The Ongoing Torture Debate

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	M - Th 11p / 10c
Cliff May Unedited Interview Pt. 1
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Economic Crisis First 100 Days

It is unfortunate that the most complete and honest debate regarding the current state of affairs as it surrounds the use of torture by America was on The Daily Show.

Obama and the Military Industrial Complex

In the first few weeks of the Obama Administration, it is becoming increasingly clear that he can't please everyone. Unfortunately, some in the military establishment have gone almost to the point of blackmail in attempting to place controls on U.S. Defense Policy.

With the word "stimulus" in the air, and every corporation with operations in the United States smelling bacon, an effort has emerged in Washington seeking to extend production of the F-22 as a sort of stimulus spending. A webpage sponsored by manufacturer Lockheed-Martin alleges that 95,000 jobs can be saved by continuing to manufacture the F-22 Raptor, without mentioning a specific cost in additional military spending. Undoubtedly, the Air Force itself is hoping for this increase as well, considering reports that the F-35 can't stand up against Russian air defense systems. However, this is the least of Obama's military problems.

Adm. Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, acknowledging the change of focus for the Defense Department from Iraq to Afghanistan, has a laundry list of potential military problems which are very far-reaching.

For instance, [Adm. Mullen] said, the United States needs to help Iran develop stability instead of fomenting terror.

Other sticking points abroad, Mullen said, are assuring stability in places like Russia and China, dealing with issues like famine and genocide in Africa, and the drug trade in Mexico.

This news report on Adm. Mullen's full lecture is well-worth reading. Obviously, the Department of Defense is going to be on the receiving end of a lot of government funding, especially considering the costs of expanding operations in Afghanistan, despite efforts to curb U.S. strategic objectives.

Two other reports regarding the military-industrial complex could serve as an early test of the new administration. The first, that the military is attempting to accuse Obama of reducing military spending, by not giving them all that the Joint Chiefs of Staff wanted, smacks of career military officials attempting to establish their role in crafting defense policy. While bureaucratic squabbling is hardly anything new, this second report, is far more disturbing. If senior military officials are truly attempting to pressure Pres. Obama into accepting a misleading plan to rename apples oranges, they are certainly making a political decision instead of respecting the orders of their new Commander-in-Chief.

Defense policy, especially spending decisions, are fundamentally political decisions, and thus the exclusive province of elected civilian leaders. Even if General Petraeus is worried that he is losing his hotline to the White House that he enjoyed in the days of the Bush Administration, it would probably be more useful for him to pursue a good working relationship with the incoming administration, rather than engaging in bureaucratic in-fighting over issues which have already been addressed.

Palin Strikes Back

For those worried that the Daily Show might run out of material during the next four years of an Obama administration, the Internet's savior, Sarah Palin, has come through again, launching her own new SarahPAC. Political Action Committees are compelled under federal law to comply with certain regulations, but they spend a lot of money in a city where Benjamin Franklin speaks. What exactly constitutes "a better, safer, and stronger America in the 21st Century" should provide many punchlines in the near-term. Hopefully Governor Palin's four year vacation from federal electoral politics will help her develop coherent policy positions, but I don't imagine her supporters want to hear anything more than catch phrases.

In a slightly more disturbing twist, there is a group known as PalinPAC which stole the catchy name, and as of this writing has received 2588 hits on their website. The most telling mark of something resembling the political version of a scam is that their mission page mentions the values and issues of the Republican Party, but doesn't, at any point gto into any meaningful depth on what exactly those values and issues are. The one page that might reveal the thinking behind the leaders of the group, about their Religious Values has a bible quote, and a very interesting quote which is reproduced below.

Every problem we have can't be George Bush's fault like many believe. Why don't we look to and ask the Congress and House of Representatives what they have been doing about our country's problems? The Democrats wanted control and got it. But what have they done with it?

Obviously nothing a group that supports Sarah Palin would agree with.

Enforcement of the Convention Against Torture

Perhaps the winds of change are blowing through the District of Columbia, for a change. Professor Manfred Nowak has spoken publicly about his belief that George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld should be brought before a court because of the conditions of imprisonment at Guantanamo Bay. A video of an interview with CNN's Rick Sanchez is posted for context below.



For those readers unfamiliar with the various levels of complicity, such as John Ashcroft's infamous quote, Condoleeza Rice's admission, or Dick Cheney's admission from Taxi to the Dark Side, a few highlights are presented below by liberal pundit Rachel Maddow, for a quick brief.

To summarize the argument even further into condensed legal flavor, Article 4 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment compels member states to prosecute allegations of torture, casting a wide net to catch everyone between the interrogator to those who knew about it and did nothing, in theory. The Text is quoted below.

1. Each State Party shall ensure that all acts of torture are offences under its criminal law. The same shall apply to an attempt to commit torture and to an act by any person which constitutes complicity or participation in torture. 2. Each State Party shall make these offences punishable by appropriate penalties which take into account their grave nature.

This, to state the obvious, is the largest test of the new administration. How will Obama handle these allegations? I hope this is a question that is being asked again in the White House and in various agencies of the Federal Government, to the logical conclusion that these allegations must be investigated as a matter of legitimacy. How the Rule of Law is enforced will set the tone, as it a lack of credible enforcement of the law as it is written set the tone of the Bush Administration. Simply issuing a subpoena to  former officials will not work, just ask Karl Rove. There can be no pleading and begging for a notionally independent branch of government for morsels of information and the respect due such an august body. Flaunting of Congressional subpeonas must stop, and the words of the anointed, yet not confirmed, Attorney General, Eric Holder, are encouraging, if unsettling to certain people, such as Alberto Gonzalez. Unfortunately for the shamed former AG seems to rest precariously on the words of John Yoo, former counselor in the Bush Administration's Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel. 

Weaseling Out of Things

With the new year and the change of administration in Washington there has been a tendency lately for retrospective looks at the outgoing Bush administration which has reminded us of all that has gone wrong in the last eight years and all that the Bush administration and its collaborators have to answer for. This tendency has in turn provoked the apologists for the Bush regime who are now using the unitary executive theory as a shield rather than a spear. The result is conversations like the one on the Diane Rehm show this morning where lawyers acting as apologists for the nefarious acts of Bush policy sound like panicky weasels trying to slip out of anyone having to take responsibility for the wrongs they have done. These pundits try to appear to be centrists, but the way they use arguments regarding pragmatic politics to evade moral accusations that there has been wrongdoing on the part of the Bush administration paints these men as the worst caricature of the sleazy lawyer.

Like the beetle who's larva burrow into the human brain, Bush's political appointees are burrowing into their respective departments. As the president's term comes to an end, people who occupy positions that are appointed by the executive take up new jobs within their departments, preserving their high status within influential government agency's and moving beyond the reach of the incoming president of the opposing party. It is something that always accompanys a change in the guard but with the Bush administration's appointees it takes on a more sinister effect. We have recounted many times here that President Bush's picks for department heads have not been based on quality of the individual but on their loyalty to his narrow ideology and the individual of the president. One need only look to the energy department the EPA or to the Justice department to see scandals arising from industry insiders acting as regulators or "holy hires" who were picked because of the ultra right wing religious fundamentalist colleges they attended. The damage done to policy and the public interest done by this administration will take decades to undo.

Another example of cementing of Bush policy long into an Obama presidency is the midnight passage of executive orders. Like the burrowing of political hacks, these last minute orders cement extremest right wing policy and weaken government oversite and cannot be easily overturned by a new administration partly because of the time consuming process of determining all the changes and waiting through the public commentary period but also because of a lack of political will. Somehow there is the perception in Washington that turning back all these executive orders will cause some kind of liberal shock to the populace at large resulting in a backlash against the president. As if setting things back to the way they were is somehow more shocking than a lame duck president without a mandate of the people sneakily instituting his personal preference for policy at the last minute.

The Afterglow

I have made the analogy before that the campaign was like being hit on by a drunken sociopath. In the aftermath of the election it seems even more so with various special interest groups and media outlets remembering various promises made by Obama while on the road to the White House. They seem like an expectant lover on the morning after, hopeful that this impulsive decision to get in bed with this beautiful person who said all the right things will turn into a healthy relationship. All the while the recipient of the lover's attention hurriedly prepares to move on with his agenda while assuring the lover that, "that was all pillow talk baby." We can at least hope that Obama doesn't spurn the voters like a one night stand. But he is a politician and I won't hold my breath.

John Stewart made the observation to Obama that the country isn't what it was when he started this race. Truly Obama is inheriting a sloppy shit sandwich from one of the most hated presidents in history. Unfortunately for the discontent, Bush is scheduled to leave office and they will loose a symbol of everything they dislike about U.S. policy. But the problems he created will remain. What happens if Obama fails? Do we loose the meager gains we have made in race relations? Does the country swing wildly back to the politically extreme right? Will there be much left of the country after four years if he can't get a hold on these various crises?

Parts of the country started to reflect Bush's low approval ratings by going blue this election. My question is whether these states who were red in 2004 have an indelible sin on them for causing the last 4 years of unnecessary downward spiraling of the nation. Ohio and Pennsylvania, I am looking at you.

As usual, I have nothing positive to say.

The Urban Shaman

In days long past and in parts of the world untouched by the corporate monoculture there are psychopomps and shamen who know the spiritual secrets of the Earth and can walk between the worlds. These men and women gain access to a spiritual dimension through chanting, ritual, drugs, or raw spiritual power. They walk in a dangerous world in between life and death where they are alive, yet not. Where they walk among the dead and the not-yet born. They are able to pass through this liminal state of not-being without loosing their soul because of their wisdom and spiritual power.

It occurs to me that airline travel has become one such a dangerous liminal state in this post 9/11 world. In a world where one can be apprehended and shipped off to a foreign country or secret prison to be tortured based on faulty intelligence, mistaken identity, or no evidence at all, airline travelers face a very real danger. When one enters an airport they pass within a barrier that the public cannot penetrate. The traveler only enters into this parallel land by performing arcane rituals and by passing the arbitrary and ever changing tests of the gate keepers. They pass into a world where names and shapes are familiar but strange. The worst part is that no one knows whether you will come out on the other side.

The difference is that air travel isn't like this because of the immutable laws of nature and of the spirit but because of the actions of wicked men.

The Ben Franklin Report: Talking Points and the MSM

It was interesting to me to observe the tone of media coverage regarding the Bailout over the last week. Prior to the rejection of the first bill by the House the coverage was neutral with most coverage being directed at explaining just what the legislation was supposed to do but there was almost no coverage of popular opinion which was vastly opposed to the measure. After the shock subsided from the precipitous drop in the stock markets following the vote by the House, and it was found that the sky had not fallen and business continued as normal, the MSM started covering the vast negative public sentiment. This was mainly as a means of explaining why the Representatives voted as they did and attached to the old adage that the House is the more populist body. Suggesting that the real people of the country are only actually represented in government at the national level in the House of Representatives.

Until this morning the MSM was freely using the term "Bailout" to describe this massive gift of taxpayer dollars to the greedy rich motherfuckers that got us into this crisis in the first place. However this morning, the MSM has started referring to the bill as the "Rescue Plan." Yes, the Bailout that passed the Senate in the dark hours of the night when noone could see their shame has been spun. Instead of being a colossal failure of leadership, this is now a plan. Instead of being a giant burden of over $10,000 on every taxpayer, this is being called a "Rescue."

How long will this kind of transparent bullshit go unchallenged? Where is the voice of the American people? We, the people of the United States are overwhelmingly opposed to this legislation but if you look at the MSM you would think that we all accept this bill as a necessary evil. This is exactly the same failure of the media that got us into Iraq. Where are the pointed questions? Where are the experts holding the feet of the members of congress to the fire? Why is Kucinich the Keebler the only person that sounds sane? It takes a vegan who thinks he was abducted by aliens to raise concerns about the artificial haste with which this bill is being forced through congress? What about the old adage that the Senate is the more deliberative side of the Legislature?

Where was the thought process yesterday? It was clouded by fear and greed. Fear that there is an imminent catastrophic collapse in the future, and greed motivated by all that money. Why think about rational solutions when you can slip in a rider that directs funds back to your pet projects? If you are going to alienate millions of people by voting "yes" you might as well buy the votes of a few back home.

Like 9/11, this is another crisis that was easy to foresee but once it materializes people in government are using the ignorance of those that did not see it coming to create an unjustified panic in order to gain unfettered power. I cant' believe that exactly the same trick is working on the same people just six years later. I guess Lincoln was wrong.

I wish that was all I had to say about this but I want to highlight the behavior of the presidential candidates and I want to single out a particular economic pundit who has been causing me great personal outrage for the last three weeks.

The H-pod has been getting increasingly aggravating with his constant reliance on the trickle down theory of economics as if it is still a valid method of thinking. As if trickle down hasn't been clearly disproven by the recent recession. As if he isn't just fattening us up for the slaughter. Velshi is just trying to keep the taxpayers calm and encourage acceptance of the vastly flawed Bailout.

As for the candidates, they have both failed to show leadership in this crisis. Neither candidate has even attempted to deliver a strategy for solving this problem. Neither candidate nor their VP nominees have given concrete examples of things they would do if elected that differs from anything they have been saying since June of '07. To me its painfully obvious that they could follow FDR and his lead that propelled us out of the last Great Depression. They start a massive public works project. How about one that creates energy independence? Then you solve two national problems at once. OK, its four problems is you include oil wars in the middle east and energy's impact on the environment. Massive building projects that create super solar farms in the sun belt, wind farms in the great lakes and off the Atlantic coast, factories that produce the new solar power generating windows. The government can spend some of the seven hundred fucking billion dollars of U.S. taxpayer rape on investing in our technology future. The U.S. is falling behind. It was the lack of foresight of congress that caused the Large Hadron collider to be built in France and Belgium.

Both parties have failed. Both houses of Congress have failed. The Bush administration has failed. Local governments have failed. Wallstreet has failed. Individual investors and property buyers have failed. Foreign governments and corporations have failed. There is plenty of blame to go around but little understanding of the full scope of the failure. This colossal failure of leadership is not likely to be cured by panic and a rush to pass the first piece of legislation proposed by an administration that has showen itself to be power hungry and incompetant. We need to vote every one of these selfish beureaucrats and politicians out of office. We need to finish the job of cleaning house that we started in 2006.

Throw the bums out.

Victory for the American People

It hasn't been often in the last 7 plus years of the Bush Administration when one could truly say that the power of people defeated the people of power. When special interests took a back seat to those who really run the country, Mr. and Ms. Average. Since the bailout was originally announced, there have been numerous campaigns to stop it, academic disputes, and even the rarest of the rare, a public battle among the normally tightly disciplined Republican party. But, in the end, those who have to face up to the voters on November 4th realized that voting yes was potentially one of the biggest threats to their political careers, regardless of party. If you look at the list of how people voted in this historic vote, those on the 'yes' side will probably have a rough time of it, if not lose their seats to those who chose not to approve the still horrible re-negotiated version of the bailout proposal. In particular, I'm sure Dennis Kucinich (OH-10th) is feeling a little smug, knowing that he predicted the outcome of the vote.

On a slightly different note, I'm not sure why everyone in the world of pundits is characterizing this rejection of the bailout proposal a failure of governance. In common parlance, bills are said to have failed, but that is almost a bureaucratic term. In real terms, this bailout was an ideological battle between those who are in favor of and those who are against nationalization and similar bailouts in the United States. Moreover, this is not a vacuum of leadership in which the U.S. government is flying down a country road like a  '62 Corsair without a driver., as that has been happening for the last 7 years. 

Of course, in a vacuum, comes the punditry. Perhaps the most offensive piece I've read thus far about the political process that brought about this conclusion comes from Rupert Cornwell from the U.K.'s Independent. My favorite metaphor in the article compares the mechanisms of American democracy to Alice Through the Looking Glass. Putting that aside, though, the author clearly doesn't understand the huge popular backlash against the bailout. Sure, in the U.K. and other parliamentary democracies, the Prime Minister isn't approved by the people at large, but in the U.S. the leaders need to be especially accountable. And to say that the bill died in partisan sniveling is obviously disregarding what was essentially a bipartisan effort to keep the American people from having to shovel out $700 Billion or more on a plan that was only designed to correct the dangerous excesses of the richest segments of society. Perhaps, too, the American people have become wary of those who warn about apocalyptic disaster and offer a solution that meets a certain biased politican agenda. 

Kevin Connolly from the BBC, in looking at the reasons behind the bailouts defeat in the House of Representatives, expresses a strange sentiment, that after this bill's defeat and the sense of crisis that it engenders will offer a way out for the bailout proposal, that Main Street hasn't suffered yet. Unfortunately, the people of the United States have been suffering, which is the underlying cause for this economic crisis. With the inflationary impact of cheap money, combined with tepid job growth, primarily in the services sector since the recession of 2001, people were forced to choose between living and surviving, which meant that the mortgage had to go unpaid. Thus, in a trickle up fashion, the banks and other financial institutions, who were holders of arcane financial securities into which these poorly written mortgages were conglomerated, began to suffer the counsequences of their poor lending practices. I think Mr. Connolly underestimates the intelligence of Mr. and Ms. Average and their understanding of this situation, as Mr. or Ms. Average are probably already unemployed, underemployed, or facing the prospect of losing their job in the failing economy. 

From the campaign trail in Iowa, Sen. John McCain who, infamously, suspended his campaign to not show up in Washington for negotiations, has called upon Congress to return to the drawing board and to get back to work right away. Sen. Barack Obama, from a rally outside of Denver, called for calm, saying that things in Congress are never smooth, and instead of imploring or demanding that his colleagues work on the proposal to shore up the wealth of the financial sector, he used a baseball metaphor.  

So panic thus gripped the financial markets, and the Dow Jones suffered its worst lost ever in terms of points. But, have no fear for liquidity, because Helicopter Ben Bernanke has come to the rescue, increasing the amount of dollars in the global financial system by a whopping $630 Billion dollars. To show you a frightening graph that indicates inflation, perhaps even hyperinflation, is just around the corner, here is the Adjusted Monetary Base, courtesy of the St. Louis Federal Reserve. The highlight of a series of moves in the banking industry, Citigroup has purchased Wachovia, after the stock lost more than 80% in trading on Monday. 

The Walk of Shame: Corruption and Government, Don't Look So Suprised

Apparently the tax law is so complex that even the guy in change of writing it doesn't understand his own obligations under that law. Or maybe he just forgot to report tens of thousands of dollars in income over two decades. Somehow, I think that if I made a similar mistake there would be gruff men in dark suits knocking on my door.

Speaking of money owed to the government. Days after the Interior Department received an award for high standards of integrity the Inspector General of the Interior Department issued a detailed report describing inappropriate conduct among the minerals management services who collect royalties from oil companies. The sordid dealings include contract fixing, inappropriate sexual relationships between regulators and oil company execs, and regulators being on the payroll of oil companies as consultants. The missing money comes in where the MMS has failed to pursue thousands of dollars in royalties owed to the government by the oil companies while they have been racking in record profits and growing fat off of huge tax subsidies. Subsidies which also don't seem to be doing anything to keep gas prices low. At least the "MMS Chicks" had a good time.

Pelosi seems to think this will effect the nature of the debates regarding increased offshore oil drilling. By which she doesn't mean that this information revealing that the Bush administration could have done something about the rising cost of oil will be used to take increased drilling off the table. (Drilling that wont do anything to reduce the cost of oil since it will take decades for there to be any production and that production will be so small as to not make any impact at the pump.) No, this will just result in some language being added to the bill regarding integrity. This new information won't change anything because it has already been decided to go ahead with drilling. In fact congress has decided to go ahead with a worse plan than that suggested by Paris Hilton.

Criminal Convenience

Fortunately for bloggers like myself there are real reporters out there doing the hard work like research to produce helpfull things like this. If you have ever been outraged by a Bush asministration supporter and found yourself too flustered to back up your claims that various members of the administration might have possibly violated the law, Slate has decided to help all of us with an interactive chart of who did what.

Politicising the Mail Room

We have previously commented on this blog about the propencity of the Bush administration to not only engage in cronyism in hiring but to prefer political supporters over more qualified candidates to the detriment of the function of U.S. governance. The depths to which people were vetted based on their loyalty to the individual that currently holds the office of the President had not been previously revealed. This article describes that it was policy to prefer ideologs at every level of hiring, even down to lowly interns. The ideology-based hiring went so far as to violate the law.

I am not the least bit suprised. Many people would call me cynical for that. Which leaves me wondering at what point, after consistently being vindicated in my cynicism towards government corruption does it cease to be cynicism? When do the people who werent expecting it to get worse get told they are seeing the world through rose colored glasses?

The punchline of the article is that this political monkeying around with the hiring process has not only hurt these specific individuals, but it has hurt the program through which these professioinally inferior, political zombies were hired, and this has hurt the agency of the Justice Department by filling its ranks with substandard ideologs.

Flag Burning

In this image you see President Bush defacing the American Flag in violation of 18 U.S.C. section 700 Destruction of the Flag of the United States. That is the same statute that forbids flag burning. The amusing thing is that flag burning is protected speach under the first amendment but being an arrogant jingoist and writing your name on the flag may not be.

Cleveland Ohio: Terrible American City, or The Worst American City? Impeachment Edition

Dennis Kucinich(D-Ohio), the elfin-looking, vegan, UFO-seeing, hot-wife-having Representative from Cleveland has introduced articles of impeachment against President George W. Bush.

I have mixed feelings about many things in that first sentence.

First, Kucinich is a profoundly inefectual represenative. None of the bills he has proposed has ever been passed. Which statistically boads ill for the prospects of these articles of Impeachment. Kucinich will propose any legislation that will get headlines. Kucinich's legislative strategy seems less directed at serving the people of his district but rather intended to provoke headlines that get him enough free attention for his reelection.

The things Kucinich champions with his doomed legislative action are the kinds of things that are the cause of the people, or crafted to promote peace and justice in simple language. So when these things are defeated it makes Kucinich look like he is a champion of the conserns of the common man. However, even if this is genuine and Kucinich really is a champion of the people he is rather Quixotic. Personally, I think the persona of a crusader for justice that tilts at windmills has been crafted by him to keep him in politics. That being said I am willing to live with an inefectual elfin-jester of a representative that loudly champions justice and freedom and peace rather than the typical congressman who is a shill to big industry and lobbying groups and justifies his corruption by dragging home as much pork as he or she can suck out of the public coffers. So even if the virtue Kucinich parades in front of the cameras is fake, Ill take fake virtue over unashamed corruption every day.

As for impeaching president Bush, thats a whole different ball of fishooks. I think President Bush should be impeached. He has been accused of exactly what Nixon did, and Republican party officials have been found guilty of manipulating the vote in Ohio in 2004. There is also the intelligence failure leading up to the 9/11 attack, extrordinary rendition, torture, the lies in the run-up to the war in Iraq, and so forth. However, much of that is just a deriliction of duty and does not amount to a crime. Furthermore, the stuff that he could be charged for is going to provoke a long hard legal battle.

This president has proven that he is beligerant in the extreme to any type of criticism or legal attack on his power. This is bolstered by the neo-con adgenda to make the office of the president extremely powerful. This adgenda is backed up by jmore than greed and evil but by long hours of thought and legal scholarship. This goal at inflating the power of the president is backed up by legal philosophy that argues that these cruel and wicked things that have been done by and on behalf of this administration are actually legal. The simplest way to explain this is that they believe anything the president says is ok, is legal. The insand and frustrating thing to know is that they have the knowledge and scholarship to back this madness up in court if that is what it comes to. The three attornys general that this administration has gone through are proof that there are many in high places already that subscribe to this philosophy of presidential preeminence. All this promises to produce a long and hard legal fight if the congress actually has the stones to follow through.

That is the other problem. The Democratic party hasn't had the testicular fortitude to stand for anything other than giving themselves a pay raise for as long as I have been old enough to read. They cant cut off the funds for the war and they are afraid of a long fight with the Bush administration. But they arent afraid because they will loose, these chicken-shit legislators are afraid of the fight itself. They arent afraid of the possibility that they will losse and this insane legal reasoning that the president's will is law will become the law of America. They are afraid of having to stand up for something other than giving themselves a pay raise. Sen. Feingold (D-Wisconsin) the only one in the senate chamber with cajones enough to still be called a man explained it best. He wrote to me that he believes that any attenpt to impeach Bush would be a waist of time. All impeachment proceedings would do is, distract the congress from repairing the damage he has done over his tenure in office. The long fight would be a circuis and all that would be accomplished would be sound bites and grandstanding. I can only assume that House speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-California) believes something similar when she says that impeachment is off the table.

Much has been said of this kind of pragmatism and cowardice and is being played out in many editorials of this kind. I think the fight must be fought or these legal philosophies will slowly slime their way into the American legal system. Unless resisted this belief that power is greater than justice will destroy freedom.

The Torture Debate

The national discussion regarding the use of torture and extreme rendition is often cut short by declarations that this is a time of war. Such declarations are not usually followed by any explination as to what significance that should have because most of the time they are made by people that have no interist in actually considering the value or appropriateness of torture. Though now it appears there are legal consequences of the torture that these people had previously been unwilling to think about. Unfortunately these are not the legal consequences of those being responsible facing justice. They are the natural consequences of the unreliable information that is gained from torture. Followed by the that information gained through torture being unusable in court because of the tainted nature in which it was obtained.

Even if you do accept that torture does work and that it is called for by the current situation, the torture debate is more than just an argument over whether extreme measures are acceptable during a time of war. There are at least two other issues.

First, intelligence failures prior to 9/11 indicate that the US intelligence community doea not need more information since they had enough to know the attack was coming, and they are too incompetant to use the information they do have.

Second, there are serious questions about whether the person being detained under suspicion of being a terrorist is actually guilty of anything. People have been spirited away, aparently based on nothing more than a muslim sounding name, tortured, and released after months when it is discovered a mistake was made and that these people were not criminals or if they were, after the CIA had fouled up the investigation.



Many people are not conserned with this because they don't have muslim sounding names and are merely mundane white people living in the heartland. This should consern everyone because it is the start of a slippery slope. If the people responsible for this get away with abducting and torturing innocent people for something as vaguely defined as being a suspected terrorist it is a small step to other criminal suspects and then another small step to the imprisoning and torturing of people for legal but unpopular behavior. And then you have the thought police.

These steps are smaller than most people want to believe because the first step has been so large. That people that are merely suspected of being terrorists are being tortured is highly significant. It causes the ensnarement of innocent people based on unchallenged circumstantial evidence.

Bush Seeks Coalition Against The Troops

Since the run-up to the war in Iraq anyone who has questioned the Bush administration has had to endure ad hominem attacks on their patriotism and accusations that they don't support the troups. But it has been the Bush administration that has failed to support the troops. If you are like me, when Rumsfeld attempted to justify the lack of adaquate but available armor plating on hum-vees, you were so overcome with rage that you passed out half way through the press conference. The hypocracies and outrages continue even in these late hours of the dark years of the Bush administration as the President has promised to veto an expansion of the GI Bill.

This is particularly significant in relation to war profiteering, the topic an earlier posting on this very blog. The members of the administration who ducked out of military service and their friends and business associates rake in the cash while overcharging the government on essentials for the troops, telling the manufacturers not to include available additional armor, force wounded soldiers to live in decrepid conditions, and deny expansion of the GI bill. When the government is being overcharged here its you and I that are being screwed in the pooper.

These soldiers have taken it on the chin from this administration and continue to step up and volunteer to serve this country. It is a true testiment to the indominable spirit of the United States soldier.

War and Business as Usual

When one learns of phenomenal profits reaped by elected officials during their tenure, the typical reaction isn't necessarily one of disgust. However, when one learns that several officials personally profited off of W's decision to go to war, any American citizen who claims to 'support our troops' should be incensed. Incredibly, to belabor the point with an altogether morbid and tragic twist, the fact that 2004 Democratic Presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, one is left simply flabbergasted.

Why, after all, should the voters attempt to disregard an individual's rational choice? If the decision is presented that one must vote against or otherwise hinder and impede a potentially illegal invasion of another country yet lose billions of dollars (and counting) in the process, or wave a flag and cash the checks, the voters should not expect much.

Clearly, many American politicians are in the business of war, but how much of this business is really in the public interest?

Flowers is the Least We Can Do

She may not be your mother, but you should do something nice and chipin to send some flowers to Helen Thomas. The only way to improve the endeavor would be for Stephen Colbert to deliver them to her on behalf of the Internet. If you need more reasons than her questioning of the administration's use of torture, you can also look at her contribution to Stephen Colbert's roast of the President at the 2006 White House Correspondent's Dinner, the entirety of which is included below. For more information about this illustrious figure of American journalism, here is the standard wikibio, a series of opinion pieces, her website, and a look at how popular she became after the infamous exchange between her and President Bush in 2006. Mail her if this email address still works, helent@hearstdc.com. But I'm sure a hand-written letter would be much more appreciated, c/o Hearst News Service 1850 K Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20006.

Part 1


Part 2


Part 3

Corrupt government employees

This is what I was talking about in a previous post. This is what a law abiding person has to fear from a government that has too much information and no respect for boundries, rights, or freedom, in obtaining that information.