President Bush admits to committing war crimes and the media overlooks the story to report about Obama's job offers to Democratic primary challengers.
You may not have heard, but in a speech in Grand Rapids, Michigan, former President of the United States of America admitted to committing a war crime. President George W. Bush said, "Yeah, we water boarded Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. I'd do it again to save lives." In the same speech he went on to call the 9/11 attacks a declaration of war against the United States. Now, if you want to get all technical, a declaration of war would make our actions subject to the Geneva convention, which explicitly forbid waterboarding as torture, and since we agreed to abide by the Geneva conventions in 1882, thereby acknowledging them as law and agreeing to abide by said law, President Bush just admitted committing war crimes.
Would it be reasonable to assume that, at the very minimum, a special prosecutor might be called to investigate breaking the law by a President? Would war crimes be serious enough to appoint a special prosecutor and call for an independent investigation?
You probably won't hear any calls for it. Why? Because an admission of war crimes by a former President of the United States is barely being reported by the so-called "liberal" media, which is instead focusing exclusively on the very serious crime by President Obama of offering someone a job. Now, I really don't mean to downplay the Obama controversy. There is a legitimate debate as to whether the President did something unethical, but any accusations of illegality are fragile at best. I mean, do you really want us to go over all of Bush's appointments to make sure they weren't pats on the back for doing him a favor of some sort? Clinton's? Reagan's? Seriously - this is something everyone does, we know everyone does it - and as long as it's legal, the right needs to remember that if they regain power they'll be subject to the same silly scrutiny.
On the other hand, you have a clear admission of guilt from a former President regarding war crimes and human rights violations. We've even prosecuted leaders of other countries for doing the same to our soldiers. Any first year legal student with a 2.5 could make a compelling legal case out of this one, folks. And there aren't loud calls for even an investigation?
I'm willing to listen to the right's arguments that Obama's actions are unethical, maybe even illegal. I truly am. I want a government that is open and honest and does not commit crimes. But don't give me outrage and articles about Obama's actions being illegal, aiding Blogojovich's defenses, and call for a special prosecutor and give me crickets about the former President torturing people in my name, k?
Nice piece and food for thought. I do believe that Politicians, like everyone else, should be responsible for their actions. However the way to hold them accountable for their politics is not to place them in jail, rather to place them out of politics. The only way to do this is get involved.
So because Ford didn't want to "tear this country apart." We now allow the right-wing warmongers to commit some of the most heinous crimes on the planet, and if anyone dares to medically cover the citizens of this country they are called a traitor. That not pragmatism, that is blind indifference.
I understand you are trying to be the devil's advocate here Scott, HOWEVER we are so far beyond looking at it from both sides, it isn't even funny.
Clinton got a BJ, and supposedly Obama is in trouble for doing what every president for the last 200 years has been doing. Yet, Bush and his cohorts kidnap and torture people to death, and not a peep. Sorry there is no looking at it from both sides on this one.
I mean come on! To even entertain the thought that sexual misconduct and murder are even close... Ridiculous...
When are you guys gonna learn when it comes to kidnapping, torture, and murder the RepubliCONs think they have a God given right to do so. No librul anything is going to tell them they can't maim and kill for securing resources and spheres of influence.
The "liberal" press were lockstep with Bush Co.'s lead up to their illegal war in Iraq. If anyone would care to read the Bill which allowed Bush Co. to invade, you would know that is was based on whether or not there was truth to the WMD claim. NOT if there were any, BUT if the claim there were was true. Which has been proven it wasn't true. Anything happen on that one?
The Bush Admin was rife with illegality. People were kidnapped out of their homes and tortured to death for christ's sake. Are they even under investigation? Of course not.
Now if they get a whiff of criminality from Obama it is the end of the world... You guys need to wake up and see who is really running this country.
In everyone's abject indifference we have let this country be taken over by the most evil people on the planet. I am not talking about some religious wacko jihadist who clearly says he hates us. I am talking about the self-righteous murderers who claim to be fighting for you, when they are so clearly fighting for themselves.
You all want to haggle over precedence?! What a joke. The fact they want to investigate Obama and not Bush is a slap in the face of precedence, not to mention common sense.
What it is is the difference between reality and fantasy. While pragmatism may seem repugnant it is also necessary. It is what Gerald Ford understood back in the 1970s. Such a prosecution or prosecutions would tear this country apart. It would not only grind things to a halt now, it would guarantee so in the future. The question is not a melodramatic question about ones love for justice but a question of whether you are willing to destroy the very thing you love in the interest of justice. While I recognize the horrible wrong, the question comes down to whether it is worth that risk. I believe Ford was right and think Obama is right now. I believe they both love the rule of law but are both pragmatic. Maybe that makes us horrible people. I believe it means we are living in the real world.
No Scott. Political crimes are crimes and are handled through the regular criminal court system.
I still say, what you have espoused, believing and saying there are TWO different classes of citizens, is UNDEMOCRATIC, is against the American Way of Life and is the HIGHEST ACT of DESTROYING our constitution. Unless and until you understand that, you are lost.
You are for the Rule of Man -- and -- depending on the "man" who holds the most power, there goes your lot in life.
I really agree with what you are saying principle. The problem is that while these are heinous crimes, these are also political crimes. Political crimes are prosecuted by politicians and the ones on the right have shown consistently that they don't know the difference between prosecuting a crime and playing dirty politics. Bush politicized the justice department and I have full faith that future Republican presidents do the same. I think a world court would be best for Bush and Cheney. It would be an impartial judge and jury. If the Congress and US courts do it then conservatives will just cry about it being a political prosecution because many of them don't know the difference. So they could go to jail but people would not undrstand and think it was all about politics. The right would turn him into some kind of Nelson Mandela. Start the process now of at least closing any loopholes so that Congress can easily impeach the next guy that does it.
I love the way you think, carguy.
As I've said before, the Dems are great at infighting but they absolutely suck when dealing with their true adversaries, the Republicans. I often wonder why that is. It has gone on for generations.
Sam, I'm with you! Obviously, as you can see from the "liberal" posts here - many people, for some reason, want to thwart the Rule of Law. "It's dangerous to investigate or indict a former sitting prez is not what it is. HORSESHIT. That is what it is!
Any time. Any. Time. You allow One. ONE. person. to get away with MURDER, especially, murder by torture, you have a serious problem with your priorities, not to mention democracy. Those of you who post such horseshit must never again whine about the loss of any civil liberty. Never again whine about "corruption" nor about "what's the world come to?" Because its "Come" to people who don't mind --even speak up FOR -- having two types of citizens - those that are allowed to "get away with it" and those that aren't! Unfortunately, we the people are always in the group that aren't!
Disgusting.
Wouldn't it be great if Bush or Cheney went to another country and were arrested for war crimes?
Probably the only country where they can be assurred of safety is Israel where war crimes are a way of life.
I'd give my left one to see either of them do the perp walk and sit in the docket at the World Court.
....think it will change if the base keeps knocking them off in primaries? (Specter and possibly Lincoln come to mind)
Hey, you have to give them credit. Have you every tried to straddle a fence? Either your feet really hurt or your balls do.
That's because our (Democrats) leaders don't have the stones to do it right or wrong.
You're right. And boy does that hurt to admit.
What I want to do get everybody whoi was involved in these illegal andinhuman acts and kick them to next Tuesday but stop short of indicting anybody because that is not in anyone's best interest.
But I REALLY, REALLY hate it when the pot calls the kettle black and WE are the pot. Crap!@
My issue here is the double standard. Whenever you have a scandal, or in this case, a non-scandal, the media and Republican "leadership" is all over calling for an investigation. Clinton gets a BJ from an intern and it warrants a special prosecutor and depositions and a media circus - Bush admits to heinous crimes against humans and it warrants crickets chirping? Now Obama offers someone a job that isn't even a paid position and they're talking legality and special prosecutors again?
My point here is, hold all of our leaders to the same standard, not just shield the "Republicans" from the can of worms and not the Democrats.
Fact is, the GOP really BELIEVES that. Their "end justifies the means" absolutely enrages me. This is not the party of Eisenhower and Dirksen or Rockefeller or even Gerald Ford. It's not the party of John McCain v.2000. And to think Bush would stand up there and say that....WHAT AN IDIOT!
This whole crappola about Obama and his trying to run his party in an orderly fashion. George Will said Sunday that this is "politics as usual". It just doesn't always get splatted up on the TV for all to see. Jeeeez, the conservatives will jump on any little thing, the bastards. God help us if Obama replaces a roll of toilet paper that rolls "under" not "over".
OTOH.....if the president's toilet paper roll "under" .......
To play Cheney's advocate (and quite literally in this case), do we really want to open this can of worms? When you investigate a former president you open up a pretty dangerous precedent. When does that one stop? When (not if) the right takes over Congress, do you want them investigating Clinton again or Obama when he leaves office? Here is what I say needs to happen:
1) The press needs to cover this and get all over his ass. While I don't want him to go to jail, that doesn't mean this should be a pleasant experience for him.
2) Investigate what happened without prosecution. That way you can get the full truth and then put in safeguards so it can never happen again.
Of course, that's just playing Cheney's advocate.
But....but....don't you know that it's not illegal if the president does it!
Nixon said so!
(snort)
I don't hear any "lib rul" Congressmen calling for an investigation into this admission, either. I've been wondering why.