Leahy requests Gonzales era torture documents.
By on Oct 26th, 2007 at 12:41 pm
Leahy requests Gonzales era torture documents.
In a letter to White House Counsel Fred Fielding, Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) requests all legal opinions that the DoJ has written relating to torture. The White House had turned over “four previously undisclosed documents” relating to the administration’s torture policy earlier in the week, but they all preceded Alberto Gonzales’s tenure as Attorney General. The New York Times reported this month that the Gonzales DoJ had issued “secret opinions” that “lawmakers did not know existed.” Leahy is asking for “the complete picture” of the administration’s policy. Read the full letter HERE.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Leahy should go focus on more important topics, like running a country, as opposed to pointing out the semantics around legitimate actions to protect National security
October 26th, 2007 at 12:42 pmi wanna see “DEMANDS” documents…
is that so hard? … the days of “polite” are long over…
October 26th, 2007 at 12:43 pm.
Sanctioned torture is step 2 on the road to fascism. Don’t give up, Patrick – please stop this administration before it destroys this nation any more.
October 26th, 2007 at 12:47 pmLeahy should go focus on more important topics, like running a country, as opposed to pointing out the semantics around legitimate actions to protect National security
Comment by hits — October 26, 2007 @ 12:42 pm
A nation that considers torture a “legitimate action” is not worth protecting.
October 26th, 2007 at 12:48 pmIf Mukasey is confirmed before this is handled, I’m going to quit voting.
It’s convenient that right wingers claim that the government should have “better things to do” when they face embarrassing exposure, yet Bill Clinton catches a blowjob and they go through the trouble of putting him on the witness stand just so that they can trash him for political points.
Leahy should either push harder, or publicly announce that he is going to stop going to Judicial Committee meetings until he is allowed to do his job.
October 26th, 2007 at 12:48 pmtoasterhead,
A nation that arbitrarily disregards useful tools to preserve its existence deserves the slow decay it will get
Hits
October 26th, 2007 at 12:51 pmI’m always amused by the self-described “clear headed thinkers” that say things like “Don’t you have anything better to do than dig into the past?” or “Why are you wasting resources on this issue when there’s a war on!”
I wonder where these sentiments were when the GOP was hounding Pres. Clinton in an effort to find something (Anything!) they could use to distract from the economic highs, surplus budgets, peace and prosperity, and no terrorist attacks on US soil.
Now, rather than question “Why did we get to the sad, pathetic place where the US now finds itself?” they just want to shut their eyes and hope (and pray) that these egregious actions will magically disappear and never be thought of, nor happen, again.
Sorry, but wearing rose-colored glasses does not make the future bright. It only blinds you to the truth. If the actions were legal, then digging into them won’t be any problem at all, right?
If the current Administration has nothing to hide, then they won’t mind letting the Congress exercise their oversight responsibilities! Only a guilty person hates the truth.
October 26th, 2007 at 12:53 pm#6…What is better — slow decay or the immediate gutting of all the principles on which the country was founded?
October 26th, 2007 at 12:54 pmMenehue,
The principles that the country was founded on are 300 years old – many are not relevant any more. To survive and thrive, one needs to adapt
Hits
October 26th, 2007 at 12:55 pmA nation that arbitrarily disregards useful tools to preserve its existence deserves the slow decay it will get
Hits
Comment by hits — October 26, 2007 @ 12:51 pm
I agree. Disregard a “useful tool” like the Constitution, and decay is inevitable.
October 26th, 2007 at 12:55 pmThe interesting fact is that torture has always been proven to accomplish one of two things:
1) Get the person being tortured to agree to anything at all just to get the torture to stop. They’ll lie their a$$es off, just so you stop torturing them. Result: No uselful data at all.
2) The death of the person being tortured, because they didn’t give any info and you had to keep torturing until they died. Result: No uselful data at all.
All the US would have to say is: “Torturing works, because we got info from prisonor A and stopped the attack at such & such place! See, torture works!”
Has anyone at all heard of any positive information being acquired at all from any US torture methods? Anyone? Anyone at all?!?!?
The fact of the matter is that torture does one thing, and one thing only. It proves that the US is just as sadistic an depraved as al Quaeda. Nothing more, nothing less.
October 26th, 2007 at 12:56 pmA nation that arbitrarily disregards useful tools to preserve its existence deserves the slow decay it will get
Hits
It’s just a goddamn piece of paper!
- gwb
October 26th, 2007 at 1:00 pmThe principles that the country was founded on are 300 years old – many are not relevant any more. To survive and thrive, one needs to adapt
Comment by hits — October 26, 2007 @ 12:55 pm
So you’re prepared to throw away democracy, freedom, and civil rights just for a false sense of “survival?”
That’s not just sad, it’s psychopathic.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:01 pmMenehue –
Why ask a Fascist BrownShirt Lockstep Lemming Pig any question at all? You know that this scum sucking subhuman neanderturd will answer…after all a Fascist Pig is a Fascist Pig to the core.
Buck Fush
October 26th, 2007 at 1:01 pmAh –hits. The principles on which this country was founded are what we have been fighting for all this time. Remember “better dead than Red”? If our country loses its prinnciples, then it is already defeated. There is no “USA” without the Constitution. Grow a set, man. Live your life unafraid.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:01 pmA nation that arbitrarily disregards useful tools to preserve its existence deserves the slow decay it will get
Hits
And that, my progressive friends, is the delusion of the right side. This country has survived 200+ years of much greater danger than al quida, but to listen to Bush, we have to tear down our own way of life to live our way of life. Somehow that makes no sense to me. how about you?
October 26th, 2007 at 1:01 pmSorry Leahy. The Bushies will claim those documents are state secrets and can’t be turned over because of national security.
Besides, it would be irrefutable evidence of their war crimes.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:04 pmAnd that, my progressive friends, is the delusion of the right side. This country has survived 200+ years of much greater danger than al quida, but to listen to Bush, we have to tear down our own way of life to live our way of life. Somehow that makes no sense to me. how about you?
Comment by StratRat — October 26, 2007 @ 1:01 pm
This delusion IS a greater danger than al-Qa’ida, and I’d argue it’s the greatest danger our nation has ever faced. If more people start thinking like hits here, it will truly be the end of the United States as a free and open society.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:05 pmThe principles that the country was founded on are 300 years old – many are not relevant any more. To survive and thrive, one needs to adapt
Hits
Yeah… We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America… is so 1778.
http://www.earlyamerica.com/earlyamerica/freedom/constitution/text.html
October 26th, 2007 at 1:05 pmDamn, you sure do see the word “Please” alot in that letter!
I mean, good manners are nice but I think a list of what they need and expect to receive would suffice.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:06 pmThis country has survived 200+ years of much greater danger than al quida, but to listen to Bush, we have to tear down our own way of life to live our way of life. Somehow that makes no sense to me. how about you?
Comment by StratRat — October 26, 2007 @ 1:01 pm
If your plan is to surrender, it makes perfect sense.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:08 pm#19, Oops, make that so 1788.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:08 pm#9 – “The principles that the country was founded on are 300 years old – many are not relevant any more. To survive and thrive, one needs to adapt.” Comment by hits — October 26, 2007 @ 12:55 pm
So, which portions of the US Constitution are you willing to give up? Life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness?
How about the right to not be subjected to unreasonable search & seizures? (sp?)
I know! You won’t mind not being able to vote anymore! What does it get you? Just more headache and heartache. You won’t mind giving up the right to representation before taxation, right?
I’m sure you’ll pardon me for wanting to keep all the rights my forefathers fought and died for in their entirety. If the US has to become less than what it was in order to survive in the new millennium, does it truly deserve the right to exist at all?
Claiming that we have to give up part of what made the US great in order to “survive” is a canard. It’s nothing but a fake “choice” to justify being less-than human.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:09 pmMenehue,
The principles that the country was founded on are 300 years old – many are not relevant any more. To survive and thrive, one needs to adapt
Hits
Comment by hits — October 26, 2007 @ 12:55 pm
I agree. The Electoral College system should be abolished immediately, and the president and vice president should be elected by national popular vote.
Oh — you probably meant the “irrelevant” Bill of Rights. Nope, I think that’s still relevant today, and it’s what sets us apart from dictatorships and banana republics.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:09 pmMenehune @ 1:01 pm
It’s “better Red than dead.”
There, I corrected it for you. (:-D)
Power to the people!
In memory of Che Guevara.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:09 pm[...] many are not relevant any more. To survive and thrive, one needs to adapt
Hits
Comment by hits — October 26, 2007 @ 12:55 pm
Well said, now let’s get rid of that Second Amendment right to bear arms garble and disband the National Rifle Society and get weapons out of criminals’ hands and stop domestic homicide.
Otherwise, I would say that 300-year-old document is still quite relevant. Especially if it’s worked for 300 years.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:09 pmThe principles that the country was founded on are 300 years old – many are not relevant any more. To survive and thrive, one needs to adapt
Comment by hits — October 26, 2007 @ 12:55 pm
Sounds like you would be right at home in some Banana Republic Dictatorship, Communist China or Russia. Go to one of those places, fckwit
October 26th, 2007 at 1:12 pmRumsfeld has been served
October 26th, 2007 at 1:12 pmThis delusion IS a greater danger than al-Qa’ida, and I’d argue it’s the greatest danger our nation has ever faced. If more people start thinking like hits here, it will truly be the end of the United States as a free and open society.
Comment by toasterhead
Absolutely right! I was speaking with a die hard red stater the other day. he was a WWII veteran. I thanked him for his service and asked what he thought of Bush. He indicated he liked Bush because he will keep us safe. I asked “safe from what?”. He replied the reason he fought in WWII was to keep our countries core principals intact: free speech, freedom from illegal searches, freedom from spying on US citizens, freedom of assembly, etc… When I indicated that it seems Mr bush was doing away with those very freedoms, he simply shrugged his shoulders and said “well, at least I’m safe”. I truly felt sorry for this person. He fought a world war to keep intact the freedoms of America, but he didn’t care that those same freedoms were being taken away now. There really was no way to convince him of the contradiction in his belief system. Sad, so sad.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:12 pmHits packs so much dumb in such a short space. He may just be a writer for BO.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:14 pm#29 – blame it on the amount of agent orange he smoked on.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:15 pmHe fought a world war to keep intact the freedoms of America, but he didn’t care that those same freedoms were being taken away now. There really was no way to convince him of the contradiction in his belief system. Sad, so sad.
Comment by StratRat — October 26, 2007 @ 1:12 pm
We need to find a way. There has to be a way to reach these people.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:16 pm“hits” sez:
We’ve already been over this, Shakey.
There’s nothing “arbitrary” about refraining from torture. Even if you want to make the absurd argument that torturing is moral to the torturer, there’s still the issue of global law to consider (unless, of course, you want to evade the issue by considering that a fiction as well).
There’s nothing “useful” about torture (assuming your goal is to obtain intelligence). Torture is notorious for its inability to extract meaningful intelligence from its victims. I’ve noticed that, while you continually claim the opposite, you never seem to provide objective support for this supposition.
However, if your goal is to obtain confessions, either real or fictitious, then torture is a wonderfully reliable method. In a society where the continued abuse of power is dependent upon the constant threat of “terrorists”, a method of inducing people to “confess” to “terrorist acts” is quite valuable…small wonder that everyone in this administration is keen on continuing the despicable practice.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:17 pmHe fought a world war to keep intact the freedoms of America,
Comment by StratRat
Let me do the troll thing, here:
Just exactly what freedoms Japanese, Italia and Germany were taking away from the US?
October 26th, 2007 at 1:18 pmThe principles that the country was founded on are 300 years old – many are not relevant any more. To survive and thrive, one needs to adapt
Comment by hits — October 26, 2007 @ 12:55 pm
So you’re prepared to throw away democracy, freedom, and civil rights just for a false sense of “survival?â€
That’s not just sad, it’s psychopathic.
Comment by toasterhead — October 26, 2007 @ 1:01 pm
You can replace psychopathic with republican and it still reads the same.
It’s not sad it’s a shame.
My mother always warned me about people who scream the loudest.
Every time I hear republicans scream your un-american it just shows wme how un-american they are.
How can you claim to be American and hate the Constitution.
Theyre lucky it’s around otherwise they may be deemed as enemy combatants with the disgust they show the Consitution.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:20 pmAny citizen who believes their personal safety is more important than the principals this country was founded on is too much of a coward to have a voice here. Please ignore all the advocates of torture and treat them as the pariahs they are.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:20 pmJust exactly what freedoms Japanese, Italia and Germany were taking away from the US?
Comment by Juan C. — October 26, 2007 @ 1:18 pm
Safe passage of goods and people across the Atlantic, in Germany’s case.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:21 pmJust exactly what freedoms Japanese, Italia and Germany were taking away from the US?
Comment by Juan C.
I can imagine how a mainland invasion of the US by Germany, Japan, and Italy (if it had gone that far) would probably cause a little discomfort to our way of life and our Constitutional government. Are you suggesting that if we were invaded and defeated, the Axis powers would simply “go home”. After all, we still have soldiers in germany, japan, and italy right now. Please explain your reasoning…
October 26th, 2007 at 1:26 pmJust exactly what freedoms Japanese, Italia and Germany were taking away from the US?
Comment by Juan C. —
Duh, our freedom to establish economic hegemony over the rest of the world.
Good thing we’ve got Bush in the saddle now to continue that great legacy of awful morality. Thanks to him, we’re irreversibly stuck with the trade-off of pursuing that goal, or letting the middle east self destruct. This is our Peloponesian War.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:26 pmI say the heck with requesting any documents. Let’s just rendition Gonzo to a secret foreign prison and waterboard him untill he tells all!!!
October 26th, 2007 at 1:27 pmI see hits the socialist self-loather is here now. Victims of fire shouldn’t rely so heavily on FEMA… poor people shouldn’t get financial aid from the govt… but hits feels comfortable with his decision to hide under his mommy’s bed while the real men do the fighting on his behalf. He’s an addmitted lazy chickenhawk coward. What a pathetic POS.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:28 pmhe simply shrugged his shoulders and said “well, at least I’m safeâ€.
or, “well, at least i’ve got my teevee”, or “at least i’ve got my car”, etc.
… There really was no way to convince him of the contradiction in his belief system. …
Comment by StratRat — October 26, 2007 @ 1:12 pm
at this point, there is no convincing ANYone of such a mindset…
the CONSTITUTION as irrelevant…
never, EVER thought i’d hear such a thing…
should be a crime… hell, it IS a crime, as far as i’m concerned…
October 26th, 2007 at 1:28 pm…
I say the heck with requesting any documents. Let’s just rendition Gonzo to a secret foreign prison and waterboard him untill he tells all!!!
Comment by free thinking american — October 26, 2007 @ 1:27 pm
Ooh, ooh, can Harriett Meiers go too. That would be double plus good for the likes of shits, to torture a woman.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:29 pmComment by Dave C — October 26, 2007 @ 1:28 pm
Yup. People like him are the real strain on our society that GOP’ers always speak so low of.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:30 pmthe CONSTITUTION as irrelevant…
never, EVER thought i’d hear such a thing…
should be a crime… hell, it IS a crime, as far as i’m concerned…
…
Comment by katy — October 26, 2007 @ 1:28 pm
Denying the constitution is acceptable to the reich wing. Not wearing a flag pin, now that’s important.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:31 pmdave c @ 1:28 pm – that one is no socialist… anarchist is more like it…
October 26th, 2007 at 1:33 pmfascist, probably… monarchist, obviously… on down the list…
but not a socialist…
…
After all, we still have soldiers in germany, japan, and italy right now. Please explain your reasoning…
Comment by StratRat
Do you think Germany and Italy and Japan had the ability to invade the US? I mean, of course they were a threat…but the American freedoms? You would think that you would have to learn German and Japanese, right?
mmm…hardly, that’s the same fantasy of some right loonies, that Arabs are going to convert everybody. That is dumb. Do you see German people talking Russian as their first language? My point is that the WWII was not fought in American soil…that alone, poses a distinctive mark of what freedoms the enemy could have taken.
Just like the war on terror. How many bullets do people in the US are dodging everyday within the war on terror?
October 26th, 2007 at 1:39 pmDave C…hits a socialist?
He is SAFE. He is GOOD. Individualism is hardly a socialism-related concept.
our freedom to establish economic hegemony over the rest of the world.
You have the cigar…
October 26th, 2007 at 1:41 pmdave c @ 1:28 pm – that one is no socialist… anarchist is more like it…
fascist, probably… monarchist, obviously… on down the list…
but not a socialist…
…
Comment by katy — October 26, 2007 @ 1:33 pm
He’d agree with you on that too. But to a degree everyone is a socialist. Or at a minimum, everyone benefits from social programs. hits benefits from the protection the military of the U.S. provides but he’s unwilling to participate in that protection. So in a sense it’s comparable to the dude who doesn’t want to work but wants to get govt pay to help him survive. There are lots of social programs that even the wealthy benefit from. They rarely complain about that. The only complaints about socialism I ever hear is people complaining that someone is getting something that they don’t get or need.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:44 pmFor the thousands of people killed in pearl harbor, that was the freedom to live…
Comment by republicans hate facts
An American colony, taken away from Hawaians.
What did Germany have to do with that?
October 26th, 2007 at 1:45 pmThe main reason to push the notion that hits is a socialist is that it tends to shut him up & I believe it pi$$es him off. That’s reason enough. He seems to be a self-loathing person so including him in a group he is disgusted by is just the ticket. If I have to read his drivel he can wade through some of mine.
October 26th, 2007 at 1:46 pmIf Germany hadn’t lost so many troops to the Russian winter, he would have controlled all of europe and a huge swath of Asia.
And the US is in which continent of those two? (Yeah, Im sorry but you made fun of my spelling)
I wont press the subject further, OK. But I have as much sympathy for the people killed in Pearl Harbor as I have for the gypsies killed by the Nazis and the kids killed by Napalm in Vietnam and… etc.
I would expect the same aggresive talk when we discussed Clinton killing thousands of civilians in Sudan, Afghanistan, Iraq and Serbia.
Wanna bet I wont find it?
October 26th, 2007 at 2:00 pmDo you think Germany and Italy and Japan had the ability to invade the US? I mean, of course they were a threat…but the American freedoms? You would think that you would have to learn German and Japanese, right?
Comment by Juan C.
Actually sir, I am a little disappointed in your comments. I read your posts and I respect them. My point was simple: if the Axis powers had obtained certain strategic victories at particularly important times, we COULD be speaking german now (or japanese or italian). And most certainly, if the Axis were successful, we would not have any freedoms granted to us in the Constitution. Wars are won or lost. To the victor go the spoils. We were not that prepared (militarily) at the onset of the war and by the grace of God (and millions of Americans), we were able to regain our footing and get men and hardware where it was needed – and we ultimately prevailed.
Again, I am not sure of your reasoning. Are you saying that a US victory was a given? A victory for the US was never in doubt?
October 26th, 2007 at 2:03 pmDo you think Germany and Italy and Japan had the ability to invade the US? I mean, of course they were a threat…but the American freedoms? You would think that you would have to learn German and Japanese, right?
Comment by Juan C. — October 26, 2007 @ 1:39 pm
Ok, I see your point – with very few exceptions, the continental United States was never under direct danger from the Germans or the Japanese, so the “fighting for our freedoms” term of art is a bit inaccurate if taken very literally. But they did pose a threat to our allies and trading partners, and thus our economic liberty. Sure, it’s not as romantic as “fighting for our freedoms,” but most wars are about economics anyway.
October 26th, 2007 at 2:22 pmRepublican Hate facts:
In my opinion, evil and malevolence come from a subjective moral judgement. I like to see political events without the shroud of my own ethic personal opinions.
I noticed you didnt say anything about the rest of my post.
StratRat:
October 26th, 2007 at 2:24 pmI wont press the subject further. You think you could be speaking German now, I think not.
So because I name the things that US govts have done around the world, without forgetting what other superpowers did, I am enraged with US people?
Because I think that idealization and pontification of war is extremely dangerous in ANY case, I am fill with hatred?
Whatever.
October 26th, 2007 at 2:28 pmStratRat:
I wont press the subject further. You think you could be speaking German now, I think not.
Comment by Juan C.
And thankfully, this discussion is merely an academic excercise we are able to engage in. I respect your point of view.
October 26th, 2007 at 2:30 pmtoasterhead,
A nation that arbitrarily disregards useful tools to preserve its existence deserves the slow decay it will get
Hits
Comment by hits — October 26, 2007 @ 12:51 pm
You have just been advised by a true Nazi. Are you afraid? I’m sure you”re not!
October 26th, 2007 at 2:31 pmJuan: “I would expect the same aggresive talk when we discussed Clinton killing thousands of civilians in Sudan, Afghanistan, Iraq and Serbia.”
Juan, if you’re going to pontificate about WWII, at least you could get your more recent facts right. “Thousands of civilians???” By my count, Clinton made decisions which accounted for 10 to 20 people because of a bombing in Sudan, 20 or 30 terrorists at an al Qaeda camp in Afganistan, and, at most, scores of people in Iraq when attacking potential nuclear weapons sites. I don’t even think “thousands” were killed by Clinton’s bombs in Serbia. Where do you get “thousands of civilians?”
October 26th, 2007 at 2:32 pmGermany was guilty of trying to genocide both gypsies and jews – you say the US had no duty to stop that? To stop ethnic cleansing in Serbia, Sudan?
Comment by republicans hate facts
Yes, the US was so concerned about those gypsies and jews, that when the war was over they lent enormous amounts of money to be spent ON AMERICAN PRODUCTS.
Get real. There are no good or bad countries. Come on.
Toaster had it right. It’s all about economic interests.
October 26th, 2007 at 2:32 pmWhere do you get “thousands of civilians?â€
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper
With all due respect because I admire your posts:
How many are good for you?
So I can post “scores” of people and we finish this discussion.
October 26th, 2007 at 2:38 pmStratRat:
I wont press the subject further. You think you could be speaking German now, I think not.
Comment by Juan C.
I can’t let this one go. The Third Reich declared war on the U.S. The problem of German spys committing espionage on the east coast was so grave that the Roosevelt administration had to go to the mob for help. The Nazis were on the verge of perfecting the same technology we would use to create the first atom bomb. They had already annexed the vast majority of Europe. They had already executed millions for being Jewish, Gypsy, Black, and brown. They definitely could have won that war if Hitler wasn’t such an insanely bad military strategist. The Japanese had designs on the west coast. They wanted oil and control of the Pacific. They had already annexed most of southeast Asia and China by the time we got involved. They also could have won their part of the war.
I’m not sure how anyone could have gotten the idea that the U.S. was in no danger of being controlled or even invaded by Germany and Japan. Germany wanted the “1000-year Reich.” How could they have possibly achieved that without taking over the United States?
October 26th, 2007 at 2:39 pmJuan: “With all due respect because I admire your posts:
How many are good for you? ”
Bullshit. This is not about “how many are good for me.” None, ok. None are good for me. This is about you making sweeping statements which vilify Clinton and have no basis in historical fact. You want to vilify Clinton, fine, but let’s keep it factual. No need to inflate his crimes.
October 26th, 2007 at 2:41 pmI don’t even think “thousands†were killed by Clinton’s bombs in Serbia. Where do you get “thousands of civilians?â€
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper —
I’ll take this, seeing as you’ve provoked the ire of the board, and I find what you’re saying to be totally resonable, Juan C.
Thousands died as a result of Clinton’s bombing of pharmaceutical companies in Sudan, because it literally cut off the nation from the basic necessity of simple drugs like antibiotics. It was claimed that this was a chemical weapons plant, but the intel didn’t support that conclusion, especially since there weren’t chemical weapons being used.
In Serbia, tens of thousands died as a direct consequence of our bombing. NATO General Wesley Clark warned that such bombing would provoke the ethnic cleansing that took place AFTER we engaged. It is demonstrated by military body counts that the ethnic cleansing came after our engagement, not before.
This is because Clinton was dedicated to preserving the impression of US dominance over almost anything else. I liked him, aside from those issues, but factually Juan C. is very correct.
October 26th, 2007 at 2:50 pmNo one is trying to vilify Clinton, but let’s not turn a blind eye to a President’s transgressions simply because we support him. That’s basically the same ethos that conservatives back Bush with. Just because people liked JFK doesn’t mean that the Bay of Pigs wasn’t a disaster, or that he didn’t OK the assassination of South Vietnam’s President.
October 26th, 2007 at 2:57 pmI’m not sure how anyone could have gotten the idea that the U.S. was in no danger of being controlled or even invaded by Germany and Japan. Germany wanted the “1000-year Reich.†How could they have possibly achieved that without taking over the United States?
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper
Again, the Colonel shows his wisdom. This topic was turned slightly toward: “Well, we won so we couldn’t have been in danger of invasion.” Folks with a sense of history will agree that our winning the war was never a slam dunk (sorry, george tenet). We prevailed after a long period of defeat and disappointment. We prevailed after Hitler – and Japan – made some strategic decisions which ultimately lead to their downfall. If their momentum had not been slowed by these bad choices, the job of our soldiers would have been much, much worse.
October 26th, 2007 at 3:07 pmhttp://www.newsweek.com/id/62129
October 26th, 2007 at 4:20 pmLeahy requests . . . they say no.
Leahy asks . . . they say no.
Leahy demands . . . they say no.
Those letters must just frighten these criminals.
October 26th, 2007 at 5:40 pmJuan, I want to apologize for my tone responding to your post. My problem with Clinton is with his politics. I think he had the right instincts on certain social issues with the notable exception of capital punishment and welfare, and on tax policy. I think his conservative tendency to deregulate and his free trade policies were a disaster. I like him personally, but consider him to be to the right of where moderate republicans were when I was a kid. The best thing I can say about Clinton politically is that he’s extremely competent and things ran a lot better with him and his people in charge.
But I don’t think it’s fair to consider him a warmonger or a doctrinaire corporatist. He seems to want to be a postitive force in the world with his “Global Initiative,” his various charities and his fund-raising for disaster relief, so I give him a break. What gripes me about Clinton-bashing is that I’ve never seen a President and his wife subjected to such an onslaught of smearing and dirty tricks over the course of longer time than the Clintons and the smearing has been by the right wing and the mainstream media together. I hate to go along with all of that in any way.
October 26th, 2007 at 5:48 pm“I’ll let ya rub my chrome-dome if you give me the secret documents”
Pat Leahy.
October 26th, 2007 at 6:00 pmRet. Col. Jack:
Sir, after I posted my last post, I knew I had made a mistake by addressing you in that insulting way.
I had to take care of other things, but that was helpful because I meditated about my response and probably my personal issues and views in the way of the debate.
I am sorry if offended you, or anyone here.
October 26th, 2007 at 6:06 pmNo worries, Juan and thank you. Keep up the good work. I agree with you on 95% of everything you post.
October 26th, 2007 at 6:11 pm