NY times calls for criminal prosecution of Cheney and others.

[Moonbeam]

I hope I'm wrong on this one but as the NYT points out Obama has studiously avoided accountability for action. Now however the recent report on torture leaves little to the imagination as to what happened. The ACLU and Human Rights Watch will be giving Holder a letter calling for a special prosecutor to look into criminal abuse.

What I wonder is how Obama will respond to this if at all. So far it's been "let's not dwell in the past but look forward", which is blithering nonsense.

So will the DOJ and the President actually do something concrete or will it be more dissembling?

I see no reason to trust but in light of the report he'll not so easily escape criticism from some of those who supported him.

So what's going to really happen?

Link to NYT piece.

I would have added the intention to seek criminal charges of every president for the next thousand years who won't file criminal charges.

 

[compuwiz1]

They're murderous terrorist pieces of shit. What's the problem? Those responsible for 9/11 have been shown more mercy than I would have given them. Torture away!

 

[Zorkorist]

Those responsible for 9/11 are mostly if not entirely dead.

You can hate the rest of Muslims, and want to torture them, but be assured you are a bad person for wanting that.

-John

 

[compuwiz1]

Those responsible for 9/11 are mostly if not entirely dead.

You can hate the rest of Muslims, and want to torture them, but be assured you are a bad person for wanting that.

-John

10-4

I don't hate the peaceful ones. The other ones should hang by their balls.

 

[inachu]

We will not be good at this. Look how ROME has failed its very own people.

America's very own neocons will be it's own undoing: Let these wise words warn the FBI and the CIA:

"For this day's work, lords, you have encouraged treason and opened
the prison doors to free the traitors. A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly against the city. But the traitor moves among those within the gates freely, his sly whispers
rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears no traitor; he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their garments, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation; he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city; he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared. The traitor is the carrier of the plague. You have unbarred the gates of Rome to him." -- Marcus Tullius Cicero

Neocons dam them all to hell.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

They're murderous terrorist pieces of shit. What's the problem? Those responsible for 9/11 have been shown more mercy than I would have given them. Torture away!

Well I wouldn't go that far with punishing Cheney et. al.

 

[Sonikku]

All he did is torture. Not like he did something serious like bring a PoW home or anything.

 

[brycejones]

They're murderous terrorist pieces of shit. What's the problem? Those responsible for 9/11 have been shown more mercy than I would have given them. Torture away!

Yep that's the way to light the way for freedom and democracy around the world. /s

When we act like uncivilized assholes we lose credibility as a nation. Its short sighted, simple minded thinking like yours that has cost this country so much of our international reputation and our ability to lead in ways that don't require the use of military force.

 

[Brainonska511]

Yep that's the way to light the way for freedom and democracy around the world. /s

When we act like uncivilized assholes we lose credibility as a nation. Its short sighted, simple minded thinking like yours that has cost this country so much of our international reputation and our ability to lead in ways that don't require the use of military force.

In addition to the moral repugnance of torture, its interesting to see the people who have no problem with the government engaging in such behavior on our behalf. Today, its people we deem to be radical religious extremists' whose rights we violate (even if they were not in-fact terrorists). Who will the next group be that the government (or a group within it) decides is unworthy of so-called inalienable human rights?

 

[CitizenKain]

They're murderous terrorist pieces of shit. What's the problem? Those responsible for 9/11 have been shown more mercy than I would have given them. Torture away!

Not all them were, but as long as they are brown they deserve to be tortured is what you are saying.

 

[fskimospy]

There is little actual disagreement on what the definition of torture is as related to this program. It easily falls into the legal definition previously used. Generally I am EXTREMELY reluctant to go after previous leadership over differences in policy as it sets a horrible precedent, but the abuses here were so blindingly obvious and so egregious in nature a line has to be drawn somewhere. If we can literally torture people to death without accountability, then what can't we do?

So should we prosecute them? Absolutely. Will we? Absolutely not. By the way, I approve of using this standard against Obama and litigating his decision to unilaterally execute an American citizen by drone strike.

Defending Cheney and other torturers on this is an abrogation of morality. By the way, want to see some 'morality' in action?

I imagine this has a lot more to do with partisan ID than religion, but that should put to rest the idea of religion as being a necessary basis for morality.

 

[Brainonska511]

Defending Cheney and other torturers on this is an abrogation of morality. By the way, want to see some 'morality' in action?

I imagine this has a lot more to do with partisan ID than religion, but that should put to rest the idea of religion as being a necessary basis for morality.

Why is that poll only broken down into all adults, select religions of people who are white, and no religion?

 

[Jaskalas]

Bottom line take on Bush/Cheney: Never EVER vote to the highest offices of gov't two businessmen who come from the class of the very wealthy and privileged...

I would add to that. Never elect Presidents with direct ties to previous administrations / eras gone by. Bush Jr + Cheney + Rumsfeld had a vested interest in Iraq from the former Reagan + Bush admins.

Their experience in Washington made them wealthy, privileged and horribly wrong for the job.

 

[glenn1]

There is little actual disagreement on what the definition of torture is as related to this program. It easily falls into the legal definition previously used. Generally I am EXTREMELY reluctant to go after previous leadership over differences in policy as it sets a horrible precedent, but the abuses here were so blindingly obvious and so egregious in nature a line has to be drawn somewhere. If we can literally torture people to death without accountability, then what can't we do?

So should we prosecute them? Absolutely. Will we? Absolutely not. By the way, I approve of using this standard against Obama and litigating his decision to unilaterally execute an American citizen by drone strike.

Defending Cheney and other torturers on this is an abrogation of morality. By the way, want to see some 'morality' in action?

I imagine this has a lot more to do with partisan ID than religion, but that should put to rest the idea of religion as being a necessary basis for morality.

Bush and Cheney should have just let Al Qaeda hit NYC again. Then we'd not only have a lot less New Yorkers but the ones that were left would have done the torture themselves.

 

[bshole]

There is little actual disagreement on what the definition of torture is as related to this program. It easily falls into the legal definition previously used. Generally I am EXTREMELY reluctant to go after previous leadership over differences in policy as it sets a horrible precedent, but the abuses here were so blindingly obvious and so egregious in nature a line has to be drawn somewhere. If we can literally torture people to death without accountability, then what can't we do?

So should we prosecute them? Absolutely. Will we? Absolutely not. By the way, I approve of using this standard against Obama and litigating his decision to unilaterally execute an American citizen by drone strike.

Defending Cheney and other torturers on this is an abrogation of morality. By the way, want to see some 'morality' in action?

I imagine this has a lot more to do with partisan ID than religion, but that should put to rest the idea of religion as being a necessary basis for morality.

Weird how religion is INVERSELY related to morality. That poll is a stain on Christianity.

Bush and Cheney should have just let Al Qaeda hit NYC again. Then we'd not only have a lot less New Yorkers but the ones that were left would have done the torture themselves.

So your views on terrorism line up with Al Qaeda's? Why am I not surprised?

 

[Brainonska511]

I would add to that. Never elect Presidents with direct ties to previous administrations / eras gone by. Bush Jr + Cheney + Rumsfeld had a vested interest in Iraq from the former Reagan + Bush admins.

Their experience in Washington made them wealthy, privileged and horribly wrong for the job.

I wouldn't say never do that. The key is just to nominate and elect the right people. Bush Jr, Cheney, and Rumsfeld were the wrong people people for the job.

Bush and Cheney should have just let Al Qaeda hit NYC again. Then we'd not only have a lot less New Yorkers but the ones that were left would have done the torture themselves.

Seeing as how torture didn't work and didn't make us safer, I don't see why anyone would even think of expressing such a stupid thought.

 

[Jaskalas]

Lol Yeah, we should just elect a community organizer. That couldn't possibly go wrong.

Surely there's a sweet middle ground between Washington crony with an axe to grind, and a green incompetent.

Such as... Bill Clinton. Had to govern a State first, but his daddy wasn't President. Made him a good outside man for the job.

 

[shira]

Bush and Cheney should have just let Al Qaeda hit NYC again. Then we'd not only have a lot less New Yorkers but the ones that were left would have done the torture themselves.

This is a repugnantly dishonest post. You're implying that torturing detainees is the essential reason that Al Qaeda didn't strike NYC again, that all other U.S. actions post-911 were essentially irrelevant in the fight against international terrorism. You're implying that NOT torturing detainees would have amounted to a green light to Al Qaeda.

This is your version of reality?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Why is that poll only broken down into all adults, select religions of people who are white, and no religion?

It's clearly a "poll" with an agenda. I'm sure eskimospy is fine with it though.

 

[Brainonska511]

It's clearly a "poll" with an agenda. I'm sure eskimospy is fine with it though.

I don't know if it's a poll with an agenda, I just wonder why the demographics were broken down like that for the more detailed analysis.

 

[fskimospy]

It's clearly a "poll" with an agenda. I'm sure eskimospy is fine with it though.

lol. It seems odd for someone who cites partisan sources as frequently and uncritically as you do to complain about the agenda of a nonpartisan scientific poll.

As I mentioned in my previous post, I think that partisanship is the best explanation for this overall. That being said, the race part here is irrelevant. (it just happens to be a byproduct of how the data is displayed here) In all 3 cases the percentage of white/religious people surveyed who support torture exceeds the percentage of white people as a whole who do.

check the results out for yourself:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/page/...estion_15189.xml?uuid=MALZwIcMEeSrz1o9ezsguA#

So, you were saying?

 

[fskimospy]

I don't know if it's a poll with an agenda, I just wonder why the demographics were broken down like that for the more detailed analysis.

When people hear results that they don't like they immediately try to find a way to make them not true.

Again though, support for torture is most closely related to self-identification as a conservative.

It is particularly funny/sad to me that followers of an ideology that views giving poor people health care as tyranny are so supportive of actions that are basically the dictionary definition of tyranny.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

I don't know if it's a poll with an agenda, I just wonder why the demographics were broken down like that for the more detailed analysis.

The graph appears to have been generated by a blogger with an agenda. Here's a more detailed breakout from the Washington Post who conducted the poll:

 

[fskimospy]

Bush and Cheney should have just let Al Qaeda hit NYC again. Then we'd not only have a lot less New Yorkers but the ones that were left would have done the torture themselves.

Lol. Spite based policy decisions strike again, huh?

I continue to find it funny to watch your white hot jealousy of NYC burn.

 

[fskimospy]

The graph appears to have been generated by a blogger with an agenda. Here's a more detailed breakout from the Washington Post who conducted the poll:

Wrong again, it's actually a reproduction of the Washington Post's own breakout as shown on their website.

So now that you've accepted that the Post is a credible source for this are you either going to declare them to have an agenda or actually discuss the disturbing correlation?