President Barack Obama today defended his decision to close the military detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba and promptly raised more serious concerns for civil libertarians. In his speech, Obama announced that the country’s “moral authority” demanded closure but then said that his lawyers were working new policies to hold certain detainees indefinitely without trial.
Obama broke the detainees into five categories. He is to be commended for deciding to send some detainees to federal court for a true and legitimate trial. However, he still refused to take the rule of law to its full conclusion. With one category, he isolated to “detainees at Guantanamo who cannot be prosecuted, yet who pose a clear danger to the American people.” He promised “[w]e are not going to release anyone if it would endanger our national security, nor will we release detainees within the United States who endanger the American people.” Of course, this would mean holding people in violation of domestic and international law — precisely what George Bush did. It is part of the Administration’s effort to appear principled by doing an unprincipled thing. The reason that we cannot try these individuals is because they would win. The solution, according to both Bush and Obama, is not to give them a trial.
For the full story, click here.
God Bless Dick Cheney.
The speech by Mr. Cheney does not require any detailed analysis. It was simply another version of the same faulty argument that has been repeated ad nauseam by defenders of the Bush administration. All of the rhetoric boils down to a single post hoc, ergo propter hoc assertion: we instituted torture and this country suffered no attacks thereafter. I submit that those to whom the fallacy of that argument is not readily apparent are incapable of rational analysis on any topic. Therefore, responding to them is a useless exercise.
With regard to the president’s speech, I was disappointed over his comments on the issue of indefinite detention. That policy is a constitutional and moral abomination. I remain hopeful, however, that Pres. Obama recognizes that, but is refraining from saying anything more until a solution has been formalized. I have to remind myself that fear cannot always be overcome with facts, and it is apparent that Republicans are still quite capable of stirring up fear whenever they deem it politically useful.
Turns out the shepherd who was suppose to gather the flock is a wolf in lambs clothing and the wool was pulled over your eyes, not mine of course. The Saturday Night skit where GW says a vote for McCain is a vote for me should of had Obama instead. Simple division has turned into multiplication of dissent. I cant wait to hear what the teleprompter has to say as he continues his We Apologize Tour. His D-day speech should be quite interesting. I’m sure he will say in Dresden the U.S. committed war crimes, we are sorry and there will be no investigations then go to Nagasaki and Hiroshima and tell the Japanese, Like 9-11 the United States knew that Pearl Harbour would be bombed but we turned a blind eye so we could have an excuse to test out our nuclear arsenal just like we needed an excuse to invade Iraq. We are sorry that we gathered up all the Japanese enemy combatants, suspended thier civil liberties and put them in camps even though over 60% were U.S. citizens. Can you imagine the speech to the muslims.
Obama, Biden, Bush, Cheney, Congress and co-conspirators are War Criminals and guilty of many other crimes. They should be IN prison but ‘We The People’ can’t find a judge or prosecutor who will do his duty under the Constitution and arrest them. The government officials are cowards and traitors.
All I can say is “WOW”,after reading this,By David Brooks no less
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/22/opinion/22brooks.html?_r=1
I find myself very disheartened by the dueling speeches of President Obama and Dick the war criminal. Not by the President’s preventative detention policy (although he’s just flat out wrong on this one) or by the war criminal’s despicable lies in service of his personal CYA tour, but by what the speeches and media coverage of them says about the position of the American people. In a poll on MSNBC.com only 54% of people agreed with President Obama and 43% agreed with Dick that torture can yield useful intelligence. In my opinion, the only way to get the president to do the right thing on this issue is to change public opinion to the point where real polling (and let’s face it, a web poll on MSNBC is going to have a liberal bias) shows 2/3 of the people against torture. People need to be convinced that torture is both ineffective and wrong (and that either of these objections is a sufficient reason not to do it). President Obama has shown a willingness to listen to arguments he disagrees with and change his mind when he is convinced that he is wrong so we need to speak up and convince him that he is wrong here.
Achilles,
An example of how torture has made us less safe is provided in the book by Mike Alexander (I forget the title). In working as an interrogator in Iraq he found that the best technique was to build a rapport with the prisoners and treat them humanely. In doing this he found that most of the prisoners (especially foreign nationals who came to Iraq to fight the US) had joined Al-Qaieda in Iraq after hearing of brutality by US forces. Upon finding out that this was not the case, they became cooperative. Thus the thousands of Americans (unless you don’t consider our soldiers Americans…) killed since Saddam’s regime was toppled died primarily as a result of torture. Furthermore, it has been pretty well established (by the testimony of interrogators, military officials, and other authorities) that the only thing that torture produces is false confessions and unreliable information. Indeed, the SERE program from which the torture techniques were reverse engineered were developed to prepare our troops for possible interrogations by people like the North Koreans looking to extract false confessions from our POWs (and personally, I don’t think that the North Koreans are the moral example we should try to emulate…). The bottom line is that since torture is immoral AND ineffective we received absolutely no benefit for the stain on our national honor and even if no Americans had died because of this policy it would still be illegal, immoral, and reprehensible.
A few more questions achilles.
How did Bush know that he was safe in the school on 9/11?
How did he know that a plane was not going to crash into the school?
It was announced on Sept 7 that Bush was going to be at the school in Sarasota, and 2 of the hijackers were IN Sarasota at a Holiday Inn on September 9 just miles from where Bush was staying. Are you suggesting that the hijackers were SO intelligent as to outsmart our defense and intelligence agencies in order to hijack 4 planes at once and to control NORAD taking 85 minutes to respond, but they were too DUMB to know that the PRESIDENT of the country they hated was just MILES from them and they couldnt find out he was speaking at the school on 9/11 even though that info was public knowledge???????
So, Bush didnt want to “frighten” the children by quietly getting up and saying “I’m sorry [to the teacher] but I have to take care of something”, but he put the lives of the children, faculty and his own staff in danger by staying INSIDE the school when god knows how many planes were being hijacked at the time or where they were?
Do you believe in the easter bunny too, achilles??
Of course, why would Bush jump into action on August 6, 2001, when he didnt do JACK SHIT EITHER ON THE VERY DAY OF 9-11 even AFTER knowing planes were smashing into the towers?? Unless, achilles, you call listening to children read “The Pet Goat” as jumping into action!
Dont give me that fucking “but he didnt want to frighten the children” BULLSHIT either. I have one question for you achilles:
“When Bush took a question from a boy at a school in December 2001 about ‘how Bush felt that day’ [9/11], “Bush said these very EXACT words: [“Well, Jordan, you’re not going to believe what state I was in when I heard about the terrorist attack. I was in Florida. And my chief of staff, Andy Card — actually I was in a classroom talking about a reading program that works. And I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower — the TV was obviously on, and I use to fly myself, and I said, “There’s one terrible pilot.” And I said, “It must have been a horrible accident.” But I was whisked off there — I didn’t have much time to think about it..”]
How did Bush SEE the FIRST PLANE hit the tower when the footage of FIRST PLANE hitting the WTC was not shown until the NEXT DAY? He wasnt talking about the SECOND plane, because in the quote above he says, “It must have been an ACCIDENT”. Everyone knows when the second plane hit it was NOT an accident, so it had to be the FIRST PLANE he was referring to. HOW did he see it hit the tower ON 9/11 when it wasnt shown until the NEXT day after news stations had retrieved the Naudet brothers’ footage of it?
Got an answer for that, genius???
Hey achilles—–Maybe Bush couldnt have known the details of the impending attack that would happen 36 days after the August 6 PDB, but HE COULD HAVE FUCKING BEEN IN WASHINGTON ATTEMPTING TO FIND OUT INSTEAD OF HIS RANCH FOR NEARLY THE ENTIRE MONTH OF AUGUST!! Did you know that Bush took about THREE YEARS of vacation in his 8 years as Prez?? I mean THREE literal years, well over 900 days of vacation! NO PRESIDENT SHOULD TAKE ANY VACATION WHILE TROOPS ARE DYING IN A WAR! How many vacation days did Lincoln an Roosevelt take?? You are an ASS achilles! Bush is LEGALLY guilty of murder too according to legal genius Vincent Bugliosi.
From my ‘Greatest Hits’…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wmc60JmaLbE&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fjonathanturley%2Eorg%2Fabout%2F&feature=player_embedded
http://newsbusters.org/node/5310
Olbermann: “All of this, Jonathan, has been likened to the swing of a pendulum, that this is Vice President Cheney, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, harkening back to their days as rookies in the Ford administration, watching the fallout of presidential powers being cut back after the abuses of Richard Nixon. If that’s true, if it is a pendulum, does the pendulum swing back? Can it? Will it?”
Turley: “Well, unfortunately, civil liberties don’t swing back like other issues. Civil liberties is a very precious commodity. When you lose them, it tends to run out of your hand like sand, and it’s hard to get it back. And that’s one of the dangers here, that presidents, when they acquire power, rarely return it to the people. And so we have to be very concerned. This country is changing in a very significant way, and it’s something that citizens have to think about because if there is a war on terror, and I believe that we must fight terror, obviously, but we’re trying to defend that Constitution. And we’re really at a point where the President is arguing about his own presidential power in ways that are the antithesis of that Constitution and the values that it contains.”
Olbermann: “Constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley. As always, sir, thanks for your time. Thanks for joining us.”
Turley: “Thanks, Keith.”
CCD and Mespo,
Well done. The trolls are always so weak on the facts.
acilles:
“You recite the bin laden PDB memo that said: “Bin Laden determined to attack inside the U.S” and then directly attack Presient Bush & C. Rice for not comprehending the significance of this dire warning.
1) what day was the attack suppose to be?
2) where city were they planning on attacking us at?
3) what was the target?
4) what weapon were we being attacked with?
5) how many attackers were there going to be?”
*************
Well lets take a look at the original source and see if we can respond to your talking points? We have some limitation since only a small portion of the PDB of August 6, 2001 was declassified and released but maybe we can see how a mere novice like me might react to the information:
“Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US
Clandestine, foreign government, and media reports indicate Bin Ladin since 1997 has wanted to conduct terrorist attacks in the US. Bin Ladin implied in US television interviews in 1997 and 1998 that his followers would follow the example of World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef and “bring the fighting to America.”
After US missile strikes on his base in Afghanistan in 1998, Bin Ladin told followers he wanted to retaliate in Washington, according to a [–] service.
An Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ) operative told an [–] service at the same time that Bin Ladin was planning to exploit the operative’s access to the US to mount a terrorist strike.
The millennium plotting in Canada in 1999 may have been part of Bin Ladin’s first serious attempt to implement a terrorist strike in the US. Convicted plotter Ahmed Ressam has told the FBI that he conceived the idea to attack Los Angeles International Airport himself, but that Bin Ladin lieutenant Abu Zubaydah encouraged him and helped facilitate the operation. Ressam also said that in 1998 Abu Zubaydah was planning his own US attack.
Ressam says Bin Ladin was aware of the Los Angeles operation.
Although Bin Ladin has not succeeded, his attacks against the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 demonstrate that he prepares operations years in advance and is not deterred by setbacks. Bin Ladin associates surveilled our Embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam as early as 1993, and some members of the Nairobi cell planning the bombings were arrested and deported in 1997.
Al-Qa’ida members–including some who are US citizens–have resided in or traveled to the US for years, and the group apparently maintains a support structure that could aid attacks. Two al-Qua’ da members found guilty in the conspiracy to bomb our embassies in East Africa were US citizens, and a senior EIJ member lived in California in the mid-1990s.
A clandestine source said in 1998 that a Bin Ladin cell in New York was recruiting Muslim-American youth for attacks.
We have not been able to corroborate some of the more sensational threat reporting, such as that from a [–] service in 1998 saying that Bin Ladin wanted to hijack a US aircraft to gain the release of “Blind Shaykh” ‘Umar ‘Abd al-Rahman and other US-held extremists.
Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.
The FBI is conducting approximately 70 full field investigations throughout the US that it considers Bin Ladin-related. CIA and the FBI are investigating a call to our Embassy in the UAE in May saying that a group of Bin Ladin supporters was in the US planning attacks with explosives.
Late in the month, a foreign service reported that Abu Zubaydah was considering mounting terrorist attacks in the United States, after postponing possible operations in Europe. No targets, timing, or method of attack were provided.”
—
My untrained eye would have surmised that attacks were imminent say in the next 90 days or so given the increase in activities consistent with terrorist attacks or hijackings and like information being received prior to attacks on our embassies. I would secure buildings in LA, DC and NY. I would increase security at airports to enhance my chances of apprehending any would be hijackers. I would place the federal air marshal service on alert, and notify the airlines to report suspicious activity especially cash sales of one way tickets. I would get more info on the 70 or so ongoing investigations including what level of activity and where the activity was most prevalent. I would alert the Air Guard to have more planes in the air in these locations, and suggest more surveillance of federal and landmark buildings in the most likely target areas. I would notify the public of the heightened state of alert and seek the public’s help in identifying suspicious activity in or around airports, and ask that it be reported to the local FBI field office. Since terrorist attacks are usually the work of less than 20 members I would surmise this pattern would hold true and alert law enforcement of this probability. I would be particularly sensitive to the possibility of hijacking cross country flights since they carry the most fuel, and would carefully screen these passengers for weapons. I would ask the FAA to invoke emergency rule making to insure that no weapons of any sort were permitted on cross country trips to lessen the likelihood of this type of plane being used as a weapon. Publicity trumps secret plots every time.
The one thing I wouldn’t have done is nothing. How’s that, oh ostrich?
Gordon and achilles:
You two will surrender your civil rights to feel safer, but it’s a catastrophic error. Tough for either of you to see through the lies and deceptions of BushCo. The evidence is out, connect the dots. Got liberty?
Achilles,
For a troll you a pretty mean spirited. You are forgetting one of the major aspects about George the Second’s handling, or non-handling of the PDB in August, 2001. George didn’t do anything after receiving the briefing at his ranch. He didn’t leave his vacation and kept “clearing brush”. The attack on 9/11 was on George the Second’s watch and for some reason your response is that we weren’t attacked after 9/11. What about 9/11? By the way, why aren’t you at the new Star Trek opening tonight?
achilles,
One last things, I am an attorney and I did a bombing case. My clients occurred August 28, 01. The FBI, CIA, Alcohol Beverage Commission, MSP and all of the local agencies showed up. They knew just like Pearl Harbor that it was coming. You fool. Sig Heil. We are attacking Iran on 2 fronts now. Oil, Oil Money and Bankers, that is what it is all about.
achilles,
Heel, boy, heel. Or is it sig heil der furher? What do you call your leader? Der Cheney? We call ours our inner moral compass. I am sure it is easy to confuse morass and morals. They have almost all of the same letters. Unless you are ghettofied, then mor ass has a different meaning, don’t you see. Oh thats right, you have not been found, so you are still blind. Got it.
Really, what do you call your leader? Der Cheney?
PS for Mespo:
Tomorrow Barack Obama picks up his moring PDB and reads the following words:
Bin Laden determined to AGAIN attack inside the U.S
What plan of action do you recommend idiot boy???????????????
You know idiot boy, it could very well happen that those are the words in his PDB……..and if they were, you would be whining about the CIA instead of doing something about protecting America.