Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
..."Bush has kept us safe since 9/11" bullshit.
No, Bush terrorized his own country from within after 9/11.
Everything Osama bin Laden wanted to happen to the U.S. pretty much happened after 9/11.
Bush & his cabal of idiots have ruined America's economy, military, ruined housing, privacy rights, jobs & international moral standing, etc. All after 9/11.
So please stop with the bullshit "Bush has kept America safe after 9/11" when, in fact, Bush has done anything but.
Oh yeah: Bush has also ruined the Republican party in the aftermath of 9/11. So it ain't all bad.
Are we sure? I remember for awhile in the years after 9-11 hearing about an extraordinary number of oil production facility fires, an explosion in a munitions plant and many many forest fires in the west.
Who's to say these all these incidents are terrorism free. Does anyone believe the government would really tell the truth when the "no attacks" meme has been so very effective?
You write: "Most importantly for this discussion, in this strict father frame, the father alone, the Leader, defines, determines, and coincides with, what is right."
This theory reduces a person to a sheep, a robot, an automaton without intellect and, if taken as a model for behavior, would lead us off the cliff as lemmings.
Sorry, no defense....
I ask because I can't believe any clear-thinking person would seriously advocate, never mind believe, this:
It's a new world, didn't you get the memo?
Like "good German", but without all the mustache and hails thrown in.
We used to be all good Americans (Dems and Repubs) until Bush and 9-11 fear-mongers told us first--we have to prove we support the GWOT and ignore international laws to recapture our standing as non-traitorous citizens of our once, true-Americans until PAT Act I& II say otherwise.
From -93 to -01 there were no attacks either. And before -93, when was the last attack?
The argument "there have been no attacks, so torture is fine" is moronic. Anyone who says it is either an idiot, or a liar. I don't know which is worse.
Thanks again Glenn for not letting up on this. Also, Joe Klein in Newsweek.com today: "The Bush Administration's Most Despicable Act" http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1870319,00.html
Clickable link at sig.
I am not convinced that the idea of investigations and prosecutions against Bush and his DOJ is losing all traction. Seems like more people are actually encouraging it.
Clickable link to Joe Klein's article at sig. The other one didn't work.
Yes
While pressuring the feckless Democrats to uphold our laws and insist that criminal acts committed by the Bush regime need to be prosecuted regardless of the wealth and elite standing of those lawbreakers in the beltway community, it would certainly make matters much easier if the international community would start demanding as much as what Glenn is pointing out. I've been baffled since the Abu Ghraib abuses came to light in 2004, and then the torture program being executed directly from the White House (even boastfully by Cheney) was exposed, why the signatories to the Geneva Conventions (Great Britian, France, Germany, Italy, Norway, et al.) aren't demanding justice.
Of course there will be war crimes trials over this. I have been saying this for 6 years now. The real questions are, when and by whom ? Back then, I predicted them by 2015; we shall see if I was optimistic or pessimistic.
I call it newsweek.com and then I link to Time.com. Oh well, they've always seemed the same to me> :)
"This theory would make us sheep..."
Yes, that's the problem, People operating in this frame just obey orders, take their moral guidance from the leader. They believe whatever he says is right and good and legal.
for no reason at all -- if we don't torture and enable the torture and extermination of suspected Terrorists and their Terrorist relations.
There is no difference between that reasoning and the reasoning of the Germans as they rounded up, tortured, and exterminated their many enemies -- opposing military personnel, innocent bystanders, terrorists, resistance, freedom fighters, what have you, and anyone around or associated with them -- along with scads of Untermenschen of all kinds, including Jews, Gypsies, and Homosexuels.
Germans, after all, were destined to be slaughtered in their beds by their many enemies if they didn't do so.
As wack as Krauthammer is (and there is hardly a more wacked out pundit on the American scene these days), surely he knows -- and respects -- the parallel arguments, and what he and others are basically saying (though if confronted, they would deny they are actually saying it) is that the American enemies who were tried for war crimes at Nuremberg may have been guilty, but they did the right thing from their patriotic perspective. They, unfortunately, lost the conflict. Too bad, so sad.
In their view, America (and Israel, our Only Real Ally In the Whole Wide World) has not lost the conflict with the Muslim Horde.
And so long as that is the case, there are no "war crimes" and no punishments for them due -- on our side. There is no Universal Law, according to these bright thinkers who gobble up airtime and printer's ink with abandon. There is only what you can get away with and impose on others. Until and unless the Horde is victorious, which of course means the End Of Everything, it is insane to hold anyone on Our Side to account for anything they do in the service to the Authority they serve. Failing to carry out orders to massacre and torture is the chargeable offense.
Just as it was in Nazi Germany. And if Germany had been Victorious, there would have been no War Crimes Trials for Germans, only for the Allies who lost.
The notion of International Law is simply alien and nasty to them. And they have been very successfully propagandizing Americans to believe likewise.
It's possible that some in the international community have been watching what the US is itself doing regarding torture and the like. For anyone (within the 149 signatory countries) who might have an interest in prosecuting members of the Bush administration, they can only be encouraged to do so by Cheney's blatant admissions--almost as if daring anybody to do something about it. And if US Govt. fails completely to address it, that would also encourage interested parties overseas to take action.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
