For quite awhile now the truth itself has become a Hard Left ideology.
'...that our little David Ignatiuses deceitfully dismiss as "liberal score-settlers" and that our David Broders and Jon Barrys accuse of lying by masking their Hard Left thirst for partisan vengeance with false pretenses about a belief in the rule of law and contrived disgust at torture.'
Didn't Obama himself say "now was not the time for vegence" and continually push that we ignore it? And they say that Pelosi is an enabling coward.
Obama is a coward--not a particularly honorable role model for the young black man. Yet, Democratic partisans will defend him in the us vs them game--even when he reflects identical sentiments.
Regarding Obama's comment that "now was not the time for vengeance," he should be reminded that the application of the law is not a matter of vengeance in the least, but a matter of justice and moral duty.
By describing those calling for accountability of the Bush administration's behavior in the so-called war on terror and its treatment of prisonners as seeking vengeance, Obama unduly and manipulatively ascribes them a reprehensible psychology, whereas the issue is, above all, a legal one, as well as a moral one, and not a psychological one at all.
The government concerned about legalities or moral????
All they do is playing a psychological doctrine to suit the hidden agenda. It is not Shock Doctrine anymore but a Doctrine by ATTRITION. Keep the people in perpetual struggle and you can pretty much do what a Few Good Men want.
Sioux Rose
ABENDLAND: Excellent point!
You are so right, Vern.
Our establishment media simply cannot get beyond this stultifyingly narrow framework. It is pathological.
-----------------
No, it's a technique of misinformation they've been trained/instructed (hired) to use.
If the candidate being accused of torture was Bill Clinton they'd revert back to a sound legal argument defending the Convention on Torture.
These "journalists" are not stupid, they're mentally ill.
Most of these pundits, I'd be willing to bet, are CIA, or whoever bankrolls them today.
Google Operation Mockingbird for a more complete understanding of how the CIA placed their assets in all the major media in the 1960's.
"If the candidate being accused of torture was Bill Clinton they'd revert back to a sound legal argument defending the Convention on Torture."
I'm not so sure about this. Clinton's war against Serbia and his oversight of the sanctions against Iraq (half a million dead Iraqi children, a price that was "worth it" according to Madeleine Halfbright) did not result in any investigations. Come to think of it there weren't any investigations of the Clinton administration that had to do with policy. It was all about land deals and extra-marital affairs. Torture, war, murder are cool. Sex with an intern? ... not so much.
Yes, it's too bad we can't look at Clinton's administration with a cool eye. The Republicans really did us a terrible disservice with their sex/witch hunt. Instead of seeing him with his pants down or zipper unzipped, we should be looking hard at things like NAFTA and 'don't ask don't tell'. G. W. Bush was not the only one to help destroy the United States.