NavigationUser loginSpam?See spam posts on this site? If so, please don't reply to the spam! Instead, just report the URL to the webmaster. |
Bush admits he approved torture[A nation based on laws? A society based on the rule of law? A government where no person is above the law?! If any of that were true, then Bush would be in an orange jumpsuit behind bars.] Bush admits he approved torture The American people have heard President Bush and his spokespeople say many times that the U.S. government does not engage in torture. Whether Bush was believed or not is another story especially in light of the photographic evidence of the abuse of prisoners in Abu Ghraib. Its understood that many of the photos are too sadistically graphic to be made public. Still, the official U.S. denials of torture continued until earlier this month when Bush acknowledged in an interview with ABC-TV that he knew about and approved enhanced interrogation of detainees, including waterboarding or simulated drowning. As a matter of fact, Bush added, I told the country we did that. And I told them it was legal. We had legal opinions that enabled us to do it. The president added, I didnt have any problems at all trying to find out what Khalid Sheik Mohammed knew. He was the person who ordered the suicide attack I mean, the 9/11 attacks, Bush said. And back then, there was all kind of concern about people saying, Well, the administration is not connecting the dots. You might remember those that period. Bush said. Bush also said in the interview that he had been aware of several meetings his national security advisers held to discuss enhanced interrogation methods. Surely he is aware of the U.S. commitment to international treaties barring cruel and inhumane treatment of prisoners. What is startling is that he feels no remorse about the cruel image he has created for us and the damage done to our credibility and probity. In referring to the legality of torture, Bush apparently was thinking of a 2002-2003 memo by John Yoo, a Justice Department official who argued military interrogators could subject detainees to harsh treatment as long as it didnt cause death, organ failure or permanent damage. The memo was rescinded. Bush, who has insisted we do not torture, also recently vetoed legislation that explicitly banned torture. Sen. John McCain, whose whole political persona has been defined by the fact that he had been tortured while a prisoner of war during the Vietnam era, supported Bushs veto. For both Bush and McCain, I recall the words of Joseph Welch, the special counselor for the Army during the 1954 Army-McCarthy hearings when Welch asked Sen. Joseph McCarthy, R-Wis.: Sir, have you no sense of decency? We expected the usual cast of characters including Vice President Dick Cheney to be in on the sinister torture-planning sessions. But it came as a shock that Gen. Colin Powell, then secretary of state, sat in on the meetings and went along with the planning. Powell had been on record warning against U.S. torture policies on the basis that if we mistreat our prisoners, foreign countries will feel no qualms about abusing American captives in wartime. Once revered for his integrity, Powell has lost his halo. Now we have this weeks testimony of Air Force Col. Morris Davis, a former chief prosecutor, who took the witness stand at Guantanamo Bay on behalf of a prisoner. Davis told how top Pentagon officials had pressured him on sensitive prosecutorial decisions for political reasons. He said he was told that the charges against well-known detainees could have real strategic value and that there could be no acquittals. Davis also testified Brig. Gen. Thomas Hartmann reversed a decision he made and insisted prosecutors proceed with evidence they obtained through waterboarding and other methods of torture. Davis also testified he was told to speed up the cases to give the system legitimacy before a new president takes over in January. Is Congress so cowed that it accepts the statements of a president who has little regard for the truth? Is there no lawmaker who is appalled about the tarnishing of our image in world opinion? And where are the voices of the other presidential candidates who will inherit the Bush legacy of torture? Why the silence? I count on the American people to refuse to be shamed any more. |
Re: Bush admits he approved torture
Hmmm... Colin Powell "lost his halo"? Hahaha. He sold out long ago; it was obvious that he was just the token black man who was expected to do as his masters say. It was such a disappointment; surely he must have worked hard to earn his rank, and as soon as he took on civilian duty he deserted his principles and became Dubbyah's stooge and whipping boy. Powell is a disgrace to the military; it's fortunate we still have far better men and women than him in service and outright disgraceful that there are worse than him in the services. Look up Harry Belafonte's comments about Powell and Dubbyah - there's a man who doesn't let age mellow him or threats by cowards masquerading as patriots silence him.
Re: Bush admits he approved torture
Exactly; Powell sold out long, long before he deliberately lied to the US in the run-up to the Iraq invasion.
But Bush is in a tough spot. Whether he attacks Iran or not, he may eventually be held accountable for his crimes.
Counterpunch is running a great piece entitled, "Blame It On Paraquay! The Bush's Family Bad Latin American Real Estate Investment which explores some scenarios of Bush being prosecuted after he leaves office.
We can only hope (and agitate!).
Re: Bush admits he approved torture
I doubt Dubbyah will ever be prosecuted. We couldn't even give Tricky Dicky the orange jumpsuit that he deserved. Also, Dubbyah's immune from prosecution for anything he did in his official duties as president so you can forget about him being tried for approving torture.
The dogs of war are baying again though - they're talking about attacking Iran again. I think if they push that, Iraq will have it's own version of the "Islamic Revolution" and even the secular members of Iranian society who would like to see secular reform wouldn't tolerate us occupying their country and only a minority of them would support the US at all. It's a lose-lose situation, but our loser monkey president is good at dropping us all in the poo. The entire force deployed in Iraq should have been in Afghanistan instead; attacking Iran means losing Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, and really screwing over the economy. The only people to benefit (if you call them people) are the weapons manufacturers.
Re: Bush admits he approved torture
I have no problem with water-boarding terrorists. None whatsoever.
Re: Bush admits he approved torture
What makes you think everyone who was tortured were terrorists? Numerous people were tortured in Abu Ghraib and in the secret East Bloc torture camps that Dubbyah authorized. There are claims of torture at gitmo. One Canadian who was finally returned claims to have been tortured. Back home honest Americans are being unlawfully detained by mentally unstable goons working for the "homeland security" gang and as they're eventually released by superiors because they've done nothing wrong, they're threatened and told to shut up about what happened. So when will you oppose Dubbyah's kidnap-and-torture policies - when your neighbors start to disappear? Maybe when they come and take your own family - who knows. The USA has become a police state run by criminals who claim to be patriots and who threaten genuine patriots under the pretense of national security.
Re: Bush admits he approved torture
Well, that's one position. First, let's straighten out the terminology, because accurate language defines the debate.
It's not "waterboarding", it's torture. Drowning torture (which is what the so-called waterboarding really is) has been used for many hundreds of years.
I think what is important is to realize how low the US has sunk. Three points:
1) Historically, the US sees water torture as torture. In WW2 the US put Japanese war criminals on trial and executed them for "water boarding" a single American. The Japanese did far worse than anything done on 9/11 and yet we didn't resort to the barbarity of torture.
2) The US Constitution calls a ratified treaty "the supreme law of the land". The US has ratified the Geneva Conventions which bans torture. The world agrees that water torture is torture -- it has been for centuries. Though Bush's lawyers claim water torture is okay, it's important to remember that even Hitler had lawyers that justified his actions. But that still didn't make them right.
3) Back to terminology, what is a "terrorist"? The US refuses to extradite a person who was convicted in a fair trial of blowing up a civilian airliner. Yet the US gov't also labels animal rights activists who free animals as "terrorists". This label is as useful as "freedom fighter" -- the definition is defined by the person using the label.