I'm so damn old, I remember when this woud have actually outraged most of the US population:

[Atticus]

"Bush knew Guantanamo prisoners were innocent". http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7092435.ece

Today, we're "looking forward", don't ya know?

Bush gets HOW MUCH for a speech these days? And, Dick is writing a book?

Can you say "morally bankrupt" boys and girls?

[xultar]

1. I don't find it strange that they are speaking, i find it strange they are paying.

[katandmoon]

2. Their freedom makes Obama and his DOJ complicit in their war crimes.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[treestar]

25. Oh for god's sake

So when a prosecutor doesn't think they have enough evidence to proceed, they are "complicit" in murder, or robbery? Whatever.

[Bluenorthwest]

40. No, silly, when they announce that justice is the same as

seeking revenge, and that we should simply look the other way at crimes committed, forget them, turn the page, that makes them complicit. It just does.
Look, we have all seen photos of torture, of children in prison, hooded captives, we have all seen them. And then the President in his stark hypocrisy demands that nothing be done about those things, while still claiming to be a Christian? Leonardo DaVinci said "he who refuses to punish evil commands it to occur." You do not agree with daVinci. Please explain why.

[Enthusiast]

52. Too bad the Nazis

didn't have prosecutors with such an attitude at Nuremburg.

[treestar]

143. There was evidence against the Nazis

With Bushco, it is just a morass. You can prosecute Lyndie England or whoever, but the farther up you go, the easier it is to cast doubt.

Then they have so many defenses they could use. Political decisions, war, etc., and having the support of the People at the time.

Just a big waste of time. If the economy was roaring away wonderfully, maybe it would be worth trying.

And a prosecutor is not complicit in a murder just because he/she does not have evidence to move forward. Look at the armchair prosecutors of DU who have never had to prove a case. That can be damn hard.

[ChiciB1]

59. One Would Think By NOW That There Are HEAPS & MOUNDS Of

EVIDENCE!! From just what "we the people" have been able to get access to, I'm wagering we only know the tip of the iceberg!

NO, I can't wear those BLINDERS... I do BELIEVE there is enough evidence! I could go on, but when lady JUST-ICE has tightened HER blinders, I don't see much use!


JMHO!

[treestar]

145. If there were evidence, they'd do it

Getting the evidence is near to impossible as anyone who could testify is under threat or liable to prosecution themselves.

The economy is more important.

Look how long the Watergate hearings took. And how little came of them.

Armchair prosecutors find it so easy - real ones would tell you that it is not so.

[GOTV]

66. Has Obama claimed the evidence is not sufficient? I don't remember hearing that.

[ooglymoogly]

69. Laugh! I thought I'd die.

A million or so dead from war crimes. But then, who's counting? We don't prosecute powerful pugs, even when they admit to murder, mayhem, torture and war crimes. "Not enough evidence", don't cha know, and nobody wants to even look under the rug, where it is metastasizing.

[blackbart99]

76. I agree....and i think they are guilty as sin.

You can't blame them for not wanting to touch this issue. If they do every time the Govt. changes
hands after an election, the criminal charges would be flying. Half of every new administration
would be used up prosecuting the former admin. We would be mired in presidents in jail. Admit it...
some times presidents have to do ugly things....not an excuse for Bush and his crimes but we wouldn't
have any health care reform or any new laws and programs if we had to spend the first year looking backward. On the other hand there was never a more deserving candidate than the Bushies.

[RaleighNCDUer]

88. Bull fucking shit.

The pugs wasted millions of dollars investigating Clinton, and ALL they found was a white lie about a blow job.

NOT ALL POLITICIANS ARE CRIMINALS. NOT ALL ADMINISTRATIONS ARE EQUALLY CRIMINAL.

Letting criminals skate because of fear of political repercussions is the height of political cowardice. If Clinton had vigorously pursued the Reagan/Bush criminals, the criminal right would have had its balls cut off years ago. Obama failing to prosecute Bush's crimes only leaves them in position to commit greater crimes later on.

You don't stop criminal activity by ignoring it. You stop it by showing that it will end badly for the criminals. That is NOT 'looking backward'. That is looking forward to the very predictable consequences of NOT prosecuting criminals.

[FailureToCommunicate]

100. +1 That about sums it up

[ooglymoogly]

104. Plus excellent 1. nt

[liberation]

111. Indeed... enablers are the epitome of moral bankruptcy...

they want to enjoy the benefits of illegal and criminal behavior, while pretending to enjoy the same moral footing as the victims.

I find it funny, that plenty of people find those willing to do something to hold criminals accountable, to be worse than the criminals themselves. There is always a "concern" parade the minute those code pink ladies manage to make Rove's day slightly less pleasurable. Plenty of Americans prioritize perception over reality, and DU being a microcosm of this society has plenty of such individuals.

[TxVietVet]

124. Since the Obama Administration and Nacy Pelosi

refused to go after the bu$h/cheney crime gang, when the next conservanazi cabal takes the White House, WATCH OUT. Bigger crimes because the Democrats WOULDN'T do anything about bu$h/cheney. It's haunting this administration now. :scared:

[Kalun D]

139. ^^^ ++++ 10

agree totally

[ooglymoogly]

98. Yes, much better when only the thugpugs do it. nt

[ooglymoogly]

101. self delet...repeat post.

[Mike K]

120. Prosecuting the many crimes of the Bush Administration -

- is more important than the health care issue or anything else the Obama Administration has done in its first year because if there is no accounting for the way BushCo managed to nearly destroy this nation it is a matter of time before the same thing, and worse, happens again. Your reasoning obliquely suggests that we shouldn't prosecute any crimes because there are more important things we could do with the time and money. Anything good the Obama Administration does will be promptly undone when the next incarnation of neo-Conservative criminals force their way into Office.

Consider what we could do with the amount of resources expended to maintain marijuana prohibition, yet we allow some of the most egregious crimes ever committed by federal officials to go unpunished because it's convenient to do so? This absence of deterrent plainly invites repetition.

[treestar]

144. It is just letting the Repubs start a cycle

Every new administration prosecutes the prior one. Every single president is impeached.

It's giving in to their way of looking at things.

[Ticonderoga]

83. Not in all cases.

But in the case of the United States vs. George W. Bu$h et al. Absoluterly.

[frylock]

128. when a prosecuter can't even bother to review evidence..

then yeah, they're complicit. that includes the prosecuter's boss.

[Dank Nugs]

137. Precedent is everything

I concur. I said that the next administration would use Bush's actions during his presidency as legal precedent and push the line just that much further. Ever since Obama has pulled that total 180 on the FISA Bill that was up for consideration in the Senate, it was plain and clear as day that he was not acting on behalf of The People's interests.

[johnaries]

146. Oh, good God. How fucking old are you?

This stupid statement just shows how naive you are. Someday, you should join us in the Real World. Then maybe we can actually get some Progressive policies passed.

[Mari333]

3. knr. i remember too.

[RKP5637]

4. I think for many Americans many events anymore have become out of sight out of mind. So much

happens by the second now, so many people lead such rapidly paced, hectic lives and a multitude of distractions, that I think many events pass right over their heads. This country has lost its priorities and, as you say, is "morally bankrupt."
And, the morally bankrupt politicians have captured a way to make big bucks off of misery and destruction. And we have the profit making machine of war rolling along. In my book these guys are outright criminals and should be tried for war crimes. I don't think Truman or Eisenhower would have done similarity

[whoopingcrone]

27. Truman DID and then some...

Hiroshima: 80,000 to 140,000 killed;100,000 seriously injured...
Nagasaki: 286,000 people living in Nagasaki at the time of the blast; 74,000 killed, 75,000 severely injured...
in seconds.

[RKP5637]

29. Yes, quite true. IMO that was a different situation than now wherein for Iraq,

it has been needless. And for Afghanistan, also prolonged.

[ChiciB1]

60. I've Pondered Long & Hard About Truman & What Happened...

I DON'T like war and I surely don't like bombs! I would probably have been astonished and shocked at the time, but I WASN'T here!

And history books tell stories and there are many true facts... so I stay CONFLICTED about Hiroshima & Nagasaki!

[texastoast]

70. Was that war based on lies? n/t

[AlbertCat]

81. Was that war based on lies?

Did we start it?
Was the bomb preemptive?
Did they lie about it in the SOTU?
Did they even know the effects of the bomb beforehand?


A very different time and situation from the Bushies. (and indeed, what was the Bush family up to then?)


And think of where Cheney might have been today if we had really flushed out Watergate and not pardoned Nixon?

[ooglymoogly]

77. Entirely different circumstances.

Japan stopped invading its neighbors long enough to send Yamamoto to invade this country; With a declaration of war a full half hour after the sinking of Pearl began. If that is not a cause for war; There is none. The bomb? That is another matter; The argument is that Japan intended to fight to the death of its own country, costing many thousand more American lives and many hundreds of thousands, of lives in Japan; The Enola Gay ended the war in its tracks, arguably saving millions of lives. We will ponder the dropping of the "A's" for eternity with a lot of guilt. I do not believe FDR or Ike would have dropped the bomb, but would have found another way, though the pikins were slim; As Japan intended to fight till the last Japanese. If there is such a thing as a just War, that was it; particularly, when you compare it to a war who's main purpose was the transferring of the entire country's wealth, into the hands of a few...you got grounds for prosecution for treason, big time. This inaction by by our government will be O's legacy, no matter how much good he might achieve. It will fester until it erupts like a Krakatoa covering the earth in blackness; Condemning it once again to another dark age. Let the repeating of history begin.

[Ticonderoga]

86. But it's highly debatable

whether the U.S deliberately targeting civilians was the right thing to do. The message would have been just as clear to the Japanese warmakers that the jig was up had they executed an atomic airburst 30 miles out to sea rather than a direct airburst over the population. So arguably the mass murder of Japans civilian population was of itself a War Crime of the highest magnitude.

[RaleighNCDUer]

92. Fewer were killed in either Hiroshima or Nagasaki than were killed

in the fire-bombing of Tokyo. The only difference was the number of planes needed to deal out the destruction.

The one was no more mass murder than the other.

And arguing that a sea burst would cow them into submission is nonsense, as they were NOT cowed by the first bombing of Hiroshima. They didn't jump on the radio and beg for a chance to surrender after the first bombing - why would you think they'd do so after a demonstration bombing that hardly anyone would see?

[ooglymoogly]

103. zactly right. nt

[whoopingcrone]

106. Debatable?

Not to me... even though I was "just" a teenager at the time.
I knew it was a War Crime, even though the concept hadn't been thought of in those days.
I knew the fire bombings of Hamburg and Cologne and Dresden and Berlin and London and Kobe and Osaka
were war crimes, too.
BTW 1: the A-bombs were intended as a message to the Soviet Union, not the Japanese.
BTW 2: at the time the bombs were dropped, the Soviet Union had not yet declared war against Japan
BTW 3: in 1945 the Soviet Union had "existed" as a state for 23 years.

[ooglymoogly]

132. By the way, we won both the wars against those who would have,,,

enslaved us and decimated those who were not up to the bizarre and ruthless standards of the Reich; A fate staved off for 70 years until now when it is becoming more and more evident a new Reich is well under way; New megalomaniacs with roots still in Nazi Germany. When we are attacked with real threat of war and extinction, there are no other options. When you threaten another country with extinction leniency in war is not an option. Most of us are proud of the way our soldiers met and defeated the challenges that faced us and they did it the only way they knew how, meeting barbarity with barbarity. It is just the opposite in Iraq where we are the invaders and it is we who will bear the consequences, and they will come with a vengeance. There was a 1st world war, then a second; There would have been a 3rd if the outcome had not been total and devastating for the Nazi's and the Japanese. There in lies the 60 years of peace and prosperity that followed; For us, the Japanese, the Germans and most of the rest of the world.

[Art_from_Ark]

133. I don't know what kind of message the A-bombs might have conveyed

to the Soviets-- "Our German engineers built a bomb before your German engineers did", perhaps?

At any rate, if the bombs were intended to send a message to the Soviets, they basically ignored it as they happily gobbled up one Japanese island after another after the Hiroshima bomb was dropped, right down to the northern coast of Hokkaido. They also didn't have too many problems putting Eastern European countries under their control in the immediate post-war period.

[Art_from_Ark]

129. Lots of countries were invading their neighbors--

or, as more often was the case, faraway lands.

Japan was quite happy to be an inward-looking backwater up until the 1850s, but was essentially forced onto the world stage by Matthew Perry in 1853-54. This created two large factions in Japan-- the ones who hoped the foreigners would go away and leave them alone, the those who looked at what had been happening in China and elsewhere in the undeveloped world and decided that they did not want to become some Western power's colony. This led to a power struggle, with the latter group emerging victorious and immediately embarking on an ambitious program of modernization and militarization. The new Japanese government looked at the empires of Britain, France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, etc., and decided that Japan had every right to build its own empire-- especially after the bloodless coup in Hawai'i led by American businessmen. That was followed by a series of events that would bring the Japanese and Americans into eventual confrontation.
A brief timeline:

1893-- Coup in Hawai'i led by American businessmen.

1894-95-- Sino-Japanese War, Japan takes control of Taiwan

1898-- US conveniently declares war on, and defeats, a weak Spain, which cedes two of its Pacific territories to the US (Guam and the Philippines), which, incidentally, also serve to stop Japan's southward expansion. That is one reason why the US had no problem granting Cuba its independence in 1902, but forcibly put down the Philippine independence movement at around the same time.

1904-05 Russo-Japanese War, Japan defeats the Russian navy, to the horror of white supremacist Western powers.

1906-07-- Anti-Japanese sentiment in the US leads to laws discriminating against Japanese in San Francisco and elsewhere, eventually culminating in the "Gentlemen's Agreement" in which the US basically says only Japan's best and brightest can be accepted as immigrants.

1910-- Japan, thwarted by American territorial acquisitions in the Pacific, turns its empire-building attention toward Korea

1920's-- Japan becomes increasingly militaristic, recognized as a naval power, but feels short-changed in the so-called "5-5-3 agreement", which allows Japan to have 3 warships for every 5 of the US and Great Britain. Also in this decade, even Japan's best and brightest are denied consideration for immigration to the US.

1930s-- Great Depression. Several Japanese prime ministers are assassinated or nearly assassinated. The Japanese military (led by some of the stupidest people on the planet at the time) take firm control of the government.

1931-- Japanese invasion of Manchuria

1933-- Japan becomes first nation to leave the League of Nations, due to criticism about its invasion of Manchuria. Anti-Japanese sentiment grows in the US and elsewhere.

1939-- World War II begins when Japan's ally, Nazi Germany, invades Poland. FDR terminates 1911 commercial treaty with Japan.

1940-- Franklin Roosevelt cuts off shipments of steel and other strategic materials to Japan.

[deaniac21]

119. I thought those bombs were dropped by whales and dolphins.

[ooglymoogly]

71. Yes and plus 1. nt

[AlbertCat]

79. I think for many Americans ...

... the government and its actions are far far removed from their lives (so they think) and is something they have no control or say over and/or is something to fight. It's like the US government is over there somewhere while we're over here.

[southerncrone]

5. I'm that damn old, too.

We can never be a truly free country, until we recover our moral fiber.

[RKP5637]

7. +1000, n/t

[gtar100]

15. But wasn't it the liberals who destroyed morality in America?

At least that's what the angry, self-loathing, bigoted, hate-filled, hypocritical, self-serving right-wing of America has been saying for so long.

Oh, the irony. Hopefully enough of them see the obvious truth of their wretched belief system before too many people get hurt. But the prognosis is looking more like insanity lately so I take hope with caution.

So hang on, the storm's not over yet. But come hell or high water, one day it will be over.

[RKP5637]

30. For the RW, someone else is always responsible. They also lack a

feedback mechanism, therefore, everything they do is justifiable in their eyes and perfectly logical. They are never wrong, the liberals/democrats/progressives are the root of all evil. The RW is forced by them to have to clean up the situation. Their rationale is extreme and endless...

[axollot]

126. Right?! And we Dem's are often the first to pick on ourselves and our officials when

impropriety is implied. What many mistake for in-fighting within Dem ranks is often finding understanding in our diversity with the same ultimate goal of a more social democratic system for all. Now if only we could get our highest elected leaders to act less like R's 20yrs ago and more like the Democrats we elected.
The right doesnt do that - they have their orders and follow them. No matter how asine they sound, they'll go down with the ship.

cheers
Sandy

[Individualist]

6. K&R

[nadinbrzezinski]

8. Banality of Evil

that is all I have to say...

[EFerrari]

9. I'm so old, I remember when it would have been reported!

[Daphne08]

24. +100

[pepperbear]

10. I remember when breaking into your rivals office was all it took to stop the presses.

the public talked about it FOR MONTHS ON END.

now "President knowingly harms innocent people" is followed by a new episode of "Lock Up."

You nailed it.

[elleng]

18. Its part of evolution, believe in it or not.

Watergate was the beginning of journalism revolution, everyone wanted to be one, and since that time, and coincident, technology has grown along with #### of 'journalists.'

Times change

[axollot]

127. Heh. These have a decidedly "yo mama" sound to them.

I too am old enough to remember. Why does it seem like we gave up when Ollie and the Raygun Admin got away with Iran/Contra? Besides the 'thugs being ridiculous with The minutea of Clinton's extra marital affair - what a waste of time, effort and resources.

Now when real investigations need to be conducted our highest office feels it is not relevant. (part of me does think that Obama knows these guys will go down and lots of things have been considered illegal recently, more and more is coming out - mainstreaming it - by letting it go through the judicial system, he doesnt have to wear the political fall-out. Via fake outrage. I "hope" by the end of Obama for hopefully 8yrs the guilty criminals of the * admin will be indicted. Let them talk, let them feel immune to the law....for now.)

Cheers
Sandy
PT optimist

[Chulanowa]

11. Don't lie

Change "terrorist" to "commie" and most Americans "back then" would not have given a flying fuck.

[JoeyT]

16. +1

I don't think there's been a time in our history that the hated "other" couldn't be destroyed at will without a peep from most of our population. Who's considered the other changes, but the attitude doesn't.

[RKP5637]

31. Very good point!!! n/t

[im1013]

12. K&R!!!!!

:grr:

[wroberts189]

13. I would say you are in your forties...at least. Wild guess nt

[gtar100]

14. In this day and age one must hold to justice very personally.

It's sick that these things are let go of by both the justice system and the media, despite the tremendous pain, suffering and death of so many people. Even though I can't enforce the law, between me and the universe I hold these actions of bush, cheney, et al, in complete contempt. For what it's worth, they do not get a pass with me.

Maybe, just maybe, sometime in the future truth and justice will stop being such wimps to evil. I can't help but think there's got to be a way of destroying it without becoming it. But it all comes down to the individual and it only takes a few jerks to mess things up for a whole lot of people. It's overwhelming when it's nearly half the population.

[avaistheone1]

19. How can we go forward without accounting for these atrocities?

What kind of stinking future is that?

k&r

[ooglymoogly]

90. That is it in a nutshell.

We must repair the damage caused by an illegal prez; Impeach the monstrous f*ker along with the Justices he appointed; Round up the stolen loot, prosecute the thugs and apologize to the world; Make reparations in order to move on and reclaim our rightful place amongst honorable peoples. As it stands we are nothing but very dangerous, lying, hypocrites, willing to do mayhem for power, a handfull (spelled warehouses full) of dollars and other peoples assets. Yes, I know, the pugs have been doing this kind of thing for all the ages, but seldom so egregious as this; And they are getting away with it. Kinda makes you wonder what is really going on with our present government's forgive and forget policies, at least where powerful pugthugs are concerned.

[freebrew]

102. It's the lying media

that pokes fun at any liberal wanting real justice.
It's not just FAUX, it's CNN, ABC, NBC. ALL of them.

It's the anchor not calling the bastards on the lies they espouse.
It's the DOJ(Asscroft) for not stopping the shit before it happened.
It's the DOJ(Gonzo AND Holder) for not prosecuting after the fact.
It's the DN/LC for not recognizing Howard Dean and put Rahm in power.

But mostly, it's us for not taking the bastards down when we needed to.

I sincerely hope that I outlive *, as when he dies, I WILL hunt down his grave and piss on it.

That is probably the only justice that I can mete out.

If only I were a zillionaire, I could buy back this nation and give it to those deserving...

[Solly Mack]

20. America talks a good talk but then coddles...even nurtures... war criminals

[craigmatic]

21. It's not that we're not outraged. It's the simple fact that there's so much to be outraged about

from the bush regime that we really don't know where to start.

[flyarm]

41. our political leaders know where to start ..they just don;t have the stomach to take responsibility

for their own complicity in the crimes, and the hanging on to the power grab, and watering down or downright destruction of our constitution..that was done by the former administration.

The first place to start is "rule of law", without that we are nothing as a nation, or a people.

Without re-instating everything stripped from our constitution..we are no longer a Democratic republic.

Giving immunity to the telecoms for spying on Americans was proof of the complicity of the Democrats to the destruction of our constitution and our bill of rights.

People fought for those rights.

People died for those rights ..

The fact that renditions continue ..ought to be proof to all, that this administration does not respect the rule of law, any more than the previous administration did.

The fact that no one is being held accountable for their crimes makes the democrats complicit in those crimes...in every way.

History indeed is repeating itself. Right in front of our very eyes.

Some see it very clearly..some make excuses for it , and some ignore it totally.


read this and weep for our nation..........she was once proud of the rule of law..she was once proud of democratic ideals..and principles..she is no longer..

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/04/09/johnsen/index.html

[glitch]

75. President Obama could get some redemption by nominating, actually fighting for her as USSC Justice

Won't happen, the reasons Greenwald points out so well, but it would be a potential path for him.

You should check out this one by Francis Boyle: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1004/S00014.htm

"Despite my best efforts to prevent it, the Harvard Law School Faculty and Deans hired the war criminal Goldsmith right out of the Bush Jr. administration knowing full well that he was up to his eyeballs in the Gitmo Kangaroo Courts, torture, war crimes, enforced disappearances, murder, kidnapping, and crimes against humanity, at a minimum. And when Goldsmith's proverbial "smoking-gun" Department of In-Justice Memorandum was published by the Washington Post, then Harvard Law School's Dean Elena Kagan contemptuously boasted in response about how "proud" she was to have hired this notorious war criminal. Previously Kagan had also publicly bragged that the future of International Legal Studies at Harvard Law School would be in the "good hands" of their resident war criminal Goldsmith. How perversely and tragically true! The Neo-Conservative Harvard Law School Faculty and Deans deliberately hired this Neo-Nazi legal architect of the Bush Jr. administration's bogus and nefarious "war against terrorism" because they fully support it together with all its essential accouterments of torture, kangaroo courts, war crimes, murder, kidnapping, enforced disappearances, crimes against humanity, and Nuremburg crimes against peace."

he also discusses Kagan on http://kpfa.org/archive/id/60186

[midnight]

80. Yes, Yes, Yes.....

[Rex]

22. People only remember what they see on the cable news channel

until 10pm when they go to bed and forget/dream/have nightmares.

[Golden Raisin]

23. Yes. Totally outrageous

and disgraceful. But we have become a nation of automatons. Most just desperately trying to get by from day to day and survive financially; others too hypnotized/anesthetized by the Kardashian girls, Kendra and Dancing With The Stars to worry about stuff like the Constitution, Bill of Rights, rigged elections, Guantanamo and/or abandonment of moral outrage.

[treestar]

26. I feel young

I've never known a US population that would care. Only a minority, like us perhaps.

I just want the prisoners tried or freed; put the energy into that. I just don't care about Dubya and Cheney. With the media and their rich friends, going after them is just fruitless and bound to be frustrating.

[AllHereTruth]

28. I agree. But this administration has done little to change the situation.

Guantanamo is still open for business while two Wars rage on.

I seem to remember a time when those facts would have upset, even ENRAGED, the Liberals, Progressives, and Democrats------------alas how times change

[RKP5637]

32. +1, n/t

[Shining Jack]

33. Well,someone told me recently...

...that what was the left not so long ago as now become the lunatic extreme left fringe ! :banghead:

[CBR]

34. The government has done many things in the past

that the American people knew about and, yet, were not outraged.

[Vinca]

35. Example: millions and millions and millions of dollars spent

investigating Whitewater. If St. Ronnie were alive today he could sell arms to whoever he wanted to, no strings attached. My biggest gripe with the current administration is the "kumbayah, we all make mistakes" mentality. Without penalties for criminal behavior, it's only a matter of time before history repeats itself.

[flyarm]

38. History is repeating itself, right now, in front of all of our eyes!

and many cheer it because it is democrats doing the very same things.

Don't you know..it is OK when "our side " is doing it..that is the mentality most of us see, even here on DU daily.

But I am sure I am not the only one hearing the grumblings in our own communities, from many of our families and friends. The anger and grumblings are getting louder by the day.

[Enthusiast]

53. +1 nt

[ChiciB1]

61. +1000, But I Don't Say It's Okay Because "Dems" Are Complicit!

I'm fed up and so disillusioned!! All this pent up anger doesn't seem to be going away and I wonder each and every day when it will come to a head and just BLOW!

I dare say it won't be a pretty picture, FROM EITHER SIDE or down the MIDDLE!!

My one fear is that IT WILL HAPPEN!

[MissDeeds]

130. Yes, it is

New boss is same as the old boss. I hope the grumblings are getting louder.

[90-percent]

36. GWB's lasting damage

Bush' outright evil has not yet even begun to kick in to it's full extent.

It will kick in dramatically sometime in the future when we elect a Republican Sociopath that isn't as humanistic and enlightened as Bush was.

This future psycho will simply take advantage of all the "If the President does it, it's Not Illegal" Nixon doctrine, that has been embraced by the Obama Justice Department as perfectly acceptable and no treason here.

So the future will be wrecked by the over reaching and Unconstitutionality of the GW Bush years, and the legal cover generously donated by the Obama Justice Department.

It's magnificent how much the current generation is wrecking the future for all upcoming generations!

-90% Jimmy

[Enthusiast]

54. Bush's damage

started with Bush v Gore. Since then this country has been on the fast downhill slide.

[Aleric]

37. Why Yes, I *can* say "Move on"

Move on, people, Move On. Pay no attention to yesterday. Move On.

[flyarm]

55. +1 !!!!!! eom

[Soylent Brice]

39. K&R

[Odin2005]

42. Most people have been trained into the Neo-Cons' manufactured reality by the MSM.

[spanone]

43. that story is from april ninth...not a peep since then from the u.s. media...not a peep

[flyarm]

44. "Can you say "morally bankrupt" boys and girls?" ..morally bankrupt indeed!

read this and cry for our nation.......

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/04/09/johnsen/index.html

Friday, Apr 9, 2010 15:10 EDT

The death of Dawn Johnsen's nomination

by Glenn Greenwald



snip;

The question how we restore our nation's honor takes on new urgency and promise as we approach the end of this administration. We must resist Bush administration efforts to hide evidence of its wrongdoing through demands for retroactive immunity, assertions of state privilege, and implausible claims that openness will empower terrorists. . . .

Here is a partial answer to my own question of how should we behave, directed especially to the next president and members of his or her administration but also to all of use who will be relieved by the change: We must avoid any temptation simply to move on. We must instead be honest with ourselves and the world as we condemn our nation's past transgressions and reject Bush's corruption of our American ideals. Our constitutional democracy cannot survive with a government shrouded in secrecy, nor can our nation's honor be restored without full disclosure.


What Johnsen insists must not be done reads like a manual of what Barack Obama ended up doing and continues to do -- from supporting retroactive immunity to terminate FISA litigations to endless assertions of "state secrecy" in order to block courts from adjudicating Bush crimes to suppressing torture photos on the ground that "opennees will empower terrorists" to the overarching Obama dictate that we "simply move on." Could she have described any more perfectly what Obama would end up doing when she wrote, in March, 2008, what the next President "must not do"?

I find it virtually impossible to imagine Dawn Johnsen opining that the President has the legal authority to order American citizens assassinated with no due process or to detain people indefinitely with no charges. I find it hard to believe that the Dawn Johnsen who wrote in 2008 that "we must regain our ability to feel outrage whenever our government acts lawlessly and devises bogus constitutional arguments for outlandishly expansive presidential power" would stand by quietly and watch the Obama administration adopt the core Bush/Cheney approach to civil liberties and Terrorism. I find it impossible to envision her sanctioning the ongoing refusal of the DOJ to withdraw the January, 2006 Bush/Cheney White Paper that justified illegal surveillance with obscenely broad theories of executive power. I don't know why her nomination was left to die, but I do know that her beliefs are quite antithetical to what this administration is doing.

[CLANG]

45. Jesus, you are old!

[Hubert Flottz]

46. "morally bankrupt"

But they voted for Bush because of "MORALITY" issues in 2004? Every "News" broadcast on TV said so. Were we fooled? I wasn't.

[ThomWV]

47. k&R

[deutsey]

48. I remember a time when major news media in America would actually report this

:evilfrown:

[harmonicon]

49. who didn't know this at the time? wasn't it assumed?

The entire operation is and was illegal, so who gives a shit about things like guilt or innocence in that context? The outrage, if there is any, would now be nearly a decade too late.

[flyarm]

57. this is a must read........

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/04/09/johnsen/index.html


Friday, Apr 9, 2010 15:10 EDT
The death of Dawn Johnsen's nomination
By Glenn Greenwald
(updated below - Update II)

After waiting 14 months for a confirmation vote that never came, Dawn Johnsen withdrew today as President Obama's nominee to head the Office of Legal Counsel. As I documented at length when the nomination was first announced in January, 2009, Johnsen was an absolutely superb pick to head an office that plays as vital a role as any in determining the President's record on civil liberties and adherence to the rule of law. With 59 and then 60 Democratic votes in the Senate all year long (which included the support of GOP Sen. Richard Lugar, though the opposition of Dem. Sen. Ben Nelson and shifting positions from Arlen Specter), it's difficult to understand why the White House -- if it really wanted to -- could not have had Johnsen confirmed (or why she at least wasn't included in the spate of recently announced recess appointments).

snip Per DU rules:


The question how we restore our nation's honor takes on new urgency and promise as we approach the end of this administration. We must resist Bush administration efforts to hide evidence of its wrongdoing through demands for retroactive immunity, assertions of state privilege, and implausible claims that openness will empower terrorists. . . .

Here is a partial answer to my own question of how should we behave, directed especially to the next president and members of his or her administration but also to all of use who will be relieved by the change: We must avoid any temptation simply to move on. We must instead be honest with ourselves and the world as we condemn our nation's past transgressions and reject Bush's corruption of our American ideals. Our constitutional democracy cannot survive with a government shrouded in secrecy, nor can our nation's honor be restored without full disclosure.


What Johnsen insists must not be done reads like a manual of what Barack Obama ended up doing and continues to do -- from supporting retroactive immunity to terminate FISA litigations to endless assertions of "state secrecy" in order to block courts from adjudicating Bush crimes to suppressing torture photos on the ground that "opennees will empower terrorists" to the overarching Obama dictate that we "simply move on." Could she have described any more perfectly what Obama would end up doing when she wrote, in March, 2008, what the next President "must not do"?

[ChiciB1]

63. That IS Truly SAD! Guess She FINALLY Got The Message & Saw The

handwriting on the wall! When a person who has reached high enough to be nominated for something and CAN'T get confirmation for whatever reason, I think it say a lot about the WH too!

KUMBAYA... sounds good, is fun, but NOT SO SERIOUS, and in the end doesn't get much done! At least not in "these times!"

[athenasatanjesus]

50. "morally bankrupt ?" the only thing morally bankrupt in politics is being a liberal

Arresting the innocent,torture,and starting illegal wars is just fine so long as your not a socialist.

[Enthusiast]

51. Every time we "look forward"

it further erodes a grain of U.S. justice.

This looking forward by the Obama Administration is creating a veritable Grand Canyon.

[RufusTFirefly]

56. We've developed a pathological fear of confronting unpleasant truths

Anyone who maintains the outworn notion that facing our past atrocities head on is more likely to ensure a brighter future is considered "negative" or "obsessed with old news."

[AnArmyVeteran]

58. RULE OF LAW, RULE OF LAW, RULE OF LAW!!!!

Republicans kept chanting 'rule of law' during the lead up to the impeachment of President Clinton. It didn't matter than he committed no crime against the state. He got a blow job. But republicans were frothing at the mouth (almost as much as Monica on her knees) to get Clinton. During that same time the great American Larry Flynt outed over a dozen republicans who were screwing their interns, had babies with staffers and other high sex crimes. And they were all sitting in judgement of Clinton, who received a blow job, which isn't even considered sex in most churches.

Yes, Clinton did lie about his blow job, but his lie hurt no one. Bush & Cheney's lies to go to war killed almost 5,000 American soldiers and hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis. But not one republican has ever mentioned holding them accountable.

And where the FUCK is the so-called 'liberal media'??? In fact, the media isn't liberal at all. It's corporate and all they care about is making money and to hell with the truth or facts. If the same quality journalists who covered Nixon and Watergate were still doing their jobs there would be nightly stories about how evil and corrupt the Bush regime was.

[midnight]

62. I hear you Atticus...... K&R....

[perdita9]

64. Locking up a person without charges is Unconstitutional

But the Tea Bagger nutcases only care about the constitution as it pertains (or how they think it pertains) to health care reform.

They could care less about prisoners being denied lawyers or being tortured.

[femrap]

65. Hell, go back to 2006 when the

Dems got the House and Senate and did NOTHING about investigating the crimes of bush, cheney, rumsfeld, rove, etc.

That was the first BIG clue that we were burnt toast.

We're a dying empire of selfish, greedy, immoral, evil beings that lies with a glint in its eye.

[mochajava666]

109. 2006 was an indicator that Dems had no intention of

limiting or questioning the treason and war crimes that happened in the Bush administration.

Obama and the Dems are now complicit in the illegal US wiretapping, illegal war in Iraq, and illegally imprisoning innocent people in Gitmo. The Obama administration has been corrupted by this lack of action.

[Triana]

67. Morally Bankrupt

Definitely. The GOD of money and power rules the world.

It's rather a problem.

[RedstDem]

68. Your're pretty damned old

I can remember Kissinger and Nixon raining hell on earth over Cambodia...

Innocent people were shredded into mince meat, much less confined.

[glitch]

73. I remember it being reported and outraged citizens marching in the streets because of it

a war ending and a president made so unpopular eventually he had to resign for covering up a political dirty trick.

[RedstDem]

105. Thats why we call them the good ole days...

Someday I hope they return, but not until the corporate media, isn't anymore..

[RVN VET]

72. Inured to the horror of it

When the US Army in Afghanistan learned that one of its detainees, torture victim Dilawar, was innocent and had been fingered by people who only wanted to collect a bounty, they nevertheless kept him in prison for an additional 3 weeks. They continued torturing him, brutally, and finally released him after he died in their custody. The bones in his legs, an examining physician said, had been beaten so viciously by his "interrogators" that they had been rendered, literally, into pulp. Dilawar was a cab driver whose greatest joy was that, with the Taliban defeated, his little daughter would be able to get an education

The Times reported on this in detail a while after it occurred. But the story was a 2 day sensation that faded quickly from media attention. It was as if Dilawar's horrible murder was just an anomaly, instead of what it really was: a sick act in a long series of sick acts perpetrated by a sick and sadistic U.S. government.

[green917]

74. I couldn't agree more!

This is so abhorrent to me that I don't know where to start. It brings to mind a quote though that is pretty damn ironical:

America is never wholly herself unless she is engaged in high moral principle. We as a people have such a purpose today. It is to make kinder the face of the nation and gentler the face of the world.

George H.W. Bush

Bang up job there Georgie boy! Guess the rumors about W. not listening to him as a young man are all true.

[TheKentuckian]

78. Because we are a fallen, complicit, and willfully ignorant people

Not to mention intellectually lazy and disinterested.

Few even want to know what is going on, much less be bothered to be even mildly agitated about it.

[Blue Owl]

82. cuff 'em and stuff 'em

unless they're above the law, of course

:eyes:

[groovedaddy]

84. They were daring us all along to do something about it. n.t

[BakedAtAMileHigh]

85. Nope, sorry: your nostalgia is bogus

I'm not sure what world you have lived in, but "most" of the nation supported the Vietnam war. Resistance arose domestically because the draft threatened the comfort of young white suburban men. The draft was the primary cause of resistance to that war: if the military had used stop-loss programs instead of the draft "most" of the nation would have gone about its merry way without so much as a blink. I truly believe this is also true for incidents like the My Lai massacre.

This is of course why we do not have a draft now, despite the fact that our current conflicts demand so much of our nation. The M-I Complex very well understands all of this....and it works.

[Art_from_Ark]

125. Most of the nation might have supported the Vietnam War in 1964

in the wake of the Tonkin Gulf Resolution, when 98 Senators were climbing over each to vote to escalate the war over some fabricated incident, but the tide started turning around 1966, when the then Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, J. William Fulbright, admitted that he had been duped into voting for the resolution. The anti-war movement began picking up steam in 1967 and 1968, in part because of fear of being drafted, but the Tet Offensive, the summary execution of a suspected Viet Cong by the mayor of Saigon, Walter Cronkite's opposition to the war, the My Lai massacre, and the secret bombing of Laos and Cambodia, all helped to turn the tide against the war-- and it wasn't just a bunch of scaredy-cat white guys who were opposing it.

[bkozumplik]

87. do you remember having a president with teh balls to do something about it

I dont think we've had one in my lifetime. I'm 37. Expending political capital to prop up the rule of law is jut too hard for these guys.

Even Obama doesnt care, and he's the best we've seen in a while.

[tranche]

89. Were you old enough to remember the Japanese internment?

I still can't figure out how you guys go about conveniently forgetting that. it's actually a serious question. Were people outraged then?

[BakedAtAMileHigh]

91. Shhhhh

They are busy remembering a nation that never really existed.....

[liberation]

112. Well, that and the obvious red herring from the previous poster

Ah, the irony....

[Atticus]

131. The Japanese internment was before my time. nt

[Hippo_Tron]

138. In other words, you remember the brief period of time when there was a strong anti-war movement

The United States government has committed war time atrocities (and often peace time atrocities) throughout most of our history and usually nobody gives a shit. The 1960's and 1970's were an exception to the rule, not the rule.

[Atticus]

140. "In other words", I had hoped it was obvious that I am too intelligent to be so clumsily "framed".

All wars feature atrocities on both sides and, yes, I grew up in the 60's and 70's. If you choose to discount what my generation did to end that nonsensical conflict, that is your right, but I refuse to feel bad or ignorant simply because you are narrow-minded.

[Hippo_Tron]

141. I'm just trying to put things in perspective

Abuses of power and atrocities (especially during war time) are nothing new in American history. What we're dealing with here is not a new phenomenon but a phenomenon that is as old as this country. The fact that people stood up and opposed this during the 1960's and 1970's is great. But just because people don't do it today, doesn't mean we're dealing with unprecedented levels of apathy. We're dealing with what has basically been the status quo for over 200 years, with a brief exception for about two decades.

[Atticus]

142. That's one way of looking at it, and it is accurate, as far as it goes. But, what happened during

those two decades and what was accomplished by a bunch of long-haired in your face kids, showed the world what was possible. I'm proud to have been a small part of that.

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed, citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."
-----Margaret Meade

[patrice]

93. I'm so old I remember when standing on your own 2feet didn't mean taking .75 on a $ given to Charity

[blueworld]

94. Makes ya want to paint a peace sign on ya walker, huh? Im witcha. n/t

[Gwoppi]

95. No, but I can say

This is what you get when:

1. Your media has been bought by corporate interests.
2. All the CEOs of those corporate interests are right-wingers.
3. We on the left do not cut off their satellites and advertising, or take over their studios.
4. The merest suggestion of doing so is decried and ridiculed as terrorism or "like the bad guys".
5. Instead of organizing a nationwide strike and shutting the nation down until the Executive and Judicial branches are personally affected, then appointing a leader who speaks for us and demands that these criminals be immediately arrested and indicted, we post on an internet forum, feel better, "figure someone else with nothing to lose'll do it for me", go eat some McDonalds and sit on our collective asses, and nothing changes.
6. Someone reads this, almost feels angry enough to rise and do something,
7. And then someone else arrives with the inevitable "So who are *you* and what have *you* done, Miss Want A Revolution?" retort or a personal attack and/or ROFL emoticon.
8. And the beat goes on.

Until the above eight points change, which they won't, prepare for more of the same. I just post here occasionally for a lark, but I have been lurking here for years, and I am convinced nothing is ever going to change, especially here. DU itself is a sanctioned steam valve greenlit to let off public pressure when it becomes too great for you guys to bear. It serves no purpose to the right, and they do control everything. If this forum were not here to prevent you from becoming pissed enough to actually do something, this site would disappear overnight. Don't be fooled.

Until someone on our side gets angry and crazy enough to heighten more than rhetoric, why even ask these questions and post these items? You know as well as I do we're all guilty of letting it get to this point. I'm guilty, too, because if I had the courage to do what I really wanted to do, you'd all distance yourselves from me and side right by those Teabaggers and boys in blue to put me in Gitmo.

I'd organize a strike that would paralyze this nation and put together a liberal team to enter by force and take over the news studios, and begin broadcasting the truth about "conservatism" to break America's spell and begin reeducating the brainwashed so they can think independently again. That's the way to do it, and the way it's always been done throughout history - seize food, transport and commodities, then regain control of the broadcast and print media - but I wouldn't dare today.

The reason is that in years of lurking here I don't see any potential allies here with guts who would risk their homes, families and jobs for this nation by being put on the spot and on the line, in public, at the mercy of "the news" and its smear machine, and simply not care in the interest of getting things done. So I ignore what I really want to do, shut my brain off, go to work, go home, and watch the country fall.

There was a time we got outraged and then DID something about it. But not anymore. And blaming the right, the "sheeple", or anyone else we want to misidentify as "not us", just doesn't cut it anymore. Each and every one of us, including me, who wastes time posting on some fucking internet forum about the fire out in the street instead of grabbing a hose and a bucket and getting dirty in the smoke to put it out, is to blame for the death of the nation.

Flame away.

I don't give a fuck.

[theFrankFactor]

96. It's The Stages of Grief For Me... My Party is Shit and Pleny of My Fellow Dems Are the Turds...

That anyone on this site would make excuses for not persecuting war crimes of the magnitude discussed here is very telling. I am actually beginning to enter the acceptance phase. This party is developing a very keen taste for SHIT.

If it bears explanation... ah fuck it.

[theFrankFactor]

97. Honestly, I Ask You, Who Do YOU Blame?

[liberation]

114. As much as it pains me, I think a big chunk of the blame resides on us...

... and by us I mean "liberals" or whatever it is left of the left (pun intended) in this country nowadays.

At some point, we're responsible for not standing up for our principles and allowing ourselves to think it is perfectly reasonable to support as our representatives people who, by at large, have nothing but contempt for liberal and progressive principles and policies.

That is a very very very obvious fault, that a lot of people in progressive side of the political spectrum are ignoring.


Until we have a clear honest assessment of the problem, we're never going to find a correct solution. Note, I am not claiming those really at fault for the egregious illegal activities carried in our name (and against us ultimately) are not at fault. None of the sort. But we have enabled things that should have been unacceptable from the get go, and yes... that means we're partly at fault for said enabling.

[bkozumplik]

135. the left of the left? really?

the "purists" who didnt like the health care bill? we're part of the problem? I think we are the best of the crowd.

[Uncle Joe]

99. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Atticus.

[The Green Manalishi]

107. The same population that didn't give a damn about firebombing Dresden?

The same population that glorified the pioneers and cowboys for wiping out the hidious savages in the way?

The same population that didn't give a rip about the Jews that DID have a chance to flee Hitler?

[erpowers]

108. Media Not Reporting

Is the media even reporting this story? I think part of the problem is that the media is not reporting these stories and people are not being informed about the stories. I think some people might be angry about this if they knew about the story.

In addition, people might not feel they have to ability to change things. It might be like John Maher's song "Waiting on the World to Change". Maybe there needs to be a way to encourage people to get involved. However, people might feel if President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder are not going after the Bush Administration then why should they do anything and what can they do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBIxScJ5rlY

[Brigid]

110. What outrages me . . .

is that Bush and Cheney are giving speeches -- and getting paid for it -- when they should be in prison. :grr:

[WCGreen]

113. I feel the same way...

Look at what brought down Nixon and compare it to what these ass hats did to the country.

They should be tried for treason and crimes against humanity.

[Just-plain-Kathy]

115. " Their freedom makes Obama and his DOJ complicit in their war crimes." +1

[DailyGrind51]

116. "Justice" is irrelevant these days, for those who are not "like us"!

[tomp]

117. i will never forgive obama for letting bush/cheney, inc slide.

could he at least free leonard peltier? or is that move not on the 3-d chess board either?

[sulphurdunn]

118. Reality

We live in a nation where no politician who seriously entertained the thought of prosecuting the likes of the Bush Mob for their crimes could ever be nominated by either political party for the Presidency.

[defendandprotect]

121. No matter how enraged we may be about Bush/Cheney, Obama isn't going to do anything . . .

nor is Holder -- nor Congress.

That is, as far as I can see!

[TrollBuster9090]

122. I'm with you on that one, brother. I'm old enough to remember being outraged

...being outraged that a petty crook like G. Gordon Liddy, who organized burglaries with the intent of subverting the democratic process became a right-wing hero after his release from prison, and started cleaning up on the talk show circuit.

Being outraged when Exxon stock WENT UP after they dumped oil over half the shoreline of Alaska.

Being outraged when Eisenhower said "what's good for General Motors is good for America." That seemed like a screwball way of looking at things when he said it, and now it's considered to be a TRUISM that if politicians look out for corporate interests FIRST, the interests of the citizens will be served also.

Being outraged when Leona Helmsley said "Taxes are for little people." She went to jail for tax evasion. Today, it's not only legal for the rich to pay a lower tax rate than the middle class and working poor, thanks to preferentially low capital gains taxes (in the guise of "supply side/trickle down economics"), but hiding money in offshore tax havens is considered GOOD, PATRIOTIC and constructive enough for "think tanks" like the Cato Institute to actually put out videos and editorials claiming that tax havens are useful because they provide "tax competition," which encourages developed countries to keep their tax rates low. (Basically, the equivalent of saying cat burglars who steal jewelry help to keep the price of diamonds low by increasing the supply of diamonds on the market.)

Seriously! Take a look at the Cato Institute's video on "The Moral Case for Tax Haven's."


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xf14lkyH2dM

[branders seine]

123. morally bankrupt

[amborin]

134. yes, totally shockingly morally bankrupt

[Dank Nugs]

136. Morality is subjective and dependent on the observer

Besides, who are we to criticize when we don't even hold them accountable? Their moral compass is pointed towards money/power. Those are the only moral constructs in their world.

Attack them for violating their oath to the United States Constitution, complicity in crimes against humanity, or infringing upon foreign sovereignty and putting forth the pre-emptive attack doctrine. You're seriously going to criticize them on the grounds of morality? It's a subjective thing and you're being very intellectually dishonest when you frame the argument that way.