The country has stood by while one incident after the next of deliberate lawbreaking and cover-up at the highest levels of our government has been revealed. -- Greenwald

The country has stood by? Or has it been certain powerful forces -- media, congressional leadership of both parties, corporate "citizens" -- who have "stood by?"

Blaming the passivity of "the country" for this mess is convenient, but is it accurate? People do take action, all the time; but that action is ignored, dismissed, or denounced -- unless it comes from the right interest groups, and for the past decade or more (not six years, it's been much longer than that) the right interest groups are almost exclusively corporate-wingnut interest groups. No one else has had any particular influence in the halls of Power in many, many years. But boy-o-boy. Get the fascists and their corporate sponsors to froth and foam, and the Powerful hop to.

But that doesn't mean others ("the country") have stopped taking action.

It's just that their action has little or no effect.

Harman and Rockefeller of course have (or had) some major responsibility for the lawlessness that has consumed our Government. But they do not act in isolation. The institutions they serve have failed, not just the individuals at the top. Any member of the committees involved could have intervened, but none did. They could have gone public, but none did. (Yes, there are risks involved.) Any member of Congress could have raised a fuss about the lawlessness all around them, and some did, but they were ignored, dismissed and/or denounced -- often by their own party colleagues.

The Leadership (whether in the minority or the majority) could have intervened at any point. They haven't to this day.

The problem is institutional.

Lawlessness is the Rule -- at least for the time being. And for the time being, the Rs together with a sufficent number of Dems form the institutional majority to keep it that way.

"The Country" is not causing this situation, and "The Country" is not standing idly by while it continues. "The Country" -- or at least a committed part of it, including the Greenwalds of the Nation -- is trying to get the attention of those in Power, in order that some changes be made, so far without significant results.

Are you a delusional right wing nut, or are you merely a right wing troll? Having just read your apologia of the tape destruction, I have to wonder. Either way, I suppose that there is no hope of redemption for you.....

From todays NY Times:

"In a statement to employees on Thursday, Gen. Michael V. Hayden, the C.I.A. director, said that the decision to destroy the tapes was made “within the C.I.A.” and that they were destroyed to protect the safety of undercover officers and because they no longer had intelligence value."

From Wikipedia:

"On July 14, 2003, a newspaper column entitled "Mission to Niger" by Robert Novak disclosed Plame's name and status as an "operative" who worked in a CIA division on the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Mrs. Wilson's husband, Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson, stated in various interviews and subsequent writings (as listed in his 2004 memoir The Politics of Truth) that his wife's identity was covert and that members of the administration knowingly revealed it as retribution for his op-ed entitled "What I Didn't Find in Africa", published in The New York Times on July 6, 2003.[3]"

"Destroying those tapes was the right thing to do.

Why? Because like the Abu Ghraib pictures it would be leaked, and live forever in cyberspace as the stereotype of all America. While I'm sure quite a few here would like that to occur, our current reputation of being the cruelist, most bloodthirsty, lawless nation in recent history doesn't need embellishment." shooter242

Another vivid illustration of the capacity for self-delusion exhibited by rightwing freaks like shooter242, to whom it never occurs that the desctruction of the tapes achieves precisely what shooter242 decries: the embellishment of the image of our country as cruel and lawless.

Sorry to go off-topic, but I had to throw this bit of Joe Klein insanity into the mix that I just heard and it made my jaw drop (I'm not sure why I'm still shocked by this guy). After Bush's dismissing of the NIE report, Media Liberal Clown [tm] Joe Klein went on MSNBC's Joe Scarborough show yesterday to make the following statement:

The Bush reaction to this — he didn’t try to block it. He didn’t try to postpone it. He didn’t spend weeks, he didn’t ask the intelligence community ‘give me a couple of weeks, let’s see if we can figure out some kind of negotiating initiative or some way to respond to this.’ He didn’t try to spin it to our advantage. This is an amazing moment of candor by the United States.

- Joe Klein (12/06/07)

An amazing moment of candor.

These fascist swine will live forever, and even if they retire or are voted out of office someone just like them will take over with the lies, spin and bullshit. Witness Karl Rove and his gig over at Newsweek. Witness Karl and his $3 million book contract. Imagine! $3 million for the lies, spin and bullshit he used to dispense for free. Ironic, eh? Actually it's mind-boggling, but that's the way it is, folks.

Destroying those tapes was the right thing to do.

Why? Because like the Abu Ghraib pictures it would be leaked, and live forever in cyberspace as the stereotype of all America. While I'm sure quite a few here would like that to occur, our current reputation of being the cruelist, most bloodthirsty, lawless nation in recent history doesn't need embellishment. As for the legality of the destruction, it may or may not surpass the act of leaking such information, so unless I hear calls for the exposure and prosecution of the leakers as well, forget about it.

-- shooter242

Shooter,

You clearly understand the symbolism of leaked videotapes documenting the US engaging in torture. That you understand this point suggests there are still bits of humanity inside of you that RWA talking points have not shouted down. You are absolutely right that this would stand as a testament to us as a "bloodthirsty, lawless nation". I disagree that would make us the "cruelest" because you and I both know that hijacking planes and flying them into buildings to kill innocents is as outrageous as it gets and other regimes' acts resulting in systematic murders of millions exceed the actions of the US here. In fact, I would argue that is precisely the leaking of the tapes that would prevent us becoming the cruelest. Only by exposing wrong practices, discussing them, and then correcting our practices can we be distinguished from those who have no principles guiding their actions when pursuing their "cause".

The actions in the tapes themselves (by inference, from previous admissions of waterboarding and other "aggressive" techniques, although, admittedly, we will never know if all copies have indeed been destroyed, as claimed) and the destruction of the tapes are felonies. On the other hand, exposure of crimes committed by the government is not a criminal act in itself, and never has been, so your final bit of blather evaporates on examination.

You are right to make the connection to Abu Ghraib. US practice in handling of detainees in Iraq was improved (we think) when these atrocities were disclosed. At least those pictured were punished and there were attempts to punish those in authority over those who committed the wrong acts. A few of those also were punished, although administration of "justice" in this case was a bit spotty as I recall. How is the prosecution going on those who leaked the photos?

There has been much discussion in the last few threads over "ends" and "means". I think this case encapsulates it quite clearly with respect to Bush and his cohorts. In the heady rush of power they arrogated shortly after 9/11, they employed means that overstepped many boundaries of human decency as well as international law and treaties. They are now backing away from some of the very worst and doing everything they can to destroy the evidence associated with those acts. Sadly, they are clinging to some of the wrongly acquired "means" and resisting all efforts to remove them, as in the warrantless wiretapping and telecom immunity issues still under discussion.