Alexander Hamilton (Federalist Paper 8; click here)
When each President takes office... when he is sworn in by the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, the most important thing that he vows, his most important role as leader of the United States of America... is to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution. As Alexander Hamilton was aware more than two hundred years prior, in times of danger and upheaval, even the most ardent proponents of civil liberties can become susceptible to losing freedom for safety's sake. It is up to "the leader of the free world" to make sure we do not succomb to such temptations. But, George Bush didn't do that. In fact, he was leading the cause... violating his sworn duty, by violating the laws of this land.
Now... I like Obama. I haven't agreed with him on everything, but, for the most part... I like the general direction of his administration.
However, President Barack Obama MUST prosecute the previous administration, and their violations of the Constitution, or he himself, will be in violation of the Constitution. Not "should"... not "i hope he does"... not... "it may be a good idea"... NO... He must. Its as simple as that. And this is no trivial matter. The world is watching, but, that is not the main reason for a full investigation.
This is America. We were founded on rule of law. This is not Europe. We have no history of dictators... kings... queens... emporers... caesars... pharoahs... czars... fascist leaders... communist leaders... none! We established a society where no man was above the law at a time when Europe was still dealing with the whims of inept monarchies.
There are no legal exceptions to the US criminal code on torture.
"We did it because..."
Your reasoning is irrelovent. Did you... or did you not break the law? And US law is malleable. If Bush felt there were things that he needed, he could have gone through the legal process to change laws. He could have gone to Congress. Right after 9/11... as spineless as Democrats were... he probably could have gotten most of what he wanted. They didn't want to do that. They wanted to operate under the cloak of dark. But free democracies do not ignore laws.
Obama acknowledges that torture happens. He acknowledges that laws were broken. The President feels that it would be "prudent" and "pragmatic" for the country if we just moved on. Sorry, thats... not... an... option. Thats what Banana Republics do. Thats for leaders who disband parliament on a whim... who wear orange leisure suits and always wear sunglasses and drink pina colado early in the afternoon. America doesn't have that option... and if he didn't want to make that kind of decision... then Obama shouldn't have run for president. Thats where tough decisions are made. If he thinks it will be divisive, then pardon George Bush. Richard Nixon was not convicted of any crime when he was pardoned by Gerald Ford. It is within the legal rights of the President to issue a pardon to any man for any crime at any time, but to ignore the act and purposely avoid criminal proceedings for crimes you acknowledge? Unacceptable.
And now we're having this debate about whether or not there was torture or just enhanced interrogations... yet we're balking at releasing certain photos because of world reaction. Whats so scary on the photos? Its just some good ole' fashion... Enhanced interrogations right? Thats just a phrase they keep saying over and over, (like "enemy combatant") so that stupid people start to believe the distinction you're attempting to make.
"They're not soldiers... they're enemy combatants... um... yeah... so... er... that is... y'see... that means... the Geneva Conventions... dont really... apply to them."
What an assinine thing to say. Even moreso coming from the same retards who insist on saying "war on terror" in all their press conferences. We're fighting a war... but against no soldiers. But, we like saying "war" so we can detain people until the war is over... but, when does this war on "terror" end? We should wage a mighty war against jealousy next. What a glorious battle it shall be! We've been fighting a war on drugs and cancer for 30 years. They just want to be able to hold these guys without trial (as POW's) for the rest of their lives. "Spreading freedom"
Semantics are for morons... they dont work on me. Hows this for a torture debate... at least 98 detainees have died while in US custody. AT LEAST 98 DETAINEES HAVE DIED WHILE IN US CUSTODY.
did they die from poor food? were these senior citizens? 70 year old terrorists? if there is no torture... how did a 100 people in our custody die? debate... over...
Interestingly enough, the "super-duper tree hugging, gay lovin' liberal" media (as Fox 'Noise' claims they are)... for some strange reason... has yet to make mention of the detainee deaths since 2002. You have to go "hunting" for that story. Even with the torture talk, you woooooould think dead prisoners would come up right? Google the subject and see if any of the mainstream (allegedly) Bush hating sites like CNN.com and MSNBC.com come up. I dont think sooooooooo. For some reason... all these flaming liberal companies have been mum on the subject. You would think if someone would bring up a 100 dead prisoners, the "was it really torture?" debate would go away... but none of the great reporters in the mainstream media seem to be aware of it.
The problem with a true investigation... EVERYONE is implicated. The Justice Department wrote the memo mentioned below. The CIA is carrying out most of the work. George Tenet is having torture meetings IN THE WHITE HOUSE with all the "principles." Top ranking Congressional Democrats (Nancy Pelosi in the news this week for this very reason) and Republicans were briefed by the CIA about torture. Judges like John Yoo were giving opinions supporting the change from the Geneva Conventions view on torture (click here). All branches of government have the stench of torture on them.
Forget the idea that an former undercover FBI agent (Ali Soufan), testified before Congress last week and disputes... a) that torture is an effective way to gather information... b) claims of Dick Cheney about intelligence gotten from it. (click here) Interestingly enough, Al Quaeda member Al-Sheikh al-Libi died in a Libyan prison last week. Yes, in 2009, its still happening. I bet you didn't hear about his death either. What great reporting! Go CNN. Im sure there was a missing child or something. Anyway, Libya says it was a suicide. Human Rights Watch isn't so sure. (click here) But, he claimed he was tortured by Egyptians (after the CIA handed him over in 2002... love those "renditions") to the point that he lied about a connection between Saddam and Al Quaeda. Told them what they wanted to here in order to make the pain stop. This was the sole source that made the White House claim (repeatedly) that there was a connection between Iraq and Al-Quaeda in Prague. One guy being tortured in an Egyptian prison cell. (FBI agent) Ali Soufan may be right about torture and unreliable info.
The "torture memo" recently made available by Obama's administration, which is 124 pages (click here) details responses to questions and requests that came straight from the Bush White House. There have been prior occasions where questionable and illegal activity have been done in America's name, and perhaps with our blessings... maybe by some South Vietnamese forces in the 1970's, for example. But, this is the first time that you see undeniable proof tying it DIRECTLY to the White House. The torture memo is a letter being sent to the White House from the "Justice" department. Signed by the Assistant Attorney General.It goes into great detail about plans to interrogate Abu Zubaydah, a high ranking Al Quaeda operative. The ten techniques to be utilized were... attention grasp... walling... facial hold... facial slap... cramped confinement... wall standing... stress positions... sleep deprivation... insects place in confinement box... and waterboarding. Isn't it interesting how waterboarding, something that was done during the SPANISH INQUISITION, of all things... was called torture by the United States when it was done to POW's during the Vietnam war.
There must be prosecutions... anything short of a full fledge investigation, is just not an option.
Posts
