Ed Harges—You must be thrilled that cyrena showed up to defend your gutless position—she always will. But, I wont read her posts anymore. So, you’ll have to borrow her cajones…

She REALLY doesnt “like” me…lol…but she DOES refer to me, personally..I do notice that. As I scroll past it.

Re: By JFoster2k, April 21 at 3:22 pm:

JFoster2k writes:

“Leaving aside the widely held contention that torture is actually NOT effective, it is completely beside the point.

“Waterboarding is torture. Torture is illegal.”

Right. It’s obvious, but still, that point can’t be made often enough.

By Ed Harges, April 19 at 11:10 pm #
re: By cyrena, April 19 at 10:32 pm:
Oh, hi Cyrena!
KDelphi and ITW have been teaching me all the riches of my prose that I never knew were there. KD has discovered, from perusing my posts with his secret decoder ring, that I’m actually against prosecuting the CIA torturers; and ITW has divined that I’m actually yearning to establish a new, world-wide Arab caliphate.

~*~*

Hi Ed
I noticed, (though not the part about ITW, since I guess I didn’t read that far down). But, I’m not the least bit surprised by KD, (she’s a female by the way, we’ve heard her life story a few times), since she has more ‘issues’ than the NYT. I’m used to it, since a large percentage of the population is equally afflicted in some form or fashion. Mental health issues are epidemic,  because they aren’t immediately recognized by a lot of people. Most of us in fact.
So she says Obama is a Constitutional Lawyer, and that she expects him and the Justice Department to uphold the law. She’s right. He spent 12 years teach Constitutional Law at the University level, and his ‘speciality’ is Civil Rights Law. What Kdelphi doesn’t know (and would be incabable of connecting the dots on even if she did) is that at Columbia, he did his undergraduate work in International Relations, with generally includes International Law – or at least the framework of it.
Kdelphi of course is clueless to any of the politics involved in international law, or how it works, or even the politics of the Judicial System in this country, especially now, after 8 years of Cheney running a secret government.

So to be honest, you only provide ‘bait’ for her when you state the obvious – which is that Obama could be wiped out, because she’s been an avid anti-Obama ideology from day one. In fact, Kdelphi is of the negative anti-pretty much everything ideology anyway. She’ll bogg you down in the typical bullshit minutia that the average miserably unhappy neurotic indulges in.

So she says… so what, that’s what he signed up for. Well DUH!! As if there hasn’t been a much higher assassination risk against him since the day he entered the campaign. It’s not exactly like these two extraordinarily intelligent people,  (Michell and Barack Obama) with impeccable judgement, didn’t KNOW that and give it an incredible amount of consideration before they made the decision. So KD says, (in her typical neurotic mindset) that he should have know that when he took the job. That’s the kind of BS we get from her. Same old neurotic shit, and it’s pretty predictable.

In reality, there’s far more to it than an assassination, which is always a possibility, though you’re right that this issue increases it. But more importantly, we the people (and the rest of the world) don’t want to settle for prosecuting a few lowly soldiers (like they did for the torturers at Abu Grahib) and even more importantly, many of these criminals are STILL DEEPLY IMMERSED within the political/government apparatus. They have to be identified, and relied upon for information to prosecute the big fish. And the political reality of the thing, (which Obama sort of let slip) is that as soon as he or the Justic Department makes some ‘general threat’ to prosecute the tortures, everybody and anybody who knows anything is gonna lawyer up, (and clam up) and do their best to stonewall any attempts to get to the information required,  to get the ones responsible for the torture, beginning at the top of the heap.

TBC

2 of 2
So Kdel has a reasonable expectation for the current administration to ‘uphold the law’, but she’s totally clueless to exactly how that has to happen, or what ‘the law’ even is. So while I understand the frustration from those with genuine and legitimate expectations, who actually DO know something about US Constitutional and International Law -  (this does NOT include Kdelphi) of prosecutions, it’s just not an overnight thing, and they have to tread (legally speaking) very carefully, or the whole damn thing could blow up in their faces. IOW - they need their ducks-in-a-row configuration to be as tight as it gets.

I have my own moments of frustration with some of the decisions that Obama made prior to his election, but in each case, I preferred to give the benefit of the doubt, knowing that I couldn’t possibly be privey to ALL of the components and the rest of the political bullshit in constant motion. So way back when, (and Felicity helped confirm my own ‘sense’) I realized that Obama holds his hand pretty close to his vest, and there are damn good reasons for it, many of which have come to prove themselves as being in the best judgment, based on the reality that so many folks continue to deny.

It has always been my opinion that the International Court needs to try these people for Torture. It’s a Universal Law, making it a Universal Crime, and while it is also addressed in our own Constitution, I personally, (and yes, this IS also a professional opinion) think that the International Community should do it first, and for a whole plethora of legal and political reasons, including but not limited to the fact that they are well equipped, (maybe more so than our own domestic system) to deal with this prosecution of what is at the top of the list of International Crimes.  I’m guessing, (based on a history of these same sort of musings and their results) that Obama probably believes this to be the most effective way to deal with them as well.
And, for whatever the reason, I’m inclined to believe that Obama and Eric Holder and the rest of the new team are considerably more informed than Kdelphi.
Meantime, for Jfoster2k:

“…As for Obama’s reluctant approach, I have to hope there is some reason for it. I suspect that if he plays it relatively neutral and lets the Congress and DoJ proceed, he can avoid a lot of the “Witch Hunt” accusations, however, the attempt to shield torturers who were “just following orders” is still bothersome.”

I think you’ve got the right idea, and I agree that there should be no attempt to ‘shield’ those who have in fact engaged in torture, regardless of it they were ‘just following orders’ or not. But that’s not what I see happening. Many of these lower level military personnel have already been scapegoated to a certain degree, and the military has been forced to re-write portions of their manuals, and on and on. So I don’t think it’s a matter of ‘shielding’ any of them on the part of the Obama Admin.

“Shielding” is a long way from a decision not to do mass prosecutions, and I’m as convinced as I can be about much of anything these days, that the Obama Administration will be overly cooperative in making available any and all records (that haven’t been shredded by the former thugs) to the International Community that could effectively prosecute them.

I have previously recommended two books that I find so helpful to understanding our own situation in this and other matters of abuse heaped upon us by the Cheney regime.

“Exorcising Terror: The Incredible Unending Trial of General Augusto Pinochet” by Ariel Dorfman
and

“A Miracle, A Universe: Settling Accounts with Torturers” by Lawrence Weschler.

The second one is particularly helpful I think, for most of us who are even semi-politically conscious.

The fascinating argument we hear from Cheney and others on the right is that these memos should not have been released because waterboarding and other techniques are effective.

Leaving aside the widely held contention that torture is actually NOT effective, it is completely beside the point.

Waterboarding is torture. Torture is illegal.

As for Obama’s reluctant approach, I have to hope there is some reason for it. I suspect that if he plays it relatively neutral and lets the Congress and DoJ proceed, he can avoid a lot of the “Witch Hunt” accusations, however, the attempt to shield torturers who were “just following orders” is still bothersome.

ED—You should read your own stuff: you said Obama could “get shot”. You said that “we have to make him” (I simply disagree—he is an constituional attorney—he knows what to do), and, you said that i was ‘with Cheney and wanting to impeach Obama”—talk about exagerration!!

You guys know what is right here. You also know who has to decide.We will see if it happens.

I guess I previewed this and didnt sent it. Sorry.

ED—

“...we should all work to make them happen. If you want to pursue this activism while believing that Obama is a devil indistinguishable from Dick Cheney or Richard Perle, well, I can’t help it if that’s they way you see the world. It’s ludicrously untrue,..”

“KDelphi, why should he risk getting too far out ahead on this issue?

I’m not sure we all appreciate just how red-hot dangerous this is for Obama, and not just politically.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but, um, we do have a history of political assassinations in this country, you know? Obama risks getting bumped off for going even this far.”

“Think about his situation. Think about Dick Cheney, think about the legions of Rush Limbaugh nutcases out there, think about what happened to MLK and RFK and JFK. Think of all the CIA agents and military people who must be enraged about Obama’s revealing these documents. Would YOU have the guts to do this? If they would torture people, wouldn’t they do anything to Obama if they thought they could get away with it?”

HE IS THE PRESIDENT OF THE USA. If he didnt want the respnsibility he shouldnt have run. It is the respsonsiblity of the president and the AG to uphold the law.

Thats all.

re: By cyrena, April 19 at 10:32 pm:

Oh, hi Cyrena!

KDelphi and ITW have been teaching me all the riches of my prose that I never knew were there. KD has discovered, from perusing my posts with his secret decoder ring, that I’m actually against prosecuting the CIA torturers; and ITW has divined that I’m actually yearning to establish a new, world-wide Arab caliphate. You really should have these two put you on the couch and see what they can find in your subconscious. But just remember: your denials will only confirm how right they are about whatever they discover.

Ed Harges writes/wonders…
•  “KDelphi, can you really be this dense? I’m in favor of prosecution also. You need to learn to read.”

So Ed, you noticed.

Meantime, I’ve been intentionally avoiding these discussions on the Administrative position not to prosecute, in part because I’ve been busy, and because the rest of it is all about real politick and the reality of how the apparatus works, and who’s who, and where they are, and what they know, and a whole bunch of other shit.
The short answer is that we need to prosecute the right people, based on the chain of command. In short, we need Cheney and his top henchmen/women. Cheney ordered the Torture, and his people re-wrote the legislation that Congress approved. THOSE are the people to prosecute, because not ALL of the CIA was a party to it.
I think Obama and his Justice Department are a whole lot smarter than we might want to give them credit for, which is actually kind of neurotic on the part of the public who is demanding not only that these prosecutions happen, but how and when, based on limited to NO knowledge about how the system operates.
The rest of my short answer is that this is a smart move (and NOT unexpected) on the part of the Administration. Justice WILL prevail, but just not at a drive thru window like Americans expect it to happen.

That said, the most onerous of these crimes would be far more effectively prosecuted at the International level, both practically and politically.

WE can get them for TREASON, and at some point, we should. Meantime, the International Community can prosecute all of the torturers, and I’d bet my next disbursement that’s what Obama has in mind. The ACLU can certainly help, and we are. (I remain a proud card-carrying member.)

However, it’s not like we don’t have some other stuff to work on, (like keeping even more of us from falling into the abyss) and there’s no statute of limitations on ANY of their crimes.

Cool your jets folks…it’ll happen.

re: By KDelphi, April 19 at 5:01 pm:

KDelphi writes:

”... the ACLU is very much in favor of prosecution, as you must know.”

KDelphi, can you really be this dense? I’m in favor of prosecution also. You need to learn to read.

ED—If you think that calling Pres. Obama about it will do any good, I believe that you are mistaken. But , have at it. I am glad that you have money to give to organization but, the ACLU is very much in favor of prosecution, as you must know. But, hey, if you can get him to do something about this—what exactly you want him to do, you are not clear—good!

Otherwise, it is just blah, blah, blah.

How do we “push him”, contact a member of Congress , who was probably involved and very aware of what was happening and whom Pres. Obama is protecting?

Why wont you tell me how you felt when you heard about/saw the torture? And, I am certain that, at the time, you felt that people should be held accountable—the higher ups. I dont understand what has changed. The actions havent changed. They still happened…if JOhn McCain had won, would you want him to “move on” or expect GOP to “push him”. I think you would be decrying him for protecting GOP.

HOw is Pres. Obama not doing hatt now?

KDelphi writes:

“So, for Dems,that want to do nothing about it,the real alternative (except a tiny protest, or phone calls or a petition) is to just move on, look to the future,  and get over it. “

But that is clearly not my position. There is no way from what I have written that you could possibly think that is my position.

Ed—Where would you suggest we start? “Move on”.

The only choice left for those who wish to do nothing (except express righteous indignation, and be SO glad that THEY didnt directly do it—-just paid for it, knew about it, knew more about it and decided to let our chief law enforcement officials just “let it go”), is to just…well, let it go.

I was being facetious about the petititon..(yeah, I have credo, so I have free speech calls, and I call all the time)Pres. Obama doesnt give any indication, that I see (although Dems keep referring to it) that, like FDR, he wants you to “make him do”..anything. I think that that sits solely in the imaginations of some people who supported what they saw as a progressive candidate… He just doesnt want to do it. It was his decison, not Eric Holder’s.

I can see WHY he doesnt want to do it—but that doesnt make it ok.

So, for Dems,that want to do nothing about it,the real alternative (except a tiny protest, or phone calls or a petition) is to just move on, look to the future,  and get over it. C’mon, as a loyal Democrat, you should be used to that by now.

Just answer me one question—how did you feel when you heard (and knew) that Bush et al were defying intl law and doing this…why dont you feel that way now?

re: By jackpine savage, April 19 at 2:24 am:

Well, it’s OK with me if you pursue your activism while at the same time believing that you shouldn’t have to.

It would be as useful to prosecute these low rankers as it was to torture prisoners.
Torture only re enforces Resolve, Prosecution only provokes Miranda.
We don’t need to get the ones following the orders - we Must get those who dared usurp the laws to proliferate it.
What information could we obtain from those who are willing to come forward- without fear of retribution. Would we find out more concrete information about other War Crimes not yet revealed.Such as Cheney’s Assassination Squad?
Consider who might have been on those lists? Someone who could have derailed the foundations to an illegal invasion, curtailed further Radical extremist activities?
What would Pakistan look like now had Bhouto not been assassinated, had won the Presidency. Would the masses have united under her call for peace. Would there be the hotbed refuge in the Swat Valley? Would we have been able to surround the Mountain region from both sides- cutting off all roads and escapes? Would the Taliban realized their was another wolf right out their back door- with nuke capability.
And what would a truely Fully engaged Pakistani ally afforded US- More troops and more supportive Role back up. How would have that effected those who earn their Profits from providing such contractual services? Would Halliburton, KBR ,Blackwater have a smaller role to play - if any?
Let’s be clear- the only reason we have these ‘Legal’ Briefs is because the CIA ASKED for them. How many other War crimes were committed where “legal” cover was not requested. ‘If the President does it, it is not Illegal’...What WH did Cheney,Rummy & Wolfie Cut their teeth on? isn’t that basically what unfettered ‘Executive priviledge’ means.
We have at least 3 men who have spent the last 40 yrs committing High Crimes Against US.Their Crimes are so vast and so insideous, I would be willing to give Immunity to even their last Puppet, King George the W, if only he talk. And frankly what does he have to lose- Admit he had no control over his own admin- we already knew that. Did they think we missed McCains campaign admitting ‘the candidate does not speak for the Campaign?’- an admission of the existence of those in the ‘Shadows’in the Repug party who actually pull the levers of power.

Ed,

I never said that Obama is indistinguishable from Dick Cheney and Richard Perle…though i will note that those types have been pretty happy with his Central Asian plans.

But he ain’t hope incarnate, not by a long shot.  I also find it pretty disingenuous that the standard retort is “he has to fix the economy first”.  Any reading deeper than WH press releases suggests that he’s probably making that issue worse in the long run.

More important than prosecution is stopping the practice.  I’m sorry, but having Obama say that we’re not doing it anymore isn’t enough.  Bush said we weren’t doing it too.

And while i’m all for activism to force the issue, i am not sure why i need to force the president to do what’s right.  Didn’t he swear to uphold the Constitution and all that?  And why should the responsibility fall to me when his DoJ is issuing briefs and motions to protect both the torturers and those who ordered torture?

Who’s the leader here?  I was never in position to put a bill/amendment/non-binding resolution up for debate in the Senate.  I would have if i had been in that position, why didn’t Obama?

The answer is that Democratic Congresspeople knew and went along with it.  There’s been pressure on these people to do something about it for years.

Releasing the memos is great, but until he acts on the “revelations” it isn’t much different than Kruschev denouncing Stalin.

re: By Folktruther, April 18 at 6:49 pm:

Thanks, FT for your interest in the caliphate position. Until Inherit the Wind explained it to me, I was totally unaware that my heart’s desire was to bring about an ultimate world super-caliphate dictatorship ruling over all 750 million Arabs.

But yes, you can rule the caliphate yourself, if you want; I grant the position to you. I don’t think I’d be any good at it, since my desire to lead the Arab World Domination Conspiracy remains deeply buried in my alleged subconscious, where only Inherit the Wind seems able to find it.

By KDelphi, April 18 at 3:33 pm:

There are probably petitions out there all ready to be signed. I pay my dues to the ACLU, but I don’t always keep up with their e-mails. We have to keep a fire lit under Obama’s butt, and under every butt in Congress, that much is clear. I do a lot of direct calling to lawmakers, earnestly pleading and cajoling and outraging at whoever answers the phone. I figure, if enough people are doing that, it will make a difference. Political pressure is not just accomplished with financial donations. Large numbers of people making themselves annoying and refusing to shut up can really move votes in Congress, too. Just read Paul Findley’s book on the Israel lobby.

Ed Harges I’m glad you could see that KDelphi was right, as far as she went.  But what I waht to ask you about is that Caliphate of 750 milliion Arabs that Inherit said that you supported establishing. 
As far as I know, you haven’t displayed any interest in become a Caliph.

In that case, if it’s alright with you,  I’d like to apply for the position.  In these times of mass unemployment, one can’t bee too fussy about taking what jobs are availiable.  The fact that I am Jewish shouldn’t matter that much; the pope appointed a Jewish retainer as Cardinal in the 13th century. 

And Judiasm is closer to Islam than it is to Chistianity, and the languages are pretty similar.  I’ll just fake the rest.  Please let me know when you have things set up and the position becomes vacant.

Ed—Great! As I said, let the indictments begin..lets get a petition going to Holder…

re: By KDelphi, April 18 at 1:51 pm:

Whatever. I don’t think there’s really any practical disagreement between us.

felicity—I’ve heard people talk about it, as if,well…sortve the “we were following orders” dodge. As in, “well, the CIA was told by the Justice Dept”...I dont believe tham that the CIA did NOT know that this was “illegal”. People disobey orders all of the time. They pay for it, too. I dont buy it and, neither should AG Holder.

You are right, just think if you were a prison guard. You have an inmate that may know where a kidnap victim is being held (lets just give them that, although they had no way of knowing who knew what—many were probably innocent, turned in for rewards offered by the military)). Someone—even an attorney—tells you that it is ok to keep them awake for 11 days to bash their head against a wall, to actually kill them, torture them to death—do you believe it?

It certainly doesnt take an attorney to know that what the govt advocated was wrong, huh? If the soldiers at Abu Gharib can serve prison time (and, for the most part, they should) then let Rummy and Yoo and Bush et al go too! General population, no federal prison. That is what I think that they should do. I think that it is necessary for both closure as well as to move on as a country, with any respect in the world. This wil not “end” here, even if the Administaraiotn tries to make it “go away”. The world will not forget this..

Let the chips fall where they may.  They certainly wouldnt let you or I off for something as mild as tax evasion…if people can serve time for smoking pot, let the indictments begin. If people can get the death penalty for gang violence, let the indictments begin.

Dont you agree?

Four years ago I read an article which discussed the CIA’s involvement in torture. What was most interesting was that early on the CIA had its lawyers draw up some documents to be signed by either Justice or the Pres/Vice which in essence let CIA agents involved in torture off the hook if or when it came to prosecution.

Getting past the horror of the entire practice, I found it interesting that the CIA obviously knew what it was doing was illegal or it would never have had the documents drawn up in the first place.

Relying on what I read as true, the question is why hasn’t this come out?  Any guesses?

Ed—Who said that Obama was the ‘devil” or “induistinguishable from Cheney?”?? Why would I want Cheney prosecuted if I thought that??

ALOT BETTER THAN BUSH IS NOT MUCH OF A COMPLIMENT. I wouldve been alot better than Bush!

Even when Pres. Obama does things that I admire, (which, I must admit, have been few)there is no point in talking about it, with Obamas’s loyal supporters, who are so blinded by their complete trust in him (which is antithema to the Constitution and what a Democracy is supposed to stand for) that they just think that if you dont support Obama—-you must be Right Wing. Only in the uS, are there only those two options and people guillable enough to think it has to stay that way.

You are aware that, in civilzied countries, there are many more alternatives to neo-Right and neo-Left, no?

Ed,

I agree with you. Obama is ten x better than George W. Bush who history will eventually record as an even worse president than James Buchanan. Bush had zero accomplishments in his eight years in office, unless you count tax cuts for the upper class.  Having campaigned for Obama, I hold him to a high standard and so far he has delivered for the most part on his campaign promises and the ideals he set forth in his book “Audacity of Hope”.  The problem for Obama is that his core support comes from a group that felt so strongly about our torture policies that it became one of the few issues to receive almost unanimous support. Unlike our economic policies about which there is honest debate about the best way to go, no progressive worth their salt would ever condone torture as national policy. That is that anethema to our national purpose and was never condoned even during periods of darkness far worse than what we are currently going through.  Obama is a good man but also a realist - he has to fix our economic problems and our health care problems; everything else can wait - the problem with going after guys like Yoo is the enormous distraction it would create. Personally I wish he would string those guys up but I understand the political realities. But he will need to go after these guys within a years time or risk losing a lot of credibility with our allies.

re: By jackpine savage, April 18 at 9:50 am:

I just think people are underestimating the immense importance of Obama’s release of these damning documents. I’m not going to bicker any more with a bunch of people with whom I’m basically in agreement, in terms of core values. These prosecutions have to happen, and we should all work to make them happen. If you want to pursue this activism while believing that Obama is a devil indistinguishable from Dick Cheney or Richard Perle, well, I can’t help it if that’s they way you see the world. It’s ludicrously untrue, but hey, peace.

With this decision, Obama has made himself an accessory after the fact for war crimes, and guilty of Crimes Against Humanity.

His job as Chief Executive is to faithfully execute the laws of the United States, not cover up crimes and protect the criminals!

BobZ,

I’m pretty sure that Americans are the only ones who don’t already see the US as hypocrites. 

Ed, i think you’re confusing what progressives want to think Obama is thinking and what he is actually thinking (since we cannot ascertain the latter anyhow).  But besides that, will this man ever take a stand on anything?  Why is it my responsibility to do his job through the most inefficient means possible? (and i’m a pretty big believer in my own responsibility; i take responsibility for the torture and the illegal invasions…something that most progressives like to blame solely on Bush)

Here is another point, that had occurred to me: why in the hell release themn if you wont let anyone do anything?? So people will just be pissed off? THINK OF WHOM HE IS OFFERING TO DEFEND!

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-04-17/how-obama-excused-torture/

“Obama has set a precedent of 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.”

I dont agree with the entire article, and I hated Reagan, but, jeez, to toss this out there and then say, “move on” is just too much!!!

And, if you think that the Pentagon, CIA and militia groups will stop this just because “its out” with no punishment, I think you are very naive..

Just let me ask you—are you not pissed..

Ed—More fear mongering ..“Its Obama or ELSE!” Or else what ?? What is he doing that you are so proud of so far? Dont say GITMO or Iraq, health care , or any of that. You cant say that until it happens.

Like I said before—-you will get what you will tolerate.

NO one is on trial at GITMO that wasnt before. Reports from antiwar.com say that Pres. Obama has said we may have to stay in Iraq (due to Al Qaueda) ??. “Health care reform” is already an industry joke.

What is it about “the US doesnt torture” that you do not understand? Why are you so histrionic about Pres. Obama??

Impeaching Obama is ridcicuous. But to someone who just cannot imagine a world without a duopoly, I guess this the only course, Right.

Is it even conceivable to you that we dont have to put up with either of these samo/samo parties??

Big B- I’m proud to have you as a homeboy!  You’re right, Obama IS a gutless prick, but his gutlessness goes beyond his legitimation of torture.

Obama is continuing, indeed, escalating the Bushite War on Terrorism under a different rhetoric. And this includes wars on populations, primarily Muslim populations.  In these words murder, kidnapping, lawless imprisonment, and torture are NECESSARY tactics to defeat an insurgent population.  The issue is not torture here, but the whole war, what the military is now calling the ‘long war.’

Obama can’t punish the Bushites for torture if he is continuing it.  And he IS continuing it, with the same lower personel that the Bushites used.  How can he punish them for past torture if he is continuing pressnt and future torture?

The issue is the War, not torture.  As long as the War continues, torture will continue.  So the issue of prosecuting Bushites for it is completely moot.  There is no way he can do it effectively while the the War and torture continue. 

So all the Obama hopesters still in denial about the Obamanations will have to close their eyes to the barbarities that flow from Obama’s policies.  And remember, the War on Terrrorism applies to the American Homeland as well.

OK, so it’s unforgivable.

So now you have no logical course of action except to begin agitating for Obama’s immediate impeachment.

And in that you will have lots of help from the Republicans. And after you have gotten rid of Obama with lots of Republican help whether you want it or not, I’m sure he will be replaced by someone who’s really, really super-fearlessly progressive.

Because there’s no way the populist conservatives who help you oust Obama will be able to co-opt the anti-Obama momentum and install a new ultra-right-wing crazy who will make you really, really miss Obama, right?

Good plan!

God, these memos remind me of the meetings held by the Nazi’s in WWII on the justification for exterminating the jews. The United States is on a very slippery slope in trying to rationalize torture and not be shown up as massive hypocrites by the rest of the world. All of a sudden the moral highground that was established at the Nuremburg trials has evaporated. Obama needs to rethink his decision not to go after the perpetrators of these abuses. The enitre world is watching us and waiting to see if we will do the right thing.

Ed—Nope. Dont see it. He needs to follow the law. It is not complicated. I think I’ll stick with the rule of law. You keep pushing Obama and let me know how that goes.

  Here is am alternative explanation:

http://www.progressive.org/wx041709.html

Shame on Obama for Letting Torturers, and Their Bosses, Go
By Matthew Rothschild, April 17, 2009

“...The memos just released on Thursday provide prima facie evidence that the following Bush lawyers committed war crimes: Jay Bybee, John Yoo, and Steven Bradbury.
Alberto Gonzales, by signing off on these memos, also implicated himself. By extension, Bush and Cheney did, too. As did Rumsfeld, who wrote a memo of his own authorizing some of the same techniques.

Title 18 of the U.S. Criminal Code, Section 2441, says that someone is guilty of a war crime if he or she commits torture or conspires to commit torture.

It then defines torture as “an act specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering.”

The Bush lawyers, as we now learn, greenlighted waterboarding, which we prosecuted Japanese soldiers for in World War II…..

How can the Bush lawyers get around that one? They can’t….

But Obama and Holder are letting them.

And that’s unforgivable”

I agree.

Re: By KDelphi, April 17 at 9:12 pm (also: attention PSmith):

KDelphi writes: “I am willing to bet money that Zinn and Vidal do not think that Obama is making the right decison not to prosecute….”

Yes, I’m sure they’re screaming about it, as they ought to. And I’m sure Kucinich is screaming about it.

We all must scream about it. Screaming about it is our part in the strategy, that’s how we make him do it: we have to exploit this very rich material he has given us, this tremendous gift —  a treasure trove of explicit, revolting, authoritative evidence about what Bush was doing — and generate public outrage to the point where the prosecutions simply must happen, because the people who would try to stop it by getting rid of Obama are SUFFICIENTLY AFRAID OF US to back down.

Obama hasn’t given us everything, OK? But he has just given us a whole hell of a lot. This is like the President himself disclosing the Pentagon Papers to the public, instead of a journalist. Obama has acted as journalist-in-chief here, by getting the story out. Why can’t you see how extraordinary this is?

As PSmith put it below:

if enough people have Obama’s back - to the point that all Holy Hell will break out if he as an ‘accident’, and those that might try to arrange said accident know it and know that they will get it second - then perhaps he may be more progressive.

JOhn Caruso requested that I refer it back to the original post. It is Bloomberg News (on Morales)

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a.yMGIqHCnwY

Chavez may be irritating, but he has the balls to stick up for his own people against the multi-nationals, which is more than you can say for any recent president we have had…

I wonder if he is afraid of people assassinating him…he should be, as the CIA has tried to do it so many times, as Naomi Klein noted in “The Shock Doctrine”. But, he keeps on, sticking his finger in the eyes of the rich. I wish we had someone who would do the same. Instead, the Shock Doctrine wil now be tried on the uS, now that they have experimented in Latin America…

Can you say Third World, torture capitol?

PSmith—The dates on these videos are 2007 and 2008. I am willing to bet money that Zinn and Vidal do not think that Obama is making the right decison not to prosecute. They were talking about health care and other social programs…If Obama had half the couarage of MLKJ we wouldnt have to be pushing him to do the right thing. You actually think MLKJ wouldve let this go??? JFK?? Where, at the Bay of Pigs??

The truth is, I dont give a damn what anyone else has to say. I am just amazed that I am being trounced for requesting that our govt follow the rule of law…dont you remember how angry you were when you heard what they were doing?? Or werent you… I can tell you that the rest of the world has not forgotten and they never will, least of all Islam!

If Lyndie England can go to prison, so can Rummy.

Here is presidential courage for you: John Caruso at Distant Oceans…on Evo Morales. (You gave the names of many who died for their convictions)

http://www.distantocean.com/2009/04/what-a-president-with-genuine-courage-looks-like.html

“...The superficial similarities between Morales and Obama only serve to highlight the critical differences: Bolivia’s president is a former union leader who draws directly on his experience to fight for his principles, whereas our erstwhile community-organizer president trades on his past to gain votes while actively betraying the principles he formerly espoused.  To put it another way, Morales uses his power to further the goals of the popular movement that made him president, while Obama co-opts the power of the popular movement that made him president to undercut its goals.

Just for a moment, imagine what it would be like to have a president who actually possessed (positive) core, non-negotiable convictions, and for whom going on a hunger strike was well within the range of sacrifices they were willing to make to fight for those convictions.  While you’re at it, imagine what it would be like to have a populace that demanded this level of conviction in exchange for their support—and refused to settle for less.  And finally, imagine how far short of those goals we could fall and still be light years beyond where we are today.

It’s no surprise that we’re constantly told the most we have a right to expect is tiny incremental steps toward positive change, but what’s tragic is that so many people have not only accepted that but have internalized it as though it’s some sort of immutable law of nature.  They never seem to notice that those same restrictions don’t apply to negative changes—like (say) massive restructuring of the entire system of world trade, radical financial deregulation, or the repurposing of a “defensive” military organization as a weapon of U.S. foreign policy, to name just a few.  They end up excusing and rationalizing the most craven compromises (and even outright betrayals) with carefully-inculcated arguments about pragmatism and political feasibility and the need to lower their expectations.

As a great philosopher once said: you get what you settle for.”

I dont feel like settling on this one. Pres. Obama is a constitutonal scholar. He knows what he should do. It will be up to him whether or not to do it. Not us.

We have been a nation that tortures people for decades now. We finally had our big chance to cleanse our souls of this black mark on our history, and what happened? Our new president, the decendant of slaves, who were tortured and killed by our southern ancestors, has decided to give everyone a mulligan.

He is a gutless prick.

Edf—If you supported Kucinich, I have to wonder why you seem to be taking all of this so personally… I simply said that I disagreed with Sirota on this one (I almost always disagee with FluffPO) and that I thought Pres. Obama should follow the rule of law. I am certainly not alone in this…most liberal websites agree—except FluffPo.

HOw does Kucinich feel abou it? I havent heard yet, but I’m willing to bet he is pissed.

I was a Kucinich supporter, but, I am not a Dem. (I dont have any money anyway—I dont even pay for the internet) (I think I gave him $5)I am simply angry that these basterds are going to get qway with staining our country’s reputation forever, and wil retire with luxury while the rest of the world has another resason to blame the uS for everything. Peace.

I just refuse to buy the assassination argument. Think of the logical extensions that Dems could take that one to…it could become an excuse to not do most anything they dont really want to do. How many Dems were involved? Dont you want to know?

The Dems have enough excuses as it is…

re: By KDelphi, April 17 at 7:33 pm:

Well, for the record, I gave all my money and my primary vote to Kucinich. I even gave money to Kucinich after he lost the primary, to help him keep his congressional seat. Only in the general election did I vote for Obama, and I never gave a dime to him. So I’m not an Obama groupie, in case you have that impression. In fact, I just about vomited when he went and groveled to AIPAC right after winning the nomination.

Ed—I am not on any “high horse” to expect the president to follow the rule of law!

You are the one that needs to wake up. I have been “out there” again and again. I am not going to go try to make someone that i didnt support do anything. You do it.

What exactly do you have in mind that I could do tha Pres. Obama would give a rat’s ass about? What are you doing to do?

You get what you expect—nothing more.

Every president has known about security risks before they ran. I am not making light of it, but, people die for decisons that presidents make every day. You do them no honor by not showing courage as their Commander in Chief…he asks others to go into much more dangerous situations..

I want him to follow the rule of law. Dont you? He is a constitutional attorney—dosent he know better?

“Fear of assassination” can become an excuse not to do almost anything…I still say that it is a bogus argument.

But, as I tried to say, you will get what you demand, but, you have to demand it when they need you—-not afterwards…

By KDelphi, April 17 at 6:26 pm:

In my opinion, the danger is very real. Only a person of really extraordinary courage would act in complete disregard of it. So Obama is not a person of extraordinary courage. Well, gee, what a revelation. Now that we know this, we should decide he’s evil and just sulk in the dark and hate him, right?

No. Get off your butt and make him do it, even if you think you shouldn’t have to. He’s already shown a lot of guts by opening these papers up to the public eye. Think about his situation. Think about Dick Cheney, think about the legions of Rush Limbaugh nutcases out there, think about what happened to MLK and RFK and JFK. Think of all the CIA agents and military people who must be enraged about Obama’s revealing these documents. Would YOU have the guts to do this? If they would torture people, wouldn’t they do anything to Obama if they thought they could get away with it? Get off your high horse.

People are risking their lives everyday for the GOP/Dem wars..

People risk their lives everyday at protests—and theyre not even getting $2 m a yr for it…

Ed Hargew—No offense, but ,you reply is pure fear mongering.

Umm, not to put too fine a point on it, but, umm, he should go out on a limb to do the right thing and create ‘change”.

But I am sure that Pres. Obama wil do no more than what you make him feel is politically expedient. After all, why should we expect moral courage from our leaders…

Sorry, but, the “assassination” fear monger just really gets to me…

I made copy/paste mistake in my last post: it should read as follows:

KDelphi writes:

“Why should we have to force a person to do what is right?”

KDelphi, why should he risk getting too far out ahead on this issue?

I’m not sure we all appreciate just how red-hot dangerous this is for Obama, and not just politically.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but, um, we do have a history of political assassinations in this country, you know? Obama risks getting bumped off for going even this far.

WE have to make these prosecutions happen.

KDelphi writes:

“Why should he risk getting too far out ahead on this issue?”

I’m not sure we all appreciate just how red-hot dangerous this is for Obama, and not just politically.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but, um, we do have a history of political assassinations in this country, you know? Obama risks getting bumped off for going even this far.

WE have to make these prosecutions happen.

I dunno—we’ve gotten a lot of lip service on the issues Sirota mentions (like tax cuts for rich, the Stimulus bill being about “Main St”, “cracking down on Wall St”) but, when you look at the details, what has really been changed? They are just giving more tho Wall St. continuing the wars, etc. And, most of all, sticking together…

Ed—I am not sure I agree with FluffPo (I will have to read it) or Sirota on this one. Why should we have to force a person to do what is right? I know, politically it might be difficult. Or, could it be that many Dems were also involved, even people that Pres. Obama still employs?

If its right, just do it… I learned that when I was 3 yrs old..who was it that said that they would rather be a one-term president…that is rather unlikely, considering Pres. Obama’s unflinching popularity , no matter what he does, and the GOP’s total disarray, as I see it. They are grasping at straws and the Dems keep giving them to them…let them drown. We need “bi-partisanship” like we need another damn war..enforce the rule of law and let the chips fall where they may…

Obama is sending activists a clear signal by releasing this material. He’s saying, “Yes; I agree. This is horrible. I agree with you about what needs to be done; now go out and make me do it. The ball is in your court.”

There is a very famous story about FDR doing this.

See David Sirota’s peice about this at the Huff. Post:

from ‘The “Make Him Do It” Dynamic’

...For the progressive movement, the point here is that the more we embolden Congress to act as a progressive force on Obama’s left, the more we will strengthen Obama—and the more we will reach our policy objectives. Indeed, Congress and the movement administering this pressure isn’t being “disloyal” to Obama—it is at once being loyal to the progressive agenda and helping our new president. Like FDR was to progressives of his era, Obama will be our ally most of the time. If you look at his campaign platform, it’s clear he agrees with us, and wants to do what we want to do. But now we have to make him do it.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/the-make-him-do-it-dynami_b_162599.html

There is not much to say really, is there…we got Lyndie England, though! Right! And, how bout them SEALS! We got them 16 yr olds! Yeah!

USA!USA!USA!USA!USA!

Scahill’s new site is great.

Most people reading this know what is right. Yes you do…it is NOT about revenge, it is about justice. Not prosecuting these basterds (while they do prosecute soldiers) is extremne cowardice. They disgrace their offices.

We will all pay for this. But, most will not recognize it as such. Just as we all had to pay for de-regulation, the “wars”, tax cuts, and al the rest. WE all Pay—they dont…when wil the ‘Merkin people demand justice?!

Yes, bring the uS Justice system to your country! You cant stone someone in a football stadium, but, you can sexually humiliate and waterboard them to death in a darkened cell. You can give someone a lethal injection—-so much more civilized.

And go home and live in luxury—-unlessl youre a peon from West Virginia…

Shame on the govt of the uS

Well then, shouldn’t the terrorists walk if they were just following orders?

And in the event that the US prisoner is tortured—let’s not bother with any of that—we need to be unified looking forward.

  Candy ass bull shit.
They take us for fools.

See Jeremy Scahill’s blog for links to Center for Constitutional Rights and many discussions
http://rebelreports.com/

Scott Horton was discussing it on DemocracyNow this morning, I think: http://www.democracynow.org

Obama is now guilty of protecting and harboring those have disgraced our country with this ILLEGAL activity. He should resign, immediately!

So the “I was only following orders” defense used unsuccessfully at Nuremberg will work for our Eichmanns.  The Code of Conduct in the U.S. military demands that these people refuse immoral orders.  Well, since my own service in the Army 40 some years ago, I’ve watched my country turn more and more into Nazi Germany, in kind if not in degree.

I am ashamed of my country, and afraid that my patriotism will get me killed.