A few words from George W. Bush during his speech in Michigan (CNN):

“The first thing you do is ask, what’s legal?” he said. “What do the lawyers say is possible? I made the decision, within the law, to get information so I can say to myself, ‘I’ve done what it takes to do my duty to protect the American people.’ I can tell you that the information we got saved lives.”

And a little bit about how to handle foreign policy and rogue regimes:

“A lot of times people want to give out the carrots,” he said. “My attitude is, you give out the carrots when the behavior changes.”

He was courteous to Obama, but that’s not the news here. My question is this: If you are so vigorously defending the interrogation techniques and the necessity for them, why mislead the public about them? If they are NOT against the law, why use your lawyers to find a work-around? Here’s this prick in 2007 answering questions for the press:

The President’s words: “We stick to U. S. Law and our international obligations.” Well, that’s just a large, steaming pile of bullshit. The Geneva Convention - part of our obligation in international law, states in Part III, Section I, the following:

No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever. Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to any unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind.

Maybe it’s me, but there’s no lawyer-speak in this statement. It’s so straight-forward a gorilla could understand it. The simple truth is: EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THIS. To suggest otherwise is disingenuous.

So, once again Mr. Ex-President, if you were so confident that your program fell within the law and was necessary to our safety, why mislead, why lie, why keep it in it’s entirety from Congress? And even if you want to tinker with the meaning of “torture”, wouldn’t waterboarding fall within the description of a prisoner not being “threatened, insulted, or exposed to any unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind?” Surely, the prisoners of Abu Graib were a tad uncomfortable when they were “threatened” by dogs - and maybe a little bit “insulted” when guards, oh, what’s the word….INSULTED THEM.

Look. I’m no fan of these people. Anyone who attacks this country really doesn’t deserve a whole lot of mercy if I were the one dishing out the punishment. But that is why we have law, so angry whackos like me can’t make my actions against these type of people personal. And our government is supposed to be held to a higher standard.

Bush knew what he was doing. That’s why he mislead. No amount of defense for these actions will soften the fact that our President broke the law and lied to the country.

Verbal Paintball Geneva Convention, George Bush, torture

Once again, these filthy cowards in the Bush administration (this time, in the form of Condi Rice) are still trying to justify torture because of September 11th. I find this so disingenuous it defies logic. By their admission, the September 11th attack opened up the window to the “anything goes” form of retribution.

Their logic goes something like this:

<i>We were attacked on September 11th, so we will take any means necessary to pull information out of potential informants, no matter the consequences or pain induced.

We were attacked on September 11th, so the laws of privacy for ALL Americans no longer apply. Why? Well, because we were attacked.

We were attacked on September 11th, so it’s necessary to attack Iraq. Why? Don’t you remember? Terrorists attacked our citizens! Why are you pressing me on this? Don’t bother me with your cowardly “but the terrorists were Saudi’s” bullshit.</i>

America has been a beacon for other countries because of the extent of our freedoms and the depth of our example as good citizens of the world. We’re not perfect and we have erred (many times in many ways); Propping up puppets in third world and middle east countries, such as the Shah in Iran, for example. But the majority of our efforts have been for the betterment of people here and elsewhere. Why? Because we ARE (or have been) our government in one way or another.

The Bush administration took us backwards - and very simply because they were so shit-in-their-pants scared of everything around them after 9-11 that they figured anything was acceptable. Want to know what a coward looks like? That’s it. A courageous person would take stock in the situation and soberly decide the best course. Bush and his people acted like chickens with their heads cut off and knives flailing in both hands.

And I still suspect our government knew some of the limits of our enemy - and even if they didn’t, there are things this country should never be and never do because the response to our fall from grace damages our security more than anything else in this world will.

We win with our enemy by destroying their reason to exist. It’s more nuanced, more complicated and less concrete, but it’s the only way to actually come out on the better side of this thing.

That is what this country did with the KKK. If we had taken KKK members, tortured them, put them into rendition, killed family and friends accidentally and lied about our reasons, we would have had MORE of them and a civil war in the U.S. again.

Anyway, here is our previous incompetent Secretary of State tripping over herself trying to justify the lies and criminal behavior of herself and her asshole administration:

I particularly like the line “Unless you were there…”

Nice excuse for committing crimes, bitch.

Current News, Politics abu ghraib, Condoleezza Rice, George Bush, republican liars, torture

From CNN:

Cheney told CNN’s “State of the Union” that the Bush administration’s “alternative” interrogation techniques were “absolutely essential” to preventing further assaults like the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington.

Critics said those techniques amounted to the torture of prisoners in American custody.

“President Obama campaigned against it all across the country, and now he is making some choices that, in my mind, will, in fact, raise the risk to the American people of another attack,” Cheney said.

“Stuff happens, and an administration has to be able to respond to that and we did,” Cheney told CNN’s “State of the Union.”

Stuff does happen. But how you respond to it as a moral country is what’s important. Can we get actionable intelligence from prisoners who are not brought close to death? Some interrogation officials say yes. For me, the issue wasn’t that this country was torturing prisoners (this happens in every war), but that it was a government policy to do so. The second Bush approved waterboarding and other interrogation actions that were considered unlawful by the Geneva Convention, he took us down a road that would actually make us LESS SAFE.

Smartest thing to do would be to use it when absolutely necessary. In our current situation, it was the rule instead of the exception.

And that immoral, bald headed fuck is the last person who should give any advice at all.

Current News Barack Obama, Dick Cheney, terrorist attacks, torture