Bishop to Boycott Obama Commencement Speech
South Bend is heating up over the controversy surrounding Obama and the local bishop...Read the post2009 College Grads: We're the Lucky Ones
Why there is hope for the graduating Class of 2009, and how they can find work in a recession...Read the postBeer in Vending Machines -- What Drinking Age?
U.S. policies on drinking age seem restrictive when examining the rest of the world...Read the postHow The Press Can Remain Relevant
Is it any surprise that Obama has employed a strategy to cordon journalists that is similar to previous administrations?...Read the postBe Afraid, Cheney Warns. Be Very Afraid.
Just when you thought the Bush-era warnings of Armageddon around the corner were over, Cheney strikes again...Read the postObama: You Wouldn't Like Me When I'm Angry...
Obama threw down his stick, spat on the floor and growled in the face of cameras -- metaphorically... Read the postObama to GOP: 'I Won, I'm The President'
"You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done," Obama told GOP leaders...Read the postPalin Seeks $11M Book Deal, but Can She Read?
One can only imagine what Republican rising star Sarah Palin could possibly write about in her memoirs...Read the post
boston university
politics
Why Do Americans Oppose the Release of Information?
Matt Negin is now a contributor for The Cram, a student news arm of the newly launched PoliticsDaily.com. To follow his future work, click here.
In a new Washington Post poll, most Americans approve of Barack Obama's performance during his first 100 days in office.
But although the Post led its Sunday story with that finding, another response in the survey about the recently released torture memos is considerably more newsworthy. Apparently, 44 percent of the public disapproves of Obama's decision to release secret documents from the Bush administration detailing the interrogation of terrorism suspects. Fifty-three percent approved.
That key question also revealed a deep partisan divide, with three-quarters of Democrats backing the disclosure of the memos and just as many Republicans opposing the hotly debated move.
Why does access to more information fall along a partisan split? I was just as perplexed last year when I covered the Roger Clemens steroids-in-baseball hearing on Capitol Hill, and Democrats on the government reform committee harshly interrogated The Rocket while their Republican counterparts defended him. (I still can't figure out why, and Clemens has not been recorded by the FEC for any GOP campaign donations.)
But when did the issue of releasing information -- albeit from the secretive Bush administration about the sensitive issue of torture -- begin to irk conservatives? Shouldn't the availability of information be heralded by all, whether it be documents implicating a Democratic governor of New York in a prostitution ring or sexual instant messages between a Republican congressman from Florida and his congressional pages?
Whether the new information about counter-terrorist interrogations during Bush's term justifies the use of waterboarding or exposes a lack of understanding about torture methods, the very fact that the public can debate the use of torture with more understanding is valuable. Public debate without appropriate information is just yelling or pandering (or cable-news filler).
For example, one nugget from the torture memos released April 16 includes information (some in a footnote) about how simulated drowning, or "waterboarding," was used 266 times on two suspects. This news raised questions of not only waterboarding's effectiveness, but its frequent use. Advocates and critics of waterboarding can now understand better the controversial topic they're debating.
Yet even after that news has been reported, 44 percent of the public (mostly Republican but not all) still think it was a bad idea for Obama to make those documents available to be read by anyone, according to the Post poll. The question was not a matter of defending or criticizing the use of torture; it was, "Obama has ordered the release of previously secret records of Bush administration policies on the interrogation of terrorism suspects. Do you support or oppose Obama's decision to release these records?" Out of everyone asked, 32 percent "strongly oppose" the president's move, and another 12 percent "somewhat oppose" it.
One of the arguments against the memos' release is that potential suspects now have a wider view into counter-terrorist methods. (Still, fake drowning is fake drowning, whether you know it's coming or not.) And then there's the idea that because terrorists are potentially very dangerous, maybe the public doesn't want to know what it takes to get information that could help authorities prevent an attack.
These points appear to be valid, but certainly not partisan; nobody on Capitol Hill wants to make it easier for terrorists to strike. What they should want is the most information available to adequately serve public discourse.
In a new Washington Post poll, most Americans approve of Barack Obama's performance during his first 100 days in office.
But although the Post led its Sunday story with that finding, another response in the survey about the recently released torture memos is considerably more newsworthy. Apparently, 44 percent of the public disapproves of Obama's decision to release secret documents from the Bush administration detailing the interrogation of terrorism suspects. Fifty-three percent approved.
That key question also revealed a deep partisan divide, with three-quarters of Democrats backing the disclosure of the memos and just as many Republicans opposing the hotly debated move.
Why does access to more information fall along a partisan split? I was just as perplexed last year when I covered the Roger Clemens steroids-in-baseball hearing on Capitol Hill, and Democrats on the government reform committee harshly interrogated The Rocket while their Republican counterparts defended him. (I still can't figure out why, and Clemens has not been recorded by the FEC for any GOP campaign donations.)
But when did the issue of releasing information -- albeit from the secretive Bush administration about the sensitive issue of torture -- begin to irk conservatives? Shouldn't the availability of information be heralded by all, whether it be documents implicating a Democratic governor of New York in a prostitution ring or sexual instant messages between a Republican congressman from Florida and his congressional pages?
Whether the new information about counter-terrorist interrogations during Bush's term justifies the use of waterboarding or exposes a lack of understanding about torture methods, the very fact that the public can debate the use of torture with more understanding is valuable. Public debate without appropriate information is just yelling or pandering (or cable-news filler).
For example, one nugget from the torture memos released April 16 includes information (some in a footnote) about how simulated drowning, or "waterboarding," was used 266 times on two suspects. This news raised questions of not only waterboarding's effectiveness, but its frequent use. Advocates and critics of waterboarding can now understand better the controversial topic they're debating.
Yet even after that news has been reported, 44 percent of the public (mostly Republican but not all) still think it was a bad idea for Obama to make those documents available to be read by anyone, according to the Post poll. The question was not a matter of defending or criticizing the use of torture; it was, "Obama has ordered the release of previously secret records of Bush administration policies on the interrogation of terrorism suspects. Do you support or oppose Obama's decision to release these records?" Out of everyone asked, 32 percent "strongly oppose" the president's move, and another 12 percent "somewhat oppose" it.
One of the arguments against the memos' release is that potential suspects now have a wider view into counter-terrorist methods. (Still, fake drowning is fake drowning, whether you know it's coming or not.) And then there's the idea that because terrorists are potentially very dangerous, maybe the public doesn't want to know what it takes to get information that could help authorities prevent an attack.
These points appear to be valid, but certainly not partisan; nobody on Capitol Hill wants to make it easier for terrorists to strike. What they should want is the most information available to adequately serve public discourse.
Join The Discussion
Categories
Most Popular Stories »
- U.S. retailers are on sale
- The Rivalry: 145 games strong
- Slideshow: Lehigh-Laf week
- HAWKS SKIN LEOPARDS
- Macys thanksgiving day history
Recent Comments »
Page 3/6
Post Your Comments Below
Previous 20 Comments | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Most Recent | Next 20 Comments
LYN CONNELLY
8:59AM 8:59AM Apr 27th 2009
Obama's backfire on the partial release for political gains is what any partial story is, a lie. When no follow threw on removing "ear marks", changing the culture within Washington, now backing off when he finds out Polosi and Harry also signed approval of water boarding, no accountability from TARP funds to banks, so what has us surprised when the largest cause of the credit failure, The Banking Reform Act has the same people (ie Barney Franks) still working to lay off responsibility on those lousy auto workers. Yep, same lies and everyone bought into it. Wait until you baby boomers discover the 46 Trillion dollars you put into the "system" is also gone and there is only higher taxes in store to give you any "retirement".
Rating :
Reply to this commentReport!
mahalapril
4:56PM 4:56PM Apr 27th 2009
Why should we investigate the waterboarding of 3 islamic terrorists 9/11 masterminds [which saved thousands of American lives by foiling their planned attacks inside our homeland not even publicized by the liberal-biased media] and say nothing about the 3,000 innocent American civilians torture/massacred on 9/11.Are we really a better country than the terrorists because we are not supposed to pour water on these terrorists. I don't think so. The Obama administration should have been the one investigated because Obama's cabinet,associates and fellow democrats are tax cheaters,liars,corrupt,anti-America,anti-military and anti-US veterans racists,domestic and islamic terrorist sympathizers,Obama's friends Ayers,Wright,Rezko,Blago,Acorn,corrupt homo Barney Frank and lying weasel Dodd,The brinless and American traitor Nacy Pelosi and American traitor who accused the US military of killing civilians in Iraq.Our enemies are ridiculing the economically,culturally ,militarily incompetent pathological liar Obama. All our enemies are ridiculing the weak Obama-North Korea,Al-Qaeda,Taliban,Iran, Venezuela, ignored by Russia and G20 and Obama destroying our country from within economically
Rating :
Reply to this commentReport!
LJS
12:04PM 12:04PM Apr 27th 2009
I oppose the release of info because the Obama admin is just trying to make the last admin look bad. It won't change anything. Personally, I think they ought to put all the terroists up against a wall and publically shoot them on international TV. The terrorists think it's fine to behead our citizens on international TV in front of their families and anyone else watching. If you think every Pres and admin doesn't break world laws, everyone is really not with it. Bush Sr. was head of the CIA - do you not think he's ruthless, as he must be? This is nothing but a vendetta and a waste of more of the U.S. citizen's money for a witchhunt. Even the supreme ct says they won't vote for punishment. The catholic pope, islamic religious leaders and jewish religious leaders all have involved themselves in making decisions to kill throughout the centuries. Our news people never think of what they are bringing down around our heads by putting all of our business in the public eye. They just think they have the right to know all the country's affairs - well they don't. They act like this is Perez Hilton reporting on Hollywood idiots. This world is NOT civilized and is never going to be. It's not in man's makeup to not want POWER and as long as people are present in this world someone will kill and someone will rule and kill inorder to keep the power. Just the way it is. So let our leaders go about the business of keeping us safe and don't worry about all the details. Be happy you're safe and can live in relatively good health and peace here.
Rating :
Reply to this commentReport!
Wonkette
1:28PM 1:28PM Apr 27th 2009
WHY don't AMERICANS want it released?
Gee...
Here might be a couple of clues....
We are already hated by many in this world...Don't you think it might irk our many, many friends in terror land to know what was done to their little friends while visiting our great nation?
THIS is purely political...STOP fooling yourselves that it isn't...WHY wait 100 days? Hmmmm....
How about this..EVERY time a LIBERAL cries..."Oh the inhumanity" of pretending we were going to hurt someone....Place...side-by-side...the beheadings of Daniel Pearl, Nick Berg, Benjamin Ford, Eugene Armstrong and Jack Hensley just to name a few.
How about the rape of Major Rhonda Cornum during Desert Storm?
Please GET that the AMERICAN public has had ENOUGH of this distasteful and petty liberal agenda that they feel they've won along with the presidency.
I'm a republican and I in NO way voted for this president....but I've bent over backwards to give him his chance to right this country and get it moving again....TELL the DEMS to focus on their own shortcomings....Oh yeah...they won't..that's why they are SUDDENLY focused on this....
Rating :
Reply to this commentReport!
paul
2:29PM 2:29PM Apr 27th 2009
Matt, this idea of releasing information that has to with national security is an absolute no brainer.. you never ever do it... and for crying out loud you especially don;t do it if it is for the reasons this commie president did it..... for political reasons only.. oh and of course let's not forget ,, so he can make sure that our enemies like him because he is helping them. and what is this all about in the final analysis ? Politics and power... come on america wake the hell up.
Rating :
Reply to this commentReport!
Dennis
2:34PM 2:34PM Apr 27th 2009
Chris Schultz 7:45AM 7:45AM Apr 27th 2009
The moment this Republic condones and endorses torture, we are no longer the United States. We are Rome. We are Imperial France. We are China. We are all the banana republics that ever were. Let the others be barbarians. We are unique. We are better. That doesn't mean we are weak. It means we are stronger and believe in something more valuable than some religious superstition. Shame on those who would throw away our Constitution for a temporary feeling of safety, or worse, revenge.
----------------------------------------------------
Chris, what's your concept of "Torture?" I cannot believe that a person of your surname, is so unread, and unlearned. Did you know that we summarily condemned and shot such people if all previous wars? The Geneva Convention only protects Uniformed combatants, in war. All other armed subjects, are considered as Spies, or terrorists. Waterboarding has never killed, or permanently harmed anyone. All our people who applied Waterboarding, have themselves, been Waterboarded, as a requirement for their qualifications. This Era of Political Correctness, is going to get more Americans killed. If we don't defend against it, we deserve to be among these casualties of war. Read some more, Chris. Start with the Constitution, and the Geneva Convention.
Dennis
Rating :
Reply to this commentReport!
Dennis
2:42PM 2:42PM Apr 27th 2009
Chris Schultz 7:45AM 7:45AM Apr 27th 2009
The moment this Republic condones and endorses torture, we are no longer the United States. We are Rome. We are Imperial France. We are China. We are all the banana republics that ever were. Let the others be barbarians. We are unique. We are better. That doesn't mean we are weak. It means we are stronger and believe in something more valuable than some religious superstition. Shame on those who would throw away our Constitution for a temporary feeling of safety, or worse, revenge.
----------------------------------------------------
Chris, what's your concept of "Torture?" I cannot believe that a person of your surname, is so unread, and unlearned. Did you know that we summarily condemned and shot such people if all previous wars? The Geneva Convention only protects Uniformed combatants, in war. All other armed subjects, are considered as Spies, or terrorists. Waterboarding has never killed, or permanently harmed anyone. All our people who applied Waterboarding, have themselves, been Waterboarded, as a requirement for their qualifications. This Era of Political Correctness, is going to get more Americans killed. If we don't defend against it, we deserve to be among these casualties of war. Read some more, Chris. Start with the Constitution, and the Geneva Convention.
Dennis
Rating :
Reply to this commentReport!
Gregory Dittmer
6:38PM 6:38PM Apr 27th 2009
Dennis
2:42PM 2:42PM Apr 27th 2009
Chris, what's your concept of "Torture?" I cannot believe that a person of your surname, is so unread, and unlearned. Did you know that we summarily condemned and shot such people if all previous wars? The Geneva Convention only protects Uniformed combatants, in war.
#####################################################
The Geneva Conventions are not the ONLY treaty or international law with which this Nation is a signatory! Just as there are NO EXCEPTIONS to the ban on torture, there is also NO EXCEPTION for those allowing torture or those told to torture.
The "U.N. Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment" is a much more recent document and it covers ALL PEOPLE, NOT just military or those in uniform! I have copied just a few of the regulations which this Government under Bush/Cheney is in violation. According to this document, most of the provisions of the so-called "Patriot Act" are also illegal.
Part I
Article 1
1. For the purposes of this Convention, the term "torture" means any act by which severe pain or
suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.
Article 2
1. Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to
prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction.
2. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.
3. An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture.
Article 4
1. Each State Party shall ensure that all acts of torture are offences under its criminal law. The same
shall apply to an attempt to commit torture and to an act by any person which constitutes complicity or
participation in torture.
2. Each State Party shall make these offences punishable by appropriate penalties which take into
account their grave nature.
Article 11
Each State Party shall keep under systematic review interrogation rules, instructions, methods and
practices as well as arrangements for the custody and treatment of persons subjected to any form of arrest, detention or imprisonment in any territory under its jurisdiction, with a view to preventing any cases of torture.
Article 12
Each State Party shall ensure that its competent authorities proceed to a prompt and impartial
investigation, wherever there is reasonable ground to believe that an act of torture has been committed in any territory under its jurisdiction.
Article 13
Each State Party shall ensure that any individual who alleges he has been subjected to torture in any
territory under its jurisdiction has the right to complain to, and to have his case promptly and impartially examined by, its competent authorities. Steps shall be taken to ensure that the complainant and witnesses are protected against all ill-treatment or intimidation as a consequence of his complaint or any evidence given.
Article 14
1. Each State Party shall ensure in its legal system that the victim of an act of torture obtains redress
and has an enforceable right to fair and adequate compensation, including the means for as full rehabilitation as possible. In the event of the death of the victim as a result of an act of torture, his dependants shall be entitled to compensation.
2. Nothing in this article shall affect any right of the victim or other persons to compensation which may
exist under national law.
Article 16
1. Each State Party shall undertake to prevent in any territory under its jurisdiction other acts of cruel,
inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment which do not amount to torture as defined in article 1, when such acts are committed by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. In particular, the obligations contained in articles 10, 11, 12 and 13 shall apply with the substitution for references to torture of references to other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Rating :
Report!
Dennis
2:48PM 2:48PM Apr 27th 2009
Chris Schultz 7:45AM 7:45AM Apr 27th 2009
The moment this Republic condones and endorses torture, we are no
longer the United States. We are Rome. We are Imperial France. We are
China. We are all the banana republics that ever were. Let the others
be barbarians. We are unique. We are better. That doesn't mean we are
weak. It means we are stronger and believe in something more valuable
than some religious superstition. Shame on those who would throw away
our Constitution for a temporary feeling of safety, or worse, revenge.
----------------------------------------------------
Chris, what's your concept of "Torture?" I cannot believe that a
person of your surname, is so unread, and unlearned. Did you know
that we summarily condemned and shot such people if all previous
wars? The Geneva Convention only protects Uniformed combatants, in
war. All other armed subjects, are considered as Spies, or
terrorists. Waterboarding has never killed, or permanently harmed
anyone. All our people who applied Waterboarding, have themselves,
been Waterboarded, as a requirement for their qualifications. This
Era of Political Correctness, is going to get more Americans killed.
If we don't defend against it, we deserve to be among these
casualties of war. Read some more, Chris. Start with the
Constitution, and the Geneva Convention.
Dennis
Rating :
Reply to this commentReport!
Stuff
4:14PM 4:14PM Apr 27th 2009
It seems all you hear today and yesterday is Swine Flu. Even the pigs are co-operating with Obama, by keeping the heat off of him. Another few days to be able to make up new flip flops. I had Flu early in April and believe it was worse that what the experts
Rating :
Reply to this commentReport!
Stuff
4:23PM 4:23PM Apr 27th 2009
Even the pigs are co-operating with Obama. It has given him more time to make up more flip flops. It's hard to believe Swine Flu is as bad as the Flu I had early this month. From what they say it's mild here. We have more sickness and death here because some people in government want to let illegals into our country for whatever reason, there not innoculated so we get sick and some die. I never saw so much publicity about Flu. Could it be to hide and distract us from important issues again. Business as usual in Washington. It can't stay that way, Obama and his flunkies will be outed. Hopefully before he can do anymore damage.
Rating :
Reply to this commentReport!
Clay
4:56PM 4:56PM Apr 27th 2009
OPPOSE? What opposition? I'm all for it! This is a Bushnazi scam to steer the people away from the truth about Bush and crew and the damage they've done to America, so we can figure out how to proceed forward in the correct direction! This isn't just about interrogation either! This covers many issues that MUST BE ADDRESSED to help us to mend and move forward!
Rating :
Reply to this commentReport!
ajM33771
5:07PM 5:07PM Apr 27th 2009
44% oppose Butt-Rack releasing information because They HAVE A CLUE as to what the damage may be to sources! Geez. Robin Da' Hood is as clueless as you can get but the Lemmings Agree With Him, SO what do we have? A BIG GOOF Ball Making Important Decisions of Which He Hasn't An Inkling!
Rating :
Reply to this commentReport!
Glorious
5:30PM 5:30PM Apr 27th 2009
most Americans approve of Barack Obama's performance during his first 100 days in office.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Mattie, that is NOT TRUE, Dearest...MSNBC polls show BO's approval rating is in the toilet. Some other polls show most of America is FED UP with this flip-flop's lies and broken promises.
BO and the loonie libs are using the "torture" thing as a distraction to keep our minds off of the many other mistakes BO is making. It is a witch hunt and it is ridiculous, but it's President Bush bashing and lunatic Liberals love that!
Rating :
Reply to this commentReport!
Gregory Dittmer
6:01PM 6:01PM Apr 27th 2009
remartantiques
7:55PM 7:55PM Apr 26th 2009
Why continue to muddy the waters and raise the contention bar about past applications EXCEPT for political, not patriotic, purposes?
####################################################
Most of what you have written seemed to make sense even if I don't agree with it... but then you had to spoil it by adding those few last lines!
You claim we "continue to muddy the waters and raise the contention bar about past applications," would you have us investigate possible crimes in the FUTURE?! The only way to get to the bottom of the issue is to look at what WAS done, NOT what WILL be done!
Bill Clinton got oral sex from Monika Lewinsky. It really had NOTHING to do with his job as POTUS. It had no effect on policy or national security. ALL it was is the fact he cheated on Hillary... nothing more, nothing less!
However, the Republicans in Congress could not let the irrelevant past remain in the past. When Ken Starr was appointed it was to look into possible wrong doing in the so-called Whitewater Scandal. When he got done, there was nothing found to be able to prosecute the Clintons, but that didn't stop Ken and the Republicans. After YEARS of being under the micoscope and millions of tax dollars, the ONLY thing Starr could find was Clinton lied under oath about having an affair!
Now try to spin that into something other than political assination which had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with Clinton's job as POTUS.
Investgation of past CRIMINAL events perpetrated by Bush43 and/or his Administration is NOT politically driven. It is a possible CRIMINAL act against humanity perpetrated by Bush43 and HIS team! Regardless of what your personal view, this Nation helped write and then ratified an international treaty against torture. Furthermore, it was spelled out quite specifically WHAT constitutes torture. Virtually EVERY act of "enhanced interrogation" is considered torture in that document!
Between giving the okay to torture and the stated motivation for invading Iraq are against the laws WE wrote and used to justify executions. According to OUR OWN wording, the Bush43 administration has broken virtually EVERY aspect of EVERY International treaty which labels the events "crimes against humanity."
If it was worth spending years and millions of dollars investigating EVERY aspect of Bill Clinton and then actually pursuing prosecution, it is IMPERATIVE that we, as a Nation, investigate the questionable actions of Bush43 and his entire administration! For the good name and international standing of this Nation, we MUST investigate and prosecute wrong doing!
Rating :
Reply to this commentReport!
dan lynch
11:56AM 11:56AM Apr 28th 2009
I hate the terms "waterboarding" or "fake drowning."
Pouring water over someone's nose while their mouth is covered IS DROWNING, until the flow of water is stopped. Controlled Drowning is a far more accurate term for Waterboarding, because that's what it is. According to the released memos, the interrogators/torturers were allowed to pour the water for 20-30 seconds, allow the terrorist to take in 3-4 deep breaths, then continue to pour the water, with such a cycle allowed to go on for ten minutes with a limited number of sessions allowed during one hour. As anybody who has come close to drowning knows, 3-4 breaths after having an unceasing flow of water entering the mouth and nose is hardly sufficient time to recover from not only the lack of air, but from the fright you receive from the whole drowning experience. This is why it's TORTURE, idiots! Even if it's done to somebody like Kalid Sheikh Mohammed (or whatever that hairy bastard's name is,) IT IS STILL TORTURE, and as George W Bush so eloquently stated, "The United States does not torture." Jail sentences should be given out not to the idiot lawyers who offered laughable legal opinions or the CIA fools who were given instructions on Un-American "interrogation techniques", but rather to the evil men and women who allowed all of the above to happen (namely, Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, Gonzalez, Rove, and surely a few others!) We can only "Look to the Future" when we know past injustices have been righted, not ignored or allowed to remain as hideous legal precedents.
Rating :
Reply to this commentReport!
Chap
7:12PM 7:12PM Apr 27th 2009
Gregory Dittmer - it is IMPERATIVE that we, as a Nation, investigate the questionable actions of Bush43 and his entire administration! For the good name and international standing of this Nation, we MUST investigate and prosecute wrong doing!
*********************************************
If that is the motivation then we must also prosecute Clinton and his administration. Much worse methods were used to interrogate terrorist in his administration under the guise of extraordinary rendition. High level people in congress must also be prosecuted for their role as well. They are briefed on these types of things to provide oversight when national security is involved. If they failed to stop it they are just as guilty. Are you willing to see the Clinton administration and such democrats as Pelosi and Ried go down in flames? If not, then it is just a political witch hunt to feed your personal vendetta against Bush. If we want to set that precedent there are plenty of people already that would like to see Obama go down. Imagine the kangaroo court that will be held when he leaves office. If you want accountability the congressional officials who failed in their roles of oversight and then later pretended to be shocked are most culpable.
Rating :
Reply to this commentReport!
Gregory Dittmer
6:37AM 6:37AM Apr 28th 2009
Chap
7:12PM 7:12PM Apr 27th 2009
If that is the motivation then we must also prosecute Clinton and his administration. Much worse methods were used to interrogate terrorist in his administration under the guise of extraordinary rendition. High level people in congress must also be prosecuted for their role as well. They are briefed on these types of things to provide oversight when national security is involved. If they failed to stop it they are just as guilty. Are you willing to see the Clinton administration and such democrats as Pelosi and Ried go down in flames? If not, then it is just a political witch hunt to feed your personal vendetta against Bush.
#####################################################
Sorry Chap, but you are making too many assumptions! I have no "personal vandetta" with Bush43. If a crime was found to have occurred, I don't care who did what, NO ONE is above the law!
I do not know if Clinton's "extraordinary rendition" was worse than Bush43's "enhanced interrogations. Furthermore, if Clinton did indeed order
"extraordinary renditions" that were knowingly for the purpose of committing torture, he is no more above the law than is Bush43 or Cheney. If the evidence points toward knowingly committing torture, a full investigation of that should also take place. ANY person that knowingly allowed torture by US personel or on US territory or that knew of and allowed "extraordinary rendition" for the purpose of torture should be made to answer for their actions.
As for Pelosi, she should have retired years ago with Ted Kennedy... they BOTH give Democrats a bad reputation!
Rating :
Report!
Will Felder
9:29PM 9:29PM Apr 27th 2009
Don't hold your breath! lol
Rating :
Reply to this commentReport!
anniemott
10:46PM 10:46PM Apr 27th 2009
How about Obama release his college records......
Rating :
Reply to this commentReport!
Previous 20 Comments | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Most Recent | Next 20 Comments