I remember having the same impression during Watergate: why is that taking so long when the crime, motivation, etc are all so apparent on the face of things.
Even if the emperor has no clothes, it takes the masses quite a while to stop seeing an emperor and start seeing a naked guy.
And the press? Well, they may never figure out there is a naked guy present, but they may be able to interview folks about the conspiracy theory that there is a naked guy posing as emperor. That's the role of the press, isn't it?
Posted by mike at April 22, 2009 07:05 AMI find it interesting but not surprising that Darth needed to get permission to declassify docs that only 3 months ago when he was in office could have easily done himself. I mean seriously, didn't he say in the Libby trial that his Fourth Branch powers allowed him to declassify information like covert operatives names like Plame at a moments notice......plus didn't he have a brouhaha with the National Archives while in office saying he didn't need to place his papers there as his new branch of office was exempt and he threatened to withhold funding.
Wow, the man just reeks of lying inconsistency, yet the gullible enabling pressitutes continue to bend over backward giving every statement he says a truthful nod of approval.
Earth to press/journo's: Fact the man's a serial cherrypicking lawbreaking fabricating liar...he uses and abuses everyone
Posted by emal at April 22, 2009 07:20 AMthere is a possibility that he is simply mad (as in insane). Cheney was an original Nixon thug and has been a behind the scenes manipulator in D.C. as long as George H. W. Bush has. Cheney entertained presidential ambitions once, but didn't have the personality and watched as others such as GWHB made it to the top. He willingly took the job of finding a VP for George W. Bush and either by plan or at the behest of Powerful People, installed himself in that position, nicely situated to enact his policies with the cooperation of a lazy, uninterested president. Suffice to say, the 9/11 attacks could not have been more convenient for his motives.
Posted by T2 at April 22, 2009 08:08 AMMore likely is that Cheney is correct, the harsh interrogations DID work. So says Obama's intelligence director:
WASHINGTON - President Obama’s national intelligence director told colleagues in a private memo last week that the harsh interrogation techniques banned by the White House did produce significant information that helped the nation in its struggle with terrorists.
“High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the al Qa’ida organization that was attacking this country,” Adm. Dennis C. Blair, the intelligence director, wrote in a memo to his staff last Thursday.
Admiral Blair sent his memo on the same day the administration publicly released secret Bush administration legal memos authorizing the use of interrogation methods that the Obama White House has deemed to be illegal torture."
Whether it worked or not is irrelevant.
We could solve poverty by shooting all poor people in the back of the head. That doesn't mean we should do it.
Posted by snark at April 22, 2009 08:31 AM"provided a deeper understanding of the al Qa’ida organization" - give me a break manappe. Let me ask you a simple question: if the torture is so successfull, why, in 7 years, Cheney and Bush did not get enough information to capture Bin Laden? He's still on the loose manappe...and still telling us why he hates us.
Posted by T2 at April 22, 2009 08:40 AMYour analogy is stupid. Did the poor people fly passenger jets into the twin towers? The fact that Obama's NID is saying it worked goes Cheney's recent request that the government tell the WHOLE story instead of just cherry picking evidence that will bolster their case.
Remember how you blamed the Bush administration of "cherry picking"?
Why is Obama afraid of the truth?
Posted by manapp99 at April 22, 2009 08:44 AM"why, in 7 years, Cheney and Bush did not get enough information to capture Bin Laden? He's still on the loose manappe...and still telling us why he hates us."
That question should be asked of the man who made the statement about the techniques working, Obama's national intelligence director.
Perhaps the press corp will ask Huckleberry Gibbs on that today. Stay tuned.
Posted by manapp99 at April 22, 2009 08:48 AMAs usual, man ape and peter forgot to include this part of the story:
"The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means," Admiral Blair said in a written statement issued last night. "The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."
And then there's this part:
Admiral Blair’s private memo was provided by a critic of Mr. Obama’s policy. His assessment could bolster Bush administration veterans who argue that the interrogations were an important tool in the battle against al Qaeda.
That, folks, is why the trolls never, ever, link to their sources. And now that it's coming to light that Bush/Cheney used torture because they hoped to get forced and false info about the non-existent Saddam/Bin Laden link, these trolls' idiocy is that much more hilarious. And saying "torture works" is not the same as saying "in some instances." But, of course the dipshits feeding the trolls this garbage know that, don't they?
Posted by Twinky P* at April 22, 2009 08:53 AMSo, who's cherry picking, ape man?
Posted by Twinky P* at April 22, 2009 08:55 AMYour analogy is stupid. Did the poor people fly passenger jets into the twin towers?
Ok, so you're bringing morality to the table.
The fact that Obama's NID is saying it worked goes Cheney's recent request that the government tell the WHOLE story instead of just cherry picking evidence that will bolster their case.
Again, regardless of "the whole story" regarding what useful info they got from it the case is being made that it was illegal under our treaty obligations. Illegal and immoral. Just like shooting innocent poor people in the back of the head to ease the burden on the rest of society would be.
Posted by snark at April 22, 2009 08:56 AMOn the bright side, Cheney's the most hated man in the world, along with Bush, and it appears that he's still the face of the marginalized right, which means they will continue to be marginalized. Please, keep defending torture and the torturers who tortured! According to TPM, even John Cornyn says "it's going to be real hard" to keep Dems from gaining 60 seats in 2010. Thanks for the help, man ape!
Posted by Twinky P* at April 22, 2009 09:04 AM"The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means,"
There's a big DUH for that statement. Know one can know what the road not traveled would have brought. What we CAN know is the interrogations DID produce "high value information"
The part of the story you make your argument around is what is suspect. That you call it "cherry picking" to no include what is not knowable shows your desire to put partisan politics above the truth. A lot like your dear leader.
Posted by manapp99 at April 22, 2009 09:09 AM... a window of opportunity for truth and justice.... ... President Obama obviously sees no window at all, let alone any apparent will in heaving it open.
Okay, paradox, try to pretend for a moment that you are a pragmatist, not an idealist. You fully understand the Constitution and the need for prosecution, but you have a problem.
If you just come right out and file charges against these guys you'll have the entire Washington establishment, including the press corpse and most of the military departments (Pentagon, CIA) fighting against you on this and everything else. You'll even have the Democrats like Reid and Pelosi, who were clued in on this in 2002 and approved of it, fighting you on your entire agenda.
What to do, what to do.
You are a pragmatist. You set priorities. You know this must be done before your first term, but it's not as critical as some other things. You also know that a direct approach on this issue will cause a Washington backlash on all your agenda.
What you need is to create a cultural shift in Washington. Here's how you do this:
1) Establish yourself as a neutral party who can be trusted by all sides.
2) Make torture a frequent topic of conversation. You can't change minds if people aren't thinking about it.
3) Let the people understand just how bad it really was.
4) Make it seem like the establishment is pushing you to prosecute, not the other way around. That is, make it seem like it's the establishment's idea.
If you've read studies on the art of persuasion, negotiation, and/or building consensus you'll recognize all the techniques listed above.
And that's exactly what Obama is doing. Yes, he's making "move forward, ignore the past" statements, but always with weasel words to allow prosecution if really bad things are found. Meanwhile, somehow, someway, and from a variety of different sources, a steady drumbeat of leaks and information releases have kept the topic in the media.
Funny how each release/leak contains information that is more repellant than the release/leak before. Just like someone had planned it that way.
Yesterday we learned that the torture started long in advance of Iraq.
Today we learned that it was demanded from the top in a desperate attempt to justify the invasion of Iraq.
What's coming next? Perhaps lists of the numbers of innocents who were killed during torture. Or the tapes that include screams of children tortured in hopes of elliciting false confessions from parents (as have been reported by a few people).
It's not by accident.
Posted by Anonny at April 22, 2009 09:11 AMNot to worry though. Obama's new Homeland Security chief has figured out who are REAL enemies are:
"Ottawa was rushing to defend its border security on Tuesday amid a diplomatic scuffle with the U.S., which erupted after Washington's homeland security chief suggested that the 9-11 terrorists entered the U.S. through Canada.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano made the comments during a media interview earlier this week, much to the chagrin of Canadians on both sides of the border"
Read the comments from Canadians for insight as to how Obama is "improving our relationships abroad"
Posted by manapp99 at April 22, 2009 09:15 AM"And that's exactly what Obama is doing.
Since you can no way of really knowing this you mean that's exactly what you HOPE Obama is doing.
You have to keep telling yourself this to be able to live with the fact that you have been conned.
Posted by manapp99 at April 22, 2009 09:20 AMCheney is adamant about this because he is the fall guy. We all know the Mad King, idiot son of George, never took responsibility for anything in his life. Busch has his ass covered and I'll bet everything regarding the responsibility of this mess points right at Cheney. I have no doubt that Cheney hangs if this mess gets prosecuted.
...saying it worked...
Of course it worked. They tortured the shit out of someone to get them to say stuff. Those people said stuff and so would you. Give me 30 minutes with you and I'll get you to tell me about the numerous gay affairs you've had. Torture extracts information, that's all.
It worked so good they had to do it 186 times to one guy over a period of a month. It worked, but it was not effective -I don't think tyme bombs tick that slowly. That much is obvious. And it's neat how you skip right by the moral hazard in all of this.
I seem to have heard all of the crap manape and peter spew before:
"Confessions of witchcraft, extracted under torture or threat of torture, commonly came attached to denouncements of other possible witches, keeping the Inquisitors in business."
"...the children of convicted witches suffered even more horribly. These kids were themselves prosecuted for witchcraft -- girls after the age of nine and a half, boys after the age of ten and a half. Even younger children could be tortured to elicit testimony against parents."
"A French judge is reported to have regretted being so lenient when he sentenced young kids to be flogged while they watched their parents burn instead of sentencing them to burn as well. Children may not be easily culpable for heresy or their parents' heresy, but they could certainly be influenced by or even possessed by Satan. The only hope of saving their souls was to torture their bodies to drive out the satanic influences."
"Voluntary testimony from someone as young as two could be admitted despite it not being treated as valid in other cases. This was a sign of just how serious the threat of witches was perceived to be."
Everything the republi-KKKon fucktards say is sounding very very familiar
Posted by phidipides at April 22, 2009 09:22 AMIt's not by accident.
Annony, again, you're a welcome voice of reason, articulating my sentiments exactly. Thank you so much for taking the time!
Sorry, ape man, you've been pwned, now slink away like a good little tool.
Is anyone watching Hillary Clinton's testimony to the House Foreign Affairs committee right now? Apparently (according to dKos) she's kicking GOP ass and taking names. Go SecState!
Posted by Twinky P* at April 22, 2009 09:23 AMA little bait and switch there Phid? Are you having a problem with what Obama's NID is saying?
This is not Cheney saying it worked....this is not some right wing operative....this is Obama's man saying this. And in a memo that Obama failed to release when he allegedly opened up our secrets for the world to see. Why would he not want the WHOLE story out there. Are you o.k. with your president shading the truth for his political gain?
There was no mention of witches however there was a refutation to the left wing bat lie that "torture does't work anyway" A lie I am sure you have repeated yourself.
Posted by manapp99 at April 22, 2009 09:29 AMI see man-ape got the latest talking points for today...who could ever predicted them complete with Rove induced projection...wow...amazing.
Let's see shorter man-ape contortions aka the illogic of a wingnut
-Dems did and approved it (so apparently that makes something illegal legal? and now okay).
-The most trustworthy man in Murka (Darth Deadeye) says it worked and will somehow be exonerated once all those torture documents are declassified. (Those same classified documents that the same man and his rabid followers stated he had the power to declassify back just a few months ago but didn't, Yes.. (those same documents that just a day or two ago depending on your repuke talking head source also said that releasing them endangered national security and helped the terra -ist because well but you see just a few short months ago "we don't torture" anyway, but now you see they destroyed tapes because those tapes proved they don't torture anyway and also because well those tapes prove torture worked...or something.)
-SERE training (so well it must be okay) Even though those using those same torture techniques were prosecuted and executed several decades ago by the US.
Ma-ape and his toady petey are just the type of brownshirts darth dick luvs...stupid followers without a lick of freakin common sense in their body. Oh yeah and did I mention you see it all began because well the terra-ist attacked us because they're jealous of our freedoms and our democracy....they want to be like us because we're morally superior to them those savages ..so what do we do we stoop to their level. Bra-vo ape man...Bra-effin-o..Tortured logic!
The mind of a wingnut...they never fail to provide amusement.
Posted by emal at April 22, 2009 09:32 AMSo....what you wing-nuts are saying is that you don't really want the truth from your government. You just want ammunition to use against your sworn enemies, the GOP.
You will learn too late that your real enemy is not the guy who lives next door that may have a different opinion than yours and votes differently.
Posted by manapp99 at April 22, 2009 09:35 AMThe mind of a wingnut...they never fail to provide amusement.
Sorry, emal, but I have to disagree - wingnuts don't have minds. Though they are awfully amusing!
Posted by Twinky P* at April 22, 2009 09:38 AMHi Twinky. I was on this site back in September telling everyone to chill out about the poll numbers. You remember was it was like back then -- even Krugman was freaking out and suggesting that Hillary would have been a better choice.
I was pointing out that Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight had predicted in early August the exact polling trend we saw in early September after the conventions, and also predicted that the polls would end up favoring Obama by about 6. Of course, the stock market crash accelerated that trend, but it was there anyway.
I was also here in October, arguing with the posters that no, it wasn't a mistake for Obama to agree with McCain in the debates.
I was here in late August, responding to posts about how the pick of Palin might doom the Obama campaign. Within 2 hours of that pick I'd dug into her history and predicted on these comment boards that she was going to be a disaster for the McCain campaign once people got to know her.
And of course I was here in June, trying to add some logic into the Hillary-was-robbed discussions.
I consider the people at TheLeftCoaster allies in the long fight for justice and a better society. I think this is a wonderful site and am glad it is here. I just wish they could be a little more pragmatic sometimes.
Posted by Anonny at April 22, 2009 09:41 AM"Sorry, emal, but I have to disagree - wingnuts don't have minds. Though they are awfully amusing!"
You got something right for a change Twinky
Though you left wing-nuts are awfully amusing, you really don't have minds.
Posted by manapp99 at April 22, 2009 09:41 AMThough you left wing-nuts are awfully amusing, you really don't have minds.
I know you are but what am I.
It's like listening to pre-schoolers.
Posted by Anonny at April 22, 2009 09:45 AM"It's like listening to pre-schoolers."
I know...but Twinky, like HeadXray, always sounds juvenile.
It is just something you have to put up with if you wish to get you daily left wing talking points from this site.
Posted by manapp99 at April 22, 2009 09:50 AMIt's like listening to pre-schoolers.
Kind of, in that the laughter of pre-schoolers is music to my ears as are the tears of the wingnuts! Poor things, really, no leader, no platform, no plan, no future. All they have left is "I know you are, but what am I?" and "torture is good."
I was on this site back in September...
Well, it sure is nice to see you back here, then. And yes, the fretting does get exasperating, but humans are so...human. I can forgive the worry, since 8 years in the wilderness watching the unthinkable happen can make even the coolest cuke lose it at one point or another.
Posted by Twinky P* at April 22, 2009 09:57 AMAnnony...it's all they've got...
Posted by emal at April 22, 2009 10:02 AMNo. These assclowns are not amusing. They are reprehensible humans, and only pay lip service to being American or standing for any of the ideals that come from being an American.
Our country faced many extremist threats in the past -fought wars- and never codified these techniques as a form of policy. In fact, we prosecuted those who did use these techniques as being inhumane and morally reprehensible. So reprehensible that they had to die for their acts.
And so now we have the douche-nozzles on the right telling us how "good" the information we extracted was, how it saved lives. And to that I would say they are idiots beyond all belief...morally bankrupt...reprehensible...lacking any humanity... that they should be prosecuted right along with their failed leaders.
So, what "high value" information did we get from waterboarding Abu Zubeida 83 times in August 2002 and Khalid Sheik Mohammed 183 times in March 2003? That there was no link between OBL and Saddam. That's it, that's what we got. So what did the assclowns on the right do? If your answer includes them "killing 4274 Americans" you will be correct.
Posted by phidipides at April 22, 2009 10:08 AMGood points, phidipides - let's just say that it's amusing to see them out of power, out of ideas, and out of their minds, then, eh? And when the perps are finally, finally brought up on charges, then we dance?
Posted by Twinky P* at April 22, 2009 10:14 AMThey are reprehensible humans, and only pay lip service to being American or standing for any of the ideals that come from being an American.
Yes.
Seems that every human population has a few of these, with genetic defects that make them fanatically pro-tribe, intensely paranoid, and with virtually no empathy for others.
Posted by Anonny at April 22, 2009 10:16 AM"And to that I would say they are idiots beyond all belief...morally bankrupt...reprehensible...lacking any humanity... that they should be prosecuted right along with their failed leaders."
Sooo...why don't you suggest to your dear leader that he prosecute his man, Dennis Blair for saying that the techniques worked.
Damn, you are so against getting to the truth you would rather shoot the messenger. Guess it beats admitting you were wrong.
Must be dark in the sand where you have parked your head.
Posted by manapp99 at April 22, 2009 10:17 AMWhat Dennis Blair really believes about torture.
Note the article also links to a side documenting how the mainstream press is reporting the soundbite from the far right and not the full statement.
This is what Obama is up against. A news media staffed largely with people who are pro-war, pro-torture, and sympathetic to the military and CIA.
Posted by Anonny at April 22, 2009 10:36 AMJust noticed that the Blair memo was a private communique to Obama that was leaked by member of his staff who disagreed with Obama's policy.
Once again: what is needed is a culture shift. There are a lot of people in the Pentagon and CIA leadership who liked the idea of torture -- perhaps the majority. Most of those who actually believe in following the law left of their own accord during the past 8 years.
Obama knows that the last 8 years were a disaster. Most of the people in those organizations who worked for Bush during the last 8 years know it too. But most of them are still loyal to him an suspicious of Obama. Obama has to change culture while winning them over.
Posted by Anonny at April 22, 2009 10:43 AMYeah, Annony, when the misfit trolls who can't even tie their shoes come along with a coordinated talking point, you know it's vomit from Billy Kristol they've lapped up and re-spewed. And I'd already remarked up above that the private memo was leaked by the opposition. I'm hurt, I tell you, that you missed it!
Posted by Twinky P* at April 22, 2009 10:46 AMhere is the "high value information on Al Qaeda" - NO connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda. That's what the torture provided. That's the info they got. But, of course, everyone already knew that. What Bush and Cheney wanted was to torture someone to the point that they told them what they wanted to hear, not what was true, so that Bush/Cheney could Lie the American people into an Iraq War and, so far, kill 4200+ American GI's in Iraq. Torture people into giving false information so you can start a War using that false information. War Criminals.
Posted by T2 at April 22, 2009 11:24 AMObama's man said this. Apparently it needs to be repeated for some of the people here.
"The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."
And just in case you missed it or don't understand. Here it is again.
"The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."
.
So the techniques are not essential to our national security and the damage from using them far outweighed any benefit.
Stick a sock in it manape....this dude said torture sucks and isn't worth it.
Posted by emal at April 22, 2009 11:27 AMThe Blair memo specifies nothing, and is just another vague statement devoid of actual facts backing up the statement, if indeed the memo even exists.
This is just another reason why we must have a commission review the information obtained from detainees before torture, and ALL the information (false and accurate) vomited out during torture to see what useful intelligence we actually "gained" by violating federal law and becoming a pariah nation that sadists like mancrapp00 get a hardon over.
We've gone from hearing that the torture "stopped massive attacks!" to weak claims that well, um,...we "learned about al qaeda" from the torture. It does appear that torture confirmed for us that there was NO link between Saddam and al qaeda, although Cheney and von Rumsfeld were probably just hoping for (knowingly false) statements there was a link, which is the usual sort of worthless "info" one gets from torture.
Since the sick sadists of the right (like mancrapp00) have been eating conserva-shit 24/7 that "torture works!!" we need to get to the bottom of what was actually "gained" from our massive torture regime.
Posted by euzoius at April 22, 2009 11:37 AMThere is a simple solution.
Torture Cheney.
Posted by The Creator at April 22, 2009 12:05 PMCreator makes sense...
moving on, hearing the man-ape refer to me as juvenile is nothing short of hilarious..you right wing morons are a laugh a minute with your hive mind spewing the same bullshit propaganda points....man-ape you are simply this..a complete waste of bandwidth..never anything of any remote significance or intelligence....and I suppose you will expect us to believe you don't felch dead eye dick....
Seriously, if torture is legal, I'm going to start torturing Republicans to find out what they knew about Bush's incompetence and Cheney's malevolence and when they knew it.
They said it works. And it's legal. So let's get on with it.
We cannot afford these kinds of mistakes again.
Posted by The Creator at April 22, 2009 12:37 PMCreator makes sense...
Sorry, but no, he doesn't.
Seriously, if torture is legal, I'm going to start torturing Republicans
I thought they caught BTK... Well, at least we have his IP, huh?
Really, this macho bullshit doesn't help.
Posted by Twinky P* at April 22, 2009 12:54 PMa largely pverlooked fact about the torture the cheney/chimp cultists pursued is their simple bloodlust for revenge of an obviously inferior bunch..Muslims...the trolls reflect this attitude and mindset on a daily basis....put them lowlifes in there place!!!
will dead eye dick ever shut his lying, treasonous pie hole or do we have to do it for him? self righteous just like our crack troll brigade....
last comment reflects right wing view of Muslims..not mine...I simply see humans..except for trolls....
Posted by headxray at April 22, 2009 01:00 PMObama triggers firestorm in CIA tactics case
The above is from Reuters. Not as good ad McClatchy, but not as bat as A(llegiance to the) P(arty).
What's the point? Just to reinforce my comments before:
1) If this much shit is stirred up now, imagine the reaction to actual prosecutions.
2) AND YET, this is a critical step in shifting the Overton window (google it if that is a new term to you) towards the public and the punditocracy accepting the notion of trials of the Cheney mafia.
And Twinky ... sorry I missed your comment. When the trolls are out in force, as they are in this thread, I tend to only skim it.
Posted by Anonny at April 22, 2009 01:09 PMForgiven, Annony, I understand completely.
Posted by Twinky P* at April 22, 2009 01:25 PMSo, how long does this culture shift have to take before Mr. O insists on accountability for war crimes? Weeks? Months? Years? And our basis for thinking he has a secret plan for effecting this culture shift and (eventually) insisting on accountability is.....what, exactly? I see what you're saying and I hope it's true, but it doesn't seem supportable based on what has actually happened. Maybe paradox isn't a "pragmatist," whatever that is, but she (he?) isn't bad at calling out evil bs and wondering at our political system's carefully hedged non-response to it.
Posted by scott at April 22, 2009 01:48 PMSo, how long does this culture shift have to take before Mr. O insists on accountability for war crimes? Weeks? Months? Years?
Look, I'm sorry it's so hard to understand, but let me try again.
The basic premise is this: if the Obama administration indicted Cheney today there would be a major uproar -- one that would make it politically impossible for him to accomplish anything that required cooperation with Congress or the various departments, especially the Defense Department.
Yes, I know he's the boss, but if you know anything about management and leadership you know that hierarchical power is limited.
Remember in 2005 when Bush and the Republicans tried to kill off social security (they called it "reform")? They had the votes and the Presidency, but the resulting uproar meant that the bills didn't even get voted on.
Well, if Obama had tried to indict Cheney say, in January, the uproar would have dwarfed that.
How long will a cultural shift take? Not clear. You have to keep hammering away until the attutudes are adjusted. It won't take as long as the cultural shifts in civil rights took -- in those cases you basically had to wait for older generations to die out to change minds.
In this case the problem is that too many people buy into the idea that the problem was limited and/or isolated, or that the victims were mostly guilty.
We also have a problem that for the past 30 or so years we've stopped teaching the Bill of Rights in the way we used to -- that is, explaining the rationale behind each right, and why you (for example) have to let Nazis march in Skokie. Or treat the worst criminals with the same rights given to all defendants.
But, in this case, I suspect you'll see demand for indictments come to a fever pitch before the year is out.
Posted by Anonny at April 22, 2009 03:28 PMSen John Thune, (R) South Dakota on MSNBS: Looking back is counter productive, no prosecutions needed, let's look forward.
I don't remember him saying "No need to look back and see who was eaten and who wasn't, that would be counter productive, let's just look forward", when the Milwaukee Police caught Jeffrey Dalmer.
Posted by TIKI AL at April 22, 2009 03:28 PMWhat you need is to create a cultural shift in Washington. Here's how you do this:
1) Establish yourself as a neutral party who can be trusted by all sides.
Posted by Anonny at April 22, 2009 09:11 AM
Well.. there you have your first problem. There is no one in a Democratic leadership position who can qualify with those requirements.
Why did you set the bar so damn high?
Posted by redsneakers at April 22, 2009 06:24 PMbecoming clear now. All the members of the Bush Administration who said "we do not torture", knew that they did. They just lied straight to us.....but we knew they were lying. I wonder why the nation just let them do it?
Posted by T2 at April 22, 2009 07:29 PMAnonny, I agree with your suggestion that this is being formulated slowly, by this Administration, with a goal in mind.
When people take an Oath of Office, they are required to uphold the law. It would be a dereliction of duty and that oath to do anything less.
Posted by Judith at April 23, 2009 03:35 AMSaying that torture worked does not prove it worked, and coming from Dick certainly proves my point.
Where's your proof Dick? Are you busy these days writing falsified memos about how well torture worked in case you need them at your trial?
Remember the impact the pictures had on the public? What happened to those pictures that were to come and never did? You want the public behind you. Start showing the truth in pictures to the American people, and then let them be the judge.
Why would you even engage the brown shirt trolls in any conversation? They are the enemies of this Country.
Posted by Judith at April 23, 2009 04:08 AMAs always, I appreciate being condescended to (who doesn't?) with graceful phrases like "I'm sorry it's so hard to understand" and "if you know anything about management and leadership." But you never answered the basic criticism, which is that we're deferring any action (not just indictments, but even investigations) in response to war crimes based on the hope that the culture will change. I think people have agency, the power to affect events if they choose to do so. Mr. Obama hasn't chosen to exercise his and has instead made statements indicating that he'd like us all to forget about the whole thing and look forwards, not back. Saying that he couldn't do anything absent a profound cultural shift in effect robs him (or anyone in a similar position) of agency and reduces him to some sort of paper cut-out. I don't buy that and think it's a cop-out. He's making a choice here, and holding him responsible for it and making him own that choice were what I thought you did with democratically elected leaders. If that makes me or other people who think like that unpragmatic or "naive" (the all-purpose putdown of anyone who actually demands results from our political system), so be it.
Posted by scott at April 23, 2009 05:46 AMPoor dear! If you clutch those pearls any tighter, you're going to break the strand, scott.
Posted by Twinky P* at April 23, 2009 07:19 AM