Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Tortured to justify a war
I know a lot of people don't want to think about this. It's done, isn't it? Well if you click on the link and read the above article, and I hope you will read the above article, it is NOT done.
It is important to me to not think negatively, to try and be positive, but every time I read the paper, I feel the anger boiling up at what the Bush administration did regarding torture. Mostly what Dick Cheney did and Bush let happen.
For anyone who saw the most recent Cheney interview where he was asked whether Bush knew about the torture, the emphasis from some was that Cheney was saying Bush authorized torture. Listen to it again, read the words.
What Cheney said was-- well I think he had to have known. Say what?!! Cheney stumbled all over himself as he basically revealed that he ran that operation maybe under Bush's agreement. Doubtless he told Bush, what he is trying to tell any American who still listens to him, what he's trying to tell Obama-- torture or you are responsible for the deaths of Americans. This is a sick man. Why is anyone listening to him?
Taking deep breaths and trying not to be furious!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
Cheney is an unmitigated disaster, with 2 legs and a suit.
Here's one for you, don't know if you've seen it:
New York Times Reporter David Barstow Wins Pulitzer Prize for Exposing Military’s Pro-War Propaganda Media Campaign
Cheney is an idiot. If you or I did some of the things he has, we'd be in jail.
you got it right - WHY is anyone listening to him, and WHY is he not in jail somewhere writing a book about himself that NO ONE WILL BUY? well, because life doesn't always make sense...and because so many Americans are stupid and/or don't think for themselves and/or are so partisan they can't see one foot in front of themselves with any clarity whatsoever.
oh boy, every American has a right to be furious about this one. What a complete utter madman. Well, I suppose the Germans had Hitler, Americans had Cheney. Emphasis on "had". No evidence of genocide yet, hope it stays that way.
So many things I want to say here. First off I believe that the United States should have a high moral imperative to not torture prisoners. Having said that I find the hate filled rage that blinds people when discussing the Bush administration to be sad. Yes they did plenty of things that I did not agree with as is the Obama administration, but I do not hate either of them.
And if we are going to start putting people in jail for trying to keep America safe after 9/11 then I guess Nancy Pelosi and Diane Feinstein and all the other House and Senate leaders that were in the loop on the interrogation methods used and who voted for the Iraq war need to be put in jail too.
And just one more thing, I believe that while he may have cheered on 9/11, Sadam did not have a direct role. But there must have been some kind of Al Qaida link to Iraq because why else would have Bill Clinton bombed Al Qaida sites in Iraq during the Monica Lewinsky testimony. That is another guy that if I did the same thing as him, I would be in jail.
Can someone say Cheney is a bad actor without being accused of hating him? I think the right uses this hate argument way too often. So we cannot talk about the actual actions without being accused of being haters?
On Clinton, would you give your site for where you found out he bombed Iraq. I understood him to have bombed Sudan and afghanistan sites trying to get al Qaeda but haven't seen what you are referring to.
If Pelosi etc were informed but in secret meetings where they were told they could reveal nothing, how do you see them as responsible? Do you think they had planning sessions with Cheney where together they decided to torture to get false information on Saddam being the one behind 9/11? I don't particular like Pelosi as I have said many times but I don't think she or Reid were behind the torture. That honor goes to Dick Cheney. whose company btw also clandestinely sold weapons to Iraq and Iran during the embargo of such while Cheney was the head of Halliburton.
You say you don't like what the Bush administration did but continually support them. You can't be a little bit for this or that but have to be on one side or another. Did they torture? Do they deserve to be prosecuted by criminal courts? Do you think they did but since it was for 'you' it's okay? Those are the questions this country is facing and a lot more like them.
You can say Cheney is a bad guy all you want. But most people are just blindly screaming Cheney is an idiot or Cheney is a criminal when they have no idea what they are talking about.
I believe that W did what he felt was best for protecting the country. He did not change his mind every time a poll came in that showed he might not be as popular. Like the current president is doing about almost everything in the war on terror. Now suddenly he is against showing photos of detainees. While I agree with his position it is somewhat ironic that before he got in power he talked about transparency of government, but now that he has to deal with the same things as the previous president that he bad mouths his war decisions are starting to look more like W all the time. Restarting military tribunals in Gitmo for example. It is easy to run your mouth when you do not know the entire story.
And like the experts testifying before Congress today, I do not believe that the harsh interrogation techniques were torture.
I did not say Pelosi was responsible. I said she knew about them all along and had no problem with them until it became politically expedient for her to start a smear campaign against the previous administration. Like you said either it is right or wrong you cannot have it both ways, unless that is you are in the Democratic party in this country.
And I guess I had a memory failure there. Clinton bombed Sudan and Afghanistan to get Al Qaida during Monica's testimony. He bombed Iraq to stop Sadam from having WMD's during the impeachment trial.
Obviously, we disagree. Bush didn't keep us safer. 9/11 happened under his watch with plenty of warnings which he ignored. As for after it, nobody knows that Al Qaeda ever tried to attack us again. The things Cheney wants to credit with torture delivering were often wrong or pathetic attempts at something.
Certainly the torture he authorized which got no information according to military sources, didn't help us in the world. Read up on this and quit listening to right wing sources for your info. The military said it didn't work even on the one Cheney wants to brag the most about.
If you read the article, you saw that it was intended to get someone to admit to something they hadn't done. The usual situation with torture in the past also.
As for Obama, that's in tomorrow's blog. i debated putting it here but decided to tack it onto the end of one I call Culture Gap
The Iraq bombing was btw a joint effort with Britain who I guess also was in on the collusion? Anyway here is what Clinton said about it at the time: Clinton's speech regarding bombing Iraq WMD facilities. You guys can't have it both ways. First it's Clinton did nothing, then it's wag the dog. You have as much hate for him as anybody could have for Cheney.
so waterboarding and sexual abuse don't qualify as crimes in your eyes? They used to. And the experts are on both sides of that issue. The point is it did not work. Even if you don't mind stripping people naked, doing things that can lead to their deaths (and some just disappeared), and all with no evidence those people know anything, just a desire for revenge or power, that's what you are justifying. It's what Obama doesn't want to reveal and I think he's wrong. Your side will keep justifying this and trying to whitewash it to a few soldiers and not face that it's your side that did it and got their jollies from it probably!
You know what has gotten me for the last 8 years is how the right renames things. Torture is now harsh interrogation. Taking away from citizen rights is Patriot Act. Clean Air means dirty air and on it goes. It's amazing and it works as the right just parrots them all back with no caring that they are losing all meaning in words. if we say it's good, it doesn't matter what IT is.
Ogmigod! I just read the article and the end is truly frightening. We call ourselves civilized? It is just one more proof that power corrupts and that absolute power corrupts absolutely!
How anyone who reads, or does more than listen to Limbaugh, Hannity, et. al can possibly continue to justify the things the Bush administration did is beyond belief.
I need to add one thing. There were only four representatives who were told about the torture. Pelosi was one of them. The fact that only four were told by the Administration was in itself illegal. A minimum of eight are to be told as required by law. Those four were sworn to secrecy. Pelosi, by herself, could do nothing.
Rain I do not hate Clinton I believe that he is a brilliant politician. And I actually agreed with some of his policies while he was in office. Not many but some.
I find it interesting how you can look at the right and say they are saying one thing and doing another and I can look at the left and see the exact same thing how they are saying one thing and doing another. I guess that is what make this such a great country. We can express our views and have different opinions.
That is what tomorrow's blog is about but I don't have answers. I just see the same thing in how people in this country are seeing things.
Oh my, I really don't want to comment here, but I just simply cannot believe that Rain has the nerve to say that the right uses the "hate" label way too often when that is EXACTLY what you said I was doing on Pitchpull because I did not want to buy a stupid Dixie Chick record after their comments.
In case you've forgotten, here are your words in the comment.
"You like a boycott and it makes you feel you are doing something positive (even when it's hating), I guess. "
And here was my response:
"I simply will never understand why refusing to spend my hard earned money on people who I seriously disagree with is "hating".
Is anyone else absolutely sick of that word and how it has been so misused the last few years?
I don't hate these people. I don't know them and from their actions or words, I don't care to know them.
The connotion of "hating" implies vile things. To use it because I don't want to put money I have earned in the Dixie Chicks' pockets is offensive. I would hazard a guess that it is even more offensive to those that have actually suffered true hate crimes."
Guess what? If I disagree with you does not mean I hate you.
Just my opinion, but calling someone Hitler is out of line, no matter which side is doing it. And yes, I would classify THAT as HATE. But apparently you don't, you reserve that term for people like me because I won't buy a Dixie Chick record.
Wow.
good points, Rita. It was unfair of me to suggest your motives were hate (even if I did put it in parenthesis to avoid it being the main thought). People can dislike the left's political agenda and not hate. There has been a lot of hate out there-- from both sides and one inspires the other probably-- but it's not a requirement for feeling a certain way about what should be done or being upset at what is being done. Listening to talk radio (certain commentators) and you can think it even more. I know (because of having friends) that there are good people who think very differently than I do on all of this.
I appreciate that you come and read given your political views. I go in spurts where I can handle reading the right wing blogs but then just can't do it. There are times I'd just like to forget politics exists and absolutely 'hate' the idea of writing about it; but then something comes up and I feel the inner urge to voice my own opinion on it. It's a very frustrating time for Americans-- on both sides.
Post a Comment