Public to White House: Move on; Pentagon prepares to release more torture photos
Results from the latest Rasmussen poll show a public more in tune with Dick Cheney than George Soros:
Fifty-eight percent (58%) believe the Obama administration’s recent release of CIA memos about the harsh interrogation methods used on terrorism suspects endangers the national security of the United States. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 28% believe the release of the memos helps America’s image abroad.
Thirty-seven percent (37%) of voters now believe the U.S. legal system worries too much about protecting individual rights when national security is at stake. But 21% say the legal system is too concerned about protecting national security. Thirty-three percent (33%) say the balance between the two is about right.
This reflects a significant shift over the past couple of years. In several surveys conducted during 2008, Americans were fairly evenly divided as to whether our legal system worried too much about individual rights or too much about protecting national security…
…Forty-six percent (46%) of voters disagree with Obama’s decision to close the prison camp for terrorism suspects at the Guantanamo Naval Base in Cuba, while 36% agree with the president’s action. Support for the decision has fallen since the president announced it in January.
Thus, Obama has backtracked on his openness to a Truth Commission. Another day, another flip-flop.
Nancy Pelosi prevaricates.
But, oh, Chinese Gitmo detainees may be coming to a neighborhood near you!
For the first time since taking office, President Barack Obama will see his Guantanamo policy tested before the US Supreme Court after 14 Chinese Uighurs detained without charge lodged a petition for their release.
The nine justices will decide this summer whether to hear the case that was filed Monday by the men asking the country’s high court to lift a bar imposed on their release by a federal court of appeals.
The 14, members of the predominantly Muslim and Turkic-speaking Uighur minority who were captured in Afghanistan in late 2001, have been cleared of accusations that they were “enemy combatants,” but legal wrangling over their fate continues.
The case has become a major political headache for the Obama administration, which has sought to avoid a major diplomatic bust-up with China at the same time as unpicking detention policies of the preceding administration of president George W. Bush.
Should the court opt to hear the case it could find itself embroiled in the establishment of new rules governing the detention of terror suspects, analysts say…
…The Defense Department and the State Department have tried unsuccessfully for several years to arrange the transfer of the Uighurs to a third country, saying they face the risk of persecution if they return to China.
The Obama administration has said it “cannot imagine” sending the inmates back to China.
Beijing regards the men as “Chinese terrorists.”
Baker Manning said a diplomatic solution could be found “for the vast majority” of Guantanamo detainees, but that the case of the Uighurs is “highly political.”
“China made clear to any country in the world that it would not be in their interest to take these men,” she said. “China has enormous diplomatic pressure on all other countries.”
Should the court reverse the lower court’s February decision and order the Uighurs freed, a US source speaking on the condition of anonymity said there was a possibility that they could be released in the US capital.
“This is now President Obama’s Guantanamo,” said Emi McLean, an attorney at the Center for Constitutional Rights, evoking US courts’ repudiation of Bush’s policy on the “war on terror” detention center three times in recent years.
“If (Obama) is truly committed to closing the detention center, these men should be on a plane to restart their lives in the United States.”
Montana, here they come?
***
Meanwhile, brace for this:
The Pentagon on Thursday agreed to release photos showing the treatment of prisoners in Afghanistan and Iraq, images that the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) says prove that detainee abuse was widespread during the Bush administration.
In a letter to the U.S. District Court Judge Alvin Hellerstein, Acting U.S. Attorney Lev Dassin said the Defense Department will release photos in response to a lawsuit filed by the ACLU in 2004. Officials are processing 44 photos plus “a substantial number of other images,” and will release them on May 28.
The ACLU had made a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to release the photos, and filed the lawsuit when it was denied by the Bush administration. A 2006 court ruling ordered 21 photos of prisoner treatment in Afghanistan and Iraq released, and the U.S. Court of Appeals last September upheld that ruling.
The Pentagon will not appeal the case to the Supreme Court, Dassin said in the letter.
Wonder if Rosa Brooks will be involved.
***
Ed Morrissey on the White House admission that the release of the OLC memos was an explicitly political response to Dick Cheney:
Instead of the headlines being about what the Bush administration sanctioned, they became about Nancy Pelosi’s denial and then non-denial of her knowledge on waterboarding interrogations, the success of the interrogations in preventing an attack, and Obama’s lack of testicular fortitude in sticking with his original position to let sleeping dogs lie. Small wonder that he began backtracking in earnest yesterday when meeting with Congressional leaders.
Now we have confirmation that Obama planned this all along as a political attack against a man who hardly matters on the national political scene any longer – or at least he didn’t until Obama decided to pick a fight with him. Just as with his strange attack on Rush Limbaugh, all it did was elevate his opponent and diminish himself.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Eric Holder: Seriously, We’re Going to Close Gitmo Pretty Soon
September 20, 2011 04:07 PM by Doug Powers
40 CommentsCharges to be re-filed against KSM and Company
May 30, 2011 11:10 PM by Michelle Malkin
53 CommentsWaPo: Family Visitations For Gitmo Detainees Under Consideration
May 12, 2011 04:08 PM by Doug Powers
105 CommentsWaterboarding Point/Counterpoint: National Security Advisor vs. CIA Director vs. Attorney General
May 3, 2011 08:27 PM by Doug Powers
48 CommentsThe suicide stunts at Gitmo revisited
April 25, 2011 10:12 AM by Michelle Malkin
117 CommentsObama administration retreats (again) on Khalid Sheikh Mohammed civilian trial; Holder blames Congress
April 4, 2011 11:50 AM by Michelle Malkin
129 CommentsOmar Khadr: Guilty, guilty, guilty, guilty, guilty
October 25, 2010 10:16 AM by Michelle Malkin
17 CommentsGitmo Horrors Continue: Detainees Limited to One Ice Cream
September 26, 2010 10:21 PM by Doug Powers
48 Comments
Holder on hot seat at Senate Judiciary Committee
April 14, 2010 10:42 AM by Michelle Malkin
27 Comments
Babalu Blog
» Greece is BurningPatterico
» NYT hails the safety net: Poor hardest hitDaily Caller
» Inside Media Matters: Sources, memos reveal erratic behavior, close coordination with White House and news organizationsNice Deb
» Former DEA Chief Tells Fox News: 3 Other Federal Agencies Knew About Operation ‘Fast and Furious’AmSpecBlog
» Weekend Political Wrap-UpJustOneMinute
» I Guess I'm Still Stuck On StupidThe Hill
» Rep. Ron Paul not conceding Maine vote
WSJ Online article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124044375842145565.html
Thank you for the response.
My point was that it was acceptable for Pres Bush to not pursue the escaping Taliban and Al Qaeda from Afghanistan to Pakistan and take very little heat from the ‘right’. While at the same time, the ‘right’ took then Sen Obama to task for saying the Taliban and Al Qaeda should be pursued into Pakistan. Well, Obama said we should ‘act’ when others would not, or could not, when we could take them out.
My point is about consistentcy.
Fair enough, and I agree. Pres Bush made a promise to bring justice to terrorists and their supporters. He made no caveats or qualifications. In fact he said, “If a country is too timid to act, we will.” Unfortunately he did not follow through.
I am going with what he said during the campaign, and which he took a great deal of heat for, that we should ‘act’ to get those who perpertraited Sept 11, no matter where they are.
[Note: I am ignoring the dog comment. LOL.]
As for the specifics of these recent events I am using history as a guide. Pres Obama was fairly mum on dealing with the pirates, yet he quietly put the means in place that resulted in the successful release of the highjacked Captain. And, all the while there were those nipping and yakking like chihuahuas on sugar highs at his ankles, say something, do something, etc. Yes, ask the questions, avoid assigning motive and idle speculation. It has been a day, I suggest giving it time.
Neither am I, and to date, neither has Pres Obama. And, he has he has never said so in the campaign. Just ‘act’ and that has many connotations.
Understood. And, I agree a public statement can be useful. Maybe not Pres Obama himself, but the Sec State or Sec Def could say say something. Heck, even if they don’t, then the Press Sec could acknowledge what is happening and that the situation is being monitored and we are working with the Pakistani Gov.
I prefer to avoid assigning motive and idle speculation, and since Pres Obama, or anyone in his administration, has said nothing, how could it possibly be obfuscation?
My veiw based on how he handled the pirates is that he practices ‘ready . . . aim . . . fire’ vice ‘ready . . . fire . . . aim’.
As for experience, albeit a good thing, I much prefer judgement.
I was unaware that Pres Obama is taking orders from George Soros, on this issue, or any other. Please, provide a link.
Great question…
Hell, I’d settle for an annual showing of the entire sequence of Sept. 11, 12, 13, and 14.
People have forgotten, which is nothing short of amazing to me.
Why don’t we just ship them back to Afghanastan?? That is where we found them, right?????? Let them find their way home from there. If they decide to fight again, shoot the bastards. Why is this so difficult to figure out????
MNUSMCDavid said (#85):
This has never been the position of the United States government. Here’s Reagan:
Here’s history (also here):
Flyoverman said (#87):
Ask again. If there’s a point, I’ll answer.
Yes. Did Johnson participate in the lie or was he a victim of it? It’s late, but better late than never.
They were tortured. Maybe you saw the movie Doctor Strangelove, where getting our hair mussed meant millions dead in a nuclear war with the Russians.
I believe BHO and his ‘people’ want chaos. I believe he wants us to be severely attacked. That way, in all our panic, he can devise more ways to take away more freedoms and crush his dissenters. While typing that, I felt like a lunatic for thinking that way. I’ve never mistrusted a president as much as I mistrust this man. (I never felt Clinton wanted harm to come to this country.)
Where is the good in this man?
Ok, I’ll get over it…heading to the Royals – Tigers game…maybe 1$ hotdogs will cheer me up….
First, nothing we’ve done according to policy is “torture”.
The word has a meaning, and what we are discussing does not qualify.
Second, “…the Convention establish a regime for international cooperation in the criminal prosecution of torturers relying on so-called “universal jurisdiction.” Each State Party is required either to prosecute torturers who are found in its territory or to extradite them to other countries for prosecution”.
Ewww…there’s a Convention…???
See, any Convention you can name does not cover these guys…
who are analogous to PIRATES.
Pirates do not have a claim to due process.
We might choose to give it to them…as we have to these PIRATES we call Jadhidiis…but there is nothing to require it.
Ummm…movie! Having a little trouble with your fantasy versus reality boundary…???
They have wonderful meds for you now.
You have to be alive for them to work, though.
So, you might want to express a little gratitude for the people who have kept your sorry…well, you know…alive.
And this is useful (productive) how?
For fairness and balance, let’s see some of the beheading videos put up on the internet by the Jihadis.
Now there’s an example of real torture.
Remember the AQ “how-to” manual on how to treat fellow Muslims…or anyone else who fell into their hands?
Lesse, electric drills, heating irons, power saws, your basic pliers, etc., etc., etc….
Where is the ACLU on Obama ordering the execution of 3 black teenage thiefs?
Where is the ACLU on Obama ordering the execution of 3 black teenage
thiefsvolunteer coast guardsmen?Data well worth repeating.
oops…. I forget my pc language…
PLUS
EQUALS seven in ten Americans either are comfortable with the balance struck by Bush, or would like to see the balance shift to greater security.
Pretty strong repudiation of MOOOO veon
This was an excellant post. Didn’t realize that Pres Reagan had said anything about torture, especially that he believed torturers should be brought to justice.
MoveOn.org/Media Matters/Huff’nPuff Post/Soros/etc are wrong in thinking they understand where Americans stand on this issue, and they know it. That’s why they fight so hard to distort and misrepresent the truth.
It wasn’t long ago that a huge uproar was made over Valerie Plame’s alleged cover being blown, that she was in danger because it was publicly revealed that she worked at a desk at the CIA and was once a spy. But now there are untold numbers of intelligence workers and advisors (even law professors who have merely written opinions that favored harsh interrogation of enemies of the U.S.) who now stand to incur the high-profile wrath of Obama and his Department of Justice. I guess classified status only deserves protection if you’re working to undermine, not protect, the United States. Anyway, my guess is we sure won’t hear Ms. Plame speaking out against this latest Obamatrocity, even though it greatly dwarfs what supposedly happened to her.
Very true, gco…
Anybody who’s ever seen the traffic jams into and out of CIA Langley each week day, knows just how “covert” the liar Plame was.
If a terrorist wanted to pot her, all they would have to do is follow her home one day.
That was one of the most amazing, long-standing lies told by the Left in many years.
How to piss off Soro’s and Obambi with heart felt feelings to the working class of America. It ain’t much but it will do. Although your ignorant gutless Harvard graduates will bring us down in the long run, its still worth cherishing at this point before Islamification.
http://www.fin.gc.ca/n08/09-038-eng.asp
Shazaam…who knew Reagan was a nice guy…
Answer: most of us… Are you just now catching up?
But, of course, Reagan was using the term “torture” correctly, as opposed to lgm, who includes finger-nail on the chalk-board as “heinous conduct”.
Also, the post citing to McCain…bogus.
http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2009/04/whats-interesting-is-that-begala-is-smart-enough-to-know-this-is-phony.html
That is, unless you can cite to a single Japanese soldier executed for water torture.
Besides which, they were ACTUALLY torturing POWs…as distinct from Jihadii pirates.
This is just something to distract you from swine flu brought in by illegal aliens.
These are Terrorists not uniformed soldiers whom have some degree of honor in most armies. Terrorists go after intentionally civilians and deserve what ever comes of them, if they get some water up the nose big whoop dee doo. All the trolls and libtards have forgotten our fellow Americans that lost their lives on 9/11. shame on you.
Ask Daniel Pearl if he would take water boarding over the treatment he received. oh wait they beheaded him and would do the same to you, your wife, kids, couisins and uncles. The PC, Libs and their mamby pamby ways make me sick and have no concept of history.
Odopey and his entire admin is a joke, a very dangerous joke.
The outrage was that Obama was showing how inexperienced and uncaring he is about national security. You do not broadcast your hand to your enemies. Bush said he was not going to pursue, then later the media, who also have no concern for security let out that drone attacks were going on across the Pakistani border. The deal is the right gets this, the left either does not or has very evil designs on America.
Talk is cheap.
A lone Senator…with clear ambitions and nothing on the line…is one of the very cheapest talkers.
Implicit in his statement was the lie that we were not going after AQ everywhere we could without alienating the closest thing we had to an ally in that region.
Bush, with “skin in the game” and the weight of defending the nation, was weighing very delicate issues, and standing to account for every decision.
Obama has shown a wonderful (terrifying) capacity for talk.
Sorry…had to pass this along….
Three Californian surgeons were playing golf together and discussing surgeries they had performed. One of them said, “I’m the best surgeon in California. In my favorite case, a concert pianist lost sever fingers in an accident, I reattached them, and 8 months later he performed a private concert for the Queen of England.”
The second surgeon said, “That’s nothing. A young man lost an arm and both legs in an accident, I reattached them and two years later he won a gold medal in track and field events at the Olympics.”
The third surgeon said, “You guys are amateurs. Several years ago a woman was high on cocaine and marijuana and she rode a horse head-on into a train traveling 80 miles an hour. All I had left to work with was the woman’s hair and the horse’s ass. I was able to put them together and now she’s Speaker of the House.”
This will give you an idea of the despicable crap that flows freely from any organization…including those that once were held in some esteem by the American people…that falls under the thrall of leftists.
http://www.stillwater-newspress.com/archivesearch/local_story_108002241.html
They just make this bilge up, like the “torture” allegations.
Here’s a fact: in almost any penitentiary in the U.S., people are exposed to treatment far worse than any Jihadii in American custody.
Good grief! That is a classic straw man debating obsfucation and redirection to score minimal points. I expect more from you. I made no comment about Pres Reagan, who certainly was a decent person, so why would you suggest I was ‘just catching up’.
Pres Reagan could have said kiwis, the fruit, are a great source of vitamins and energy. I could have said the same thing. Didn’t realize that Pres Reagan had said anything about
torturekiwis, especially that he believedtorturerskiwis shouldbe brought to justiceconsidered a source of nutrients.Go ahead, twist and spin that into me not thinking Pres Reagan was a nice guy.
As for not being able to name a single Japanese who was convicted and sentenced to death for ‘only’ water boarding, that is yet another straw man and false arguement.
I can’t name anyone who lynched a horse thief at the turn of the last century, but that does not mean lynching did not occur. Does it?
Certainly those Japanese who were convicted and sentenced were charged with several crimes, a concert of offenses, of which waterboarding was one.
Did we go into Iraq for only one reason? No, it was a concert of reasons.
A murdering rapist who burned the body of their victim, but first waterboarded them, is convicted and sentenced to death. Go ahead, make an arguement to minimize the rape, the arson, or the waterboarding. Is the punishment we deliver as a civil society only for the murder? Do the additional aggravating circumstances not matter?
Several questions, and I await your answers, or more likely another straw man arguement.
lgm,
I’ll try and find the Global Warming questions.
In terms of torture, based on your definition of it, every US service person who has gone through survival school that all pilots and air crews must pass is “torture.” Talk to my brother sometime. I served with pilots. They were treated worse than the Gitmo guys.
Torture is best described in “POW:The American Prisoner of War Experience in Vietnam.” Also, the book “Spetsnaz.”
In the book, “Spetsnatz,” a former Spetsnaz soldier told the author, “You think you cannot be broken? Imagine having your mouth wedged open with a strong stick. Then immagine one of those wood working files being taken to your teeth. NO ONE resists long when that’s done.”
lgm, that’s torture.
It is unfortunate that you did not read and possibly comprehend all of my post # 102.
I dislike being placed in the position to explain Pres Obama, because it looks like I am defending him.
He said no more than Pres Bush, go after the terrorists, without caveat or qualification. At the time then Sen Obama said what he did, was there any one unaware of where the terrorists were?
Of course, you do not ‘broadcast your hand to your enemies’ and Obama did not, anymore than Pres Bush did when he said to Afghanistan in 2001, give up Al Qaeda or we’re coming in.
And what was your position on how Obama was handling the Pirate situation? Did you want him to publicly say something? Ummmm, broadcast his hand to the enemy? My hope is that you were consistent. Were you?
Well, the media is the media, and I offer no explanation for them, except to say that the Pakistani press also reported the actions of the drones. I suppose that information was going to get out one way or another.
And, as for who gets what, that is only part of the question. More of the question is HOW do we best achieve our goals?
There is more than one way to skin a cat, and what we have been doing has been less than effective.
I don’t need to. The context of your comment is evident for anyone to see. It speaks for itself.
Now, there is a red herring. There are historical documents…volumes…that detail the after-war prosecution of war criminals in Japan and Germany. If you have an example of a Japanese soldier who was prosecuted for waterboarding, put it up. Don’t be lazy.
Otherwise, it is just more leftist BS. A naked assertion without substance.
And I noted with interest that you avoid the issue of the status of the American prisoners. That is also telling.
The whole argument you make hinges on a moral and legal equivalence between POWs in belligerent nations visa vis Jihadii terrorists. That is both legally and morally bankrupt.
Yep. Assuming that is the charge under the law, that is the sole reason for the punishment. That there may be aggravating conduct only stiffens the case for the prosecutor.
But for each offense…rape, murder, arson and some form of assault…there is a specific code of law that defines the offense, and prescribes a punishment.
As perhaps even you can see, there is no parity that supports your argument…unless, of course, you can provide an example.
Far better legal minds than mine (and yours) looked narrowly at this issue. Among them were some vaunted leftist legal scholars in the days immediately following the attack on our culture that we call 9/11. They famously wrote in support of the use of torture…real torture. Happily, that was never used, as is apparent in the documents released.
Are you even aware that our own service personnel are water-boarded as part of their training? Would you assert that is torture? Or is it only torture when it is imposed, rather than voluntary?
How about a little consistency from you?
Do you seriously mean to equate a clear general statement from the President on policy against piracy with “showing your hand” (i.e., telegraphing your strategic moves) to three thugs on a lifeboat?
If so, you are worse than a waste of time. If not, I think you owe the target of your post an apology.
Here, you simply show outright dishonesty.
The President spoke in very general terms about the goal of finding and destroying AQ and those who harbor it. There were, and still are, bars to the realization of that goal. One of them being the sovereignty of other nations. Another being the pragmatic limits of our war-fighting capacity.
Sen. Obama, in truly cynical fashion, criticized the Bush administration for fighting the wrong war. Of course, Obama knew how to conduct geo-politics and warfare better than anyone actually in command at the time.
Time…and responsibility…have tempered his hubris. I haven’t seen him invading Pakistan, though who can know what misadventure lies around the corner.
As I recall, he was roundly deplored by the Democrat field for his comment. Rightly. It was stupid grandstanding, and irresponsible, even for him.
To say that his statement was no more or less than Mr. Bush’s pledge to seek out the terrorists is simply dishonest.
Hmmm, can’t seem to post.
This is going to be weird. Posting my response one paragrah at a time to see why it won’t post the entire thing.
Agreed. Talk is cheap.
Though what Obama had on the line was becoming POTUS and he made his case and wanted the American people to base their decision to vote, or not to vote for him based on what he was talking about. His skin, ambitions, whatever, was in the game.
The closest thing we had to an ally? Please tell me you are kidding?
Pakistan was hardly an ally. We whored ourselves out to them and paid for the privilege. Pakistan was on our do not return their calls list on Sept 10, 2001.
Recall that Musharraf came to power in a coup. (Not unlike Saddam Hussein.) He made deals with Al Qaeda to leave them alone in the Swat Valley and arrested lawyers, not to mention members of their Supreme Court.
The Pakistani military allowed the Taliban and Al Qaeda to escape through Tora Bora. The Pakistani intelligence service is in league with the Taliban.
A.Q. Khan, the Pakistani scientist, shared nuclear secrets with half of our enemies and was only given house arrest.
Pakistan, an ally? With allies like that, we don’t need any more.
A.Q. Khan, the Pakistani scientist, shared nuclear secrets with half of our enemies and was only given house arrest.
Pakistan, an ally? With allies like that, we don’t need any more.
Pres Bush said, “If a country is too timid to act, we will”. He also said he would go after all terrorists without reservation, caveat or qualifications. Yet, Arafat was allowed to die peacefully in his bed. Was Arafat a terrorist? Was Pres Bush simply giving lip service to the GWOT?
I understand and appreciate the delicacies of the POTUS. But, if you are going to be consistent, take Pres Bush and Pres Obama to task over whether they each delivered on their ‘talk’.
Everyone, I am really sorry for having done this. For some reason I could not post my entire response at once.
I always like to respond to those who respond to my comments.
I noticed that I have recieved additional comments, and will address them tomorrow. It is late and I am tired.
Thank you for your indulgence,
Z
More dishonesty.
Obama was going for a cheap political two-fer:
1. present the illusion he was a hawk on the GWOT, and
2. still play to the anti-Iraq war crowd.
It was the quintessential crass political statement, and the very cheapest kind of talk. As I said.
He’s full of it, as he proves more fully every passing day.
Pakistan was…is…not a homogeneous thing.
It hasn’t been an ally, nor did I say it was. Especially not in the sense of our British allies.
But neither was it hostile to us.
Whoring? I dun think so, Loocy.
We pursue interests. They pursue interests.
Surely you are not so delicate and pure a flower to pretend otherwise. Heaven forbid!!!
Are you so simplistic a thinker as to believe that you must not pick your battles? No. You are simply willing to use dishonesty as a tactic in argument. Case-in-point, “allowing” Arafat to die…did you say peacefully? Please…
You made several statements of fact. Back them up, or have them exposed as more BS.
Otherwise, state them as opinions, or beliefs.
Want to be a terrorist and not be tortured if you’re caught? Round up some sick people with flu symptoms, in Mexico City, and send them across the border to infect the people in cities. If you or any of them get caught, the only “torture” you’ll have to face, is the waiting time for your first medical treatment, welfare check, new home, car and job. It might be considered torture, too, though it’s debatable, having to endure an Acorn visit so you can “vote”.
Thank you. Though, when you agree with something you should not be afraid to say so. It will not diminsh you.
LOL. Others have already provided links. And, nothing has changed. Because, I can not name a single individual who was executed for ‘only’ wateboarding is the red herring. If you have a problem with the word ‘executed’ or that you want to parse and split hairs.
Japanese were prosecuted for war crimes, including waterboarding.
I am sure you have visited the links by others and learned that Japanese have been prosecuted for war crimes. Do you need more substance than that?
Huh? I make an effort to cut and paste the entire post of others who I am commenting on, and do not remember you asking me about the status of American POW’s.
No. I am talking about waterboarding. We prosecuted war crimes, that included waterboarding. It does not matter who did it, or who it was done to. A precedent has been set. It is beyond ‘Clinton-esque’ to parse that.
OK.
Though I stand by the fact, and you implicitly accept, that waterboarding has been prosecuted as a war crime.
LOL. ‘Some form of assault’? OK, waterboarding is at least an assault and you agree that it should be prosecuted.
Geez, we had to go an awful long way to get you to admit that. Thank you.
Again, I am not comparing the Japanese to terrorists, or to ourselves. It is about the precedent we set in prosecuting ‘some form of assualt’ (aka, wateboarding).
Humility. It looks good on you, and I agree that there are better legal minds then we two.
Though, among the legal minds included were the Chief JAGS of our uniformed services, and each said that waterboarding is torture.
Yes, I am aware of this practice.
No. No more than I would say that a Marine commits murder in a fire fight in the streets of Bagdad. Context, time and place makes a difference.
As we debate the obvious, here is a quote from “Give me liberty or give me death!” speech by Patrick Herny (1775:
Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation?
This was not some feel good act to bring about government transparency. This was an attack on the Bush administration, an attack on American armed forces, and all those people the liberal elite hold in contempt. Another excerpt from this that famous speech:
“They tell us, sir, that we are weak — unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance, by lying supinely on our backs, and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot?”
If these clowns didn’t get the message April 15th 2009, I predict July’s protest will draw 10 times the previous crowds.
Obama continues his grade-school-playground feud against his predecessor, as American watches and hopes she doesn’t get killed.
No. I have obviously failed to make my point easily understood. Did you read my post #130 in it’s entirety?
No matter, for your benefit I will try again.
Making a public statement about policy is what Frontierguy alluded to in post # 124, referencing a policy statement by Pres Bush while taking Obama to task for not taking national security seriously, because he did not make a public policy statement.
[Note: In my post #102 I did say it would have been useful if the Obama Administration did say something.]
No, Pres Bush did not show his hand with his policy statement on going after terrorist, and neither did Obama.
Pres Bush said he was prepared to go into Afghanistan. Candidate Obama said he was prepared to act in Pakistan.
The lack of consistentcy was in taking one to task, and not the other.
And, no apology will be forthcoming, I merely asked a bunch of questions.
LOL.
When Pres Bush said, “If a country is too timid to act, we will.” At the same time, he also said, “you are with us, or against us.”
Pres Bush did not then add, well if there are difficulties in doing so because of things like sovereignty or limitations, well we won’t go after the perpertraitors of 9/11.
There were no reservations or equivocations in Pres Bush’s statement.
Yes, he did.
That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.
Why would Pres Obama invade Pakistan? As a candidate he only said “act” which has many connotations. Pres Bush acted when he sent drones into Pakistan. Much of what Pres Obama is doing, is not that disimilar from what Pres Bush had done. The difference is in style, not substance.
I disagree and welcomed that statement because I agreed with Pres Bush when he said we would bring those people who brought down these buildings to justice. I want Bin Laden’s and Mullah Omar’s heads on a stick. Obama was merely following through on what Pres Bush had said.
Pres Bush: Afghanistan, give up the terrorists or we’re coming in.
Candidate Obama: Pakistan, give up the terrorists or we will act.
A distinction without difference. Bottomline, they both want the terrorists. Pres Bush said ‘dead or alive’ Obama has yet to say that.
You are welcome to assign motive and meaning to any and everyone.
Whatever he said, he put it out there for the voters.
Assault is assault. All kinds of things that are unpleasant are done to people in combat, or in confinement. Virtually all of them would be a form of assault if done elsewhere, in different circumstances. But they are not, hence they are not assault.
Assault is a crime. You can tell, because you will find it in criminal codes.
Torture is torture. It is a crime. You can tell, because you will find it in criminal codes.
Water-boarding is not torture. It is not torture when American military personnel undergo it, or when it is applied (on TWO people) to terrorists. To assert it is NOT torture when applied to American military personnel, but is when applied to Jihadii pirates is simply stupid and morally bankrupt.
Terrorists are not enemy POWs. They are analogous to pirates, and have no right to due process, though we have extended it to them consistently.
There is no analog between the treatment of American POWs by Japanese military personnel and American treatment of Jihadii terrorists.
Water-boarding a prisoner is not assault in the criminal sense, any more than is hand-cuffing a prisoner. If I did either to you, both would be assault. (Dream sequence follows….)
Japanese soldiers were not prosecuted for water-boarding. You are relating a falsehood. There is no link showing that to be documented. Talking about it is not documentation. It is simply repeating an oft told lie.
I have concluded that you are a soft-mouthed, greasy liar who perverts logic, and is happy to confuse arguments here.
But, hey, have a good day.
OK. Though I do not recall anyone in this thread saying it was.
Quoting from you post #125, ” . . . the closest thing we had to an ally in that region.”
OK. Pakistan is not an ally, but they are close it. LOL.
True.
We too often take the short term and easy way out which violates our principles, tenents and fundamental beliefs as set forth in our Constitution. Yeah, it offends me when we get into bed with people like Saddam Hussein. Recall he came to power in a coup, but he served our purposes for a time. As long as he was our tool, we did not care what he did to his people. As long as he was our proxy agaisnt Iran, everything was fine.
I choose to be consistent, and that means standing by your beliefs, sure pursue self interest, but not at the cost of selling your soul for short term gain.
It is about picking the correct battles while maintaining your integrity. Your integrity might be cheap and for sale, you might be willing to prostitute yourself. I am not.
Pres Bush said all terrorist would be pursued and brought to justice. What is dishonest about saying that the terrorist Arafat was not brought to justice, after Pres Bush said what he said?
I have and will continue to do so. I have asked questions, and had them avoided. What is more dishonest than asking a question and not having it answered?
You may have missed my post #148.
I am not going to overwhelm you with more information for you to ignore, or insult you, by calling you names. Just follow the link.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/24/AR2009042403171.html?hpid=topnews
PROVE
IT
UP
And then see if you can get anyone here to agree with your assertion that
American POWs = Jihadii terrorists
and
It is torture when done to enemies, but not to our personnel.
So…they’re going to release more photos of Michael Moore, Helen Thomas and Rosie O’Donnell?
Yep, that would be torture!!
Obama isn’t going to do much of anything to protect this country-maybe a show rocket launch somewhere to destroy an aspirin factory or a pile of rocks or a stern rebuke somewhere else. But Obama WILL continue the word war with the Bush administration people to keep the pot boiling and to keep opponents worried.
The war of words and perhaps deeds against veterans will continue-the Left’s hatred of the military and the veteran is all consuming. From Bill Clinton’s mocking the Viet Nam Veterans at the Memorial Wall to Obama’s desire to make wounded Veterans pay for their medical care to Nepolitano’s attack on returning veterans the Left’s contempt shows through.
But to be fair I will say Obama and J-No have their precedent-that would Uncle Joe Stalin as the Left likes to call him:
Stalin was aware that the social upheaval in Russia leading to the revolution really began with the Decemberist-Army officers who had reached Paris after the Napoleonic wars. After Russia’s victory in their Great Patriotic War against Germany Stain sent whole armies of men who had reached Berlin to camps in Siberia to stop a similar issue for him. He would release these “Heroes of the Great Patriotic War” slowly over a period of years but had Baria of the NKVD keep an evil eye on them.
So as Obama prepares to release more torture photos, rather selectively, we need to be concerned who and what disappears.
True that.
Also, as our country descends into deeper and deeper moral ambiguity about how, when, or even whether to fight effectively, we become more and more ripe to be destroyed by dedicated enemies who are intent on ending our culture.
Water-boarding proved an effective tool of extremely limited and careful application. I saved American lives, cost no pirate their life, and that is the proof of the pudding.
I am persuaded that other interrogation techniques are at least as effective and not as unpleasant. They all require considerable time, however.
In an extremity, where time is of the essence in saving American lives, water-boarding a terrorist is perfectly acceptable to me.
People who infuse our society with moral ambiguity about a subject so clearly defined, both in history and law, as torture are enemies of both intellectual integrity and the people of America.
ArizonaNeanderthal said (#160):
America is protected by our higher moral values. Repudiating torture will keep us safer. Obama has the courage to rely on principle rather than animal instinct (torture). Bush was a scardy cat. Remember his actions on 9/11 and 9/12 — nothing at all.
A lesson from both the Korean and Viet Nam War: After some American soldiers were Court Martialed for “mistreating” prisoners whole units stopped taking prisoners–easier that way.
Sending special units (my case LRRP) out for the express purpose of taking prisoners was considered highly dangerous. So after risking and perhaps losing some people you were to become bell hops in a Five Star Hotel. It does not work that way. I guess people who were never there can not relate. But regardless of what that piece of human garbage John Kerry said No, we were NOT Genghis Khan killing every living thing – but we WERE young men wishing to return home alive.
Damn I do hate the Left.
BTW, for purposes of clarifying the debate that others here are working so hard to obfuscate…
arguably, any interrogation of an actual POW, beyond asking questions in what would be called a “normal” environment, would be a violation of the laws of war.
I would not support the use of water-boarding against the uniformed services of another nation, as that would be a violation of law.
On the other hand, if a Soviet-era commander of a bomber wing were water-boarded…or actually tortured…to obtain what proved to be valuable information that saved American lives, I would be proud to defend those responsible in an American court, let the chips fall where they may.
We have. You can’t win by redefining words.
What you can do is get a lot of people killed.
Public to White House: Move on;
Yes, if only that would be the case. You have to be dreaming in la-la land if you think the White House is listening to the public. Don’t you remember? “obama won”. That’s it and it’s said and done.
When was the last time any of you were listened to by whoever your elected representative was? Guess what, the libs have control, and your antiquated ideas about getting rid of them aren’t going to work.
I appreciate the information dissemination that is going on here. But the progressive/liberals/socialists/totalitarians have taken over. And no amount of Civics 101 or Into to PoliSci or American Gov’t as it was taught in the 50′s or 60′s is going to get it back.
Dream on. I’m only waiting for the repeal of the 2nd Amendment. Not that they really need it, because, despite the ruling in D.C. every political entity is fighting that with all they have.
Once they have taken our guns, there is no dispute without loss of life. Just like the USSR and East Germany.
Laugh at me if you care to. The dialog here is somewhat laughable, considering the consequences, and the naivete of the posters.
Which is why I openly advocate taking America back, via non-violent means.
STARVE THE BEAST. Refuse to be eaten. Government this out of control depends on your compliance. Do not comply.
On April 25th, 2009 at 11:56 am, Ragspierre said:
STARVE THE BEAST. Refuse to be eaten. Government this out of control depends on your compliance. Do not comply.
Do you have a Galt’s gulch in which to retreat? Unless you do, better make another plan. and it isn’t going to be pretty, nor non-violent.
I never thought I’d agree with Gil Scott Heron’s song Winter In America, but “there’s nobody fighting ’cause nobody knows what to save”.
That’s the way I see it these days. Our children were educated to hate our country starting in the 60′s with 68 Chicago Convention as just one example. And the progressives/liberals haven’t stopped since then. Meanwhile the silent majority became a minority.
I advocate a concerted, organized and intelligent plan of civil disobedience.
A tax boycott.
It cannot be ad hoc. It cannot be covert, and it cannot be participated in by everyone to the same extent. But everyone can support it in various ways, as their conditions permit.
It is not without risks to individuals, but most of us are far more afraid of the IRS than reality would dictate. I know what I’m speaking about.
On April 25th, 2009 at 12:37 pm, Ragspierre said:
RE: IRS, I also have felt the wrath in unbelievable penalties, and been dunned for years on end. I had to take second mortgage to pay them off.
I agree with you in principle. But if you think that there are enough people in the country who are going to Not pay their taxes to make a big dent in our government’s attitude, or tax policies, or spending and fiscal policies, then I disagree.
Do you think the very wealthy are going to drop out? The people who are not paying taxes don’t give a damn. The majority who are paying probably voted for Obama. Even though the Tea Parties showed a good turnout, it was well below what it would take to cripple any gov’t policy. And that’s assuming you could convince those in attendance to follow your lead.
Most of the voting age public these days actually believes that socialism isn’t so bad an idea. And they think that the previous administration was a bunch of no-goodniks; irrespective of the fact that we helped to free millions of people to determine their own lives.
Obama is preaching to the choir of communists and socialists around the world that we are BAD people because we are successful at keeping the wolf from the door.
I think that you had best keep a shotgun close to your door when he and his minions come knocking to ask you give up your liberty.
Of course I’m a raging right-wing fanatic.
Some, yes. Others will support the idea in a number of important ways that involve less risk. That is true of people in general. This isn’t a class struggle.
As an attorney, working in the system, I assert that you are mistaken. I know how strained the system is now.
An organized boycott involving a few thousand (and I candidly don’t know the number, but know it can be determined) would have a profound effect immediately.
It would gather immense momentum in very short order.
And many of us here would agree, in part. Mr. Bush was a VERY confusing…and confused…leader. He is guilty of a terribly accelerated advance into fascist economic policy, which I contend has dominated American politics since the 1930s.
It is little wonder that many Americans are confused, given the recent history of our nation.
But that only suggests that a clear, intelligent case has to be made to the people, along with an assault on the political power base in DC.
I assume no outcome. I only know what I know, and that I should be tried.
I assume no outcome. I only know what I know, and that it should be tried.
I may get tried, too.
Worked for the jews in Poland in 1940-45 didn’t it… oh wait…
Tortue: having Obama as President.
That’s torture.
They responded to a new threat with an old tactic…conform, find a way to adapt, don’t resist. It had worked through centuries of oppression. They didn’t see a new paradigm for what it was until too late.
It isn’t the Highland way…which doesn’t work all the time, either. Fight, resist, fight, run, fight…but whatever else, fight.
Being of the Highland strain, I have to feel, at the end of the day, fighting is preferable to watching my family…or my liberty…die without EFFECTIVE resistance.
So, I give my higher moral values EFFECT by taking action.
I choose to fight.
On April 25th, 2009 at 1:15 pm, Ragspierre said:
Sorry for the editing problems. I really think you are living in hope-and-change-land. I would support an effort of this sort, even to the extent of not paying any additional tax that the gov’t hasn’t already confiscated via withholding. But don’t you see that they already most of money that most people are going to have to pay anyway? That’s withholding, and they knew what they were doing when they implemented it.
And please let’s not argue about the 1930′s or the Federal Reserve in 1912.
What I originally said was that the country is lost because the libs have control of most of the levers. And that most of our children and grandchildren (I’m in my 60′s) believe that socialism isn’t that bad. They have not been educated about freedom, liberty, the origins of western culture, or even the the last two world wars and their causes.
I am saying that the minority of people have to take the country by other than peaceful means. Hey if you want to live under their thumb, then sit back and take it. Because you’re not going to be able to vote them out.
We may well get Show Trials, Truth Commissions and such as the Leftist get more bold. So we try to stop them from getting so. But sitting on our butts whining “All is doom-All is gloom” is a way to guarantee the Progressive/Fascist Left will have the clear field for the Show Trials and Truth Commissions.
The only thing we can safely assume is that the struggle will be hard, the traitors, weaklings and cowards numerous and that losing is too terrible to accept. And a victory, as they all are, will be temporary-there is always the tyrant, fascist, would be monarch waiting for his chance to place his boot on our neck. The day of “reasonable compromise” or “reasonable controls” with and by these people is over-and should have never been. Liberty is well worth eternal vigilance-compromise with evil is evil.
Well back to my EVIL CO2 producing lawn mover. I want the yard nice for my EVIL CO2 producing gas grill to cook those dead animals for I too “”Of course I’m a raging right-wing fanatic.“”.
fgmorley: Do you have a copy right on that or can I use it too?
I agree with your last statement. The Constitution is being ignored, and it has to be reinstated to do what I think you and I want.
I don’t plan to go down without a fight.
But, I firmly believe, there are intermediate steps that morally have to be taken by brave people before the fight becomes violent.
Perhaps, as you suggest, what I believe will work will not work. It still has to be tried.
For very practical reasons, I think it CAN work. There is nothing the our current government requires for its excesses than that we allow ourselves to have our means confiscated, and used as it deems fit.
So, I suggest taking that away. That is their jugular.
Nor do I think this would take long, or be terribly costly…though some would be targeted. Support mechanisms can be put in place to mitigate their injury, and would be under my model.
go for it AZ
And while we are taking intermediate steps for moral reasons the libs/fascists are not bothering with those messy details.
Hey, I’d be willing to see another plan such as yours, whatever that is. But I’ve been watching this sh!t go down for the last 40+ years. It doesn’t look promising, and the end game is getting pretty obvious and obnoxious and noxious.
LGM said “America is protected by our higher moral values.” That’s about the dumbest thing I’ll probably read today; most of our enemies could care less about our “higher moral values,” and in fact, they COUNT on those “values” since they use them against us. Go speak to the family of Berg or Pearl about how well protected they were and see what response you get. As for the argument about waterboarding, I think I can settle that one as well. If my children are in danger from terrorists, there is no level I would not go to in order to protect them, and you better believe that waterboarding would rank pretty low against other applications I’d try, mainly with a large hammer and rusty barlow knife. I’d also do this for anyone elses children. I must have missed the meeting where the rights of innocent people are worth less than the rights of murdering animals. A lot of crap talk and rhetoric means NOTHING when lives are on the line, and a bunch of whiny liberal hand wringing over the mere possibility of some terrorist getting his feelings hurt doesn’t impress me much. If liberals spent half the time defending America against terrorists, nambla and crooked politicians in obummers cabinet as they do terrorists, I wouldn’t hold them so much in contempt. How stupid can a liberal get; a common street thug who mugs someone doesn’t spend much time worrying about “values,” so a known and well publicized terrorist will? Top that off with the hypocrisy of the liberal who, after being attacked, then expects the conservative to defend him…and then promptly takes sides with the attacker against the conservative! More knife-in-the-back behavior by those who have no “skin in the game” yet are very willing to gamble on someone elses “skin.” Sorry folks, I know lgm’s purpose on here is to aggravate and generally show his a*s, but this is one of those days where I’m just not inclined to suffer fools and idiots.
We agree on all that. I find it very frustrating to read posters here who advocate doing what has been PROVEN not to work, and are so blind they cannot see the structural reasons it CANNOT work.
It is in response to obvious reality that I suggest a change in tactics to try something EFFECTIVE.
Do I KNOW it will work. Of course not.
But I have literally been modeling this idea since about 1992, when I first saw the handwriting on the wall in very clear terms.
Since that time, I put myself through law school, and I gained considerable insight into our tax system on the practical level.
People in the U.S. have been conditioned to be cowed by the IRS. Much…maybe most…of what they fear is myth. That is by design. I KNOW this, from first-hand experience.
Civil disobedience has to have a moral backing. Part of its power comes from the moral object lessons that complacent people see as it plays out.
I think it has to be tried, because if it works, it avoids what you and I both fear…and foresee…befalling our people.
For that reason alone, it is totally worth the risks, which are manageable and can be mitigated, IMNHO.
Watch for this. I only ask that people give it place in their thinking.
Well said, sir/madam/thoughtful person. I was absent the day that the rules of WAR were taught. I always thought it became a war when the rules of civilization went out the window.
Now we have lawyers deciding if it’s OK to launch a strike against the enemy. WTF???
If we are In a War then aren’t we supposed to WIN it? If not, then I guess I missed that day too.
I realize that you cannot explain your ideas on this blog post, but I would be interested in learning more about them; if only to critique. I’m still not convinced that there is a peaceful solution, although I hope that there is.
So how would I learn more? I understand that there is there is a problem with giving contact info.
Thank you for keeping an open mind.
I have to establish a web-site…that is apparent.
Unfortunately, I am challenged in that technology, and have not found anyone to help me. I know I could pay for it, but don’t have the disposable income to do it up right. (It’s a myth that lawyers make a lot of money. Most don’t.)
I have to earn a living, and even posting to this blog is costly in terms of my time.
Watch, though. I have to do this soon, and I’ll make folks aware when it happens.
Thank you again.
And to the other: yes all too many of us have been “cowed-agreed to-been reasonable” with and by the IRS and a whole alphabet of unconstitutional agencies, acts, bureaucratic regulations and such. Slowly, sometimes faster, they have been dismantling rule of law and the Rights of a Free People.
So here and now we have to say not only STOP but start to roll them back. Reasonable Restrictions on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, Speech, Assembly and Property Rights have to be rolled back and repealed, the cowards who defend them voted out of office.
When some twit defends these Reasonable Restrictions with “you can’t yell Fire in a crowded theater” thank them for their brilliant insight and ignore the twit. And when they bring up Tim McVeigh ask if they are going to put ALL college graduates on the list–there was a college graduate once who broke a law.
If you are to stay with the Republican Party-at least for the short term- get involved at the precinct and county level. There you CAN and WILL get together with fellow Conservatives to knee cap some RINO ideas and candidates.
Here in Arizona many of us are pretty much going to concentrate on denying John McCain the nomination in his re-election bid for 2010. Two fold: we want to defeat him AND if he does lead the ticket we fear too many Conservatives will stay home and cost us in other races-it has happened before.
On April 25th, 2009 at 3:08 pm, Ragspierre said:
I commiserate on your lack of web expertise. I am in the same boat. Good luck, fight the good fight. I would imagine in your profession it gets pretty effed up on a daily basis, dealing with the all the left-wing commie mofos that think they are saving the world, one war-crime at a time, or whatever they are into.
fg…
When I went to law school, I also took a joint MBA program. I’d been in business, and wanted to get my ticket punched for all I’d learned and all the self-study I’d done.
It had the collateral benefit of keeping me sane (saner…?), as law schools are pure socialist indoctrination camps, utterly detached from reality as it exists. Obama is a typical law school professor.
I have a piece on that subject at http://rags.blogtownhall.com/
I was active in The Federalist Society, which helped, as well.
Hey, don’t give them any more ideas. I hope you can make a dent there in AZ. I was wondering whether Goldwater was defeated after the ’64 election. I don’t think so. This would put egg on McCain’s face, and that’s not a really bad thing.
In fact, I’m all for throwing the bastards out, no matter who or what party. It hasn’t been any particular party affiliation that has been the source of the problems for us. It’s been the entrenched against us, who are in the trenches.
Of course I’m a raging right-wing fanatic.
I wish you well, even as I doubt you can. McAnus’s Incumbent Protection Act (McCain-Feingold) is one of those structural reasons I keep referring to that will defeat people’s attempts to make any real difference in DC.
I support your effort, though, and may send money to his opposition.
To Ragspierre:
Got to leave now. Been interesting and enlightening. Will read your blog link and get back at you. Looks as if you have some blogosphere presence as it stands.
Later…
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30415470/
Ah, the left’s campaign in full swing now. The current framing is no longer that it wasn’t effective, it is that the effectiveness is “unclear”.
The only thing unclear would have been the air in where LA used to exist if the effectiveness of the interogation methods were unclear…..
http://townhall.com/columnists/MichaelBarone/2009/04/27/the_lefts_angry_mob_recalls_madame_defarge
A fine piece by Barone, who reminds us of things THE ONE has said that left open his techniques for getting information…