**I must disagree with commentors who claim this is the fault of the American people, that we elected Obama and other hypocrites because we are apathetic, lazy, uninformed, what have you. It's not true.

Instead, the reality as I see it is that Obama exploited us - he exploited our anger, our desire for change, our mobilization of votes and energy to put him in power, and then he abandoned us. He said, "Thanks for the election!"**

While I agree with the above, I'd say it's also pretty clear that he was foisted on the public by the media as their candidate of choice. Remember when Kucinich and company were axed from the TV debate line-up at the last minute?

It was already Decided who the next Decider was going to be.

There wasn't much of a prisoner exchange at the end of the Soviet-Afghan War.

Anyone care to guess why not?

Shouldn't that be prosecuted too?

That is Political Ass.

Every time I hear 'national security' invoked to shut down an investigation, I have to ask 'The national security of whom? The democratic republic of the United States of America or the fascist oligarchy that has supplanted it? Me thinks the latter.

In reply to my comments, you noted:

Roveian technique # 12: When caught, claim this is "old news."

Also, Glenn's point is about underscoring the bullshit uttered by our political class (granted that concept is not "new news" either). In this context, the quote "We believe anyone suspected of war crimes..." practically jumps out at you and begs for commentary.

Very selective. Not only am I unaware of Rove referencing with apparent approval anti-Bush accounts like Jane Mayer,* but I also said "it's useful that the stuff keeps on being brought to our attention, including more details."

* The #1 Rovian technique is not to say "old news" but "nothing to see here." That is, there is nothing really wrong going on. Something of a subtle difference, but has kick.

You would think Republicans would be grateful that Obama is covering up their sins, but it obvious Repubs are just as determined as ever to screw Barry coming and going.

Democrats are saps.

If Dems fail on health care and jobs, it would be justice if the wingers do bring them down.

Mr. Levy,

There's no point in you and your wife leaving where you live now for the hinterlands--the polce state will follow. Stick it out with the vast majority of us who don't have the means to leave. Instead of a Candide moment, sooner or later you will be presented with a Tiananmen moment, where you will have to stare down the Gorgon. I feel bad for you about Britain, but the potential for a surveillance state here is far greater, and since many of our fellow countrymen have always had trouble determining which side of the bread their butter is on, you will be far more likely to be renditioned here.

From this post [emphasis in original]:

GG: See also, quite relatedly: this post from earlier today on how we continue to shield from any accountability the clear and serious crimes committed by Bush officials in how they spied on Americans. Let's just repeat the sermon from the anonymous Obama official in demanding an investigation into crimes by this Afghan warlord: "We believe that anyone suspected of war crimes should be thoroughly investigated." It doesn't appear that they know what the word "anyone" means.

They don’t know what it means? Sure they do. They’re the ONLY ones who know. It’s the Humpty Dumpty rule all the way…you know the one he relates to Alice about words meaning “just what I want them to mean”. “The Question” after all, “is Who is to be Master?”, right?

“Anyone” and “torture” and “war crimes” are such vague notions, donchaknow?

One of the points in the previous post which relates to the “thoroughly investigated” part of this one is [emphasis added]:

(1) The IG Report is more notable for what it fails to address than for what it discloses, but that's the nature of IG Reports. Most of the key players who authorized the illegal domestic spying -- David Addington, John Yoo, Dick Cheney, Andrew Card, John Ashcroft, George Tenet -- simply refused to talk to the IGs or, in many cases, didn't even bother responding to their request. The IG's have no power at all to compel them to do so; it's entirely optional. That -- aside from the fact that they work within the Executive Branch and for the very agencies they are supposed to investigate -- is what makes IGs such an inadequate substitute for real oversight: no matter how much integrity and independence they might have, they are extremely limited in what they can achieve.

Not only did Rumsfeld not deign to talk to Navy IG Vice Admiral Church who in May 2004 was tasked with “investigating” prisoner abuse, Church asserts that he had no questions for the [SOB] SoD:

March 2, 2005 - The “Church Report on Detainee Abuse” is released. The report is 368 pages long, most of which is classified. There is an unclassified 21 page executive summary which has been circulated [See March 10, 2005], in which Church concluded that there was “no link between approved interrogation techniques and detainee abuse.” [9] Eight hundred individuals were interviewed, but not Rumsfeld. When asked at a press conference … after the release of the summary in March, why SoD Rumsfeld was not interviewed by investigators, Church said, “I did not have any questions for him.” […]” [10] Capt. Ian Fishback contacts Human Rights Watch: I am concerned that the Army is deliberately misleading the American people about detainee treatment within our custody.” He asks they could facilitate a meeting with Senator John McCain. Fishback meets [still unidentified by name] with HRW again on July 21, 2005. The Army does not allow him to meet with McCain. He writes a letter to the senator stating his concerns on September 16, 2005. For Fishback’s initial attempts to have his concerns addressed by his chain of command, see May 7, 2004. [140]

Are we really meant to believe Church did not question Rumsfeld?

Somewhat later we get a smidgeon of a glimmer of an idea of something the SOD might not want divulged:

December 8, 2005 - DoD “records from Detainee Senior Leadership Oversight Council Meeting contain references to a previously unreleased section of the Church Report [March 2 and 10, 2005] and discuss the need for the DOD to develop and enforce guidelines governing their relationship with “Other Government Agencies,” including the CIA, in order to regulate interrogation and other “operations overseas.” These documents demonstrate that the DOD and CIA were in an ad hoc relationship, apparently unconstrained by formal guidelines.” [74] See also the Taguba Report at [19]

The Taguba Report also reveals part of the problem no one was supposed to know:

September 30, 2003 - Col. Thomas Pappas [head of Intelligence at Abu Ghraib] survives a mortar attack at the prison, and may suffer from PTSD. There are questions of whether he was capable of fulfilling the duties of his job. Also, locating a prison in a war zone is a violation of the GC and US Military doctrine stresses that prison guards should not also be in combat situations. [16] See also November 30, 2003. In his report about Abu Ghraib, General Taguba states: “[…] the horrific abuses suffered by the detainees at Abu Ghraib (BCCF) were wanton acts of select soldiers in an unsupervised and dangerous setting. There was a complex interplay of many psychological factors and command insufficiencies […] during the period August 2003 to February 2004.” [19]

November 30, 2003 - Col. Thomas Pappas at Abu Ghraib makes a request to Sanchez for an exception to interrogation policy [September 14, 2003] in order to use “fear up harsh” on Syrian male detainee #151363. [143] Part of the proposal is the use of MP’s as support personnel for interrogators. According to General Taguba’s Report, this is “contrary to the provision of AR 190-8 […]” [19] See also September 30, 2003, and November 19, 2003.

Sources at:

http://www.webdsi.com/jebbie/tline.html