Home More advice Politics & Law
One year ago... "This Government does not torture people. We stick to US law and our international obligations," Mr Bush said as he defended his war on terror launched after the September 11 attacks of 2001. Mr Bush said that "when we find somebody who may have information regarding a potential attack on America, you bet we're going to detain him and you bet we're going to question him".
Three days ago -Friday, April 11, 2008 - President Bush directly admitted what we have suspected all along: The White House was deeply and intimately involved in decisions about the CIA’s use of torture.
For the first time, George W. Bush acknowledged that he knew his top national security advisers discussed and approved specific details of the CIA’s use of torture. “I’m aware that our national security team met on this issue and I approved,” he said. He also defended the use of waterboarding -- simulated drowning where the victim feels like they are about to die.
Congress should long ago have gotten to the bottom of which top officials approved, condoned and authorized U.S. involvement in torture. But, now that the President has admitted to a policy of top-down torture, the ACLU is calling on Congress to demand an independent prosecutor to investigate possible violations of the War Crimes Act, the federal Anti-Torture Act and federal assault laws.
These latest revelations confirm our worst fears about subversion of the Constitution and betrayals of the rule of law by top government officials. Recent reports indicate that members of the Bush administration including Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell and George Tenet met regularly and approved the CIA’s use of “combined” “enhanced” interrogation techniques, even pushing the limits of the now infamous 2002 Justice Department “Yoo torture memo.”
What do you think about the latest revelation?
Piker, We attacked the Iraqis and killed hundreds of thousands of them. All over lies. They deserved none of this, and for you to portray a whole nation of people as barbarians based on the acts of a handful of lunatics (ones we created with our invaion), is beyond ludicrous.
You make it sound like waterboarding is a picnic. What would you think if it was being done to our soldiers, or to you? Would you think it was torture then. You can't decide something is torture based on who it is being done to. Torture is torture. It is illegal, and bush and cheney should be impaeached over it.
Amoeba, This has been something known for a while, but they always denied it. I guess they are trying to cover their tracks because they know they are in trouble over this, and the evidence will show they were directly involved in ordering torture. Since impeachment isn't going to happen, they better get prosecuted after they leave office.
I have known about these lies and many other that bush and his cohorts have spewed. it is too bad that many still think he is a great leader. talk about wearing blinders. the memorandum became public as a direct result of ACLU lawsuits aimed at getting out the truth. the truth is, the legal opinions put forward in the torture memo tried to give the president a virtual blank check to ignore the rule of law and to violate human rights standards. bush is a liar and a crook (any many other things this forum won't allow me to say) as are his cronies. I would relish future prosecution.
I am deeply ashamed by our government's lack of morality and leadership. When I ponder a question about what is right and wrong in times of war, I ask myself, "How would I feel if our troops were arbitrarily detaned for long periods like this and subjected to these techniques? In this case, I would be outraged. Therefore, I understand why other people are outraged over what we've done and why someone must be held accountable for it.
What good does it do us to win if we must give away our morality and values in order to achieve that victory?
Bush has been using a strange and new strategy for ignoring laws. They are basically saying that since the justice department determines that a law doesn't apply to the president, that is all the justification they need. No legislative or judicial review is required. Checks and balances don't apply because it will interfere with his ability to keep the country safe. It is a more legalistic approach to the NIxon concept when he said "if the president does it, then it's not illegal." But it basically says the same thing.
that doesn't bother me, I don't like Bush but every politician lies. Doesn't make it right but any other president would have said the same thing. And there better not be any war crimes brought up for this, the Iraqi's get to cut off our heads but we can't make em think their drowning.
bush sucks
