Anyone who thinks they have all the Answers before they've even heard the Question - is Dangerously Deluded! Real Truth Requires Vigilance, Perseverance and Courage, regardless of Party and who wields Power. Left, Right, Center, Corporations, Government, Unions, Criminals or the Indifferent.
This report, which oddly enough has to come from England, shows a Seattle Police Officer pulling back and punching a teenage girl in the face after stopping her for Jaywalking. Clearly she was being uncooperative before things escalated, but did he really NEED to do that? Is this supposed to be a better alternative to the Taser?
Also notice, although it's not proof of anything in and of itself, the girls shown in the video are black - the police are white. I just wonder which side of this fight Steve King, Glenn Beck and the Tea Partiers are going to be on?
This news report shows a woman who suffered from a rotator-cuff injury who had been to the doctor multiple times and not gotten releif ultimately resorting to Shooting herself in the shoulder in order to get care in the Emergency Room. Now she's facing possible charges.
That's how completely FRACKED-UP our Health Care system is, and maybe -just maybe, by 2014 it'll be a little bit better.
In this tour-de-force of ridicule Jon Stewart blasts the human rights and detention hypocrisy of the Obama Administration was has grossly failed to turn this country back to the rule of law and away from the brutal and illegal tactics of the Bush Administration. Gitmo is still open, Renditions are still part of our policy, Habeas Corpus is still restricted particularly at Bagram AFB because of the Military Commissions Act (which is yet to be repealed). He's even been backing down on trying KSM in Criminal Court. Not good, not good at all.
We'd all like to wish that Obama was Dumbledore and could solve this with a wand flourish and a loud - Expelliarmus Shout, but that's not the case.
If we want to avoid putting this spill fix and clean up on the public dime as John Beohner suggested (and has already walked back) we have to recognize some practical realities.
The US Military does not possess a Fleet of Oil Tankers or Fishing/Skimming Vessels. The Ships needed to clean the oil from the water have to come from private companies. Either BP is going to pay for it and hire those ships as sub-contractors, or the government will. The problem is if the government takes this over, exactly how long will it take to get the funds appropriated with people like Jim Bunning in the Senate running around saying - "But it has to be PAID FOR"?
Tax payers are not footing the bill for this. Not. Gonna. Happen. Unfortunately if BP is passing out the checks, then BP Calls the Shots! It's a total Catch-22.
It may make Obama "look weak", but really the reality is that International Corporations have become This strong. We saw it during the Housing Crisis and Bank Bailouts and we're seeing it now. These people are modern day King's, with their own private armies of thugs and serfs to do their bidding. Governments are just an inconvenience to them, which they can simply buy off in time.
I think what needs to happen is that we need to allow the EPA and OSHA to contract out the cleanup and skimming crews and then directly BILL BP for the costs. Don't let BP decide how things should be cleaned up, where, or what protective gear should be used since - they're LIABLE for it all, and it's in their corporate interest, and their share-holders interests to minimize and limit their liability as much as possible.
Right now a mechanism to actually TAKE THIS AWAY FROM BP and "Commandeer their ships" as Michele Bachmann insanely suggested - doesn't really exist without declaring Martial Law and seizing the assets of BP and all the other ships involved - we'd have to have the Coast Guard and Navy become PIRATES in international waters. And after that the really bad stuff happens, we'd have to start placing the workers into Forced Labor without compensation. Nobody wants to see anything like that happen.
This isn't Obama's problem to fix, not all by himself. He doesn't have that kind of authority over private companies, but Congress could create it with some amendments to the Clean Water Act to allow this kind of Ad Hoc Clean-Up Crew Contracting and Billing to ensure BP stays on the hook, but not in the driver's seat.
Despite the announcement two day ago by BP Exec Doug Suttles that "No one is to prevent the media from access" -
Recent media reports have suggested that individuals involved in the cleanup operation have been prohibited from speaking to the media, and this is simply untrue. BP fully supports and defends all individuals rights to share their personal thoughts and experiences with journalists if they so choose.
BP has not and will not prevent anyone working in the cleanup operation from sharing his or her own experiences or opinions.
Really Now?
Then why did BP Security - on a Public Beach - respond this way to a reporter?
OFFICIAL 1: Every single security guard here has given the instructions to every single news crew that you can be outside of 100 yards of the workers or along the boom.
WALKER: And who’s saying that? Because no one can tell me that, unless you’re the Jefferson Parish Sheriff’s Office, you’re the Coast Guard, or you’re the military, can you tell me where to go on this public beach.
OFFICIAL 1: I can tell you where to go because I’m employed to keep this beach safe. And right now, those are my instructions. I’d like to keep the workers safe as well.
WALKER: I’m going to try to talk to the worker under the tent. Can I do that?
OFFICIAL 1: No, no.
WALKER: He’s on break.
OFFICIAL 1: You are not allowed to interview any workers.
WALKER: The workers can talk to the media, according to the BP CEO two days ago. Still hasn’t trickled down to you all?
OFFICIAL 2: We already heard that one too.
WALKER: What do you mean you’ve “heard that one”? It’s true.
OFFICIAL 1: The e-mail did not explicitly give you permission to do that.
Can you believe the NERVE of these Lying Rat-Bastard Fucker-heads?
From DAY-ONE BP has been Bullshitting Us about how much oil was coming out of the well, about how safe the dispersant Corexit 9500, they've used and manipulated the Coast Guard to keep the Press and even NOAA away from the Underwater Death Plumes.
The sad part is that there isn't a lot the local or federal authorities can do. Even after Sherrif's finally escorted these reporters over to the workers They refused to Talk (because they most likely knew there would be reprisals) Legally their silence can be contractually maintained and mandated.
Work and Shut Your Mouth - Or Starve!
American Freedom in operation.
Update 1 This isn't the first time this has happened as shown by ABC News. Via Thinkprogress. This report does a good job of pointing out how the workers are essentially terrified of BP, trapped in a situation where their normal jobs are gone - and this is all they have left. It's like a Slave Labor Force. Also note in this video - NO RESPIRATORS!
ABC News reporter Matt Gutman “was hassled by the manager of a nearby crew, asking Gutman why he was on the beach.” Gutman captured the interaction on video, and said “several people” had asked him “not to talk to any of the workers here”:
Here's another example with Alabama Firefighters complaining that BP is keeping them from HELPING, when they actually have the training to do this job.
Update 2 I've been meaning to write this as a separate diary, but I think making this point here - since this is now Rec'd will probably have more impact. Obama is not Dumbledore!.
We'd all like to wish that Obama was Dumbledore and could solve this with a wand flourish and a loud - Expelliarmus Shout, but that's not the case.
If we want to avoid putting this spill fix and clean up on the public dime as John Beohner suggested (and has already walked back) we have to recognize some practical realities.
The US Military does not possess a Fleet of Oil Tankers or Fishing/Skimming Vessels. The Ships needed to clean the oil from the water have to come from private companies. Either BP is going to pay for it and hire those ships as sub-contractors, or the government will. The problem is if the government takes this over, exactly how long will it take to get the funds appropriated with people like Jim Bunning in the Senate running around saying - "But it has to be PAID FOR"?
Tax payers are not footing the bill for this. Not. Gonna. Happen. Unfortunately if BP is passing out the checks, then BP Calls the Shots! It's a total Catch-22.
It may make Obama "look weak", but really the reality is that International Corporations have become This strong. We saw it during the Housing Crisis and Bank Bailouts and we're seeing it now. These people are modern day King's, with their own private armies of thugs and serfs to do their bidding. Governments are just an inconvenience to them, which they can simply buy off in time.
I think what needs to happen is that we need to allow the EPA and OSHA to contract out the cleanup and skimming crews and then directly BILL BP for the costs. Don't let BP decide how things should be cleaned up, where, or what protective gear should be used since - they're LIABLE for it all, and it's in their corporate interest, and their share-holders interests to minimize and limit their liability as much as possible.
Right now a mechanism to actually TAKE THIS AWAY FROM BP and "Commandeer their ships" as Michele Bachmann insanely suggested - doesn't really exist without declaring Martial Law and seizing the assets of BP and all the other ships involved - we'd have to have the Coast Guard and Navy become PIRATES in international waters. And after that the really bad stuff happens, we'd have to start placing the workers into Forced Labor without compensation. Nobody wants to see anything like that happen.
This isn't Obama's problem to fix, not all by himself. He doesn't have that kind of authority over private companies, but Congress could create it with some amendments to the Clean Water Act to allow this kind of Ad Hoc Clean-Up Crew Contracting and Billing to ensure BP stays on the hook, but not in the driver's seat.
Thom Hartman vs Mark William's head of the Tea Party Express -- I understand and concur that people sometimes throw out the "Racist" accusation too quickly and too blithely - but in this case, It Fits.
Thom does a great job in the segment, and I listen to him frequently so this is pretty much par on course, but this guy Mark Williams actually says that Muslim's are "Animals" in order to justify his bigotry against almost 1 Billion - that's Billion with a "B" - 1 Billion Muslims around the world.
Williams: We Are at war with Islam!
Thom: Mark That is obscene
Yeah, it's clear that this Wiliam's guy is a charmer - here's some more background on this guy.
Days after writing that Muslims worship "the terrorists' monkey god," embattled Tea Party leader Mark Williams apologized for his insensitivity - to Hindus.
"In the course of the article I described the 'god' worshiped by terrorists as 'a monkey god.' I was wrong and that was offensive. I owe an apology to millions of Hindus who worship Lord Hanuman, an actual Monkey God," Williams wrote Wednesday night.
The original blog post equated the proposed Mosque adjacent to Ground Zero to a monument to the 9/11 terrorists.
Williams, chairman of the Tea Party Express and frequent CNN contributor, was denounced by Muslim leaders and politicians like Mayor Bloomberg for the "appalling" comment.
Williams did not apologize to Muslims in the new blog post. Instead, he used the apology to Hundus as another way to attack Muslims.
Catch the little slight of hand there? He calls Muslims "Worshippers of a Monkey God", then when caught turns around an apologies to the Monkey God for being falsely associated with those Muslim Animals.
This man is a disgrace, and he RUNS THE TEA PARTY EXPRESS!
He's not some Left-wing Plant that just showed up with a Nazi-Flag on your shirt -- Nope, not even close - he Runs the Show.
Here's William's on the Dylan Ratigan Show.
Mark, how do you draw the bright line between the very admirable and understandable principles that are advocated by so many....and the more radical views and hide if you will inside the tea party umbrella?
Williams: That’s real simple. There’s wingnuts and there’s normal people...
Ratigan: It’s not that simple...
{}
What confuses me about the tea party, is the tea parties willingness to accept the wingnuts as you put it
Williams: So it’s our fault that they are nuts?
Ratigan: You have not shamed them Mark....Do you accept racists and Nazis in the tea parties?
Williams: Here at Sacramento...
Ratigan: I’m asking you a question my man, do you want to have a conversation or do you want to come on my TV show and do a commercial for yourself?
Ratigan walks off camera.
Williams: I’m answering the question. We have a women here from a local NBC affiliate who after an anti-Semitic rant at Sac State was promoted from reporter to anchor does that make NBC, does that make you an anti-Semitic?
Ratigan: Mark, do I run NBC? Are you a guest on my show? Do you have any intention of answering any of my questions because I don’t want to continue to fool with this. You’re wasting valuable oxygen. Can we please cut off this man’s microphone, He has no interest in answering my questions, Mark a pleasure. Actually not really a pleasure. It was offensive, you’re offensive. Your treatment of my show as a vehicle to spread your propaganda, ignore my questions, offensive and an indication of what is wrong with the dialogue in this country. Period. Not to mention that a group that would accept Nazis and racists.
I take no pleasure in this, in propagating the ravings of this nutball - but people need to be aware, including legitimate Tea Party People who would like to keep government from becoming overbearing, I don't want to an over intrusive government either - NOBODY DOES - the real question though is how much of this anti-government anger is really driven by people who think they have a "God Given Right to their Bigotry" - like say, Rand Paul? How many people want a Government so small, it can be Drowned in the Gulf!, and ultimately take much of the rest of America with it?
We should all want better government, fair government and just government - not simply weak, ineffective that can't protect of from predatory individuals or predatory greedy corporations.
People going to the ballot box today, need to be aware of who and what they're truly voting for when they support the so-called "Tea Party".
Ok, maybe not Mars - some other world, like Titan or maybe Wyoming, either way she's not from This Planet.
After Liz directly Slams Dailykos for spreading a rumor that "George Bush broke up Al and Tipper" (a claim that can be easily disproven as bogus and inane with a simple search) - the fireworks really start:
Huff vs Liz - Round One: DING!
HUFFINGTON: Right here, we have the poster child of Bush-Cheney crony capitalism. Halliburton involved in this, and we haven’t said about that. They after all were responsible for cementing the well. Here’s Halliburton, after it defrauded the American taxpayer hundreds of millions of dollars –
CHENEY: Arianna, I don’t know what planet you live on, but that’s not –
HUFFINGTON: — it’s involved again. I’m living on this planet. ... Halliburton was involved in this. How can you say it is not?
TAPPER: Well, Halliburton was cementing the pipe.
HUFFINGTON: How can you say Halliburton has no relationship?
CHENEY: Her assertion that Halliburton defrauded the U.S. government –
HUFFINGTON: It did. It did.
CHENEY: It was Bush-Cheney cronyism is the left talking point –
HUFFINGTON: It was — hundreds of millions of dollars in Iraq.
CHENEY: Arianna, is absolutely not true. It is absolutely not true.
Despite Liz Cheney's extra-terrestrial flights, the Wall Street Journal has this to say about Halliburton's involvment in the BP Disaster.
An oil-drilling procedure called cementing is coming under scrutiny as a possible cause of the explosion on the Deepwater Horizon rig in the Gulf of Mexico that has led to one of the biggest oil spills in U.S. history, drilling experts said Thursday. [...]
The scrutiny on cementing will focus attention on Halliburton Co., the oilfield-services firm that was handling the cementing process on the rig, which burned and sank last week. The disaster, which killed 11, has left a gusher of oil streaming into the Gulf from a mile under the surface. ... According to Transocean Ltd., the operator of the drilling rig, Halliburton had finished cementing the 18,000-foot well shortly before the explosion.
The other issue with Ms. Cheney objects to is the assertion that Halliburton "Defrauded the Government" in Iraq. Well to be far more fair to Ms. Cheney than she would certainly be with Arriana or Dailykos - she's half right. It wasn't just Halliburton that defrauded the government, it was also Halliburton's Subsidiary KBR.
Second of all, Halliburton became notorious for its malfeasance in Iraq. It allegedly tried to cover up the gang rape of one of its contractors, knowingly exposed U.S. troops to deadly toxins, and ignored warnings of unsafe electrical wiring that led to the death of U.S. soldiers. In 2007, federal auditors told the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform that the government had wasted $10 billion on “overpriced contracts or undocumented costs.” Of that amount, $2.7 billion was charged by Halliburton.
See, Arriana was wrong there - she only said Halliburton defrauded the government for "hundreds of millions" when in fact - It Was $BILLIONS!
Now technically Halliburton began selling off it's minority shares in KBR in 2006 and some of the more eggregious actions by KBR didn't occur until after that - but the report from the House Auditors, wasn't directed at only KBR, it was Halliburton too.
The larger claim, that this explosion was the result of corporate malfeasance coupled with regulator paralysis - is also true. via - ahem - Huffpo
Both companies failed to provide a competent crew, failed to properly supervise its employees and failed to provide Rushto with a safe place to work, according to the complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. The lawsuit also names oil-services giant Halliburton as a defendant, claiming that the company "prior to the explosion, was engaged in cementing operations of the well and well cap and, upon information and belief, improperly and negligently performed these duties, which was a cause of the explosion."
Yeah, and who was doing the cementing again?
Must have been Martians.
For the record I have no knowledge or comments about George Bush being involved in Tipper and Al's breakup - other than if Liz Cheney wants us to think she actually read Dailykos I've got this drilling platform off the coast of Louisiana to sell, that's available for Absolute Rock Bottom prices...
It's been three days since former President George W. Bush casually admitted that he had authorized the water-boarding of Khallid Sheihk Mohammad, and although Huffpo claims there's been outrage - from my perspective America's collective response has been - "Ho Hum, what else is new? - Daddy, you plug that hole yet?
Bush: We Water-boarded Khallid Sheik Mohammad, I'd do it again to save lives.
Sad to say Mr. Ex-President, according to all the available evidence - Water-Boarding KSM didn't save anyone.
Not one.
In 2004, just two years after Bush's Controversial "Harsh Interrogation Program" the CIA's Own Inspector General found that it was both ineffective and illegal.
WASHINGTON — The CIA inspector general in 2004 found that there was no conclusive proof that waterboarding or other harsh interrogation techniques helped the Bush administration thwart any "specific imminent attacks," according to recently declassified Justice Department memos.
That undercuts assertions by former vice president Dick Cheney and other former Bush administration officials that the use of harsh interrogation tactics including waterboarding, which is widely considered torture, was justified because it headed off terrorist attacks.
Bush himself actually shut his program down in 2004 after this report was issued, so why's he blathering now about "He'd do it again - to save lives"?
It didn't save any then, it wouldn't save any now - quite the opposite.
Bush's FBI Director, who ought to know if any lives were saved by the use of harsh techniques, says - that didn't happen.
Mueller: I don't believe it has been the case (that Harsh Tactics have saved lives)
So where are the saved lives George?
As Keith correctly points out, Water-boarding has been a War Crime for over half a century going back as far as the Spanish American War. General Washington banned tortured during the Revolutionary War. The U.S. Prosecuted and executed Japanese Soldiers who Water-Boarded our troops in WWII. The U.S. Court Martialed this soldier for participating in the Water-Boarding of a suspected VietCong member during the Vietnam Conflict.
During the 80's, under President Reagan a Texas Sherrif was prosecuted for water-boarding a suspect. Even recently there is a trial - sadly only a civil case - over a Police Lt. who tortured and gained false confessions from over a 100 Suspects over the course of 2 decades.
Water-boarding has always been a crime, going all the way back to beginning of this nation - IT. IS. UNAMERICAN! When the HELL did that change?
Keith with Air Force Interrogator "Matthew Alexander"
Here's a excerpt from Matthew Alexanders Wapo Op-ed on torture.
as a Special Operations pilot flying helicopters, saw combat in Bosnia and Kosovo, became an Air Force counterintelligence agent, then volunteered to go to Iraq to work as a senior interrogator. What I saw in Iraq still rattles me -- both because it betrays our traditions and because it just doesn't work.
Torture and abuse are against my moral fabric. The cliche still bears repeating: Such outrages are inconsistent with American principles. And then there's the pragmatic side: Torture and. Our policy of torture was directly and swiftly recruiting fighters for al-Qaeda in Iraq. The large majority of suicide bombings in Iraq are still carried out by these foreigners. They are also involved in most of the attacks on U.S. and coalition forces in Iraq. It's no exaggeration to say that at least half of our losses and casualties in that country have come at the hands of foreigners who joined the fray because of our program of detainee abuse.
KSM's sworn testimony during his Military Commission was that he lied to us while undergoing harsh tactics - "I Make Up Stories".
As for K.S.M. himself, who (as Jane Mayer writes) was waterboarded, reportedly hung for hours on end from his wrists, beaten, and subjected to other agonies for weeks, Bush said he provided "many details of other plots to kill innocent Americans." K.S.M. was certainly knowledgeable. It would be surprising if he gave up nothing of value. But according to a former senior C.I.A. official, who read all the interrogation reports on K.S.M., "90 percent of it was total fucking bullshit." A former Pentagon analyst adds: "K.S.M. produced no actionable intelligence. He was trying to tell us how stupid we were."
Yeah, and apparently you guys were pretty fucking stupid.
KSM gave us Bupkis. Not only had the Library Tower plot already been foiled long before KSM was even captured - I think i've notice we still haven't caught Bin Laden! Weren't he and KSM like BFF's?
It's interesting that Bush's justifies the torture of KSM, but not that of Abu Zubaydah particularly since his mistreatment took place months before the OIC memos providing quasi-legal justification for it. And the fact is that according to FBI Agent Ali Soufan, Zubaydah had given us plenty of information, including confirming KSM's identity withou being mistreated, he just wasn't saying what the Bush Administration wanted to hear - "How was Saddam connected to 9-11?"
Officials who analyzed Abu Zubaydah’s interrogation reports say that the reports were afforded the highest value within the Bush administration not because of the many American lives they were going to save but because they could be cited repeatedly against those who doubted the wisdom of ousting Saddam by force.
"We didn’t know he’d been waterboarded and tortured when we did that analysis, and the reports were marked as credible as they could be," the former Pentagon analyst tells me. "The White House knew he’d been tortured. I didn’t, though I was supposed to be evaluating that intelligence." To draw conclusions about the importance of what Abu Zubaydah said without knowing this crucial piece of the background nullified the value of his work. "It seems to me they were using torture to achieve a political objective. I cannot believe that the president and vice president did not know who was being waterboarded, and what was being given up."
This is where the true outrage should stem, the fact that techniques authorized by Bush and Cheney very directly led to the unwarranted death of thousands of U.S. Troops by Emboldening and Enraging the Enemy with images like those from Abu Ghraib.
If fact, you can blame All U.S. Casualties in Iraq on Torture, since at least 1/3rd of the information the Bush Administration used to justify this War - and put on display in front of the United Nations, were produced by either Torture or outright lies.
Specifically I mean the Torture of Ibn Sheik al-Libi, something else that Bush clearly doesn't take pride and credit for in "saving lives" because It Didn't. After he was buried alive by Egyptian forces, al-Libi told us that Saddam's forces had trained members of Al-Qeada on use of Chemical Weapons.
THAT WAS A LIE. (Remember "I make up stories...")
According to the ABC News report, one other detainee who was waterboarded was Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, the director of the Khaldan training camp in Afghanistan, who was captured in November 2001. His current whereabouts are unknown, although there are suspicions that he was finally delivered to the Libyan government. Having slipped off the radar, the government clearly does not want his case revived, not only because it may have to explain what has happened to him, but also because, as a result of the application of "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques," al-Libi claimed that Saddam Hussein had offered to train two al-Qaeda operatives in the use of chemical and biological weapons.
Al-Libi's "confession" led to President Bush declaring, in October 2002, "Iraq has trained al-Qaeda members in bomb making and poisons and gases," and his claims were, notoriously, included in Colin Powell's speech to the UN Security Council on February 5, 2003. The claims were of course, groundless, and were recanted by al-Libi in January 2004, but it took Dan Cloonan, a veteran FBI interrogator, who was resolutely opposed to the use of torture, to explain why they should never have been believed in the first place.
How many lives did that Save, George?
The other two primary sources for the Iraq invasion were a known liar, code-named "Curveball" who gave us information about mobile labs which didn't exist, and a forgery of a receipt from Niger which claimed Iraq had recently purchased (not just attempted but actually possessed) tons of yellowcake uranium ore.
Yet, again - Both were LiES.
When Ambassador Joe Wilson attempted to expose the Yellowcake Lie, we all saw what length's the Bush Administration, with Cheney in the lead, went to to discredit him - including revealing the identity of an active covert CIA operative - Valerie Plame-Wilson.
It's been little reported, but there is currently no doubt the Bush was Directly informed by Saddam's own Head of intelligence that Iraq's WMD's had been destroyed in 1991, yet rather than take heed of this information the Bush Administration had this Iraqi Officer produce a forged letter claiming that Saddam's forces had Trained some of the 9-11 Hijackers.
Again - THAT WAS A LIE.
Suskind says he spoke on the record with U.S. intelligence officials who stated that Bush was informed unequivocally in January 2003 that Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction. Nonetheless, his book relates, Bush decided to invade Iraq three months later — with the forged letter from the head of Iraqi intelligence to Saddam bolstering the U.S. rationale to go into war.
,,,
Suskind writes: "The White House had concocted a fake letter from Habbush to Saddam, backdated to July 1, 2001. It said that 9/11 ringleader Mohammed Atta had actually trained for his mission in Iraq — thus showing, finally, that there was an operation link between Saddam and al-Qaeda, something the Vice President's office had been pressing CIA to prove since 9/11 as a justification to invade."
He continues: "A handwritten letter, with Habbush's name on it, would be fashioned by CIA and then hand-carried by a CIA agent to Baghdad for dissemination."
Lastly, to yet again justify their baseless invasion and attack on Iraq, Dick Cheney suggested that an Iraqi captive be Water-boarded - even though he was already co-operating - and was VERY CLEARLY PROTECTED BY GENEVA as an enemy solder, not a "Unlaawful Combatant" - he still hadn't told us How Saddam Pulled off 9-11!.
Pardon the poor audio.
There were no WMD's in Iraq - not anymore. Bush was told this two months before he decided to invade - and invaded anyway.
There were NO ACTIVE LINKS, between Saddam and al Qeada - all suggests that there were were either lies generated by torture or forgeries.
Here we have a clear pattern using the techniques created by the Red Chinese to create false confessions for propaganda purposes being used over and over and over again - with and without legal wrangling - to justify the Bush Administrations blood lust again Saddam and misdirected guilt for not paying attention to Osama Bin Laden when everyone - Bill Clinton, Sandy Berger, Richard Clarke and even George Tenet - said that al Qaeda would be the Bush Administration's Number one Priority.
A priority in which they failed, utterly, completely.
More Blood On Bush's hands.
Maybe it's the constant insane sadistic prattling of Liz Cheney and Marc Thieesen, maybe it's acute Jack Bauer poisoning - but after all these lives have been literally thrown away over lies, it's simply amazing that Bush smugly retorts "He'd do it all again...to save lives"
And America shrugs...
8,000 Dead on YOUR Watch Mr. President, ON YOUR WATCH!
Whose life did you save George, besides your own political life?
"He'd do it again.. " and America yawns....
War Crimes have no Statute of Limitations.
Is America's indifference a greater indictment of Bush and his campaign to sanitize evil, or of us?
Vyan
Update: It should be noted that Eric Holder has indeed selected Special Prosecutor John Durham to look into this issue. Exactly how far up or down the chain of command he will take this issue remains in question, but it is being addressed legally.
Starting in January of 2002 Bush began to preemptively immunize himself from prosecution under 18 USC 2441 (the War Crimes Act) by issuing executive orders which excepted so-called "enemy Combatants" from Geneva protections (and hence War Crimes protection) on the advice of Alberto Gonzales. I personally don't think that action was legal since the President doesn't make law, congress does - but it did begin a clear pattern of conspiracy to Torture even before the first high-value detainee Zubaydah was even captured in March of that year. These were followed by the Yoo Memos in August after complaints by the FBI and DOJ attorneys about Zubaydah's handling using SERE techniques by contractors. One problem with the Bush defense here is that Yoo didn't have the authority to issue those memos, Jay Bybee did - and another is that the separate Torture Statute (18 USC 2340) with it's own conspiracy section wasn't papered over until Jay Bybee determined that it required "near organ failure or death" for any treatment to be torture when he finally did issue a memo of his own.
This leaves a window from March to August - while Zubaydah was being treated using SERE-like tactics where the Torture Statue (2340) could apply even if Bush's memos had blocked Geneva. This is also why Bush talks about KSM's treatment openly, which didn't occur until later after all this legal cover was established, but not Zubaydah. It may also be why the tapes of Zubaydaah's interrogation were illegally destroyed. Bush also doesn't talk about Jose Padilla who was a U.S. Citizen and clearly protected by U.S. Law, not just Geneva. But a third problem arises, these weren't the only people subjected to this treatment and several of them even went beyond the "Bybee Standard" of protection - They died under Torture
So read several of the 44 US military autopsy reports on the ACLU website -evidence of extensive abuse of US detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan 2002 through 2004. Anthony Romero, Executive Director of ACLU stated, "There is no question that US interrogations have resulted in deaths." ACLU attorney Amrit Sing adds, "These documents present irrefutable evidence that US operatives tortured detainees to death during interrogations."
Conspiracy under both 2441 and 2340 when the subject dies, can lead to the Death Penalty. These cases are the ones most likely to be looked at by Durham, where interrogators went far outside even the framework provided by Gonzales, Yoo and Bybee - but the problem stems from the framework itself, not the act of a "few individuals".
The program was essentially shutdown after criticism from the CIA Inspector Generals Report in 2005, the Yoo/Bybee memos were later rescinded by Bradbury. Then the rest of Bush's erector set of memo's were ruled invalid by Hamdan v Rumfeld in 2006 which re-established Geneva even for Enemy Combatants. Bush then attempted to paper this over with the Military Commissions Act, which stripped Habeus protection from detainees, continued to allow coerced confessions as admissible. The torture program was Official over, but Bush still wanted access to the ill-gained "fruits" without having to admit they were illegal methods in the first place.
In 2007, despite Hamdan and the 2005 Detainee Treatment Act - after fierce urging by Cheney, Bush re-instituted parts of the program (w/o water-boarding), in clear violation of the law. Not only would he do it again - He DID it again.
