People can talk all they want about ‘framing’ and appealing to churchgoers, and representing people who drive pick-up trucks with confederate flag bumperstickers. That’s all bullshit. We, as a country, one and all, have been utterly humiliated by the use of torture. We have been exposed as a nation with zero moral seriousness. None. We were condemned two days ago by the Council of Europe. Yesterday, it was Human Rights Watch’s turn. Tony Blair ignored warnings that the invasion of Iraq might be illegal under international law. Bush said international law was irrelevent.
The case for war has been eviscerated. The handling of the war has been incompetent. The use of torture has turned our nation into a pariah among nations. And rightly so.
If we do not impeach this adminstration, we will never recover our national influence, credibility, and moral standing to be a leader among nations. It’s as simple as that:
“Abu Ghraib was only the tip of the iceberg,” said Reed Brody, special counsel for Human Rights Watch. “It’s now clear that abuse of detainees has happened all over—from Afghanistan to Guantánamo Bay to a lot of third-country dungeons where the United States has sent prisoners. And probably quite a few other places we don’t even know about.”
Human Rights Watch called this week for the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate the culpability of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and ex-CIA Director George Tenet, as well as Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, formerly the top U.S. commander in Iraq, and Gen. Geoffrey Miller, the former commander of the prison camp at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba in cases of crimes against detainees. It rejected last week’s report by the Army Inspector General which was said to absolve Gen. Sanchez of responsibility.
“General Sanchez gave the troops at Abu Ghraib the green light to use dogs to terrorize detainees, and they did, and we know what happened, said Brody. “And while mayhem went on under his nose for three months, Sanchez didn’t step in to halt it.”
Human Rights Watch also expressed concern that, despite all the damage that had been done by the detainee abuse scandal, the United States had not stopped the use of illegal coercive interrogation.
Human Rights Watch
We know they are all guilty. They have tarnished all our names, they have used our tax dollars to violate every human rights treaty devised in the post-World War Two era. And they have promoted, or awarded medals to, most of the worst criminals.
Afghanistan:
Nine detainees are now known to have died in U.S. custody in Afghanistan—including four cases already determined by Army investigators to be murder or manslaughter. Former detainees have made scores of other claims of torture and other mistreatment. In a March 2004 report, Human Rights Watch documented cases of U.S. personnel arbitrarily detaining Afghan civilians, using excessive force during arrests of non-combatants, and mistreating detainees. Detainees held at military bases in 2002 and 2003 described to Human Rights Watch being beaten severely by both guards and interrogators, deprived of sleep for extended periods, and intentionally exposed to extreme cold, as well as other inhumane and degrading treatment. In December 2004, Human Rights Watch raised additional concerns about detainee deaths, including one alleged to have occurred as late as September 2004. In March 2005, The Washington Post uncovered another death in CIA custody, noting that the case was under investigation but that the CIA officer implicated had been promoted.
Guantánamo Bay, Cuba:
There is growing evidence that detainees at Guantánamo have suffered torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment. Reports by FBI agents who witnessed detainee abuse—including chained detainees forced to sit in their own excrement—have recently emerged, adding to the statements of former detainees describing the use of painful stress positions, use of military dogs to threaten detainees, threats of torture and death, and prolonged exposure to extremes of heat, cold and noise. Ex-detainees also said they had been subjected to weeks and even months in solitary confinement—at times either suffocatingly hot or cold from excessive air conditioning—as punishment for failure to cooperate. Videotapes of riot squads subduing suspects reportedly show the guards punching some detainees, tying one to a gurney for questioning and forcing a dozen to strip from the waist down. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has told the U.S. government in confidential reports that its treatment of detainees has involved psychological and physical coercion that is “tantamount to torture.”
Iraq:
Harsh and coercive interrogation techniques such as subjecting detainees to painful stress positions and extended sleep deprivation have been routinely used in detention centers throughout Iraq. The Schlesinger panel appointed by Secretary Rumsfeld noted 55 substantiated cases of detainee abuse in Iraq, plus 20 instances of detainee deaths still under investigation. The earlier report of Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba found “numerous incidents of sadistic, blatant, and wanton criminal abuses” constituting “systematic and illegal abuse of detainees” at Abu Ghraib. Another Pentagon report documented 44 allegations of such war crimes at Abu Ghraib. An ICRC report concluded that in military intelligence sections of Abu Ghraib, “methods of physical and psychological coercion used by the interrogators appeared to be part of the standard operating procedures by military intelligence personnel to obtain confessions and extract information.”
CIA “Disappearances” and Torture:
At least 11 al-Qaeda suspects, and most likely many more, have “disappeared” in U.S. custody. The Central Intelligence Agency is holding the detainees in undisclosed locations, with no notification to their families, no access to the International Committee of the Red Cross or oversight of any sort of their treatment, and in some cases, no acknowledgement that they are even being held, effectively placing them beyond the protection of the law. One detainee, Khalid Shaikh Muhammed, was reportedly subjected to “water boarding” in which a person is strapped down, forcibly pushed under water, and made to believe he might drown. It was also reported that U.S. officials initially withheld painkillers from Abu Zubayda, who was shot during his capture, as an interrogation device.
“Extraordinary Renditions”:
The CIA has transferred some 100 to 150 detainees to countries in the Middle East known to practice torture routinely. In one case, Maher Arar, a Canadian in transit in New York, was detained by U.S. authorities and sent to Syria. He was released without charge from Syrian custody ten months later and has described repeated torture, often with cables and electrical cords. In another case, a U.S. government-leased airplane transported two Egyptian suspects who were blindfolded, hooded, drugged, and diapered by hooded operatives, from Sweden to Egypt. There the two men were held incommunicado for five weeks and have given detailed accounts torture, including electric shocks. In a third case, Mamdouh Habib, an Australian in American custody, was transported from Pakistan to Afghanistan to Egypt to Guantánamo Bay. Now back home in Australia, Habib alleges that he was tortured in Egypt with beatings and electric shocks, and hung from the walls by hooks.
“Reverse Renditions”:
Detainees arrested by foreign authorities in non-combat and non-battlefield situations have been transferred to the United States without basic protections afforded to criminal suspects. `Abd al-Salam `Ali al-Hila, a Yemeni businessman captured in Egypt, for instance, was handed over to U.S. authorities and “disappeared” for more than a year and a half before being sent to Guantánamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba. Six Algerians held in Bosnia were transferred to U.S. officials in January 2002 (despite a Bosnian high court order to release them) and were sent to Guantánamo.
Can we really allow this administration to continue to represent our values? Can we look the world in the face? I don’t hate America. I hate what the Bush administration has done to America. They must go.
And explaining to the American public why the GOP is no longer fit to represent us should not be complicated. They have ruined us. They have taken the beacon of hope that America once was, and they have turned out the light. They have shamed us, they have let us all down. They have no moral leg to stand on.
The time for outrage is now.
I have taped on the side of my computer at work a sheet of paper which says “In the News:” and the following headlines with additional text
Apr 25, 2005 Democracy Now!
2) UN RIGHTS MONITOR OUSTED FROM AFGHANISTAN UNDER US PRESSURE, POSITION ABOLISHED
– The Independent, April 25, 2005
3) MISTAKEN IDENTITY LEADS TO FALSE IMPRISONMENT, TORTURE
– The New York Times, Apr. 23, 2005
Thanks for reminding me to post it up elsewhere as well.
Not a day goes by that I don’t have to fight the white hot rage in my heart over what Bu$hCo has wrought. I am numbed to silence, which I must also continually fight, that it has happened so quickly and insidiously. I agree, I am exhausted beyond description of having to constantly hold my tongue out of misguided politeness when I interact with the delusional around me… in the words of Bono, “No More!”
I wholeheartedly agree with every word you write, BooMan. It’s about time we condemned the current administration in the strongest words possible, and not simply because these are the only true things you can say or write about Bush and all his works, but also because what’s most needed now is some degree of reflection, some sort of echo, of these condemnations in the so-called mainstream media. It’s my impression that many of us on the Left have held back in the fear of offending patriots or the masses that cling to the belief that our government and our military are G-D-chosen and G-D-directed and so must be “supported” and respected even if we date to criticize them. Unfortunately, when we temper our criticisms, what gets reported to and by the “mainstream” ends up being so weak, nothing changes and no one is punished.
It’s time to turn up the volume and intensity of our criticisms — and hope that at least some of what we’re saying percolates through to the electorate.
it’s over. This is it. We are being condemned as torturers and war criminals by respected institutions.
We are tarnished. We cannot stand for it. What we need a cadre of congresspeople willing to tell the cold, hard, unvarnished truth.
Our country’s reputation is soiled, ruined, kaput. Bolton? Are you fucking kidding me? NO FUCKING WAY.
NO WAY. We need serious people, professors, professionals, student leaders, career statesmen, to stand together and call for this administration to step aside.
I don’t care how realistic it is, or how partisan it sounds. It’s not partisan. It’s moral. It’s the only moral thing to do.
.
I’ve got this report in my hands, and the Armed Services Committee of Congress is going to read it and maybe start some hearings.
… we’re a true democracy … ain’t we? We tell the Iraqis and Afghanis they should be happy now and smile! We have even given them a Voice of Democracy through our own propaganda satellite TV.
Geez – the American taxpayer is spending > $$$200bn on their freedom and our border protection.
BooMan … I had a DREAM.
Oui – Liberté – Egalité – Fraternité
Yesterday I posted a diary on dkos, before I could cross post here, Kos went down for repairs. The long and short of it was that Bush has a big secret. Under Bush we have become perhaps the most violent democracy ever to exist. The torture still moves me to tears… at first I was just heartbroken. I still cry, but now some of those tears are rage. I read about Fallujah… rage. I read about US soldiers committing atrocities with a smile… rage. These are only secrets in the US because our media is complacent, or should I say complicit. The world is aware of what we are and what we are becoming and they are rightly speaking truth to power. Booman, I agree with every word you speak. The time is now.
Nations image lays in ashes, and …
a wasteland of squandered credibility, an emptied reservoir of America’s ability to positively influence human rights progress (with no rain in sight), our “shining beacon” has gone out.
But, Bush “earned some capital and he intends to use it.”
So where and when is the meeting to get the ball rolling? I am committed to see these “ugly Ameicans” brought to justice, are you?
Thank you. These acts done in our name are truly horrifying. I am sick at the thought of some of these individuals receiving medals.
The disclosures, the photos, the victims are there for all the world to see. But despite all of this, the wingers that I regularly speak to see these acts as justified, justified for a war for which there was no basis. Some people will just never get it.
One quibble: I believe that our credibility dropped when we started this invasion (because it was an invasion and not a war, semantic sleight of hand by the administration) and these acts only confirmed the worst fears and made for further damage.
Well, BooMan, you are cruising for an orange jumpsuit now! 😉
The only person whose behavior you control is your own. You can say, I will not be part of it, I will not support it, condone it, jsutify it, or pretend it doesn’t exist, I will not hate, or perpetuate it, and I will teach my kids those values.
If every person made that decision, there would be no war, no torture, no brutality.
Until then, there is Resistance, which comes in different forms for different people. There are those who buy a Land’s End (TM) jihad parka and get the next flight to Amman with a memorized phone number in their heads, there are those who once there, fight, and others who help US gunmen with buyers’ remorse get to physical and moral safety. (you don’t hear too much about that 😉
Others, like Giuliana Sgrena and the Resistance press fight with pens and satellite phones, or just pens. And sturdy shoes to get back to a place where they can safely use that phone.
Some adjust their lifestyle to eliminate or minimize the extent to which they fund atrocities.
Some, like Rachel Corrie, go stand in front of tanks.
Others will be busy today fixing up their basements, because they know that it’s not long before someone will need to live there.
Some sit, DeFarge-like, and knit, and there is always work for those who do not stand in front of the tank, but discreetly slide under it, let the air out of the tires, and discreetly roll out on the other side, having changed clothes and hairstyle during the roll.
Resistance is like love. Once you are ready for it, it will find you 🙂
And accomplished in less than four years.
These goppers are amazing…
OTHER America thinks about the matter:
RUSH: Pretty good, Kevin.
CALLER: Love to talk to you.
RUSH: Thank you.
CALLER: I just want you to know that we are going to have our Abu Ghraib barbecue party tonight and we are going to be playing nude Twister.
RUSH: (Laughing.) How many people you got coming?
CALLER: Well, I figure we only need 8 or 10 to make it a rip roaring time. I thought that would be kind of fitting.
RUSH: Yeah. Nude Twister? Big Abu Ghraib barbecue. (Laughter.) Okay. And that’s from Oregon. Progress here.
From antiwar.com
WOWWWW!!!
I swear to God, I don’t know how much angrier I can get. You are feeding a beast Gilgamesh.
I need to visit the Veracruzana Taqueria on Washington Ave, and drown my fury in guacamole dip, tamales and pork tacos.
First, there’s them. You know – the dittohead idiots (dittiots?) who make light of such.
Then there are the ignorami. Spiro Agnew loved them. Called them the Silent Majority. What’s common about these folks is that they’re more likely to be able to tell you Britney Spears’ favorite sushi than tell you who Bill Frist was. They think that all politicians are crooks. They don’t know the difference between Iraq and Iran, except that most of them know which one had Saddam and his weapons of mass destruction. They’ve heard of Abu Ghraib, and think he’s really a dangerous man, and we’d better catch him soon. It’s these folks that would make me break down and cry, if I had any tears left to shed.
Anger’s not enough, and resistance seems futile.
The hope? Perhaps we’ve turned a corner, thanks to Tom DeLay’s brazen disregard for anything having to do with ethical behavior. No, the vast majority of Americans don’t really particularly care what he’s done … but the folks who lead the discussions on popular culture – the mainstream reporters, headline editors, radio hosts and scores of others who are the folks that really mold opinion – have become aware. At some point soon, they’re going to identify some level of self-interest in acknowledging, and acting on, this story the same way they spoke of blue dresses and Rosty-at-the-post-office.
Will this lead to an impeachment? No. Even more depressing, the more we talk of impeaching Bush, the more susceptible the ignorami to accepting the charge that we’re just haters. At this point, restraint is imperative. We need to finesse, not bludgeon. The public is not yet ready to hold a lynching.
The 50% of the country that finally understands WMD was a complete fabrication are now ready to hear the message you are speaking. A moral choice indeed.
… and next election we only need 50.1% of the vote!
plus enough votes electoral college of courseOui – Liberté – Egalité – Fraternité
they are done. They’ve bought the farm, screwed the pooch. It’s time to get people up in the bullpen.
I’m serious. The destruction and humiliation has gone too far. It’s time for all people of conscience to say “step down”.
I’m with you BooMan. We can’t wait that long. Every day, I find myself praying that the Dems can gain control of the legislature and begin the impeachment process.
We shouldn’t have to wait until then. These issues are American issues that should transcend labels of Republican and Democrat, or liberal and conservative.
Just look at this online quote from today’s Philadelphia Inquirer:
“She said she was going to tell people she was Canadian because she was embarrassed to be an American,” he said, and her younger brother agreed. “It came out of nowhere to me.”
Even our kids know and are ashamed of what’s happening in this country! I grew up knowing that I was fortunate to live in a counry where torture and abuse and illegal wars would not be tolerated. I wish for the same for my children.
This is a sad time for our country.
We can ask ’em to step down.
But short of successful armed insurrection, we cannot make them step down. We’d need 67 votes in the Senate, and cannot for the life of me see where those votes will come from. There’s no reason to suggest that BushCo would develop a conscience, and resign without impeachment.
Democracy, American style, is a funny thing. Being right is just not enough. We need votes. If we had ’em last year, Kerry’d be president, we’d be running Congress (and we’d probably still have troops in Iraq, but it’d be managed better).
Composure: we’ll be tested again and again. Every time we rant, too many of the masses will believe their preconceived notions about us have again been confirmed – that we hate Bush, hate America, and that Ann Coulter might have something.
I’m not a spiritual type, but firmly believe life finds ways to continually test us. This is a battery of exams that we need to ace …
let’s see if we can pressure for a question to Bush at tonight’s press conference, re:
“We were condemned two days ago by the Council of Europe. Yesterday, it was Human Rights Watch’s turn. Tony Blair ignored warnings that the invasion of Iraq might be illegal under international law. Bush said international law was irrelevent.”
White House correspondents are listed under Dan Froomkin, Washington Post (contacts found via the links to their stories):
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/administration/whbriefing/correspondents.html#CSM
A long time ago, in leadership training in the military, we were taught some basic rules that were immovable, unchangeable, and to be adhered to at all times and at all costs:
You are accountable for the actions of your people – no excuses, no bullshit;
Always tell the truth, never lie, under any circumstances;
Always take care of your people before you take care of yourself;
Etc., etc.
It was made absolutely clear that anything less would bring dishonor beyond description upon yourself, your unit, the military, and your country.
These rules have not changed, but the people enforcing them obviously have.
These people have taken the honor out of being a soldier.
who ordered a car with two Iraqis to stop by firing in the air. The car was searched twice but nothing was found. Then word was passed that 3 rifles and other parts of weapons were found in the house that they had just visited. The 2nd Lt.Ilario Pantano ordered the Iraqis to search their own car. While they were doing so, on their knees “lt. Pantano, ten feet from the Iraqis, emptied his M-16’s magazine, reloaded, emptied another.”
From New York Magazine
http://tinyurl.com/8h3pr
“There is a slightly belligerent edge in his tone–he was there, I wasn’t. Pantano says he acted in self-defense. Still, I wonder about reloading. Was that, too, self-defense?”
One of the witnesses in the investigation has been asked to step down because of contributing to this article against orders. It’s an interesting case about what happens to a decent man once he gets to Iraq.
There are always soldiers in any given war that are willing to commit atrocities. Maybe it has to do with the type of person that wants to be a soldier – what compels people to want to have a career in killing? In part it has to do with the age of the recruits – straight out of school with ‘moral’ behaviors not yet formed. There are some that join in order to pay for college, and I’ve heard a few that were rather upset when they were sent to Iraq. Yet others were just so blinded when 911 happened that they joined because they felt powerless to help in any other way, or where just so angry they needed to kill something.
Your last sentence pretty well describes the marine lt. who was about 33, an ex-stock broker in NYC, very unsettled by 9/11 (who wasn’t?). The story of his rise to infamy shows that he identified himself as a warrior. This was his first kill. In the interview which takes place a year after he killed the two Iraqis, there are many hints of paranoia in his psyche. The case is complex.
My point is that the Bush administration has set the stage for this attitude towards the Iraqi people. The invasion gave no consideration for them from day one.
I’m not disagreeing with you on that, I just feel that the whole career of soldiering needs to be analyzed. If you go invade a country, any country, you are already going with a mindset of killing people in that country. Once there it can work itself into a frenzy, especially when the invaders are then allowed to roam freely and control the population.
military occupation. The Iraqi people were never defined as the enemy of the USA.
Your point on soldiering, I remember a veteran from WWII telling me in bayonet training, they were told to twist the bayonet. Does anyone doubt that the military are trained killers. In Iraq they are expected to provide security but as you say, “they roam freely and control the population.”
What’s the answer? should the military remain in Iraq until more cities are levelled and more Iraqis are killed and more military lose control.
I’m guessing Bush will have to withdraw troops because he will need them for the invasion of Iran. It’s so depressing.
People join the US services for any number of reasons — and “wanting to have a career in killing” isn’t even close to being in the top ten. That’s such a startlingly ignorant comment I’m not even sure how to begin to address the underlying assumptions.
Let me make clear that I believe Iraq was (and is) a miscarriage of justice and an atrocity committed against humanity. We should have kept our forces in Afghanistan and done our best to bring that benighted hellhole into at least the 20th century.
The world is a dangerous place. There are Very Bad People out there, who do horrible things to their own countrymen or their neighboring nation-states if no counteracting force exists to keep them in check. As a result of America’s prosperity, and our post-Cold-War standing as the remaining superpower, I believe we have a moral obligation to defend the helpless against evil. We can’t do this without a professional and well-equipped military.
People join the US armed forces because they believe that America stands for what is good and right in the world, and that they can trust their command structure (all the way up to the Preznit) to only risk their lives when absolutely necessary. I doubt you’d argue that US intervention in Bosnia to halt ethnic cleansing is something we should have stayed out of.
This contract between the warriors and the leadership has been rent asunder by one of the worst presidents ever. While the number of lives lost in GWB’s imperialist adventuring (2000-3000) are nowhere near the death toll in Viet Nam (58,000+), his misuse of our forces is having a similarly corrosive effect on our military. There’s a distinct possibility that we will come out of this with a “hollow army” that will take a decade or more to repair.
The plural of anecdote is not data, and I think you’re drawing some overly broad conclusions based on a limited number of anecdotes. While you’re entitled to your opinions, I encourage you to critically reexamine the basis for the statements you made above and ask yourself if you really mean what you’re implying.
-AG
I come from the position that it is never acceptable to take civilian lives – that in itself is an act of utter barbarity. (Was it OK for 911 to happen to us? I would guess you would say no. Terrorists do consider themselves to be soldiers for a cause.) Soldiers are not taught to be humane, unless you view killing people as humane. It is the responsibility of the civilian government to curb their use.
The world is a dangerous place. There are Very Bad People out there, who do horrible things to their own countrymen or their neighboring nation-states if no counteracting force exists to keep them in check. As a result of America’s prosperity, and our post-Cold-War standing as the remaining superpower, I believe we have a moral obligation to defend the helpless against evil. We can’t do this without a professional and well-equipped military.
War is not a moral act. We have the most powerful arsenal and military, only someone insane or truly desperate would attack us. We cannot use this for our own greed or our own views of righteousness. If we are to be the example of how an advanced civilization should be run then we need to live by that example. We have the power to marginalize those that behave differently and thus change the world, but I fear we have now marginalized ourselves.
Am I saying a military is not needed? No – of course not – I regret to say, but to bully others into our way of thinking is highly unethical. To set up one brutal dictatorship after another is also highly unethical. We helped set up Saddam and then we removed him. The people that are paying for this are the Iraqi civilians – that is barbarous. We are in the process of setting up another dubious government there, and again the Iraqi people will pay.
As for becoming a soldier – you get trained to kill the enemy. I’m not saying all soldiers are bad, but there will be bad ones and there is nothing you can do to stop it.
Great post, BooMan.
I have written something about US prisons, which i decided to post as a diary and not as a front page story as yours has a broader theme and deserves to stay up these just a bit longer…
I am not surprised that they could have done so much in 4 years; I worry about what they will do in an additional 4. I especially worry about their reaction to the coming economic crunch. Jingoism is going to be their preferred option to avoid the blame for the economic meltdown – and that’s going to end up hurting people outside the US before it hurts inside the country, if they have their way.
Strong words for a most abysmal record of human rights abuses.
I thank you for writing this and I hope beyond hope that all the decent American people will never allow this to be excused by the monstrous Bush administration.
I think it’s beyond time to call them to account. I have noticed that lately when I talk of this, which is all too often in most people’s opinion, there is more shame and less knee jerk rejection that we are the bad guys.
It’s a problem that this doesn’t get much media play, most people I know get their news from television and that’s useless. I try to talk about it with people, and lean heavy on the shame aspect, I am now ashamed of my country-rather than the anger.Anger people can dismiss, but shame is a harder feeling to write off-as in “why are you liberals always so angry?” which is nonsense but still, few people dismiss my presentation of facts with “why are you liberals always so ashamed?” It’s not a feeling anyone likes.
the Air America Radio Webmaster to correct their link to this article. It has the title wrong.
A great deal has happened in the last four days since Welshman posted his diary The Legality of the War in Iraq.
The British press have held on tight to the story of Blair’s dismissal of Lord Goldsmith’s, (his attorney general) advice concerning the legality of the war in Iraq. The six caveats addressing the illegality have been revealed and discussed openly and today the full opinion has been posted on the No. 10 website.
Why can American’s not enjoy the same type of full disclosure and transparency in our government? There is no doubt that the Blair government is in full-spin mode right now and will assert that there was both precedent and moral obligation in support of the war.
But the British people, on the eve of their elections, at least get an opportunity to address the facts in meaningful debate and voice their opinion at the polls. Their LibDem party may be a lesser third party in the UK, but they are using a collective voice to make a difference and the latest polls show they are gaining ground. They are drawing in converts from other parties who feel the outrage of having been lied into an illegal war. They got results from demanding that the legal opinion be published.
Why cannot the American people do the same? We deserve better than an administration that operates under a cloak of darkness, deception and deceit. But, we will not have better unless we demand it. I continue to encourage you to demand full disclosure of the Bush administrations justifications for war from your Representative and Senators.
This story also needs to be played out in a very public way. I would encourage you to submit the letter to your local papers and as many of national print and media outlets as you can possibly flood. A handy resource for this purpose is Headline Spot’s Op-Ed link page
In the run-up to the war, there were thousands of legal opinions offered to the Bush Administration from legal scholars in the US, Canada, Britain and Australia…our allies. 100 law professors and ten or so officers of leading human/civil rights NGO’s signed off on this letter that was sent to Bush and Blair, plus the prime ministers of Canada and Australia.
Bush and Blair did not heed these scholars’ advice, nor did Blair heed the advice he was given. Disclosing the source of Bush’s legal opinion will not legitimize the war in Iraq, but it could prevent a future war. It could begin to turn the tide of world opinion, if we are able to have a national discussion of how our administration led us purposefully astray. There would not be torture in Iraq and Guantanamo were it not for this illegal war. Transparency in government is a first step to making amends in the eyes of the world community.
Discussion of and questioning the legal authority that Bush felt he had will open that process up for review. Trust me when I tell you there is a wealth of analysis out there and Article 51, Resolutions 678 and 687, and Resolution 1441 cannot and will not stand up to scrutiny in the light of day.
In case the Welshman’s diary was not enough to get your collective hackles up, I’d remind you of the following three important dates and the language of the resolutions in support of the war.
CRAWFORD, Texas, August 26, 2002
Bush Gets Legal Advice On Iraq
The existence of a legal opinion – along with earlier reports that the Pentagon is drafting attack plans – reflect the seriousness of preparations within the highest reaches of government to pave the way for war against Iraq in case President Bush does decide on that course of action.
While saying President Bush properly “is trying to keep the (anti-Iraq) coalition together,” DeLay rejected a suggestion by former Secretary of State James A. Baker III that the president should first get a resolution of support from the U.N. Security Council.
The president answers only to the American people through Congress, DeLay said.”
I wonder if Delay charged for that piece of legal advice?
October 16, 2002: Joint Resolution (H.J.Res. 114) to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq
(a) AUTHORIZATION- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to–
(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.
(b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION- In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that–
(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and
(2) acting pursuant to this resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorists attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.
Passed the House 296-133 with four not voting on October 10; passed the Senate 77-23 on October 11; signed into law by Present Bush on October 16.
TEXT OF A LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT TO THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND THE PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE OF THE SENATE
Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)
Consistent with section 3(b) of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107-243), and based on information available to me, including that in the enclosed document, I determine that:
reliance by the United States on further diplomatic and other peaceful means alone will neither adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq nor likely lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and acting pursuant to the Constitution and Public Law 107-243 is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.
Sincerely,
GEORGE W. BUSH
This is not just about the here and now, this is about the future legitimacy of our government as a whole and preventing future illegal wars. Have courage…raise your voice…act now.
Tony Blair’s Third Way, and his arse kissing of BushCo, is about to bear truly bitter fruit. It’s almost certain that the Tories will be victorious, and official Brit policy will likely be more of the same re: BushCo and a return to the domestic policies popular under Thatcher and Major.
The LibDems may be gaining ground, but it’s at the expense of Labour. Other LP voters will sit this one out. I see no way the Tories don’t wind up with an outright victory.
There’s a (repeat) lesson here: the American left must not divide itself. It’s important for opinion leaders (no names mentioned) to work within a contextual understanding of what alternatives they’re creating.
(and, in retort to your signature, I’ll plagiarize: claws may beat skin, but weasels rip my flesh)
How can we lose something that most of the world never believed we had?
Look around the world and think of the places we have chosen to intervene. Iranians still remember what we did to Mossadeq. Chileans remember what we did to Allende. Filipinos haven’t forgotten Ferdinand Marcos. And let’s not talk about our track record in the Middle East.
Torture? We did it in Vietnam. Renditions? We were doing them under Clinton.
The difference today is that BushCo aren’t even trying to hide the abuse or defend it. They just say it’s all the price of the war on terror. For nearly 50 years, our national security bureaucracy used the Cold War to justify its many abuses on the international stage. 9/11 has given those grizzled Cold War veterans a new flag to plant in the ground. Like calls of “remember the Maine,” the 3,000 people killed on 9/11 are used to promote a global war that is killing hundreds of thousands. Millions more will die before we are through.
The real shock you hear from Europe and other quarters is that Americans still stand numbly supporting their government as the truth of our policies are revealed. Americans are addicted to control. We have always been willing to continue our sorry misadventures in places like Haiti (back in the 1920s), Vietnam, and now Iraq. All because we feel the need to control others lest they harm our people or profits.
The funny thing is that I offer this condemnation of our foreign policy as a person who has spent 15 years working amidst that bureaucracy. It will take a true political revolution to get the American people to demand something better; to give up some of our wealth to make the world a better place.
I’d like to think of as the voting class going nuclear. In that analogy, the question becomes one of critical mass. It’s really quite a puzzle, because for most political movements, there’s a lower critical mass to dissolution than there is to revolution (Dean and Kucinich campaign).
The general voting public’s initial reaction to teach-ins, demonstrations and the like tends toward revulsion. To reach ballot-box critical mass, a movement must coopt popular culture. (Yeah, I know, the elitist in me is both dancing the dance of joy and retching at the same time … not a pretty picture.)
about our track record in the Middle East”
Why not ? ? ? As I asked Booman (over the weekend), how can we explain moral outrage now over behavior we have praised (and paid for) in Palestine for decades?
And how can we “pin the tail on the Bushies” when so many donkeys have supported (voted for) the same policy in Iraq, and in Palestine before Iraq for so many years? We will not “unfool” the rest of America until we stop fooling ourselves . . . and that will involve going back way further than 9/11 or the invasion of Iraq . . .
Our track record in the Middle East is pretty well abysmal. Beginning in WWII we sought to supplant the British and French, aspiring to play the same great games that they did.
suggesting that this will come to pass? You can say,
It should not be, but it IS. That is the reality we must face. “Reality-based community,” right? You say,
“Framing” is a way of saying what we mean so that we are heard. If some think that framing is spin, lying, manipulation, pandering to the religious right or to racists, they don’t get it and fuck ’em.
We liberals who hang out on blogs and spend our days consumed with justified outrage like to think we are so smart. Not so smart if we aren’t willing to harness some of that brainpower figuring out how to be heard above the bellowing of the right-wing noise machine, the propaganda spewed 24/7 by the RWCM. If we just continue to rant that everyone should just listen to us, then we get nowhere but hauled off in an ambulance with an aneurysm. And we won’t have stopped a single person from being tortured.
As long as the vast majority of the American people hear nothing but
R: Why do you hate America? L: We don’t, but (everything after that drowned out and tuned out by R’s shouting . . . .) And R: Why don’t you liberals condemn terrorists who behead Americans and blow up innocent Iraqi children with suicide bombs? L: We do, but (everything after that drowned out and tuned out by R’s shouting . . . .)
we will not stop what is happening. We can’t impeach these fuckers until we have control of Congress. We can’t sit around waiting for enough R’s to see the light – if they ever do, it will be too late. We can’t get control of Congress until we win elections. We can’t win elections until Americans hear the truth. Call getting the truth out whatever you want, if you’re sick of the word “frame.” It doesn’t matter if what we “say what we mean” if we say it so poorly that most people hear something other than what we mean.
We have to say it loudly, over an over, and clearly. I call that framing. Call it whatever, but we have to start doing it.
I’ve had this framing debate a few times.
I am not a fan of framing as Lakoff describes it.
Framing is dishonest, in my opinion. Some of it is unavoidable. Cognitive science needs to be understood, and taken into account.
In this case, it is not framing I am calling for. I am calling for labelling them crooks, liars, thieves, and torturers, who have violated their oaths to uphold the constitution and observe all treaties.
These are facts. I don’t need to play on people’s emotions to state them.
Framing has its place. But we are being called out as a criminal nation by human rights organizations. This has to stop.
Lakoff is not the messiah, but he has some good points. I make my living teaching and writing, so I’ve spent some time over the years pondering the disconnect between what I thought I said and what they heard.
I could declare my students/readers morons who should have listened to me more carefully, but I’ve learned I get a a lot farther when I step back and ask how I could have conveyed my ideas more clearly.
And should we give some thought to the basic psychology of communication? Here’s an example:
As a teacher, I have to deal with stupid questions. Fact of classroom life. Any teacher who doesn’t figure out how to do this is a lousy teacher. When a student interrupts me with a stupid question, I could let my emotions (impatience, aggravation) control my response and give a sarcastic, “That’s just too stupid to answer,” reply. It would be honest, because that’s probably what I’m thinking. But I know that if I do, this is what I accomplish: The student who asked feels humiliated in public. S/he is angry with me for being humiliated. S/he will not hear another word I say (too busy seething). Worse, most of the other students (who may have very good questions) will hesitate to speak up.
But if I control my emotions and answer, “You know, I don’t really have time to get into that right now, but if you want to come by my office after class, I’d be happy to go over it,” in a neutral tone (lather, rinse, repeat for the true smart asses), I don’t provoke a negative emotional response in my class, and we can continue to get somewhere with the topic I’m covering.
Is it dishonest to consider the emotional impact of my words on my listeners? I don’t think so.
It’s hard to control our emotions when confronted with the outrages of the last few years, and there’s nothing wrong with the passionate opposition that motivates us to try to do something rather than just to withdraw into impotent cynicism. But unless we start to use our brains as well as our hearts to choose our words intelligently so that what we say is what is heard, and we don’t waste time making our listeners defensive and angry so that they tune us out, we won’t actually change anything.
And what do we want? To be right or to stop the torture and the killing? There is nothing that scares me more than the prospect that we will become no better than them, that we will descend into ends justify the means. If you think this is the road that framing is headed down, OK. It’s a valid consideration. The answer, however, I think, is not to reject thinking carefully about how to communicate, but to get to work using all of our supposed brainpower figuring out how we stay honest and really communicate what those of us here already know, but that too many do not yet.
I thought it was just me. I’ve been in an exceptionally pissy mood regarding our country’s direction for the past few days. I don’t watch TV because my blood pressure rises with anger. Your rant gives me even more motivation to make sure that we elect a Democratic majority in Congress in 2006 so we can nail the LYING HYPOCRITICAL FUCKERS to the wall.
Phew, that felt better. Off to try and be productive here at work.
If there is any way to do a recall of the president as we did with the governor in California..
Does anyone know, is impeachment the only way to remove a president.
Can we have a national referendum to recall Bush and Co.
he is politely asked to leave voluntarily.
Without going into details, I used to work for a very high honcho in the Reagan cabinet (2nd term). I disagreed with his politics, but that was it. It was a disagreement.
I remember riding in his Cadillac up the Washington Parkway and we’d discuss the issues of the day, whether it was taxes or the trickle down economy theory. And we’d disagree, but I felt it was like two reasonable people holding different opinions.
But this? This torture and abuse and killing? This is not a disagreement of politics. This is not two different rational viewpoints. This is disgusting. This is all the stuff we were trained to loathe Hitler for.
I hate Bush and I hate what he’s done to my country’s image and what my brothers and sisters are doing in his name. This isn’t a disagreement of policy, this is a violation of human dignity.
I for one am glad I no longer live there. Sorry but its true..
Pax
Does anyone check on this site, that has “the voice of the White house articles, There are about 20 at this point from an “Insider” of the WH. Don’t know if it’s true or not but its worth checking out.
This is part of the one from April 25, 2005
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/index.asp
Yep. I read tbrnews.org twice a week after they post the VotWH features.
After nearly 8 months of reading these articles within a few days after each new one is posted, I’ve come to the conclusion that this is the product of a clever writer with access to a number of sources in the White House, not to mention absolutely no compunction about making stuff up that loosely fits known facts and caters to liberal biases.
I still read it regularly, though. Even if much of it is fiction, there are many truths in there that would not be safe for a journalist covering the White House to speculate upon in print. Chimpy’s use of psychiatric medication, for example. 🙂
-AG
If I can take you back a little, The acceleration of the decline of the USA’s standing in the world really started before Abu Ghraib in the very first days of the Bush administration. Bush had come to power in what was widely seen as a subverted election and then virtually immediately renounced the Kyoto protocol.
Even that was forgotten in the enormous outpouring of sympathy for the deaths on 9/11 but then events in Afghanistan started to unravel that support. Much of the military success there was just purchased from the local warlords who saw a great opportunity to re-establish poppy production after the Taliban government had vastly reduced their output. It became obvious that many civilians killed or arrested were wrongly identified as opponents, either accidentally through wrong “intelligence” or because of deliberate mis-information to settle scores.
What really lost it was the abrogation of the Geneva Conventions and the opening of Gitmo Bay. Certainly here reporters had gone in and discovered some of the abuses like the taxi driver who was in the wrong place having dropped a fare and was picked up by a local militia. They were being paid a bounty by the Americans for “talibani” who were then whisked off to Cuba.
All this led to a cynicism both of the Bush junta’s motives and truthfulness. I am no scientist but even I could see that the claims about pre-cursor chemicals for biological weapons were dubious. Put very simply, this is a biological medium very like dried soup. Like any similar product on your local supermarket shelf, it goes bad in a couple of years so even if Saddam still had the stock, it would be unusable.
In a mood of anger and regret I wrote the following on another board two years ago but it does I hope go a long way to explaining the atitudes of people outside the US who are sympathetic to the ideals that founded the country but opposed to where the Republicans have taken you:
There is a strange similarity between religion and right-wing politics in the US and it’s not only the organised church aspect. Virtually all world religions share common features. They have a creation myth which often involves a struggle between good and evil. There is a sacred text (or sacred verbal tradition). Typically there is a historical or mythical indvidual or group who “reveal” knowledge. They have wicken who interpret the religion for the living and frequently practice its rites. Most importantly adherence to the religion bestows on the believer a particular “gift” or quality (e.g. afterlife benefits, “the chosen people”).
In the absolute rejection of a state religion, the US has developed a sort of secular religion alongside known variously as “US Democracy” or “the American Way”. It even has its own “holy trinity” of Science, Commerce and Law. Of course the benefits are not in the afterlife but earthly. The promise is “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” tho the right-wing adherents usually interpret this as “my life, my licence and my pursuit of wealth”. If it cannot deliver enough wealth it at least bestows an earthly “state of grace” in the form of “being an American”.
Just as questioning their religious beliefs, criticising any aspect of their political creed undermines their confidence in what they have internalised as holy writ. Challenging any aspect of american society or their current high priest, the Rev Dubya Bush of the Church of the Latter Day Morons, is to challenge their self-identity.
In their insularity they fail to understand is that after they have been prosthletised the ideals and vision of the Founding Fathers, Roosevelt and Kennedy are known and admired in all democratic countries and in most others, including those where the tyrant was installed or is supported and maintained by the US. What many see however is that the political system in the US has conspired to compromise those ideals.
Getting to know about US politics is a bit like finding out that your favorite niece who you admired for her youthful idealism, vigor and enthusiasm has turned into a raddled, drunken hooker. She’s sold herself to businessmen, lawyers and the military Her pimps have arranged for her to escort some very unsavory foreign friends of their’s. She is now reeling around drunk on her own self-importance and hydrocarbons. While she bawls her order for another fix her offspring has fallen un-noticed from her breast where even her milk is tainted by the effects of her debauchery. What’s worse she is now trying to force her narcotics on your mother.
Columbia has become the whore of Gin Lane tho perhaps that should be Oil Alley. In case you don’t know the Hogarth drawing: http://www.haleysteele.com/hogarth/plates/ginlane.html