Bush administration seeks immunity from being charged with war crimes
It's a good thing Bush & Co. have Sore Loserman and the foiled British al Qaeda bomb plot to distract us, or we might notice the latest bulls**t they're trying to sneak in under our radar: amendments to the War Crimes Act that would retroactively protect Bush & Co. from criminal charges for authorizing humiliating and degrading treatment of prisoners.
The White House says the bill will apply to "any conduct by any U.S. personnel, whether committed BEFORE or AFTER the law is enacted" (emphasis ours).
That's right: If Congress rubber stamps the amendments, Bush and his neoconvicts would be completely immune from prosecution for war crimes.
The silver lining: By virtue of drafting such an amendment, Bush & Co. are admitting that they have, in fact, committed war crimes.
Now back to your regularly scheduled programming..."NED LAMONT IS SOFT ON TERROR!" "GO, HOMELAND SECURITY!"
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-warcrimes
10aug10,1,4466016.story?coll=la-news-a_section&ctrack=1&cset=true
The White House says the bill will apply to "any conduct by any U.S. personnel, whether committed BEFORE or AFTER the law is enacted" (emphasis ours).
That's right: If Congress rubber stamps the amendments, Bush and his neoconvicts would be completely immune from prosecution for war crimes.
The silver lining: By virtue of drafting such an amendment, Bush & Co. are admitting that they have, in fact, committed war crimes.
Now back to your regularly scheduled programming..."NED LAMONT IS SOFT ON TERROR!" "GO, HOMELAND SECURITY!"
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-warcrimes
10aug10,1,4466016.story?coll=la-news-a_section&ctrack=1&cset=true
posted by Editor at Large at 12:03 PM
13 Comments:
Thank you for bringing this to people's attention. This is exactly the administration's long time M. O. Always release big news, raise an alert, etc. just when they are also doing something underhanded, or unpleasant. Another reason to confirm the press'complicity in the goings-on of our government
exactly! this is staged theater, folks. we must expose these thugs NOW! call or email your friends & family... even if some of them will think you're crazy. time is running out!
How effing MADDENING!
How horrifyingly evil.
Sweet, sweet November, how you taunt us with your distance...
Anonymous: Yes, the press is as much to blame as the Bushies. They pretty much report what they're told to report. Every now and then, though, a real journalist with integrity slips through the cracks and tells us what's really going on. We need more of those real journalists.
Ahmedinajad: Huh?
mediamonarchy: Staged theatre, indeed - like almost everything Bush & Co. have done.
Ms. Lori: November won't come soon enough, will it?
exigent: All the more reason to lead ourselves.
Why are you people convinced there was no terror plot? You really don't know, and I really don't think the British would make this whole thing up. Obviously the bombings last year in London were real enough.
You are pretty good at hating Bush, but that is not a policy.
Chris: We don't know for sure that there was no terror plot, but you don't know for sure that there was one, either. Can you blame us for being a little suspicious, considering how many times Bush and Blair have cried wolf?
We never suggested that hating Bush is a policy. We just hate him.
So Editor, would you rather see an actual attack and thousands killed before you believe there was a terror plot? Do you really believe the government would raise the security threat, for no reason? Get a life!!
Hate is the root of the problems in this world, you should grow up!
Jeff: Again, we're not saying there wasn't an actual terror plot - just that Bush and Blair's history of lies and false alarms have given us reason to doubt. You're welcome to believe everything they say (or the media reports), but if you do, we think it's you who should get a life and grow up.
Please give your readers examples of terrorism false alarms.
Jeff: We apologize for saying we think you should get a life and grow up. We're quite certain that you have a life and you are grown up. We just didn't appreciate being accused of lacking a life or maturity ourselves, so we retaliated - which, of course, is immature. As is hatred. We don't literally hate George Bush, the person - we just strongly oppose everything we believe he represents, which includes greed, arrogance, ignorance, bigotry, nationalism, imperialism, lawlessness, racism, sexism, callousness, recklessness, and violence. Obviously, it's quicker and simpler just to say we hate him. But we'll try not to be so lazy from now on.
Exigent: Thanks for providing those examples of false alarms. Another big one: the alleged existence of WMDs in Iraq. And of course, the implied connection of Saddam Hussein with 9/11, al Qaeda, and terrorism in general.
Your points about where to find the real news are worth repeating. You have to dig deeper than the front page to find what the government and their pals, the corporate publishers, are hoping you will miss. You also have to read more than one newspaper, or watch more than one TV channel, to get a more complete picture of what's really happening. You also have to engage your heart, your soul, and your intuition - not just your brain - when reading or watching the news. Read between the lines and try to see what's being left out...feel what's not being said. Just because you read a newspaper or watch the news on TV doesn't make you well informed; to be really well informed, you have to be fully conscious and acutely, painfully aware - in other words, you have to be willing to feel something deep and sometimes dark. That's our philosophy, anyway; it may seem pessimistic or cynical, but it's the only way we've found to avoid being manipulated.
How were the false alarm examples listed Bush's fault? The FBI received a tip and acted accordingly. Our government must act in the best interest of public safety, they would be negligent if they did not.
WMD's and Iraq OMG! The only person that lied is Saddam. The next battle is IRAN, but I am sure this blog group is against any action there as well.
OK. America, according to exigent, should do nothing to fight terrorism and the dictatorships of the world, because it costs too much and we will never win. OK, yea, that is a great idea!! Then when IRAN nukes someone, let me guess, that will be Bush's fault as well.
Jeff: Actually, yes, it WOULD cost too much and be a losing proposition to try to fight all the terrorists and dictators in the world. And we can't even afford to think about doing that, anyway, because we're busy in Iraq spending money we don't have and creating terrorists who didn't exist before!
And yes, as a matter of fact, if Iran nukes someone, it will most likely be a result of Bush's disastrous Mideast policies and his complete and utter ignorance of international relations.
Post a Comment
<< Home