Obama On Appointing Special Prosecutor To Investigate Bush’s Crimes: ‘We Need To Look Forward’
Obama On Appointing Special Prosecutor To Investigate Bush’s Crimes: ‘We Need To Look Forward’
The top question on Change.gov’s “Open for Questions” feature last week asked whether President-elect Obama will appoint a special prosecutor to “independently investigate” the “greatest crimes” committed under Bush. The inquiry, submitted by Bob Fertik of Democrats.com, has received over 22,000 votes. Today, ABC’s George Stephanopoulos asked Fertik’s question to Obama:
Q: The most popular question on your own website is related to this. On change.gov it comes from Bob Fertik of New York City and he asks, ‘Will you appoint a special prosecutor ideally Patrick Fitzgerald to independently investigate the greatest crimes of the Bush administration, including torture and warrantless wiretapping.’
OBAMA:We’re still evaluating how we’re going to approach the whole issue of interrogations, detentions, and so forth. And obviously we’re going to be looking at past practices and I don’t believe that anybody is above the law. On the other hand, I also have a belief that we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards. … My orientation is going to be moving foward.
Obama explained that he doesn’t want CIA employees to “suddenly feel like they’ve got to spend all their time looking over their shoulders and lawyering.” He did not specifically rule out a special prosecutor, saying, “That doesn’t mean that if somebody has blatantly broken the law, that they are above the law.” Watch it:
Dawn Johnsen, Obama’s choice to lead the Office of Legal Counsel, rejects Obama’s “look forward” approach. In March 2008, she told “the next president” to avoid “any temptation to simply move on”:
We must avoid any temptation simply to move on. We must instead be honest with ourselves and the world as we condemn our nation’s past transgressions and reject Bush’s corruption of our American ideals. Our constitutional democracy cannot survive with a government shrouded in secrecy, nor can our nation’s honor be restored without full disclosure.
In April 2008, Obama left the door open to a special prosecutor, saying, “What I would want to do is to have my Justice Department and my Attorney General immediately review the information that’s already there and to find out are there inquiries that need to be pursued.” “If crimes have been committed, they should be investigated,” Obama added.
On Friday’s Rachel Maddow Show, George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley said, “All of this ‘we need to look to the future and we have to not look to the past,’ well in our immediate past may be war crimes. And we sure better look at that.” He added:
Everything that is coming out of the Congress and the Obama administration is very worrisome. It’s not the type of stuff that would be said if you were seriously going to pursue prosecution. But they are insane to try to dodge this issue. Because if we don’t investigate this administration for war crimes and illegality — particularly war crimes — someone else might. The fact is that the rest of the world sees these as war crimes.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Bush’s “Just Us” Department tilted justice in the worst way. There is no way to restore the balance by simply moving forard.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:04 amObama may be treading a knife edge at the moment. He isn’t even sworn in as President. An announcement to prosecute former administration officials could lead to a mass pardoning from Dubya, and a mass exodus of staff from government agencies worried they might be next. Not to mention the flight risk of known guilty parties.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:11 amI still have the belief we will see justice to some degree.
Obama will restore the Justice Department to it’s proper function, and it will be up to them to proceed. Looking at his nominees to this point, I see hope.
To not start such an investgation would suggest that we are okay with what the Bush Regime did. We are not. It sounds like there will be an investigation, but that it will only be pursued if it is beyond any and all question. That’s too bad.
I don’t get why Congress still feels compelled to cater to the Republicans, by being afraid to start a ‘witch hunt’. It’s not a ‘witch hunt’, it’s justice.
And it’s a statement that the President of the United States is not above the law, as Bush seemed to think he has been.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:12 amHRC 2012?
January 11th, 2009 at 11:16 amWhta’s that old saying…? “Ignore the past and you’re doomed to repeat it”
January 11th, 2009 at 11:16 amObama could hire several people (and help the un-employmnet situatuion) to be on a special committee to just investigate and prosecute all of the criminal concerns about the bush cabal, while having others “looking forward” protecting our nation and our rights…
The new administration could use some of the “bailout money” to pay for it all….
Oh rocket science, in ain’t…
Taking over a mess, fixing it, and moving forward in a more thoughtful manner is a delicate matter.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:17 amBarack Obama wants significant BiPartisan support for his Economic recovery Program.
He is less likely to get it, if he Signals his intentions to go after Republican Criminality.
He DID say “That doesn’t mean that if somebody has blatantly broken the law, that they are above the law.”
It is the attorney General’s responsibilty to Prosecute Blatant Law Breaking.
If Obama blocks this, then he’ll get my critcism…but handing this issue off to Eric Holder makes political sense… If for no other reason than to limit the Shredding, Erasing, and Pardoning.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:19 amOur laws DO WORK!!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7820069.stm
“Chuckie” Taylor, the son of former Liberian President Charles Taylor, has been sentenced by a US court to 97 years in prison for torture.
It is the first time a US court applied a 1994 law allowing the prosecution of citizens who commit torture overseas.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:21 amwatching this now… waiting for this part yet…
but, wondered – is stephanopolis the worst at interrupting the person speaker?
January 11th, 2009 at 11:25 amI’m looking ahead to, also. When I do, I hope that any President of the United States, takes office fully knowing, with the simplest grasp of history, that should any administration be criminal in their conduct in almost every facet of their existence, that they will inevitably pay the price and pay dearly. This being said, Mr. Obama has to have a functioning government when he gets into office on day one. He can’t have already lost the CIA due to paranoia, and I suppose that has a lot to do with his guarded response. Through out this campaign, Mr. Obama has been a lot smarter than I was, and many times I thought he failed miserably, he was absolutely correct. So, here’s me giving Mr. Obama the benefit of the doubt, but still, my gut is telling me justice has taken a death blow with the Bush Administration.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:26 amI could honestly care less about punishing CIA employees. I do care, very much however, to see that those who ordered 1) torture and 2) allowed spying on the American populace without warrants to be punished to the fullest extent of the law. Looking forward cannot ignore the sins of the past; it will only allow them to be repeated in the future. That’s exactly why Nixon’s pardon, to “heal the nation,” led to what we’ve seen in the past 8 years. I can also understand the Obama in-coming administration downplaying any aspect of prosecution, because the last thing anyone wants are last-minute blanket pardons by Bush. But if this new administration is really sincere about NOT prosecuting for war crimes and violations of the Constitution, my vote for “change” was thrown away.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:27 amWe need to make sure that any Dems that were complicit in these crimes are prosecuted as well – even if their participation was merely silence. That should quiet any cries of “witch hunt”.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:28 amhere it is…
sounds like he’s putting the ball in holder’s court…
and i’ll be LOOKING FORWARD to that…
it’s up to the people – we MUST demand the investigations…
January 11th, 2009 at 11:29 amThis country is a disgrace.
The idea, the barest hint that such monstrous crimes will not be investigated, or that the CIA “We were just following orders” defense (roundly rejected at Nuremberg!) is actually being pushed by Feinstein and the other creatures is another nail in ‘merica’s fascist decline.
Goddamn every cowardly, spineless, arrogant congressional apologist. They’ve crapped on the dying remnants of the rule of law.
Fu(k your ‘change’ Obama; it’s obviously ‘change’ for the very worst.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:34 amDreary Urbanite Says: We need to make sure that any Dems that were complicit in these crimes are prosecuted as well – even if their participation was merely silence. That should quiet any cries of “witch hunt”.
Great idea. And we know that we have some DINOs that we’d like to see replaced with real Dems or liberals Independents, who probably were complicit in these crimes.
I often get the feeling that Pelosi and Reid are hiding them, so they will keep their majority status…
January 11th, 2009 at 11:36 amAmerica let one President commit crimes and nothing was done. Nixon was a criminal and Ford pardoned his crimes against America. Now a student of Nixon’s Dick Cheney has up dated the criminal blueprint and successfully committed bigger crimes not only to America but all over the World. History has a way of repeating itself. If Obama allowes these crimes to go unpunished we will see more in the future. If Bush/Cheney are allowed to get away with these crimes we will not be able to bring our System of Justice back as all criminals will look to the action of the 8 year crime spree as their defense.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:37 amThis isn’t the kind of change I voted for. Looking forward is a euphemism for overlooking!
January 11th, 2009 at 11:39 amJust what I thought.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:39 amMore of the same.
Story in NY Times:
Economy May Delay Work on Obama’s Campaign Pledges
Confronted by the worst financial crisis in generations, President-elect Barack Obama and his Democratic allies in Congress are preparing to delay some of the promises he made on the campaign trail to avoid political distractions and focus on reversing the economic slide.
Although Mr. Obama has not publicly identified which priorities will have to wait, advisers and allies have signaled that they may put off renegotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement, overhauling immigration laws, restricting carbon emissions, raising taxes on the wealthy and allowing gay men and lesbians to serve openly in the military.
For the rest of the piece:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/us/politics/11obama.html?hp
Didn’t Obama say a Presidential candidate should be able to campaign and deal with an economic emergency at the same time? Might that also apply to governing?
January 11th, 2009 at 11:39 amOne of the best ways of protecting the future is to look into the past. However, I don’t hold out much hope that Congress will do much. There are too many (key) memberswho would likely be implicated for their complicity. I hope there is no commission – commissions are made up of people whose interest it is to cover up. They are a whitewash.
The only hope for the US government taking any action may be if the international community wants to take up this matter, as noted by Turley. This may force action by the US. But don’t hold your breath for Bush, Cheney, etc. ever being indicted for war crimes.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:43 amIf these crimes aren’t prosecuted we can ‘look forward’ to more of the same.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:43 amWe all told ourselves, “we will not forget”, 911. Is this any different? I suggest not. We need to dig though the Bush years like we did at ground zero. We need that forensic approach.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:44 amIt’s sort of a true national security need that tares at the heart.
Hi Darryl.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:46 amStill nude and waiting for the party that never and will never happen?
Indeed. We torture and murder like Nazis, but nevermind that, Obama will help Wall St. refill the pilfered coffers.
I’ve never been more ashamed. This Country was born from genocide and slavery, and it appears they’re proudly defending the tradition of collateral extermination for empire.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:47 amRaptureReady Says: Libs, you constantly state that we are in economic trouble. Why waste Government funding that could be used to help you guys (Middle class) out.
Daryll, you are one of us guys (middle class).
You should learn to value ethics over money for a change, and then perhaps you won’t need so much therapy.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:53 amRaptureReady Says: It is called wasteful spending.
You didn’t feel that way about impeaching Clinton over a bj…
Hypocrite.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:56 amBut when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
– Declaration of Independence, 1776
January 11th, 2009 at 11:56 amectoendomezo Says:
January 11th, 2009 at 12:02 pmTrolls? I just see Darryl…
theswan said:
…“we will not forget”, 911. Is this any different? I suggest not. We need to dig though the Bush years like we did at ground zero. We need that forensic approach.
You think ground zero was handled as a forensics site? Are friggin kidding me. If it was, it would have been roped off and no EVIDENCE (steel) would have been sold overseas for resmelting to get rid of the burnt steel beams indidicative of cutter charges. Get with the program. 9/11 was a TOTAL inside job, that is WHY it WAS NOT handled as a crime scene, even though 3000 people were murdered. HA, you are off your rocker swanny.
January 11th, 2009 at 12:03 pmI agree the Bush crimes should be investigated. However, if you have a massive sewage spill coming into your living room, shouldn’t you focus on stopping the flow, cleaning it up first? Then if you have the time and resources, find out who did it.
January 11th, 2009 at 12:04 pmhanshiro Says:
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
– Declaration of Independence, 1776
January 11th, 2009 at 12:04 pmBUT, but, lets look forward…to the day of revolution.
As I like to say…
If they have committed no crimes, then they have nothing to fear from an investigation, and should be excited and willing to defend and clarify their record.
January 11th, 2009 at 12:06 pmRapture Ready
January 11th, 2009 at 12:06 pmPlease define the boundaries which separate the classes as defined by thee? How many tiers of middle class are there? What about above and below middle class? Aren’t there whores in Rio in need of your assistance…
If it is not torture then we should have no problems with identical treatment of US personnel.
Do you honestly think that ANY American would be comforted by our soldiers (or any other American) being subjected to identical treatment of “enemy combatants” or Iraqis?
January 11th, 2009 at 12:09 pmDaryll had no trouble wasting a trillion dollars on a war in Iraq that posed no danger to the US but doesn’t want to investigate his heroes/villains that have destoyed not only our reputation but our standing as THE super power.
January 11th, 2009 at 12:10 pmFixed it:
OBAMA:We’re still evaluating how we’re going to approach the whole issue of interrogations, detentions, and so forth. And obviously we’re going to be looking at past practices and I don’t believe that anybody is above the law. On the other hand, I also have a belief that we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards. … My orientation is going to be moving foward WITH PROSECUTIONS.
January 11th, 2009 at 12:11 pmI agree that Obama is in an awkward position at the moment, and I believe he should refrain from saying much of anything for the next few days, about politically complicated matters like Gaza, and possible war crimes prosecutions, when both potentially may snarl his appointments in the Senate confirmation process.
If Dawn Johnsen survives, and is appointed, then we should begin pressing Obama for accountability. His position as a former constitutional law scholar will be very uncomfortable, and hard to reconcile with any clear dilutions of constitutional precedent, by former administration officials, regarding our obligations to adhere to Geneva Convention protocols.
January 11th, 2009 at 12:12 pmI think Daryll would be more comfortable with a caste system than he is with a class system.
January 11th, 2009 at 12:14 pmUncle Sam to PEBO-
On the one hand what you just said, on the other very large hand, we can’t create a future in which the USA pretends there were no BushCo approved & induced war crimes.
Break that mold now, or future generations get to watch the making of another.
January 11th, 2009 at 12:15 pmDon’t kick it into the storeroom- examine, excise, break it apart, destroy that way of operating.
And the retuen on my investment is what?
January 11th, 2009 at 12:18 pmRaptureReady Says: Upper middle class, and I do value ethics over money, but not in this situation.
LOL. You’re still middle class, Daryll.
No, you don’t value ethics on any level. You’re selfish and only want your way all the time without having the ability to recognize that you live in a community that you share with other people. You don’t care about other people (what ethics is), you only care about being a greedy pig.
January 11th, 2009 at 12:19 pmFor me the real reason Obama needs to appoint a special prosecutor is to make the Republicans realize they can’t get away with breaking the law. Gerald Ford pardoned Nixon because he wanted the country to move on, at the time I agreed; unfortunately what the Republicans took from that was a complete disregard for the law.
January 11th, 2009 at 12:20 pmRaptureReady Says: We did not waste money. We invested in Iraq. Iraq is one of the few countries that has a surplus this fiscal year.
Nonsense! But let’s consider your idea of investing, for a moment. You’d rather invest in Iraq than in America? Traitor!
January 11th, 2009 at 12:21 pm48. RaptureReady Says: We did not waste money. We invested in Iraq. Iraq is one of the few countries that has a surplus this fiscal year.
Our ‘investments’ demand 1 million deaths? So what was the body count with AIG and Goldman Sachs? How many children did we offer to slaughter for the auto industry bailout?
Doubtless your parents are also siblings…
January 11th, 2009 at 12:23 pmRaptureReady Says: A much safer nation.
Then you got robbed.
We are less safe than ever.
Over 4,000 Americans have died in Iraq. Don’t you care about them too?
January 11th, 2009 at 12:23 pmSafer? How?
January 11th, 2009 at 12:25 pmToo bad you’re not white Daryll, you really would make the perfect Nazi.
January 11th, 2009 at 12:26 pmMr. President-Elect. You say that you want to look forward. That’s fine, because that’s what your job is going to be. But there are people whose job it is to look backwards, in order to make sure that the laws have been faithfully executed. Let those people do their jobs, and let them prosecute those who should be prosecuted. If you have to let a lot of underlings go free in order to use their testimony to prosecute Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Addington, Woo, and whoever else flagrantly violated the Constitution as a means to ignoble ends, then do it. But, under no circumstances, are you to just let the past go unchallenged, uninvestigated, and unprosecuted. If you do, then you’ll be out of a job in four years, nine days.
January 11th, 2009 at 12:39 pmSo true and worth repeating.
Just like Clinton failed to prosecute the treason of Reagan/Bush because he wanted votes for his budget which has led to this false, reality free view of the Reagan years.
Clinton got zero votes from Repubs who wrongly (what’s new) predicted the end of the world if his plan was passed.
That’s sickening.
So, if they just broke the law, that’s OK. So, there’s a gd difference between “breaking the law” and “blatantly” breaking the law?
“blatantly” — read: to the point where even the Republicans admit it? Dream on.
I am afraid our new president looks more and more like just another fascist, only this time naive and in smiley face.
January 11th, 2009 at 12:48 pmSome of us are willing to wait until he’s inaugurated before we start condemning Obama for actions he won’t take as President.
January 11th, 2009 at 1:00 pmEver the contrarian, I think the lack of pardons may be an indicator of how serious the problems are. A pardoned individual can no longer plead the Fifth in relation to the particular crime but is still liable for perjury under oath or contempt of court. Blanket pardons might well open the flood gates in the courts and grand juries.
January 11th, 2009 at 1:02 pmThe only ‘CHANGE’ people got from Obama being elected is in the person running the prison. That and the fact coins are being defaced with paint, didn’t that used to be a crime..defacing money? Guess it’s ok if you’re making the money or running the company that prints the money?! Only laws apply to the prisoners, not the guards!
Did the Germans just, “look ahead”, after the Holocaust? I think not!
Our Government is just like Nazi Germany was back in the 40’s. Only difference is that we’ve been abusing/killing Muslims in their homeland.
January 11th, 2009 at 1:04 pmjim in austin,
Here’s my problem with the idea of “blanket pardons”. The president has a constitutional obligation to take care that the laws be faithfully executed. I do not believe that this means he can use his, virtually unlimited, pardon authority to pardon those who violated the law on his orders, because that would be the exact opposite of taking care that the laws be faithfully executed.
Put another way, he can’t order someone to violate the law, and then claim that he was faithfully executing the law at the same time.
January 11th, 2009 at 1:05 pmIf we take “we need to look forward and not backwards” literally, then there is no need for our judicial system because all crimes are committed in “the past”.
Personally I think that Obama has every intention to prosecute the Bush Crime Family for war crimes, but just not immediately. He will have enough trouble getting Republicans to go along with the stimulus package without waving a red flag in front of the Republicans.
Besides, I think that Obama is smart enough to recognize what Jonathan Turley said the other day on Rachel Maddow’s show (or was it Countdown). What he said is that the USA pretty much has to prosecute these criminals because if they don’t, some other country will and that will be VERY BAD for the image of this Country.
January 11th, 2009 at 1:08 pmnellre Says:
HRC 2012?
No. By posting this I guess you think that if Hillary had been elected President she would immediately go after the Bush Crime Family. Funny thing, though, I never heard her say anything like that during her campaign.
January 11th, 2009 at 1:10 pmhttp://www.pubrecord.org/torture/607-additional-documents-link-bush-directly-to-guantanamo-torture.html
Additional Documents Link Bush Directly to Guantanamo Torture
January 11th, 2009 at 1:12 pmWayne A. Schneider:
It would make for an interesting constitutional debate in the courts but, as I understand it, there are no limits to the president’s pardon power for federal crimes outside of impeachment.
January 11th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
katy Says:
it’s up to the people – we MUST demand the investigations…
Everyone needs to go to change.gov and tell Obama your vision for this country is that it is a Nation of Laws and it will never be that again if the Bush Crime Family is allowed to escape prosecution for the crimes they have committed.
January 11th, 2009 at 1:14 pm[From Latin blat?re, to blab (on the model of words such as rampant).]
bla’tan·cy n., bla’tant·ly adv.
Usage Note: It is not surprising that blatant and flagrant are often confused, since the words have overlapping meanings. Both attribute conspicuousness and offensiveness to certain acts. Blatant emphasizes the failure to conceal the act. Flagrant, on the other hand, emphasizes the serious wrongdoing inherent in the offense. Certain contexts may admit either word depending on what is meant: a violation of human rights might be either blatant or flagrant. If it was committed with contempt for public scrutiny, it is blatant. If its barbarity was monstrous, it is flagrant. · Blatant is sometimes used to mean simply “obvious,” as in the blatant danger of such an approach, but this use has not been established and is widely considered an error.
January 11th, 2009 at 1:18 pmjim,
With all due respect, I think you only “understand” that because you hear a lot of right-wingers say it on TV and the left-wingers don’t argue back. But it doesn’t make sense. (And, no, I am not accusing you of being an ignorant Fox-loving troll; the right-wingers have been saying it on other channels, too.)
How can the president order someone to violate a law that he is supposed to be faithfully executing? The two actions are mutually contradictory. In my mind, the part that says that the president must take care that the laws be faithfully executed takes precedence over the authority to grant pardons. The pardon authoiry is granted under the implied understanding that the president would not issue them to people who violated the law on his orders, because he’s not allowed to order anyone to break the law!
Now, if someone violated those laws on their own initiative, without direct orders from above to do so, then I agree that Bush could pardon them if he liked what they did. But not if he was the one who told them to do it.
January 11th, 2009 at 1:21 pmThis interim period is taking forEVER.
If the government won’t cooperate or disclose things we need to change the government. It seems the secrecy is not for national security, but treasonous obfuscation to protect criminals.
Then again Bush says they used “tools” today. Plain enough?
January 11th, 2009 at 1:30 pmI have the utmost respect for Johnathan Turley….I only dis-agree on one point of his….its not just the rest of the world that sees what the Bush administration has done as “war crimes” and criminality..I think more than half of the people in this country see it as “war crimes” also…if President Obama does not “go after” this administration for their crimes..I fear we will remain a nation divided, disillusioned and cynical….there will be little sacrifice from the masses..if the Laws are not set right and people punished for breaking the laws…President Obama will get no “skin” from me..change is why we voted for him…and change meant holding all people (including Congress, the DOJ and the Executive Branch accountable!!) why should I sacrifice..when those CEO’s on Wall Street and their minions walk free? The worst criminals this country has ever had in the White House (government)..get to take their billions in ill-gotten gain and take a happy, free from prosecution, stroll home, to their multi-million dollar homes…?
January 11th, 2009 at 1:31 pmOh and if we defy world standards on matters such as this, that is wrong and might be our doom.
It’s no different from New Mexico or Vermont or Florida sanctioning rape and not prosecuting anyone for it. Would that stand?
January 11th, 2009 at 1:34 pmIf the Obama administration persists with this “look forward” Doctrine then I would love to see EVERYONE currently awaiting trial on federal charges ask for a dismissal of those charges based on the President’s view of Justice.
January 11th, 2009 at 2:01 pmWayne A. Schneider:
No trolling here. My argument is that, as far as I know, the pardon power of the president has never been successfully challenged in the courts. Without any prior rulings or judicial framework, the presidential power is just as stark and absolute as it appears until successfully challenged. There is simply no basis to conclude he can’t pardon someone he ordered to break the law until the courts so rule. And that is why I said it would make for an interesting and lively debate.
January 11th, 2009 at 2:03 pmI understand, jim. have a good day. Gotta go back to yelling at the Giants.
January 11th, 2009 at 2:07 pmFrom John Pilger, my favorite Australian Jornalist! I got this article in antiwar.com
November 24, 2008
by John Pilger
My first visit to Texas was in 1968, on the fifth anniversary of the assassination of president John F. Kennedy in Dallas. I drove south, following the line of telegraph poles to the small town of Midlothian, where I met Penn Jones Jr., editor of the Midlothian Mirror. Except for his drawl and fine boots, everything about Penn was the antithesis of the Texas stereotype. Having exposed racists of the John Birch Society, his printing press had been repeatedly firebombed. Week after week, he painstakingly assembled evidence that all but demolished the official version of Kennedy’s murder.
This was journalism as it had been before corporate journalism was invented, before the first schools of journalism were set up and a mythology of liberal neutrality was spun around those whose “professionalism” and “objectivity” carried an unspoken obligation to ensure that news and opinion were in tune with an establishment consensus, regardless of the truth. Journalists such as Penn Jones, independent of vested power, indefatigable and principled, often reflect ordinary American attitudes, which have seldom conformed to the stereotypes promoted by the corporate media on both sides of the Atlantic. Read American Dreams: Lost and Found by the masterly Studs Terkel, who died the other day, or scan the surveys that unerringly attribute enlightened views to a majority who believe that “government should care for those who cannot care for themselves” and are prepared to pay higher taxes for universal health care, who support nuclear disarmament and want their troops out of other people’s countries.
Returning to Texas, I am struck again by those so unlike the redneck stereotype, in spite of the burden of a form of brainwashing placed on most Americans from a tender age: that theirs is the most superior society in the history of the world, and all means are justified, including the spilling of copious blood, in maintaining that superiority.
That is the subtext of Barack Obama’s “oratory.” He says he wants to build up U.S. military power; and he threatens to ignite a new war in Pakistan, killing yet more brown-skinned people. That will bring tears, too. Unlike those on election night, these other tears will be unseen in Chicago and London. This is not to doubt the sincerity of much of the response to Obama’s election, which happened not because of the unction that has passed for news reporting from America since 4 November (e.g. “liberal Americans smiled and the world smiled with them”) but for the same reasons that millions of angry emails were sent to the White House and Congress when the “bailout” of Wall Street was revealed, and because most Americans are fed up with war.
Two years ago, this antiwar vote installed a Democratic majority in Congress, only to watch the Democrats hand over more money to George W. Bush to continue his blood fest. For his part, the “antiwar” Obama never said the illegal invasion of Iraq was wrong, merely that it was a “mistake.” Thereafter, he voted in to give Bush what he wanted. Yes, Obama’s election is historic, a symbol of great change to many. But it is equally true that the American elite has grown adept at using the black middle and management class. The courageous Martin Luther King recognized this when he linked the human rights of black Americans with the human rights of the Vietnamese, then being slaughtered by a liberal Democratic administration. And he was shot. In striking contrast, a young black major serving in Vietnam, Colin Powell, was used to “investigate” and whitewash the infamous My Lai massacre. As Bush’s secretary of state, Powell was often described as a “liberal” and was considered ideal to lie to the United Nations about Iraq’s nonexistent weapons of mass destruction. Condoleezza Rice, lauded as a successful black woman, has worked assiduously to deny the Palestinians justice.
Obama’s first two crucial appointments represent a denial of the wishes of his supporters on the principal issues on which they voted. The vice-president-elect, Joe Biden, is a proud warmaker and Zionist. Rahm Emanuel, who is to be the all-important White House chief of staff, is a fervent “neoliberal” devoted to the doctrine that led to the present economic collapse and impoverishment of millions. He is also an “Israel-first” Zionist who served in the Israeli army and opposes meaningful justice for the Palestinians – an injustice that is at the root of Muslim people’s loathing of the United States and the spawning of jihadism.
No serious scrutiny of this is permitted within the histrionics of Obamamania, just as no serious scrutiny of the betrayal of the majority of black South Africans was permitted within the “Mandela moment.” This is especially marked in Britain, where America’s divine right to “lead” is important to elite British interests. The once respected Observer newspaper, which supported Bush’s war in Iraq, echoing his fabricated evidence, now announces, without evidence, that “America has restored the world’s faith in its ideals.” These “ideals,” which Obama will swear to uphold, have overseen, since 1945, the destruction of 50 governments, including democracies, and 30 popular liberation movements, causing the deaths of countless men, women and children.
None of this was uttered during the election campaign. Had it been allowed, there might even have been recognition that liberalism as a narrow, supremely arrogant, war-making ideology is destroying liberalism as a reality. Prior to Blair’s criminal warmaking, ideology was denied by him and his media mystics. “Blair can be a beacon to the world,” declared the Guardian in 1997. “[He is] turning leadership into an art form.”
Today, merely insert “Obama.” As for historic moments, there is another that has gone unreported but is well under way – liberal democracy’s shift towards a corporate dictatorship, managed by people regardless of ethnicity, with the media as its clichéd façade. “True democracy,” wrote Penn Jones Jr., the Texas truth-teller, “is constant vigilance: not thinking the way you’re meant to think and keeping your eyes wide open at all times.”
January 11th, 2009 at 2:21 pmSoon people will realize that the only CHANGE that came to Washington was Obama’s discourse before and after the election.
January 11th, 2009 at 2:30 pmObama will do a “PELOSI” on everybody.
While Bush just publicly admitted he signed torure it puts Obama in a spot. But the good news is the United Nations now has from his own mouth Bush lied for 7 years to the World. Those who were in Gitmo were torturd and the US soldiers that are in jail who said they were following orders. I have noticed that no Americans seem to have a problem with the innocent soldiers in jail even the media isn’t bother. I guess that’s what is ment by Support our Troops.
January 11th, 2009 at 2:35 pm49. dbadass Says: And the retuen on my investment is what? January 11th, 2009 at 12:18 pm Recommend (0) | Report Abuse
A much safer nation.
—
January 11th, 2009 at 2:39 pmYou forgot to explain how this might be true. Please be specific. I see a less safe world than the one prior to this extremist recruiting adventure…
Update: Bob Fertik responds, “Let’s all tell Attorney General Eric Holder what we want through a petition to Holder to appoint a Special Prosecutor for Bush’s crimes.”
from that link:
On 12/20 we received a reply from Mr. Holder:
Enough folks. I hear you.
So out of respect we stopped forwarding each signature individually and will instead give him the list in full before the Senate confirmation hearings.
frankly, no, it’s not “enough”, mr. holder…
January 11th, 2009 at 2:56 pmbut glad to know you can “hear” us… just be sure to LISTEN.
Obama’s quote “On the other hand, I also have a belief that we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards.” is similar to what Biden said few weeks ago.
Its the same old story guys, the incoming administration turns a blind eye to the transgressions of the out going administration so as to ensure they get the same treatment if they get defeated badly next term!!.
Wake up people, do not take comfort trying to read between the lines!. I assure you if someone goes to jail it will be some low level sacrificial goat to pacify people crying for justice and then everything will be forgotten. Remember the constitution does not apply to the executive!! proved by Nixon et all!!.
January 11th, 2009 at 3:13 pmIts the same old story guys, the incoming administration turns a blind eye to the transgressions of the out going administration so as to ensure they get the same treatment if they get defeated badly next term!!.
It’s a little early to be judging what Obama will do. The fact he has put forth someone who has been a vocal critic of Bush administration policies to run the Office of Legal Counsel is a positive sign. Was she chosen to blunt criticism of Obama’s “look forward” message? The strength with which Senate republicans oppose her confirmation will be a good indicator.
January 11th, 2009 at 3:26 pmi don’t get it, saco… what is it you want?
do you think it would be better if mcSAME were prez? or is it more hillary whining?
either is a waste of time and energy – and serves no useful purpose…
and makes it sound like what you want is to not help…
January 11th, 2009 at 3:42 pmPerhaps President GW authorized some excesses, perhaps not. All I know is that since 9/11 no one has attacked anyone on American soil. We know that the radical Muslims will hold a grudge a very long time. Just look at the problems going on for over 3000 years since Abraham fathered Ismael via his wife’s servant Hagar and his son Isaac within marriage from his wife Sarah. God said Ismael would be father of many nations, the land known as Israel is not one of them. Hence problems continue today involving the whole world. Perhaps BO has bigger issues to deal with than spending millions that will go nowhere but in lawyers pockets. Do you really believe GW, the VP or anyone will go to jail? Remember Bill and Hill w/Whitewater and Lewinski, nowhere, Ron w/Iran-Contra – nowhere. Nixon’s crew was jailed, yet what Dick did with China and Russia relations will overshadow Watergate. Maybe BO needs to be concerned how Chicago politics will affect his credibility. Let’s fix the bigger problems, healthcare, energy, homeless, education, corrections, debt and peace. PEACE.
January 11th, 2009 at 3:43 pmPlenty of people have attacked other people on US soil since 911. In fact my paper shows a few just this week…
January 11th, 2009 at 3:47 pmTokenGimp Says:
Perhaps President GW authorized some excesses, perhaps not…
____________
Perhaps not???
This is a joke, right?
We got a concern troll here, folks… a big, fat one at that…
January 11th, 2009 at 3:48 pmIf we look forward and ignore our own dirty skirts we will relinquish the last teeny bit of moral authority the US might be able to claim. Our laws don’t end with yesterday. I do admit that the PE is in a very ticklish situation. Too much information before hand would make investigation and prosecution more difficult.
I am just hoping it is a matter of 9 days. If it isn’t, Obama opened the floodgates himself. Best we can do now is keep up the pressure and hope.
January 11th, 2009 at 3:59 pm85. TokenGimp Says:
Perhaps President GW authorized some excesses, perhaps not. All I know is that since 9/11 no one has attacked anyone on American soil.
Can you say “Anthrax?” You should change your name to ‘TokenChump.’
Or just @sshole…
January 11th, 2009 at 4:00 pmi liked this part, tros:
the land known as Israel is not one of them.
’cause, wasn’t it known as ‘Palastine’ during abraham’s time?
correct me if i’m wrong…
January 11th, 2009 at 4:03 pmthe other thing that bothers me as an American is that if we have problems here and if we let them go and the rest of the world calls us on it, what does that say about us? If the Hague comes after Bushco, and I have a hard time imagining they won’t, what does that say about our much vaunted position on justice, human rights and even democracy?
Sorry folks, we went after Hussein and Noriega and Marcos and…but if we do it, well, just look the other way. They aren’t human rights violations or war crimes if we do it?
January 11th, 2009 at 4:10 pmno, katy, I don’t think it was Palestine 2,000 years ago. You see, it was still all up for grabs then.
Why anyone calls a chunk of desert the Promised Land is still waaaaaay beyond my comprehension.
January 11th, 2009 at 4:13 pm85. TokenGimp Says:…since Abraham fathered Ismael via his wife’s servant Hagar and his son Isaac within marriage from…heehaw..heehaw…
Yes, by all means, quote a book whose various and unsubstantiated musings were written by people who thought the earth was flat, comets were harbingers of doom, unleavened bread was an abomination, and virgins got pregnant by divine dictum.*rimshot*
(insert Twilight Zone theme here….)
January 11th, 2009 at 4:16 pmif we are real lucky the various predictions for major change in 2012 will involve an asteroid hitting somewhere in the northcentral part of the Arab peninsula and making a really big alternate to the Suez Canal.
Then we wouldn’t have a piece of real estate that would be considered worthless under any real terms causing all the disruption. If all those holy places were under 100 feet of sea water (prior detection getting all the people out) then they would have to find somewhere else to kill people over.
January 11th, 2009 at 4:20 pm92.Hoodathunk Says: Why anyone calls a chunk of desert the Promised Land is still waaaaaay beyond my comprehension.
So they can drop in and claim ownership…though I’m not exactly sure how you earn the right to occupy a “Holy Land” through mass murder, killing children, lying, claiming divine superiority, etc.
I’da thought that would kinda automatically exempt a group from living there…
January 11th, 2009 at 4:21 pmAs commented above, saying anything now could lead to mass pardons. Better to say nothing until Obama is in office.
Then, if he leads the investigation, it looks like a vindictive witch hunt. Better to organize it around an independent body.
Also, investigating this won’t cause lower level CIA critters to be worried. Instead, they can find it a relief that the group that misused intelligence and ordered it arranged around political lines has now been taken down. Instead, we’re talking about what the higher ups did.
January 11th, 2009 at 4:26 pmAccording to the sixteen intelligence agencies of the United States, the war in Iraq has made us LESS SAFE. We are giving al Qaeda exactly what they wanted—to drain our military forces and economy, bogged down in two wars we cannot “win” in the Middle East. Just like the Soviet Union in Afghanistan in the 1980’s.
Do Daryll and the Gimp think they know more than our sixteen intelligence agencies? Do they think these agencies have a liberal bias?
January 11th, 2009 at 4:30 pmWhen I’m in court for driving 78 mph on an interstate when I am the only car on the road, the judge doesn’t say “let’s forget this and move forward”.
Conservatives are still complaining about the Clintons losing a few thousand dollars in a condo deal 35 years ago.
January 11th, 2009 at 4:42 pmThe Judgement of Nuremberg said, and the nations that signed on to the World Court (not the USA, which never has supported international justice), that no one is above the law–and the excuse that a criminal was “just following orders” does not exempt that person from the full penalty of the law–that is why so many Nazis were executed. Condi Rice, Don Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, Dick Cheney and George W. Bush all knew about the terrorist tactics (waterboarding, electric shots, etc) at Abu Gharib prison in Iraq, the secret illegal prisons in Poland, Peru, Afghanistan, and elsewhere, and their military who committed these pathetic and vile acts all should be tried and executed for their crimes against humanity. Not one of these evil beings can justify what they did, for they broke every international law, while shredding the Constitution of the USA–first by deleting habeus corpus, then creating an internal spy network. After they have been delt with, the entire CIA must go on trial for additional crimes against humanity, along with the Taliban, al-Quida, and the evangelical extremists (like Sarah Palin and her prayer warriors who declare that the unlawful war was their god’s plan) and be executed en masse.
January 11th, 2009 at 4:53 pmSome people want Obama to live up to his campaign promises. The sandbagging began in earnest in today’s NYT.
May be put off:
1. Tax increases for the wealthy
2. Allowing gays to serve openly in military
3. Prosecuting Bushies for crimes, torture, spying, influence peddling
4. Renegotiating NAFTA
5. Restricting Carbon emissions
6. Overhauling immigration laws
Immediate priorities
1. Economy (already well in motion, 40% tax cuts, will U.S. go to zero capital gains, like Japan?)
2. Gaza (once inaugurated, the revelation will occur. Clinton/Jones met with Tony Blair in early Dec., agreed with a change in strategy regarding Gaza, Obama’s #1 adviser is a neocon)
3. Iran (short time line to solve, will give clear expectations to Iran’s leaders)
It’s time to watch change very closely. Those who wait for inauguration day will miss important information.
January 11th, 2009 at 5:08 pm.
People,
History repeats because we FAIL to examine our mistatkes of the past.
.
January 11th, 2009 at 5:28 pm.
Dear Mr Obama,
Are you saying that the successes of the past can also be ignored?
.
January 11th, 2009 at 5:29 pm.
Oh, I get it…
“But really your honor, that dead body means nothing. Can we just look forward and forget that I killed a person here?”
… Like that?
Too drastic?
Like this…
“Mr. police officer, that may be my finger prints on the gun and all, but we need to keep looking forward and figure out how the victim’s children are going to succeed in life.”
… YES?
.
January 11th, 2009 at 5:38 pm.
I suppose “LOOKING FORWARD” applies to confirmation hearings as well?
.
January 11th, 2009 at 5:40 pmGlad I’m not the only patriot in the U.S. I can see
January 11th, 2009 at 5:46 pmthat each of you loves America as I do. I like what
endoectomezo says. I got myself a copy of both the
Declaration of Independence and the U.S.Constitution
and will get The Federalists Papers soon. It really
helps to read them
We have to remember that any investigation would have to look at “all the facts and everyone involved” not just Republicans. There are a lot of Democratic officials who could get pulled into this. Do we really want “everything” to come out? Once you open the door, everything gets exposed.
January 11th, 2009 at 6:01 pmRaptureReady Says:
Cons you CONSTANTLY want to cover up the crimes that are committed by conservatives and tie up the country for two years to investigate a blow job. You guys are wankers
January 11th, 2009 at 6:09 pmRaptureReady Says:
We did not waste money. We invested in Iraq. Iraq is one of the few countries that has a surplus this fiscal year.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yeah we did waste the money in Iraq. As for the surplus I am sure the Iraqis appreciate it and those couple hundred thousand of their dead countrymen are a mere inconvience to warmongers like you.
January 11th, 2009 at 6:15 pmRaptureReady Says:
49. dbadass Says: And the retuen on my investment is what? January 11th, 2009 at 12:18 pm Recommend (0) | Report Abuse
A much safer nation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
If you believe that you are an idiot.
January 11th, 2009 at 6:15 pmAs far as the things getting put off, don’t you people realize politicans always make campain promises that they have no intention of keeping? Thats the way politics have always worked. Why would this administration be any different? You didn’t really believe all the BS about “real change” did you? You can’t be that stupid and still know how to vote. Politicans don’t really care about party unless they’re in the middle of an election. Beyond that they’re immune to anything we can do, look at Bush.Grow up and accept disapointment, the world and life are full of it-Hope is only a small town in the Republican, inbred, red-neck run south. And a campain phrase to fool the guilable.
January 11th, 2009 at 6:16 pmTokenGimp Says:
President Gump DID authorize torture he has admitted it. He also is a war criminal lying to start a war of aggression and he most certainly CAN go to prison for it. What you overlook with your silly attempt to use Clinton and whitewater as an example of Presidents being untouchable is that THEY WERE INVESTIGATED AND WERE GUILTY OF NOTHING. That is a pretty big difference between Clinton and Bush. Bush is not above the law no matter how much you WISH he were.
January 11th, 2009 at 6:19 pmI’m delighted with the Dawn Johnson appointment, too, but we mustn’t get too giddy. As Hilda Solis said when in her confirmation hearing when Republicans criticized her pro-labor stance, “my views are now the new President’s” (or words to that effect).
While Justice is supposed to be independent of politics, and even today Obama reiterated that principal, I take a wait-and-see approach.
The Constant Weader at http://www.RealityChex.com
January 11th, 2009 at 6:24 pmYes, the damn CIA agents should think that their actions may be scrutinized.
January 11th, 2009 at 8:02 pmGov Ryan of IL is behind bars. Why? Not because of license for bribes, which many feel led to the deaths of innocents. No, it’s because he obstructed justice. Apparently death doesn’t motivate people enough. It’s the arrogance of attempting to be above the law that outraged people enough that actions were taken to put him behind bars. I could name plenty others like this.
Hey… Didn’t Clinton do the same thing? It’s not the BJ (and many other prior adulterous acts) that I care about (well, kinda), it’s the fact that he then attempted to obstruct the justice process. He tried to make himself above the law. And he’s celebrated.
Guess that kind of arrogance only bothers you libs when it’s a GOP who does it. OK, I get it. Show me your ethics again.
January 11th, 2009 at 9:33 pmSome of you are suggesting that the country is not safer than when Bush took office in 2001. For real??
Let’s see… Under Clinton, the military was hacked down, no money was spent on intelligence/CIA, we had a record number of US properties attacked during a peacetime administration (embassies on every continent except Australia, USS Cole, even the 1st WTC bombings…). 8 years of planning by terrorists who declared jihad against the US during Clinton, and then Bush is left with no ability during his first 7 months to fix it b/c the budget had already been set by congress.
You bet your hide we’re safer now.
I’m not disregarding the terrible losses around the world from the fight against terrorism. But some of you make it sound like we should do what we did under Clinton — just sit around and watch them attack and kill Americans and ignore it. How is that a better approach?
January 11th, 2009 at 9:40 pmLetsmakesureiunderstand Says:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
No Clinton didnt do the same thing since he DIDNT BREAK THE LAW.
Guess that kind of arrogance only bothers you libs when it’s a GOP who does it. OK, I get it. Show me your ethics again.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Ethics I have patience for morons like YOU that regurgitate the idiocy the Limborg screechmonkeys TOLD you to believe I dont
January 11th, 2009 at 9:42 pmLetsmakesureiunderstand Says:
You are a moron. Of COURSE we arent safer and if Clinton screwed up the Military so bad, by making the cuts that even Dick Chency agreed with by the way you idiot, then how did that military perform so spectacularly against Afghanistan and Iraq? You do know you are an idiot dont you?
The former chairman and vice-chairman of the 9/11 commission warned Sunday that the nation is ill-prepared for another terrorist attack.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/12/04/911.commission/index.html
You really are brainwashed and not very bright
January 11th, 2009 at 9:49 pmSure. Great idea. While we are at it I would really like to know what happened during ww2 so I think we need to appoint a special prosecutor for that. While we are at it I am not happy with the actions during Viet Nam or Korea. We need one for them too. Also, I am worried about the Civil war and Spanish American war.
You people are incredible. Do you see Russia or China appointing special prosecutors? For that matter when is the last time the UK or EU appointed one? How about Venezuela or Iran.
Political Science 101, nations act in their own self interest. As much as Bush was wrong I do believe he acted in good faith. Remember we were attacked and 3000 Americans were killed. 2000 were killed at Pearl Harbor and American forces machine gunned Japanese submarine crews in the water. The Nazis didn’t even do that. Wake up folks. We have bigger fish to fry.
By the way, We won those wars for that very reason.
January 11th, 2009 at 10:20 pmOh wait, there was more to the Clinton regime. He got to spend 8 years on a PR campaign to tell us how great he was making our lives. Somebody please name one thing he actually did to make your life better? He sat back and did nothing. He and the MSM convinced everyone that their lives were terrible and they needed change (actually Perot did that for him, he just latched onto it). In reality, the recession was ‘90-’91, and by the time Clinton entered office in 1Q93, we were in our 6th consecutive quarter of economic growth. Gee, thanks for saving my life, Bill. As a trillion dollars flooded the stock market b/c businesses figured out to use 401k plans instead of pensions, the stock market shot up. His PR machine convinced everyone that the stock market dictated the economy (it’s supposed to be the other way around). So everyone believed life was good and ignored those other little problems (guess jihad wasn’t such a little problem, eh?)
Unfortunately, the ‘irrational exuberance’ (Greenspan’s term from the ’90s) and the misreporting by thousands of companies’ balance sheets (seriously, retirement/benefit payouts due are not a liability?!) and the investment houses ‘putting lipstick on a pig’ to make a killing with tech stocks and IPOs was all ignored. Heck, we even had our first global credit market meltdown under Clinton, but eveyone kept ignoring it.
What do Enron, B. Madoff, MCI/WorldCOM, MerillLynch, Charles Schwab all have in common? They were all first identified as being shams during Clinton, and they were all ignored by his SEC. I guess it was better to just let the stock market get falsely propped up so people would think he was a great Pres. The Madoff investigators even admitted that they didn’t catch him b/c they relied on the process precedent for investigating the initial claims. (Left out: the precedent set under Clinton’s SEC.)
What else do they all have in common? They were all caught and handled under Bush (Madoff is obviously still being handled). Gosh, I’m really sorry that some companies got exposed, paid millions in fines, even collapsed, and it was bad for the economy (read: it hurt short-term stock market values). Guess it would have been better to ignore the problem like Clinton did, and hope that it didn’t surface until the next president came to office, so the foolish public would blame the next president? NOTE: if Clinton’s SEC had shut down Madoff after the first whistle blew, the scheme would have been halted at $50mil, not $50Billion. All Clinton cared about was his reputation, not about the country.
Funny how you jumped on board Obama’s “It was deregulation under Bush, supported by John McCain, that lead to this crisis.” You are such lemings. Actually, it was Reagan’s deregulation that started these wheels in motion (see, I’m not just bashing democrats), and it was supported by Clinton. That bill you all claim ruined the banking industry was passed in ‘99 under Clinton, Bush was not even in Congress. And Clinton himself stated in October that if we hadn’t passed it, the banks would have been in worse position to deal with the crisis.
Bush’s deregulation? He actually went after bad businesses, unlike Clinton. If Obama wanted regulation, where was his proposal to fix the problem? (For that matter, someone please name one legislative accomplishment of Obama. Can’t do it, can you?!) BUSH is the one who proposed regulating Fannie Mae in 2005. McCain sponsored a bill to regulate Freddie Mac in 2006. Obama fought against it. Why? He’s not bipartisan, he’s against anything any GOP proposes, even when those proposals are actually left-leaning! He and many other Dems just want to undermine the administration (including its efforts in Iraq) so they can point to failures and take over power.
I’ve got an idea, how about just proposing and voting for legislation that’s good for the country, not your own career?
Who in the last 8 years proposed laws to increase fuel efficiency and improve the automaker’s businesses? Bush did(2005). Who voted against it? Obama. Why? Aren’t these good things? OK, you don’t buy my arguement that it was for the sake of partisanship and for his own career? OK, maybe it was b/c of the millions paid to his campaign by the UAW and the big 3 (in a rare showing of solidarity) to protect them from that darned GOP president who was meddling in their business. Maybe the nearly $1mil paid to Obama by Fannie Mae (plus $1mil each to Dodd and Pelosi) plus the individual maxed out contribution from Fannie’s former CEO (who left with millions in severance after running the org into the ground) swayed Obama to protect them from gov intervention.
Yep, it was Bush’s de-regulation that got us in this mess. ;-)
Maybe if Obama hadn’t spent his pre-pol career in the ’90’s in court for ACORN getting judges to force banks to give out loans to people who don’t quality (what he calls “middle class” and “working families”), we wouldn’t be in this mess?
One of our last 2 presidents had the guts to do things that would not be popular but were necessary in his opinion. The other waited for public opinion to form before acting. Is that called ‘leadership’?
Here’s a good example: The world and the UN was calling on the US to act in Eastern Europe for almost a year. (The world always looks to the US for help). Clinton had access to the info. He knew about monthly slaughter of thousands under Milosevich. He did nothing. Then the stories finally hit the MSM. He did nothing. Eventually US public opinion was strong enough that it was time to get the US military involved in the UN actions. Gee, thanks oh great leader.
Ironic: I see you people comment about thousands of Muslim lives being lost in the fight against terrorism. But it was OK to sit back and watch thousands die in Europe (hey, some were Muslim!) while the world asked us for help. And I guess it’s OK to watch Americans die at home and abroad b/c of terrorists and not fight back, just as long as we don’t kill any muslims (whew!).
When 911 happened, videos from S.Arabia showed people dancing and celebrating in the streets. Nobody here is cheering the death of Iraqis. We’d love to see peace accomplished without force. But we’re dealing with terrorists who WANT to become dead martyrs.
We’re working to stablize Iraq after ridding it of an insane evil dictator who, even after he was ousted from Kuwait, openly stated that he wanted to create an arab superstate under his rule (i.e., he wanted to take over a bunch of countries) so that it would become unified (read: sunni muslim) and stong enough to remove Israel and the US from the face of the earth. Guess we should’ve ignored that? We should’ve kept letting him pay $ millions to the families of suicide bombers (i.e., state-sponsored terrorism)? Notice that we didn’t remove Iraq from earth, we’re helping the people of that country re-learn how to govern civilly after decades of oppression by a dictator who bombed, tortured and used chemical weapons ON HIS OWN PEOPLE. Talk about a sicko. And you people compare the Bush regime to Nazi Germany? This guy was Hitler reincarnate.
Let’s keep our Bush-bashing in perspective, folks. He’s certainly made mistakes. All presidents have. Have you ever made one? If you’re so gung ho on ripping the ‘regime’, maybe you should run for office so you can make government better personally? (Of course, if you’re an illegal immigrant, you’ll probably have to wait a couple years until Obama gets around to changing the law so you can run. First he’s got to deal with the economy, ya’ know.
January 11th, 2009 at 10:37 pmEugene, you say we performed spectalularly in Iraq? Weren’t you one of the people complaining about our failure in Iraq?
NOTE: we entered Iraq in 2003. This of course, was after Congress authorized budget to beef up the miliraty immediately after 9/11.
It was the lack of intelligence/CIA resources that I was pointing out that lead to the 8 years of planning to hijack the planes.
January 11th, 2009 at 10:44 pmEugene, sorry you are right: Clinton did not commit obstruction of justice. I am brainwashed. But if I were on trial, I would defend myself by saying: before I was brainwashed, I used to know how to “define the word ‘is’”.
I guess it’s even harder to define “obstruction of justice”.
January 11th, 2009 at 10:47 pmWould love to stay and chat. especially after my long rant, cuz I know many of you will have plenty to say. But I gotta go. :-( Until next time…
January 11th, 2009 at 10:50 pm.
Former guard on Guantanamo ‘torture’
BBC – Broadcast January 09, 2009
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7821569.stm
A former guard at the US detention centre at Guantanamo Bay has spoken in his first television interview about the brutality he witnessed to inmates.
Chris Arendt told the BBC what he saw amounted to ”torture” and that some of his fellow guards were so violent as to be ”psychotic.”
Daniel Sandford reports.
.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:01 pmLetsmakesureiunderstand Says:
So, are you saying the NIE of 2006 is wrong, then?
For real??
Or the documented rise in terrorism worldwide?
Safer??
Or how about soldiers that say our presence in the Middle East foments hatred toward the USA?
Do you prefer Cherry or Grape Kool Aid?
.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:17 pmdannio Says:
You are a MORON. We didnt torture either the Japanese OR the Germans in WW2. Why would we base what WE do on what Russia or China do? Are you really making the argument that it is ok to say we have joined the evil doers club but we arent as bad as THOSE GUYS????? Grow up
January 11th, 2009 at 11:25 pmLetsmakesureiunderstand Says:
Yeah lets keep Bush in perspective and that perspective would be he is the worst president in American history a LIAR, an idiot, he told LIES to take us to a war and he ok’d torture. Basically he is a catastrophe that walks like a man so we ought to keep him in THAT perspective
January 11th, 2009 at 11:28 pmObama is only more of the same, he can’t prosecute anyone as the dems are complicit in all this torture. To prosecute anyone shuts down the government. All it does is make us a nation of tortures.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:30 pmLetsmakesureiunderstand Says:
Eugene, you say we performed spectalularly in Iraq? Weren’t you one of the people complaining about our failure in Iraq?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You arent very bright are you. Did you see a contradiction there? The military did their job immediatly and took the country. You dont WIN occupations and the failures were POLITICAL. Do you not really GET that?
NOTE: we entered Iraq in 2003. This of course, was after Congress authorized budget to beef up the miliraty immediately after 9/11.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So in a year and a half the entire military was overhauled? Is that a joke? What was jettisoned after the fall of the Berlin wall was the kind of weapons systems that would be used to fight the LAST war not the kind we are fighting now which is why Cheney was calling for ending THE SAME SYSTEMS.
It was the lack of intelligence/CIA resources that I was pointing out that lead to the 8 years of planning to hijack the planes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is an argument I can get behind they HAD the resources and WARNED BUSH. Remember the PDB saying Ben Laden determined to attack in US? The lack of USEFUL intelligence is the failure that started in the 80’s that they fell in love with the technology and let the boots on the ground human intelligence founder. That isnt Clintons fault. I wouldnt even blame Reagan the CIA blew that one. Bush was simply deep into Operation Ignore terrorism. The Clinton administration TOLD them they needed to spend a lot of time on terrorism and ben Laden in particular. Bush told the CIA to lay OFF the ben Laden family. Bush made a terrorism task force that NEVER MET A SINGLE TIME. The CIA was giving Bush what they called hair on fire breifings and BUSH IGNORED THEM. They guy is a disaster.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:35 pmHUmboldt Nation Says:
As I like to say…
If they have committed no crimes, then they have nothing to fear from an investigation, and should be excited and willing to defend and clarify their record.
Yep. One would believe they would. But chimpy circumvented the constitution, made up law as fast as he and his gang broke them, ignored long held doctrine of defense, gawd their is so much more.
chimpy and his repugs are bragging about their crimes. There is enough evidence to try them pronto.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:42 pmMax,
Grape. ;-)
For every story about a soldier who says our present foments hatred, there’s a story about soldiers who say the people there welcome and praise us, & thank us for saving them.
These things aren’t black and white. U and I don’t really know unless we spend time there. And even then, we’d need to do a grand tour b/c opinions vary town by town, family by family (just like pol opinions do here in the US). I’m only trying to show everyone the gray, since there are so many on this string who only see things one way.
And the documented rise in global terrorism is several decades old. It’s not new since we invaded Iraq in 2003, so it’s not caused by Bush/our actions. I’m sure our actions are angering plenty of people, so I do see everyone’s point on that. But please realize that even under clinton, who did NOTHING to antagonize anyone, we saw an alarming increase in terrorism *against the US*. And although global terrorism is still increasing (and with so many extremists out there, sadly I don’t foresee that pattern changing in my lifetime), much of that (besides middle east) is in places like cntral and east Asia, Africa, south America. Even MSM ‘experts’ concede that terrorist acts specifically against the US have not increased in the last few years unless you include acts in Iraq and Afghanistan that are against anyone and everyone, and are really just part of the war zone. (That’s not to belittle their impact — a widow may not care whether the death occurred in a war zone or as a random act of violence.)
Do you honestly believe that the global terrorism trend will change under Obama? Does Chechnya care? How about Abu Sayef? Taliban? Iran has already showed what they think of Obama. Will the pirates leave Somalia & Nigeria b/c of Obama?
Bush may some day admit he focussed too much on terrorism and Iraq. But it’s also possible that the region becomes a bit more stable in the long run b/c there’s a functioning democracy present. Let’s hope so, it would be good for everyone. (honestly, I think it will never happen unless the Israel/Palestine issue gets resolved, which seems awfully difficult to do, and beyond the powers of even the self-proclaimed Messiah). Even if it was wrong to enter Iraq, shouldn’t we support the conclusion of that effort (which seems so close now)? If we just walked away, this WILL have been wasted lives (oh, and wasted money). And we’ll have the Afghanistan-post-Russian-invasion situation all over again, which nursed terrorism.
All that said, I am curious to find out what happened with POWs and how they were treated and how the next administration handles the situation. This may have more of a lasting impact on this country than the financial crisis. Financial crises correct themselves in due time. Especially in a country of innovative entrepreneurs. Hopefully the ‘government should take care of me’ mentality of the masses won’t ruin that last great aspect of American culture.\
OK, NOW I’m really going to bed. :-)
January 11th, 2009 at 11:48 pmLetsmakesureiunderstand,
January 11th, 2009 at 11:52 pmClick the links and read!
Euge, you say the failure was political b/c the military did it’s job immediately. Did you expect us to just walk away and a new government would magically pop up? Did that happen in Afghanistan 30 years ago? Or in 2001? For perspective on establishing a new functioning government, consider the US: After kicking out King George’s army, how many years did it take us to reach a truly functioning government (hint: it’s double digits). Articles of confederation sure didn’t work out. And consider this: the US was a completely unified nation, all giddy about their victorious revolution and they all wanting essentially the same thing. They didn’t have the same kinds of warring factions that Iraq has (Kurd, Sunni, Shiite, etc.), nor tribal rivalries with grudges from the last regime and even before. And they didn’t have neighboring countries attempting to destabilize them (Iran, Syria, etc.). Yet the US couldn’t do it. Did you think Iraq could do it even in 5 years, with all those obstacles?
None of this, of course, justifies torture (getting back to the orig article). But again it provides some perspective.
January 12th, 2009 at 12:05 amSorry Max, not taking the time to read the links. For all the links you can provide, I can provide other links.
Of course, you would call my links “kool aid” and your links are undeniable, irrefutable, unbiased facts.
I’m just choosing my flavor of Kool Aid. I’m entitled, right. That’s the beauty of Democracy. :-)
Gosh, I’ve been called a MORON by a few people. I must have struck a nerve. Didn’t think that was necessary. Well, I did call the American public “lemings” for believing Obama’s B.S. about de-regulation, so I apologize for that if any of you on this stringer were offended. (is it spelled “lemmings”?)
January 12th, 2009 at 12:23 amLetsmakesureiunderstand Says:
Hey… Didn’t Clinton do the same thing? It’s not the BJ (and many other prior adulterous acts) that I care about (well, kinda), it’s the fact that he then attempted to obstruct the justice process. He tried to make himself above the law. And he’s celebrated.
Guess that kind of arrogance only bothers you libs when it’s a GOP who does it. OK, I get it. Show me your ethics again.
Gawd! Do you sit around and think up bullshit morning, noon and night?
B. Clinton is celebrated as he rightfully deserves. He didn’t do anything to the detriment of our country or to other nations. B. Clinton was the President of the US who kept us safe. And we were repected around the world.
B. Clinton was a hell of a lot better President than the deadly embarrassing chimpy and his gang.
You are possibly that dumb.
January 12th, 2009 at 12:51 amdannio Says:
As much as Bush was wrong I do believe he acted in good faith. Remember we were attacked and 3000 Americans were killed. 2000 were killed at Pearl Harbor and American forces machine gunned Japanese submarine crews in the water. The Nazis didn’t even do that.
Sometime idiots are funny. You are sad. chimpy’s corrupted administration will continue to ooze until it’s corrected.
There a tons of thing Preferred-President Obama will have to review (looking back) before he can move forward.
Preferred-President Obama will do the right thing.
Your dittle widdle 24%ers are shrinking, I think they are dying of old age.
January 12th, 2009 at 1:34 amOne undeniable fact:
bush’s bodycount is way higher than Clinton’s. And bush crapped his pants trying to match Clinton’s 22 million jobs.
In fact, bush’s bodycount is higher than Saddam’s:
Annual deaths during Saddam rule: between 25,000 to 50,000
Annual deaths during U.S. Occupation: about 66,000
Heckuva job, bushie!
January 12th, 2009 at 1:41 amI believe that the crimes committed by bush and his cronies that we are aware of, are probably just the tip of the iceberg. We still don’t know the real reason for the war in Iraq. I am suspicious of how the 9/11 attack came along conveniently just when bush needed an excuse to go to war in Iraq. Clearly, bush was pursuing some secret agenda that had nothing to do with what is best for the country during his years in office, and this agenda led to the deaths of thousands of innocent people. I DEMAND JUSTICE!
January 12th, 2009 at 2:11 amLetsmakesureiunderstand Says:
You werent called a moron because you struck a nerve, that is funny, you were called a moron because you show yourself to be a moron. See how that works out?
January 12th, 2009 at 5:37 amLetsmakesureiunderstand Says:
Eugene, sorry you are right: Clinton did not commit obstruction of justice. I am brainwashed. But if I were on trial, I would defend myself by saying: before I was brainwashed, I used to know how to “define the word ‘is’”.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Of COURSE you are brainwashed that is obvious to anyone with two braincells to rub together for instance when was Clinton convicted of obstructing justice again? Oh he WASNT? It IS a crime you know so I guess he isnt guilty of obstructing justice until 12 people SAY he is. Remember in the impreachment process the House part of it is the equivilent of an indictment and the Senate part the trial and the Senate also did not find him guilty of obstruction of justice. See we KNOW that the bloviating screechmonkey that does your thinking for you TOLD you he obstructed justice
However YOUR delusions do not define reality.
I guess it’s even harder to define “obstruction of justice”.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Ah no, it isnt. If you are confused about that TOO I suggest Findlaw. Do you EVER know what you are talking about or is regurgitating the hivemind propaganda all you do?
January 12th, 2009 at 5:42 amLetsmakesureiunderstand Says:
We should never have invaded in the first place after we DID we created a power vacuum so we needed to stay a WHILE. DURING THAT STAY, one as short as possible we shouldnt have made the myriad mistakes we made that alienated the population. Things like guarding the oil ministry and letting one of the most important antiquities museums in the world be looted, STOPPING the municipal elections shutting down newspapers. IF we cared and wanted to help we would have fostered a democracy from the ground up. Encouraging dissenting newspapers, townhall meetings, we would NOT have announced we were going to privatize THEIR economy as if it were ours to do with as we like. We should have encouraged those municipal elections and tried to broker a unity government instead of pushing through the laws we did under Garner. ALL of those and more were political failures. Once we made them the game was up and we should have just come home since we no longer had any credibility to the Iraqi people to help them solve THEIR political problems. There may have been a whole lot of violence but there was anyway until the ethnic cleansing of the neighborhoods was complete. I cant think of two situations any LESS SIMILAR than our revolution and the Iraqi debacle. WE were setting up a pretty much ENTIRELY NEW TYPE OF GOVERNMENT. The Iraqis dont have to reinvent the wheel.
ALL the problems you mentioned were well known dynamics BEFORE the invasion and just more reasons we never should have done it. Iran doesnt WANT an unstable Iraq. About 80% of all Muslims are Sunni. Iran and Iraq are two of the few Shiite majority countries. You dont really know much about this do you? What the Iraqis could have done we will never know since we didnt try, ESPECIALLY HAD WE NOT SCREWED UP THE POLITICS OF THE SITUATION FROM THE BEGGINING. however what we DO know is that 82% of the Iraqis wanted us OUT of their country according to the British Defense Dept poll IN IRAQ. WE were adding to the equation of violence as an occupier will necessarily do.
January 12th, 2009 at 5:57 amJonathan Turley for Special War Crimes Prosecutor!
Heads will roll!! Paper or plastic?
January 12th, 2009 at 9:01 am911=Inside Job
Anthax Attacks = Inside Job (Not the Single Chemist theory either – Bruce Ivins)
Not to mention lying about WMD’s.
Then you have the torture thing.
Where to start?
January 12th, 2009 at 1:57 pmCleaning up the house is part of looking and moving forward. You can’t pretend to make forward progress without holding those accountable for their crimes. I can see it coming, the same Off-the-table-do-nothing-Pelosi nonprogressive (we’ll do as we’re told) style attitude.
January 12th, 2009 at 2:32 pmctcadguy Says: where to start?
911=Inside Job
Anthax Attacks = Inside Job (Not the Single Chemist theory either – Bruce Ivins)
Not to mention lying about WMD’s.
Then you have the torture thing.
Where to start?
Here’s where to start:
UP YOUR ASS AND AROUND THE CORNER YOU DUMBSHIT!!
It’s a conspiracy, I think the aliens forgot to put back your brain or perhaps it’s just tired of being sat on, so stand up and give it a rest! Although in your world everyone’s out to get you, in the real world you are just a crazy ass mental case who needs help. What’s that?! shhhhhhhh I think they’re coming NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Not again HELP ME!!! I hope they don’t probe me. That was close, the men in black told me that they hid the WMDs U YOUR ASS AND AROUND THE CORNER… start digging, let me know what you find…
January 12th, 2009 at 5:01 pmUidiot Says:
Where you SHOULD start MORON is with some adult education. I suggest perhaps third grade level. It will most likely be a challenge but hey right now you are just an embarassing imbecile
January 12th, 2009 at 8:00 pmIt truly is incredible wang111 every problem in the world is caused by the U.S.A not one other country is as monsterish as the red white and blue lets get out the ropes and hang them all use with me.
January 12th, 2009 at 8:56 pmAfter fighting for this country and you dumbasses I am ashamed not of my country but of the citizens of this great nation.
January 12th, 2009 at 9:38 pmI hope one day to see you and have you tell me face to face how every thing in our government is inferior to that of the word.
You people obviously speak out of ignorance.
The world is only as safe for us as we make it.
Take off your rose colored glasses and help out or are you people the type to complain about everything and let us do all the heavy lifting.
Pain
Wow. It is amazing you thought this ignorant rant was worth posting in two threads. I would have thought the embarassment of showing your stupidity in ONE thread would be enough.
January 12th, 2009 at 10:08 pmYou go pain. There is a lot of anti Americanism on this site. At first I thought it was just Bush and his administration that we were all dismayed with. Now it is obvious that many find the U.S. and Israel to be the entire global problem. Me, I love what Barack is doing. We are in the middle of a serious campaign to destroy our enemy’s capabilities of killing American people and everyone wants Obama’s entire focus to be surrender and impeaching Bush. Obama IS forward thinking and that’s one of the many reasons I voted for him. He’s not going to let the radical left deter him from doing a good job.
January 13th, 2009 at 8:06 amIf you think that Obama will bring change in America, I am afraid you are mistaken. Demacrat and Republican have become opposite sides of the same coin, same agenda. Every nominee promises change. Then when elected, it is business as usual. One example is President Clinton. He was called the next John F. Kennedy. Look what we ended up with. And for those of you who think that we are in the middle of “a serious campaign to destroy our enemy’s capability of killing American people,” think again. Our government was behind 911. The information is there if anyone will take the time to investigate it for themselves.
January 13th, 2009 at 11:59 amAs much as Bush, his dad, Cheney, and many members of their administration(s) need to be locked in prison and violated from behind by black, hispanic, and middle eastern men, I agree with Obama that we need to look forward. It would take so much time, energy, and money trying to get these guys to justice that it is more effective to let karma / god / psycho-stalkers / whatever deal with them while we instead fix the things in our society that are broken by them and other former leaders.
January 29th, 2009 at 8:38 pm