President Signs Law Giving Defense Dept Authority To Exempt Photos From Freedom Of Information Act

[kpete]

Source: ACLU

President Signs Law Giving Defense Department Authority To Exempt Photos From Freedom Of Information Act (10/29/2009)

ACLU Renews Call For Secretary Gates Not To Block Release Of Torture Photos

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: [phone]; [email protected]

WASHINGTON – President Obama today signed into law a Homeland Security appropriations bill that grants the Department of Defense (DOD) the authority to continue suppressing photos of prisoner abuse. The amendment, which would allow the DOD to exempt photos from the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA), is aimed at photos ordered released by a federal appeals court as part of an American Civil Liberties Union FOIA lawsuit for photos and other records related to detainee abuse in U.S. custody overseas, although it would apply to other photos in government custody as well. Earlier this month, the ACLU sent a letter to Secretary Robert Gates urging him not to exercise the authority to suppress the photos in their case, stating that the photos "are of critical relevance to an ongoing national debate about accountability."

"We are disappointed that the president has signed a law giving the Defense Department the authority to hide evidence of its own misconduct, and we hope the defense secretary will not take advantage of that authority by suppressing photos related to the abuse of prisoners," said Jameel Jaffer, Director of the ACLU National Security Project. "Secretary Gates should be guided by the importance of transparency to the democratic process, the extraordinary importance of these photos to the ongoing debate about the treatment of prisoners and the likelihood that the suppression of these photos would ultimately be far more damaging to national security than their disclosure. The last administration's decision to endorse torture undermined the United States' moral authority and compromised its security. A failure to fully confront the abuses of the last administration will only compound these harms."

Another provision contained in the new law allows the transfer of detainees from Guantánamo Bay to the U.S. for prosecution.

"This law allows the administration to transfer prisoners to the U.S. for criminal trials in the federal courts, and the administration should now do exactly that," said Jaffer. "The military commissions at Guantánamo are not just unlawful but unnecessary. The federal courts are fully capable of prosecuting terrorism suspects while protecting both national security interests and fundamental due process. It's time to shut down Guantánamo, transfer the military commissions trials to federal courts that uphold the rule of law, and transfer prisoners whom the administration does not intend to charge to countries where they won't be in danger of being tortured. Indefinite detention without charge or trial undermines the most basic values of justice and fairness."

Read more: http://aclu.org/safefree/torture/41364prs20091029.html

[villager]

1. Why, the "change" is coming fast and furiously, this morning!

n/t

[FiveGoodMen]

3. Yes, it's accelerating!

In the wrong direction.

Does anyone here still think Obama is even trying to do good things?

[T Wolf]

5. Hey now. Gay people are now protected under hate crimes, even though they still can't serve openly

in the US military. That has to count for something, doesn't it?

And, uh... I know there is something else that has been accomplished. Just cannot remember what it is just now.

[Bette Noir]

8. He reversed the last-minute oil leases Bush sold just before he left office.

This protected some incomparable wild lands in Utah.

So, the hate crime legislation makes two things he can check off his to-do list.

[Arctic Dave]

12. They only reversed some of the oil leases. In Alaska they still have the go ahead.

[liberation]

66. Hey, don't forget the preemptive Nobel peace price!

(I hear furious and angry pompoms in the distance...)

[taggline]

154. "PRICE"...IS RIGHT!!

[No Elephants]

157. Authorized stem cell research (not terribly controversial anymore), admits to other

countries that the US has been wrong (I'm waiting for those other countries to admit their mistakes, but, so far, crickets), the hate crimes bill (though I am not sure how I feel about that}, at least trying to close Gitmo, and other things.

I will not take every change away from him because he has continued a number of policies and stances.

However, the things he has done wrong are quite serious, in my book.

[Mari333]

6. I can hardly keep up with all this change.

and yes, its moving back to Bush's cover ups. Its like deja vu.

[taggline]

153. I was going to change the country...but, I changed my mind, instead

Well, now...Meet The New Boss...and The Song Remains The Same.
BULLSHIT, BULLSHIT, BULLSHIT...AD INFINITUM.

[No Elephants]

156. Who knew "change" meant getting Olympia Snowe's vote at all costs, though?

[chadmak09]

49. Not me.

I am ready to jump the ship of support for obama.
He is turning out to be just another politician.

[tXr]

62. He always was just another politician.

He's taking care of those who ensured his election and to hell with everyone else.

Just another politician.

[empire we are]

74. He was merely the lesser of two evils.

His change is in tiny increments not degrees.
He lost me before the election when he backed the TARP.
He has surrounded himself with oligarchs and his COS is
an Israel First-er.
Same tired old stuff... look at what they do not what they say.

[EVDebs]

87. Obama's first job out of college was with a CIA front company

Business International Corp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_International_Corporation#Barack_Obama

[defendandprotect]

117. Pretty soon we're going to have to change the name of the country to CIA, INC.

[defendandprotect]

119. "...the left wing of the ruling class" . .. wanted Eugene McCarthy as Pres...!!!

Hi ... interesting. When did you find this?



Barack Obama

United States President Barack Obama's first job after graduating from Columbia University was with the company. He held a position as a research associate in its financial services division, where he edited Financing Foreign Operations, a global reference service, and wrote for Business International Money Report, a weekly financial newsletter.
CIA

The company has been identified as cover organization for the Central Intelligence Agency, e.g. see Lobster Magazine, issue 14 in 1987. According to a lengthy article in the New York Times in 1977, the co-founder of the company told the newspaper that "Eldridge Haynes had provided cover for four CIA employees in various countries between 1955 and 1960".<3>

[No Elephants]

158. 1/ That wiki article is not exactly solid. 2/ Even if it is true, do you think a college kid knew

that? 3/ He left after a year to work in Chicago as a community organizer.

I will criticize Obama when I feel it is justified and have many times, but your post is a baseless smear.

[twitomy]

123. You mean people actually bought the "hope and change" schtick?

Naive Suckas!
He's just another politican; albeit a little on the left, thats all...

[saigon68]

163. Some did ---- I never did

He is going to KILL thousands more young amerikans for the corporations who now "OPENLY" own him

[No Elephants]

167. And you want the government to be further left?

[twitomy]

206. Depends on the issue...

Some things yes, others not so much.
Obama hasnt lived up to his hype. Cynical as I am, I never expected him or any politician to do so.

[No Elephants]

213. On which things would you like government to be further left?

And, as you reply, remember, a puppy dies every time you post deceptively at DU. Also, I have read a lot of your posts.

[twitomy]

225. Wow, I have a following!

I will admit I am not as left as most here.

But if I was King for a Day....

Ok with Gay marriage,

Eliminating Dont ask dont tell.

Health care reform that doenst involve health insurance companies, and is run by the patients, not the govt, although govt subsidies are ok.

Withdraw from GATT,NAFTA,WTC.

Withdraw from NATO. Withdraw from Korea, Japan, Germany, England.
The reasons these countries can spend so much on social programs is becasue they dont pay much for their own defense thanks to us. Well, time to withdraw the teat.

Tarriff those goods that come from countries whose standard of living is way below the US.

Eliminate the income tax and replace with consumption tax. Send a "prebate" to everyone which will make it progressive it nature.

Term limits for Reps and Senators.

Fight to win in Afghanistan or get out.

Stop deficeit spending, line Item veto.

Stop creating Debt money.

Increase min wage and have it pegged to inflation.

Just a few from top of my head

[lefty369]

92. Its a good bill. We all saw how enraged

the arab world was over Abu Garib. This bill helps prevent this.

[bjobotts]

95. Nonsense. The Arab world has already seen the photos.They don't want U to see them

[bjobotts]

96. Covering Bush's ass is a full time job for Obama.Our shame continues

[bjobotts]

97. The photos show torture was systemic not isolated and we tortured innocents to death.

[bjobotts]

98. Now stick your head back in the sand and forget Bush's crimes.Presidents are above the law

[bjobotts]

99. Indefinite preventive detention???That's what our founding fathers stood for huh

[bjobotts]

100. Put you hands in your ears but this is the Bush Obama now. and of course...

[bjobotts]

101. ...it was Joe Liebermann who snuck that provision into the bill for Obama

[bjobotts]

102. Just like Obama's Joe is making sure the public option is killed like "trigger"Obama wanted

[bjobotts]

106. Rates not tied to Medicare means premiums for PO will be higher than private plans

Reform the private ins. profiteers counted on

[snooper2]

200. see post #199

:)

[No Elephants]

160. Americans ought not know what their government does. Knowledge may affect the way they vote!

Hiding the indisputable truth is good for America!

[snooper2]

196. do you only have one thought at a time

and post

[snooper2]

197. and another

and post

[snooper2]

198. and another

and post







:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[snooper2]

199. meant to reply to 106 instead of 160...but the sub-thread

is all discombobulated now anyway :rofl:

[saigon68]

166. It upsets the Sheep to see the dark side of the Revered Military

[scentopine]

111. This is wrong on so many levels it is sickening...

we should not publish photos of

1. the Holocaust. It just makes the Jews enraged.
2. lynched black people, It just makes black people enraged.
3. police abuse, it just makes criminals enraged.
4. Vietnam War, it just makes anti-war protesters enraged.
5. Iraq, it just makes anti-war protesters... oh wait, nevermind
6. New Orleans Katrina, it just makes poor people enraged.
7. Oklahoma City bombing, it just makes pre-school children and their parents enraged.
8. civil war, it just makes the south enraged.

God I could do this all night.

What is so terrifying for our freedom and democracy is how so many democrats think censorship is the right thing to do. We are not teaching history lessons in school. We are teaching shit to keep us passive and submissive.

If this is the democratic party line (Obama is the democratic party leader), those of you out there who believe we need something better, we need real leadership to help pull together a new party and leave the those who would cheerfully reason away our rights and civil liberties all for the "common good of arabs or republicans or corporations, on and on".

Every single fucking year the CIA and NSA and DoD and FBI and Homeland Security on and on get biger and bigger and more controlling and nastier and meaner and bolder - this shit has got to stop. Now we have "Cyper Security Agency". It seems like 10% of US population is engaged in policing the rest of us. Counting all DoD civian and military, all FBI, CIA, HSA, TSA, ATF, INS, and their private contractors - its probably more than 10%.

Obama has done a big fat fucking ZERO to keep these monsters in check.

The truth shall set us free. Behind censorship and Obama's protection of CIA lies hell's gate.

[CrispyQ]

186. Excellent post.

And a belated welcome to DU. :hi:

I fear our country has become a perpetual war machine. Which is technically what we've been for several decades, we've just come out of the closet about it now.

[scentopine]

223. Yes - there are two stimulus programs in USA

For the rich
- treasury cash in form of multi-trillion dollar handout, no questions asked.

For the rest of us
- treasury cash in the form of a enlisted man's salary fighting our wars in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Wall Street is selling everything that isn't nailed down to Asia for pennies on the dollar. The only industry we have left is war making. So people are faced with Burger King or a directly or indirectly participating in the slaughter of a million or more from two ruthless wars of our own design.

The rich should have nothing to complain about from Obama. He's got their backs.

[defendandprotect]

118. No ... what prevents torture is holding those responsible for it accountable ...

making it fully public!!

[pmorlan1]

120. Delusional

Its a good bill. We all saw how enraged
Posted by lefty369

the arab world was over Abu Garib. This bill helps prevent this.

Oh my. If that's what you believe then I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.

[astroBspacedog]

135. It's a great bill !!

It prevents the world from seeing photos of the prisoners that we are torturing.

[tavalon]

190. Yep, it's the Rumsfeld Doctrine

The doctrine being that it isn't the torture that's wrong, it's the pictures that were taken that are wrong.

[No Elephants]

159. LOL!

[Ter]

228. He had no choice

The Secret Government would not be happy with him had he let it all come out in the open. :(

[barbtries]

2. f'kn bullshit

grr

[Hell Hath No Fury]

4. More crap.

:mad:

[QC]

7. How very, very hopeful and changealicious! n/t

[chimpymustgo]

32. I think it's...changiness.

[QC]

41. But you have to admit--it was a fantastic ad slogan.

I think it's every bit as catchy as "have it your way" and "Testes Great! Less filling!"

About as meaningful, too.

[liberation]

67. Was the "testes" a Freudian Slip? LOL ;-)

[QC]

71. LOL! Didn't even notice that.

Maybe it's all the recent talk of teabagging that did it.

[marasinghe]

112. a lack of same in our leaders, bring the 'T' word out of your sub-conscious? :) (n/t)

[CoffeeCat]

128. More like..."Where's the beef?" (nt)

[No Elephants]

172. I firmly oppose testes that are less filling.

Lame pun.

[tavalon]

191. Is that like truthiness?

LOL

[Bette Noir]

9. Disappointing.

[fascisthunter]

10. America the Free!!!!!

free to pay taxes, send your kids to wars for corporate interests, but ya just can't see the evidence of their deeds.

[paparush]

11. Transparency?

This sounds like something Cheney left in the top drawer.

[Oregone]

13. Freedom Of Some Information Act

But hell, photos aren't information, right?

[AlbertCat]

37. But hell, photos aren't information, right?

A picture is worth 1000 words....

Now we'll just have to read the 1000 words....if they're not redacted.

[bjobotts]

108. The photos from viet Nam ended that war.

[marasinghe]

122. well, you know - we have a more responsible main-stream media now, than back in the 60's.

they reflect the will of the american majority - when they keep those nasty photos of, perhaps, a million dead iraqi & uncounted afghani civilians, not to mention our troops, off their pristine pages & screens.

plus: that could really rouse up the populace of those two benighted countries & put our boys in danger - from suicide bombers & all - where they're all safe & snug in their barracks, now.

[saigon68]

164. If you liked SURGE 1

wait until SURGE 2 OBAMA happens

[Le Taz Hot]

150. Uh, no it didn't.

It was the first "advisors" coming back from the war who told us what was REALLY going on and that our government was lying to us. The result was a massive anti-war movement. Then a series of things occurred: the truth about the Gulf of Tonkin, (The Pentagon Papers), the Mi Lai Massacre, then Dr. King and Walter Cronkite turned aginst the war, it was all over. The photos, which we saw weekly in "Look," "Time" and "Newsweek" were considered just part of war. We were only 15 years out from the last one (Korea) and 20-25 years from WWI. Hell, we watched dead bodies on the 6:00 evening news. The photos were not what ended the war. It was the effort of LOTS of patriotic Americans who were told to "Love it or leave it."

[No Elephants]

161. So, the light at the end of the tunnel was a flash bulb?

[DUlover2909]

55. Those photos jeapardize their personal, er I mean National security.

[defendandprotect]

130. Almost totally Freedom of Some Information Act --

Every time my husband and I see the bank banners for "free checking" we always

laugh at that notion -- "Almost totally free checking" --!!

These must be quite some photos/videos!!!!

We should be fighting for them -- !!!

[No Elephants]

168. The best way we can fight for them, IMO, is to donate to the ACLU, which IS fighting for them

and has been for a long time. Even if lawyers volunteer--and they do pay lawyers--things like just court costs, copying costs, etc. on a case like this mount up to thousands of dollars.

And the ACLU fights on the correct side of a lot of issues that we post about.

[defendandprotect]

189. I'm a contributing member ....

:)

[No Elephants]

218. Based on your posts, I assumed that. I hope others read my post, though.

[MsLeopard]

14. Today's Daily Disappointment

Another day, another outrage. Meet the new boss.....

[Qutzupalotl]

15. I don't think he had a choice

since the CIA trumps the Secret Service.

[WriteDown]

17. Neither did Bushler...

He was under constant threat by the CIA :eyes:.

[Qutzupalotl]

27. CIA contractors started the torture under Bush.

Bush had no plans to stop the program, hence no threats were necessary.

[WriteDown]

28. Nope, the CIA made Bush start that program.

:sarcasm:

[Qutzupalotl]

34. Isn't sarcasm supposed to be funny?

[WriteDown]

39. About as funny as Obama being controlled by the CIA

being used as an excuse.

[No Elephants]

182. I guess the DU archives of 2001-2008 are full of posts by you condemning torture then?

If not, I am not seeing the point of your posts, except to be anti-Obama for the sake of being anti-Obama.

[WriteDown]

187. I forgive you for that....

I know the CIA is making you say these things.

[No Elephants]

216. To the contrary, you know otherwise. And, I'll take that as a no, the archives of DU are not

full of posts by Write Down bashing Bush for torture. I'm shocked.

[WriteDown]

219. If you can signal me where the CIA is holding you..

I'll send help!

[No Elephants]

162. And Obama has no plans to prosecute Bush, so no threats are necessary.

If you enflame the American public about Bush at this juncture, they may demand accountability. If they demand accountability and none is forthcoming, Obama's chance of re-election may be affect adversely, along with that of Democrats in Congress who went along with Bushco on so many things; and re-election seems to be the only true imperative in Washington, D.C.

[Qutzupalotl]

201. There could have been threats before Holder's decision not to prosecute.

There was a huge outcry from the CIA when Obama released the torture memos, even with redactions.

We don't really know what was said behind the scenes. I'll admit my theory of CIA threats, explicit or implied, is just speculation; but it seems like a reasonable explanation, given their history, for Obama's backtracking on his promise of full disclosure. I think we're getting about as much info as we're going to get.

[No Elephants]

217. I don't think this has a thing to do with the CIA.

I think Obama does, and always has done, what he thinks is best for Obama. I can see that pattern going back to at least his days in the Illinois state legislature, where he was absent or voted present whenever some potential third rail, like abortion, was up for a vote.

During the primary, Republicans and supporters of Clinton or Edwards would point things like that out to me, but I argued against them every single time and supported him. Ruefully, I wish I had been less defensive of him then.

In any event, Obama is responsible for his own words, actions and inactions, just like the rest of us. As a friend once pointed out to me, "You always have a choice, unless you have a gun to your head. And even then, you have a choice."

[Xicano]

53. Yes he had a choice. The CIA isn't Obama's boss. Remember JFK fired CIA Director Allen Dulles

n/t

[Qutzupalotl]

60. And look where that got him. n/t

[liberation]

68. I am pretty sure that was the point of the OP...

[defendandprotect]

131. Yes . . . we had a dead president and Dulles got promoted to Warren Commission--!!

And the truth of all that is waiting to be brought forward .... some day.

Takes power to do it -- and the GOP is making sure that those who want to

get this country back on the right track and put their asses in jail never

get the chance.

[Scruffy1]

16. Mission accomplished

Between selling out to Big Pharma, AHIP, and the Banksters Mr. Obama still has time to cover the CIA's ass. Well I knew he was smart and didn't really like a fight-but I also think he knows enough about the realities of office to want to survive in being as well in politics. As far as I know no one has ever crossed the CIA and survived. To my way of thinking they make the STASI look like Keystone Kops and are deeply involved in the body politic. If anyone can come up with a way to eliminate this shadow government the whole world would give a giant sigh of relief.

[Flaneur]

18. What a chickenshit move by Obama.

He should separate his administration from the crimes of Bush, not follow in his footsteps.

[GreenTea]

20. We are seeing in some respects, from a corporate & imperialistic standpoint there is no difference.

[pattmarty]

19. Just another of "change we can believe in".

[Dogtown]

21. Upsetting

K&R

[placton]

22. Obama and Dems

:puke:

[guyton]

23. used to get calls from DSCC et al

Gave them an earful last time they called. Said I've switched to giving to the ALCU and EFF.

I'll donate to individual politicians that have proved themselves, but Obama (et al) are living
up (down) to my most cynical "expectations".

Guess I shouldn't be surprised since his vote on FISA before the election.

[freddie mertz]

50. Agreed. No more Dem party money EVER AGAIN.

Only individual candidates and organizations that actually serve the common good.

As for Mr. Obama, he is, sad to say, OFF the donation list too.

[No Elephants]

165. Fist bump. I am now donating to support the ACLU, Amnesty International and

Bill Moyers Journal (via PBS).

I am not going to contribute to the DNC or to any "oh so barely left of Joe LIEberman" individual politician ever again.

As one barely literate moran once said, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice....Well, you can't fool me again!"

[d_b]

24. lol

For the record, I always knew Obama would be another shithead. I'd still choose him over McCain and Palin any fucking day.

God damn I can't wait to see what else hope and change brings us lulz

[tXr]

65. What a choice that was.

Sadly, Obama/Biden are better than McCain/Palin.

"Hope" and "change" are for suckers.

[bikingaz]

126. Obama/Biden promised change of substance

McCain/Palin said more of the same

So tell me. Who got suckered?

[lebkuchen]

25. Obama won't get any money from me

I'll pick and choose among candidates as they fall along the lines of common decency.

[katandmoon]

26. Screwed again. Screw you, Obama!

[Piewhacket]

29. I'm running out of hope and good will, Mr. President. This isn't the change you promised.

[Solly Mack]

30. k/r

[Cherchez la Femme]

31. Ya know...

...When President Obama was elected I created a new bookmark folder to save all the audacious changes he would surely enact.

Oh! The irony!

[Tim01]

33. I think mayge he was fibbing about that whole transparency thing.

Doesn't seem very transparent to me. Pretty similar to the Bush years.

[Jefferson23]

35. I'm not happy about the non release of the photos, but

this is very important, " allows the transfer of detainees from Guantánamo Bay to the U.S. for prosecution."

The lawyers are not going to be hampered in presenting a defense without those photos imo, I am relieved the US court judges will see the evidence and the coercion and rule accordingly.

[dgibby]

36. Just like "health care reform",

this is just more proof that we live in an oligarchy, not a democracy. Very sad.

[RetroLounge]

38. Getting on the HopeMobile!

:woohoo:

RL

[Art_from_Ark]

110. Oh, the audacity!

[alp227]

40. Which of the two evils (torture, the evidence) is worse?

Because: it's a really bad idea for the Defense Dept to be torturing terror suspects to such an inhumane level the suspects' brains will make them incompetent for trial. But wouldn't releasing the photos provide Al-Qaeda and the Taliban with even MORE "Amerika iz evil" propaganda to recruit more future destroyers of peace?

[No Elephants]

170. No,. Besides, the last 8 years (including 2009) have given the Taliban and Al Qaeda with more than

enough basis for claiming that Amereeka is evil. Do you think that seeing more photos of the Abu Ghraib ilk is going to turn someone against America more than having his or her village wasted or having the likes of the Karzais supported with billions, much as we did the Shah of Iran?

More importantly, what the fuck about the rule of law in this country anymore? ACLU made a totally lawful request, under then existing law, so Congress changed the law retroactively and the Constitutional law professor signed it.

[No Elephants]

185. P.S. What do you think might give Al Qaeda more recruits, the photos of what occurred during

the Bush Administration, allegedly without the knowledge of the American people, or this law trying to bury the photos? (In this connection, please note that the ACLU cited national security as a reason to RELEASE the photos.)

Not to mention ongoing torture in Bagram and ongoing extraordinary renditions. (Please see Reply # 181.)

Not to mention ruling out prosecution of anyone who engaged in torture--except MAYBE for those who went outside the parameters of memos?

How about our putting pressure on Spain to sit down and shut up when Spain tried to accuse Bushco of war crimes?

[winyanstaz]

42. So much for transparency....so much for change...

This is another big dissappointment and another blow to freedom...as well as freedom of information.
This is sad to me...I had a lot of hope.

[EFerrari]

43. This is just wrong. n/t

[The Wielding Truth]

44. GIve a little take a little. What is the reason for the non transparency

of the suspected torture detainees? How could hiding the photos be helpful? It's good the the detainees will get their day in court. Could the photos be part of their defense?

It's politics 102, give and take until you get close to justice. How I wish the corruption had not been taken to this place by the horribly misguidance of the Bush administration and all it's roots.

[joeycola]

45. crapola from our WH!!

[Javaman]

46. Well, I guess change is only in my pocket.

can't see those awful pictures, people might get the wrong idea!

you know, like we are violating international law or something? But hey, a new hate crime law is now in effect.

So let's recap. Hate crimes against American's is bad, but hate crimes against foreigners, well might still be bad, but we will never know!! Because the only real source of evidence is now off limits!!! Yayyyy!!!!

So does this mean that if a Gay person is tortured and beaten to death by someone in law enforcement, those pictures aren't admissible in court?

Some animals are more equal than others. This particular animal is completely disgusted.

[bunnysoft]

47. Thanks to Joe Liebermann for creating the bill that was just signed n/t

[No Elephants]

173. And to the Democratic Congress for passing it and to the Democratic President for

supporting and signing it.

[Chulanowa]

48. Yesterday: "YAY HE SIGNED THE HATE CRIMES BILL HE'S SO AWESOME!"

Today: "BOOOOOO HE SIGNED A BILL BLOCKING PHOTOS! I HATE THAT MAN HE SUCKS SOOOO BAD! OFF WITH HIS HEAD!"

Tomorrow: ???

[chadmak09]

52. and?

The hate crime bill was a step backwards in equal rights and was only meant as a smoke and mirror play.
We need Universal healthcare for everyone and those photos should be released immediatly..

I am sorry, but victims of assault because of "hate" DO NOT deserve more justice than anyone else who is a victim of assault for whatever the reason. ITS CALLED EQUAL RIGHTS and justice.
This is common sense and what america is supposed to stand for.
Punish the crime not the reason behind it.
ITs simple.

and before you start, I have gay family members and love them more than anything.
I would be outraged if my brother was assaulted because he is gay, but I would be equally outraged if my straight sister was assaulted for her pocketbook.

There is no legitimate arguement why my sisters attackers should get a lesser sentence than my brothers attackers in this situation. And my brother agrees with this.

[Chulanowa]

54. You really don't understand the nature of a hate crime, do you?

if I kill Mr. Goldstein because he pissed me off, or slept with my wife or something, then i'm a murderer who had a beef with Mr. Goldstein. odds are, after doing my time, I won't be a repeat offender

if I kill Mr. Goldstein because he's a Jew, then i'm a murderer who has a beef with an entire community of people. odds are that i will be a repeat offender after doing my time.

In the latter case then, because of the greater danger I present to society, there do need to be laws that extend my sentence accordingly.

Welcome to DU. Hopefully it'll be educational :)

[Ahpook]

86. You should be behind bars in both situations, permanently

I agree, these "special" laws are dangerous.

[Laelth]

104. Thought should never be a crime.

I agree with the poster above.

More severe punishments for "hate crimes" should be banned as unconstitutional violations of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment.

:dem:

-Laelth

[bjobotts]

140. If the crime is done to terrorize others then it is a hate crime.

[Chulanowa]

144. Kind of surprising, isn't it?

I always figured that this was a sort of "Well duh" subject.

I kind of expect them to start telling me trickle-down economics really really work next. It's bizarre.

[No Elephants]

176. That is dangerous ground. Besides, why isn't that simply terrorism, which is a crime in itself?

[chadmak09]

105. you got it wrong

Maybe you should read up on criminals and the statistics of thier chances of going back to jail.
They are pretty high no matter why they commited the crime.

If someone is capable of murder, then they are a murderer. Plain and simple.
Thier reasons behind commiting the crime are irrelevant. They commited murder and should be punished.

Here in america we punish the crime not the reason behind it (well at least we used to).

One murderer should not get special treatment because thier reason for murder was robbery instead of not liking a certain group of people.
Am I the only one who sees the logic in this? (I seriously doubt it).
The person who assaults/kills someone during a robbery is just as bad a person as the guy who kills someone because they are gay/minority/whatever.
Murder should be the crime here, not the reason behind it.

I am all for stiff punishment for crime, but punishing opinion and the reasons behind crimes is a bad idea.

Punish the crime. focus on the crime and what they did, not why they did it.
As horrible as these people are, these jerks have the right to hate whoever we want. Let them have thier sad lives filled with hate. Its thier right to be miserable.
And if they commit a crime, punish them just like everyone else.

With this hate crime bill,
IF a grandma is walking down the street and gets beaten to death by a robber for money, her attackers will receive less punishment than someone who kills a person because they are gay.
This is NOT EQUAL RIGHTS

With this hate crime bill,
IF a grandma is walking down the street and gets beaten to death by a robber for money, her attackers will receive less punishment than someone who kills another grandma simply beauce they dont like old people.
This is NOT EQUAL RIGHTS

With this hate crime bill,
IF a grandma is walking down the street and gets beaten to death by a robber for money, her attackers will receive less punishment than someone who kills a person because they dont like white people.
This is NOT EQUAL RIGHTS

[winyanstaz]

149. Actually you have very good points there...

We are supposed to be equal. Punish all crimes that are the same such as all murders regardless of the reason equally. No one should be punished more for what they were thinking about. We should punish for the crime. period.

[No Elephants]

175. Good point, but we are always posting/talking about people who get

convicted wrongly, whether bc of the corruption of those who want to score a conviction, "eyewitnesses" whose testimony is wrong, intentionally or unintentionally, even faulty DNA evidence.

When the ONLY element of a crime is how you feel about a group to whicch the victim belongs.....

Besides, we don't have things like black widow/widower laws or serial killer laws or kleptomaniac laws. We wait until someone commits another crime before punishing them for it. With the possibly exception of registering pedophiles, We don't punish people for crimes they have not yet committed, but MAY commit one day in the future. And we usually don't imprison people for thoughts or feelings, either.

Just throwing out ideas. I am not sure how I feel about hate crime laws, though I am practically rabid about bigots.

[Jim Sagle]

63. Glenn Beck, is that you?

:puke:

[Umbral]

113. Nonsense, motivation is always a consideration in the judicial process. nt

[No Elephants]

177. Motive and opportunity may be considered, but never like this.

Proving that the accused had both motive nor opportunity helps the prosecution get a conviction. Having a motive, or having an opportunity, for that matter, was never a crime in itself, though. Nor does having motive and opportunity typically make the punishment more severe. If I can prove you killed someone, and you are legally sane, I don't need to prove you had a motive. The jury will convict you.

So, no, hate crimes are not simply business as usual.

[noiretextatique]

202. hate crimes were routinely unpunished in this country

because of all-white jury nullification, "gay panic" defenses, etc. things have changed, but not much. the big white man who beat down that black woman is a cracker barrel restaurant somehow convinced a lot of white people that the woman, who is in the military, spit on him and thus deserved to be beaten to a pulp with her child watched in horror. until attitudes really change, i totally support hate crime legislation.

[No Elephants]

174. It's about issues--or should be--not about whether Obama is good or bad.

People who see him as not doing any good at all are as bad as those who defend/excuse him, no matter what.

(I am not so sure that the hate crimes bill is awesome at all, but that is another thread entirely.)

[Chulanowa]

224. One day we celebrate, the next we're rending our shirts

I think we're just orphan victims of the soundbite and 24-hour news cycle. We can't seem to keep a thought in our heads for more than 12 hours.

[Dreamer Tatum]

51. So now they'll take hires pics of all incriminating docs and burn the paper copies

Thanks,Obama.

[Zodiak]

72. Yup....a new loophole.

This is too stupid to not be contrived.

[bvar22]

56. Champaign Corks popping all over Washington!

Pentagon

CIA Headquarters

Republican National Committee

K Street War Profiteers

Bush residence in Dallas

Cheney's lair

Rumsfeld's HQ


Obama made lots of people happy today.
I'm sure the appropriate "Thank You" notes are being written by the War Criminals Obama is protecting.

"No Man is Above the Law" ---Obama <with fingers crossed> , campaign 2008
Hahahahahahahahaha!
Gotcha Ya again!

[irislake]

57. Groan,

I'm sorry I'm too old to move as far as possible from the US. Like to Sweden. And I have grandchildren.

I just hope too much of this doesn't spread across the border while Stephen Harper is PM.

I am nearly suicidal having stayed up late last night to read "Dear Hunting With Jesus." That would give anybody nightmares.

Now this and Joe Lieberman.

Not that I was swept away by the hope things would improve.

Can you still afford to make war? And keep all your military bases to protect "capitalism".

The health care stuff is enough to upset any decent human being.

What in the hell is wrong with American citizens? They should be rioting like the French.

Or something.

And speaking of the French why do right-wing Americans hate them? I have never understood that. Didn't they give you the Statue of Liberty?

[Zodiak]

69. You already stated the reason the right-wingers hate the French

The French are not authoritarian sheep who eat every shit sandwich their government gives them with a smile.

Right-wing Americans are such sheep. In fact, right-wingers are ONLY happy when the government is screwing them out of a job, their house, and eventually their lives. They comfort themselves that their fellow citizens, whom they consider lessers, are treated worse than they.

30% of our society has the same mentality as the snivelling side-kick to the schoolyard bully.

[Altoid_Cyclist]

152. It's a little worse than that where I live. It's not just the French.

A lot of people around here are equal opportunity haters.

They don't like the Germans. One reason being that they think that Germany helped Iraq hide their WMD arsenal before we invaded. ???????

They don't like Candians because they're a bunch of Socialists and not war crazy enough like good Americans.

They include other countries on their list but Canada & Germany stick out for me since my Sister is married to a German and they still live there and my Dad was from Guelph, Ontario. Oh.... Germans are a bunch of Socialists and too peaceful also, just like the Canadians.

They seem to think that any country that has a habit of cooperation and peaceful coexistence with other countries, and that actually gives a damn about their citizens other people in general, is to be ridiculed.

USA USA USA USA USA..... :crazy: :shrug:

[No Elephants]

178. If America were demographically and geographically like France, and Congress had not eviscerated the

unions, we very well might strike like the French.

RW Americans hate the French because they refused Dummya's invitation to join him in warring against Iraq to force Hussein to get rid of his non-existent WMD's. And mocked Dummya's claims that the non-existent WMD's existed. That's when the Congressional dining room had to serve Freedom Fries, rather than French Fries. And, supposedly, the French were cowardly collaborators during WWII.

Germany also refused to join us in Iraq and mocked Dummya--and Germany has been our enemy in more than one war, but apparently did not suffer the same fate as France in the minds of the RWers. I have no idea why.

(Much as I love Lady Liberty, getting the statue was nothing compared to getting our independence from England, and the French role in that may have turned the tide for us.)

[Lena inRI]

58. C E N S O R S H I P . . .

. . .and

ONE STEP FORWARD. . .

TWO STEPS BACK !

Now, is Team Obama protecting the BFEE because they're REALLY on the same team. . .OR

are they being mortally threatened by same?

That's the $64 thousand dollar question.

Neither answer is a redemption for Obama-change-you-can-believe-in.

Obama is more afraid of the BFEE than us.

You know, when Bush Sr and Obama had their recent non-partisan mutual admiration MOMENT for the volunteerism speeches at Texas A&M, I kept wondering. . . how can Obama stomach the criminality of the BFEE unless he's made some kind of deal with them. . .it's becoming quite obvious.

And as for us PEOPLE and government transparency, rule of law. . .EXPENDABLE.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-obama-volunteer17-2009oct17,0,324337.story





:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[FLAprogressive]

59. i'm sure GD:P is already putting a spin on this one

[niyad]

212. no, actually, it's crickets about this. I asked two of his most ardent, uncritical

love-him-no-matter-what supporters what they thought of this bill-- silence.

[Grinchie]

61. You're doing a Heckuva Job Obama. /golfclap

[RedCappedBandit]

64. What's there to say? It's just pathetic. nt

[high density]

70. These photos are very low on the things I truly care about.

Just stop the abuse, which I think we've done already.

[Dreamer Tatum]

73. Without the Abu Ghraib pics, we wouldn't know about the abuse nt

[Liberation Angel]

77. But we know about it now and the abuse has been stopped

I disagree with Obama on this but understand it.

But we KNOW much of what Bush and Cheney etc did.

They should be prosecuted and hopefully they will be and the photos will be released at some point.

But Obama wants to control that release and now that we know how truly heinous Bush et al behaved i understand why Obama would not want to fan the flames of hate which he is already facing as are our troops by showing how depraved our military and government was.

The only way out is to prosecute.

But we already know what happened: do we all REALLY need to see EVERY GRISLY PHOTO?

We need to fucking prosecute.

It is not quite the same as Abu Ghraib, it is just the details which i agree are important for democracy - but I can see Obama saying "these pictures will only make the world hate us more"

But if he does NOT prosecute --- sooner or later --- these chickens (Bush Cheney and all their fascist followers) will come home to roost.

The pictures are just details. Important ones, but in the grand scheme just what might be considered by many to be TMI.

[No Elephants]

183. Re: The abuse (supposedly) having ended, please see Reply #181.

[niyad]

214. have you been listening all the times he has said that he "wants to look forward, not back" and

basically has no intention of going after bushco?

and, for the record, there is no such thing as TMI when it comes to what is supposedly our (as opposed to the corporations') government is doing in OUR name, with OUR money.

[EVDebs]

89. A torture investigation goes directly back to 9/11, which is why Obama's scared *less

Blackwater Director Let 9/11 Hijackers into US, then Killed, Tortured the Remaining Witnesses
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x265254

[No Elephants]

181. Not sure why you think abuse has ended. Everything I've seen about extraordinary rendition says

that Obama continues that program and also that Bagram is the new Gitmo.

Besides, I agree with the priorities of the ACLU. These photos are very important for a whole host of reasons, from detainees who need to try to prove that their confessions were coercced to the American public, which is entitled to know what government does.

The idea that an informed electorate can make decisions that are good for the country was the whole point of including freedom of the press and freedom of speech in the Constiution. Having the First Amendment protect Extra! when it talks about show business celebrities, but shrugging when government suppresses evidence embarrassing to government turns the Constitution on its head.

Not to mention that we had a specific statute that said the public was entitled to the photos and Congress and Obama changed the law after the ACLU sued because that was violated. I don't know if that violates the Constiutional ban on retroactive laws, but I would say that it definitely violates the values that underlay that Constiutional ban.

Edited to add these links re: extraordinary rendition:

http://www.amnestyusa.org/counter-terror-with-justice/extraordinary-rendition/page.do?id=1351083

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/feb/01/nation/na-rendition1

With mention of Bagram: http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/siteapps/advocacy/index.aspx?c=jhKPIXPCIoE&b=2590179&template=x.ascx&action=12653

[Liberation Angel]

195. I believe that the TORTURE has ended

military efforts by their very nature are abuse, especially when civilians are harmed.

warfare is horror


but I basically agree with you otherwise - except that the the links you provide don't really clarify what is continuing that would be considered abuse except in general terms.

Right now i suspect horrors continue --- but on a much diminished and diminishing scale.

[No Elephants]

220. By "abuse, I mostly meant mostly torture.. The purpose of extraordinary rendition is

is to have a foreign country torture your "detainee," usually because doing so would be illegal under the laws of your own country (not to mention that you are less likely to be found out). And, as the Amnesty International site points out, extraordinary rendition continues AND the CIA is still doing its own thing in places like Bagram. And, the Obama administration supports its "right" to detain people indefinitely without trial.

You made a flat statement that the abuse stopped. It's up to you to support your statement, not up to me to disprove it. However, I gave you a few links anyway. I thought everyone here would know what Amnesty International was about and trust it. Amnesty International is not the Red Cross. It is now worrying about getting mail from home to a detainee. When Amnesty Internation speaks of abuse, it is serious.

Again, I have no idea why you think torture or abuse or whatever you want to call it has stopped, other than that Obama said it and you believe him, despite many articles that say otherwise.

[Liberation Angel]

75. Why the Hate? This is a Judgment Call. And the bill INCLUDES transfer of Guantanamo prisoners

While I strongly agree with the ACLU as well as being very disappointed and concerned, on balance I completely understand Obama's position on this.

It is a centrist pragmatic position.

At this moment in history Obama gains very little political ground if he releases the photos (and this release is still discretionary with Gates and Obama meaning, as the ACLU, it is still possible that they MAY be released or some may be released) and he gains a substantial amount of support from the centrists and the right and the military and intel communty which he NEEDS to have a second term and his ARGUMENT is the release will endanger our troops is actually a valid one IMHO (despite my disagreeing with him on the overall effect on our overall security - i.e. I agree with the ACLU's analysis that it ultimately makes the whole nation less secure).

I feel the same way about the lack of prosecutions of Bush, Cheney et al for these tortures (he is wrong to not prosecute and it is a mistake not to - but I understand his pragmatic political reasons for not doing this - and disagree with his reasoning).

I also believe he is wrong on the Constitutionality of suppressing these photos (though the SC will probably support his position thus THAT will be the law)

But Obama is a pragmatist politically. He is an African American left leaning (to some extent) centrist who is walking on eggshells to get things accomplished despite all the hate thrown at him from the extreme right and the racists - including death threats and vicious media hatred flamed by assholes.

Why the hate here over a judgment call which actually is not totally impossible to understand.

Frankly IF Obama were to go whole hog to prosecute the scum who did these tortures...

(and he has at least STOPPED as much of this torture as he has been able to as President --- or tried to in his pragmatic way --- the war itself is torture and a crime IMHO )

he would be able to release these photos as evidence of what he stands against.

But

do we REALLY believe that Obama, in the current atmosphere, could sustain a prosecution of Bush and Cheney for crimes against humanity and war crimes?

I think Obama is WRONG not to prosecute these treasonous sick bastards.

But I understand why he believes it would not ultimately work to make this nation stronger and better. I just think he is completely wrong NOT to do it morally.

I do believe that Obama is guided by what he BELIEVES will further his overall agenda of progress and change: i.e a better world overall. And his ability to ary out these changes by holding the presidency for eight years where he can do the most good.

in the grand scheme of things Obama's position on the photos is a sad commentary on our country and the depth of sickness (mental illness) on the right which Obama has to factor in to his decisions.

As bad as I think this decision is, it is not a deal breaker for me (not yet). Obama has done MUCH good.

This bill gets Guantanamo closed (as Obama promised)

and it is a compromise I despise and would not have made

but it is not worthy of such angst and hate here.

If he holds the presidency he can make it up to us all.

and MAYBE he will release more materials as he has done in the past.

HE is the president and I understand why HE wants to decide what gets released: especially if it keeps troops and Americans safer in these wars.

[rollingrock]

79. Who said anything about prosecuting Bush and Cheney?

we're talking about the release of photographs. No one said anything about prosecuting Bush and Cheney. that is a completely separate issue. and it isn't even clear who ordered the torture. if Obama refuses to release these photos, it is censorship and unconstitutional, plain and simple.

[kaehele]

81. yes. let us hope

I believe and hope that you are right. Excellent post.

[EFerrari]

116. Dissent is not hatred.

And didn't Bush also argue that upholding our values put the troops in danger? Hello?

[davidpdx]

134. Didn't you know Obama is just Bush with a halloween mask?

I mean we just elected the same guy again. It's all a big put on to confuse the American people and make them THINK we got change, but come Halloween Day, we are going to find out the real truth....





















Richard Nixon is alive and well....

[caseymoz]

141. What is he doing, really?

Is he a liberal at heart who suppresses the pictures and closes Guantanamo, without releasing its prisoners, to appease the conservatives? Or is he appeasing us by suppressing the pictures, while closing Guantanamo, while not releasing the people wrongfully imprisoned?

By my count, that's two steps back one step forward for us. If he's on our side, I can't tell by that score. Plus he has dutifully supported every one of Bush's violations of rights, every extension of executive power, every abuse and black-eye to the constitution and every attack on humanity.

Believe me, I would agree that he and the country have great difficulties-- that is with an opposition that is insane and that wants to go batshit berserk-- in and out of government. However, the longer this goes on, and he "pretends" to be on their side, the harder it is going to be to ever restore this country.

I don't have a choice but to "support" Obama at this point. But it's a lot like trusting a double agent. Who's side is he on?

[No Elephants]

179. Obama is on the side of re-election and also on the side of having as much leeway

in fighting terra (formerly the War on Terra) as his predecessor had. And so on.

[caseymoz]

205. Maybe, but then as a self-seeking man without integrity, he's on their side. nt

[No Elephants]

221. Maybe this is mostly semantics, casey, but, IMO, choosing a side---meaning a set of issues--

does require some integrity and some courage, even if you take the morally wrong side of the issues.

Caring just about what is best for you and yours gives you a lot of flexibility on principles and issues, because principles and issues are not what actually direct you. You can bob and weave and slip and slide, and fudge the issues as much as you want. Standing firmly for a principle, even a disgusting one, does not have flexibility.

For example, I may be willing to be deceptive. That is a personality trait I believe certain Republicans have, Joe Scarborough leaping immediately to mind. I am not on his side, though--unless being on his side--or pretending to be on his side--happens to serve my purposes at the moment. (Beneath his deceptiveness, Scarborough has a fairly consistent agenda, as do most Republicans, IMO.)

[caseymoz]

226. Not when the choice your really making is about where to mine your votes.

One has to have a profile on the issues, or it will be transparent that you are an opportunist. If you stake out a "brave" position, unless it's totally wicked like "two fetuses in every pot," you are going to capture certain voters with it. They will vote for you on the hope that you mean it, and if it you put together a profile on issues like that, and it yields more votes than offended voters, you win.

It is real bravery, though, only if you follow through. Then when it comes down to crunch time, bravery goes out the window with excuses. Because if you act, and it has consequences, including unforeseen ones, then people will hold it against you. Even if it was the right thing.

On this, Obama thought it better to keep it under wraps. Either his ethics about government transparency has limits, or he actually has no ethics about it. I cannot tell yet.

[No Elephants]

169. a/ Why do you equate disagreement/disapproval with hate? B/ Not releasing the photos does NOT

keep the troops safer. That is a myth.

"If he holds the presidency he can make it up to us all."


Or not. Then again, "can" is different from "will," so I guess, technically, I cannot disgree.

[Liberation Angel]

194. There are some haters here, it seems, and saying something is "myth" is...

is really not a valid argument.

Releasing the photos would be used to fan the flames of hatred against the US IF Obama continues these wars (and even if he negotiates for peace with the Taliban some extremists will still us them to oppose peace efforts)

Obama has made, imho, some very impressive and positive moves despite the opposition. He is human, obviously, and we are not going to agree with him on many issues --- but overall I am very glad that Obama is the president and not some of the other options we had (McCain or Hillary, for example).

Anyway, there is a lot of what feels like hate on this board for Obama. I do not equate diagreement or disapproval with hate by any means.

I disagree and disapprove with Obama on a number of issues, primarily his war policies so far in Afghanistan and his failure to prosecute. This issue o the pictures is also a place where I disagree with his policy but understand it. In the grand scheme of things it is not as important an issue to me as many, But I agree it is important, while dicey.

Obviously i he loses in 2012 he can't continue to do many of the progressive things he has been doing. He is pretty shrewd and has shrewd advisors, but he tends to be much too conswrvative for me on many issues - too willing to compromise - too appeasing to the insane right. But that is his pragmatic politics, realism, realpolitik, and if it maakes it possible for him to incrementally change many things for the better, I can still support him.

[niyad]

210. "if he holds the presidency, he can make it all up to us" ???

what in the HELL do you mean by that absurd statement? WHAT is he going to make up, and HOW????

dead is dead, for example, so he can't "make it up" to the soldiers he sends into harm's way.

freedoms once lost are very seldom regained.

and, if we don't know the truth now, how are we going to know years from now that what he is saying then is the truth?

how do we get back lost years?

[niyad]

211. so you think dissent and disagreement are hatred? wow

I think amy goodman said it best in her talk at the college of marin (televised on linktv)

obama was relating the story of A. Philip Randolph talking to FDR, who basically responded to his request with "you have to make me do it" pretty much indicated that he felt much the same way. soooooo, how do we "make him do it" and become the progressive leader so many thought they were casting ballots for? sorry, when HE decides is not an acceptable line of thinking. this is not "father knows best"

[fascisthunter]

222. the nazis felt the same way about dissent

[caseymoz]

76. Major betrayal.

What we have with Obama is Bill Clinton-- except situationally worse.

[Nikki Stone1]

83. +1

.

[marasinghe]

115. agreed.

i was thinking: neville chamberlain, or tony blair -- except situationally better; marginally. but, i'll go with what you wrote.

[katty]

78. more coverup-photos are the real evidence.

[indimuse]

80. Let the TRUTH be heard!

Let the TRUTH be SEEN! President Obama...YOU ARE WRONG ON THIS! :mad:

[gorfle]

82. The Audacity of Nope.

President Barak Obama is now complicit in covering up torture.

[KoKo]

84. LOL's ...Once he got in there and saw how bad it was he said:

"Michelle...you and me are only 'gona do this for four years...then baby ...we are cutting out of this shit and moving back to Hawaii and having THE GOOD LIFE!"

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

132. yep

he owned it on this one.

[truebrit71]

85. Wow...I can just FEEL that change...

...Are you fucking kidding me? Just what in the Sam Hell is going on here?

This is NOT the fucking change I signed up for...at least with a rethuglican in the WH I know I'm gonna get fucked...

More and more disappointing...

Never mind fighting off the repubes in 2012, he's going to have to worry about shoring up his own base first..which is going to be harder and harder the more he pulls this kind of bullshit..

[EVDebs]

88. The Spanish judge may force the DOJ / CIA into an inquiry

Spanish judge to hear torture case against six Bush officials
--Legal moves may force Obama's government into starting a new inquiry into abuses at Guantánamo Bay and Abu Ghraib

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/29/guantanamo-bay-torture-inquiry

In any event, the embarrassment of a foreign inquiry, rather than a homegrown investigation and trial which would have happened had Leahy's Truth Commission been taken seriously, may come back to haunt Obama (and the CIA).

Obama's first job out of college was with the CIA front Business International Corporation btw. Conflict of interest, similar to GHW Bush, who wouldn't admit to any prior CIA involvement during the '60s when he was made DCI.

Also,

Blackwater Director Let 9/11 Hijackers into US, then Killed, Tortured the Remaining Witnesses
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x265254

Obama's covering the CIA's massive ass. It can't go on much longer.

[orbitalman]

90. Why is Obama buying the DOD's bill of goods??

I'd like to know.

[rollingrock]

91. To the tune of $680 billion

the nation is literally bankrupt but BO somehow manages to expand the defense budget for fiscal year 2010? incredible.

[2Design]

93. this sucks - they keep protecting the criminals n/t

[Laelth]

94. You have got to be kidding.

Somebody talk me down, please. This can't be real.

:banghead:

:dem:

-Laelth

[scentopine]

103. Spineless political appeasement and good ol boy wink to torture, rape

democrats are the new republicans. Republicans are the new Fascists. Jesus F'n Christ. Dem leadership if you are reading this, nice job on this and fuck you.

Let the cheerleaders spin away how this is just another move on the chess board by the chess master.

[vssmith]

107. Transparency???

[tekisui]

109. What a bunch of shit. Don't want to dirty our little minds, or remind anyone

what fucked up shit dubya was doing.

[defendandprotect]

114. Just adds to the levels of secret government -- and moves us in the wrong direction!!

Must be quite some photos!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[orpupilofnature57]

121. NWO , no matter how you enamor it.

[Robb]

124. Silly question. I know Obama signed it. But if I remember my "Schoolhouse Rock"

...Shouldn't we also be curious about which of "our" congresscritters wrote the amendment to the appropriations bill that did this?

It's no excuse to say "it's a big appropriations bill," but it's a big appropriations bill. Who wrote the amendment?

[pleah]

125. They throw a bone for everyone to chew on while they stab us in the back

on something else. Very disappointing.

[eggplant]

127. I can't possibly be the only one here to see that...

once they are transfered from Gitmo to here and stand regular trials, that the photos will come out as defense evidence?

In the meantime, we can move forward with healthcare. If the photos came out now, the prisoners would stay at Gitmo, and everything going on right now would be completely derailed.

There's no statute of limitations on war crimes. Patience.

[humbled_opinion]

129. Maybe he needs a taste of Bush Poll numbers to knock some

sense in him? He is setting himself up for a serious sucker punch from the Right but ok he is a chess player so maybe this is all part of the grand plan? ....

Quickly becoming disillusioned...

I am also a little panicky about the watered down public option and other health care notes coming out of congress... seems to me that the (US) class, me and you, is about to take a ROYAL screwing.

1. Mandated Health Insurance (policed by the IRS)
2. Costly Public Option (Not based on medicare rates)
3. Employers able to Opt out of providing health insurance (with a severely small fine)
4. No compensation increases to help offset the PO costs to the consumers, US.
5. No increase in number of doctors, clinics, hospitals, etc
6. Still only gets 96 percent of the population.

Thats just skimming the surface.

[McCamy Taylor]

133. The audacity of....what was that exactly?

Wimpy. Almost spineless. Someone needs to grow himself a pair of cojones pronto.

[bjobotts]

136. Yeah. Watch the UK ambassador to Ubezistan video for why Lieberman made sure to cover up

[bjobotts]

137. "Boiled alive photos".Bush's torture was systemic and massive and done for political gain

[bjobotts]

138. Obama cannot cover up our shame.We must hold this mass murdrer accountable

[bjobotts]

139. Tortured for false confessions to say members of AQ, meant OBL,terror training camps etc

just so Bush could have his war/invasion and oil. The horror of all those dead and tortured by this administration cannot go unpunished. Yet our elected officials don't want to bother with it so our hypocrisy and our shame continue. A hero will be the one who holds them accountable.

[SaveOurDemocracy]

142. I never believed all the pretty words ... but, I hoped.

[PatrynXX]

143. May have to side with Obama on this one..

Last thing we need is more propaganda for the enemy to use. Like how Obama acted during the Iran election.

It's a grey area. Leave it up to someone else to figure the tough decisions

[No Elephants]

188. You should read the thread. Nothing about this is "grey.". Burying the photos is to avoid

"embarassment"/incrimination, not for national security. This law gives the enemy better and more current propaganda than the photos would. So do some of Obama's and Congress's other recent actions.

It is one thing to say that Bushco did bad things covertly and without the knowledge of most of the American people. It is quite another thing to refuse to prosecute, to pressure other countries that want to prosecute, and to enact a law burying evidence. Not to mention continuing things like indefinite detention, extraordinary rendition and other human rights violations.

If Obama and Congress REALLY wanted to protect the troops and the American people, they would have all come clean as to their own complicity, if any, made a sharp break with past practices and prosecuted the "evildoers."

[slipslidingaway]

145. Cover up of the Bush crimes :( n/t

[grasswire]

146. a good time to JOIN the ACLU

You can join the ACLU and lend the weight of your voice to their vigilant efforts to preserve our liberties. Even a small donation carries weight and influence.

www.aclu.org

[No Elephants]

184. +1. And Amnesty International. Or at least act on the issue of torture via Amnesty's website....

http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/siteapps/advocacy/index.aspx?c=jhKPIXPCIoE&b=2590179&template=x.ascx&action=12653

[grasswire]

192. here's a kick for that. (eom)

[harry_pothead]

147. Not the change I voted for.

No siree, no it isn't.

[orpupilofnature57]

209. And thats the point ,what was said ,verse what Is done.

[ProleNoMore]

148. Sadly - Much Of The Promised Change Was Merely A Change Of Face

One remembers all the rhetoric about openness and accountability.

One was hopeful that the rhetoric would be proven true.

One is not surprised that the rhetoric was a mere illusion.

[rooboy]

151. Give him a break. He's only been president for (insert number here) months... n/t

[No Elephants]

155. The most open administration in history will tell you everything it doesn't mind your knowing.

Remember how the health care process was supposed to be on C-Span, then the WH fought to keep secret the WH logs showing that the first people consulted in the WH about health care reform were the health insurers?

Good times.

And thanks to the Republicrats and the Demlicans in Congress for enacting this bill.

[katkat]

171. Good for Obama

I see no reason to release these photos. People who want to watch torture and snuff films can find them elsewhere, I'm sure.

[No Elephants]

180. A voyeuristic love of torture that can be safisfied with generic snuff films? That is what you

think the ACLU sued for? Seriously?

[robinlynne]

193. well, censorship. officially.

[noiretextatique]

203. yes...this is censorship

you can't kill people just because they are gay, black, jewish, female, etc :eyes:

[Realityhack]

204. I take it this is being signed for the guantamo stuff and not the FOIA stuff?

The FOIA crap is a horrible horrible idea. It immediately makes me go WTF?

Is the admin thinking the rest of the bill is good but the FOIA stuff will get shot down in court and rolling the dice? Is it honestly worth the trade?

[Mythbuster]

207. Well... there goes 6,000+ 9/11 photos we'll never see. n/t

[t0dd]

208. Quick!

Show a picture of him hugging a child or that gorgeous smile of his to suppress the dissent here! Mmmm, kool aid. :crazy:

Change you can make believe in.

[niyad]

215. kick

[unkachuck]

227. kick....

"...Secretary Gates should be guided by the importance of transparency to the democratic process..."

....c'mon Jameel, fascists don't care about no stinkin' democratic process....