Is GITMO any better than a North Korean trial?

The following was posted by Mitchell Bard on The Huffington Post:

"North Korea can seize two innocent journalists, put them through a bogus, private, star-chamber trial, and then sentence them to 12 years of hard labor, all without any justification. The United States I grew up in, the United States that fought wars from World War I to the Cold War defending democracy and freedom against repression, could never engage in such conduct like the North Koreans did. And yet, there it is, for all to read, that we took a man and locked him up without a trial for 7 1/2 years, torturing him while in our custody, even though two courts, one in the U.S. and one in Bosnia (one before his detention and one after), found insufficient evidence to charge him with any crime. While we clearly have a more open and democratic society than North Korea does, his experience with us was no better than what the two American journalists are now going through in North Korea. We have to recognize that Bush, Cheney and the rest of the gang did real damage to core American ideals, and that this damage is still being felt, both at home and abroad." Mitchell Bard's full story

Do you feel, like most Americans, that North Korea's treatment of two American Journalists is a crime and that North Korean leader Kim Jong-il is a criminal? Is the detention in GITMO without trial of suspected terrorists less criminal? If you are not just as outraged by the abuse of GITMO detainees as you are about the detention of two American journalists then, in my opinion, you have a serious moral deficiency.

Torture: It's illegal, Stupid!

Liz Cheney appeared on "Morning Joe" to defend her father's advocacy for enhanced interrogation. She argued that waterboarding as used by the CIA was legal. She argued that Department of Justice lawyers were within the law when they defined the limits within which waterboarding is legal. She argued that the White House is withholding information that proves that waterboarding was effective and consequently justified. The host of the show, Joe Scarborough, accused the White House of cherry-picking government records to release only negative documents regarding enhanced interrogation and withholding documents that would show that these methods were effective.

Torture is illegal. Nothing else matters. Joe Scarborough should apologize on air for defending the use of torture – for justifying a war crime. I think MSNBC should fire Scarborough and any of its personnel who defend the use torture and the violation of our laws and treaties. I'm tired of the suggestion that any rational person would use any means to extract information from a detainee that might save American lives. That's not true. It is immoral. It is inhuman. IT IS ILLEGAL.

If torture is justified by the admissions of the tortured and if admissions under torture are true, then witches possessed by Satan are REAL. The witch hunt in early modern Europe executed about 60,000 women, men and children for being witches possessed by Satan. Torture was the primary method employed to get a confession.

If you believe that torturing detainees is justified by the results, then you must also believe that tens of thousands of witches, in league with Satan, existed in early modern Europe. Since the witch hunt could not have eliminated all witches and surely did not end Satan’s ability to possess people and create witches, then you must also believe that there are thousands of witches in America that are possessed by Satan and using supernatural powers to do his will.

George W. Bush and Dick Cheney advised all patriotic Americans to watch their neighbors and report all unusual activity. They should also have advised us to watch for and report all “supernatural” activity. After all, a witch possessed by Satan is surely more dangerous than a terrorist serving Osama bin Laden.

Unprecedented punishment for unprecedented crimes

The talking heads that oppose punishing the Bush administration for its war crimes say that such punishment would be unprecedented and therefore unjust. I disagree. There is no precedent for such punishment only because these crimes are unprecedented.

The more the Bush administration and its supporters argue that these crimes were justified by the circumstances or not crimes at all, the more the need to prosecute the criminals to the fullest extent of the law.

If we do not punish the criminals and silence their supporters, a future administration will again violate our Constitution and our treaties and argue that circumstances and executive privelege justified their actions.

Thoughts on Church, Torture and Capital Punishment

The Pew Forum surveyed four major religious groups and found that people who attend church most often are also most likely to approve of using torture. 62% of White Evangelical Protestants justify torture compared to 40% of those who are unaffiliated with a church. I would expect most Evangelicals to completely disapprove of torture. Since an Evangelical strives to be Christ-like wouldn’t all Evangelicals disapprove of torture?

Based on what I’ve been taught about Christ, Christ would not approve of torturing anybody for any reason. So why do most Evangelicals approve of torture?

There are more than 200 countries in the world. The Death Penalty is abolished in 113 of them and has never been used in another 4 countries. Of the 91 countries that have not abolished the death penalty 43 countries have not used the death penalty in more than 10 years and 25 have not used the death penalty in more than 20 years. In the first 4 months of this year alone the United States has executed 24 people. Texas has executed 14 of them; almost one per week. In the previous 10 years 636 people were executed in the US and 41% of them were executed in Texas. The population of Texas is 8% of the US population. Thus, the rate of execution in Texas is 5 times as high as it is in the rest of the US. The states with the highest execution rates are the Bible Belt states. The states of the Bible Belt were the slave states prior to the Civil War. The predominant religion in the Bible Belt is the Evangelical Protestant.

The United States in one of only 5 countries that executes minors – the other countries are China, Democratic Republic of Congo, Iran and Pakistan. The United States and Kyrgyzstan are the only countries that execute the mentally retarded. The United States Supreme Court banned such executions however Texas maintains its right to execute the mentally retarded and in 2001 Governor Perry, vetoed a bill that would have banned such executions.

GW Bush was governor of Texas from 1995 through 2000 during which Texas held 152 executions. Executions in Texas peaked while Bush was governor, increasing 25% in 6 years. Executions in Texas decreased 23% since Bush left the governor’s office. GW Bush claims that each case is reviewed in detail when he considers the final appeal, however, in the case of Terry Washington, a mentally retarded man, Bush met with his legal counsel Alberto Gonzales (the same scoundrel who was Bush’s Attorney General of the US) for only 30 minutes before denying the appeal for clemency. GW Bush is an Evangelical and he approves of torture. In fact GW Bush is the only US President to authorize torture.

The countries that have used the death penalty in 2008 and 2009 are: Sudan, Bangladesh, China, Iran, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Vietnam, Yemen, United States, Botswana, Egypt, Libya, Somalia, Afghanistan, Bahrain, Indonesia, Iraq, North Korea, Malaysia, Mongolia, Pakistan, Syria, United Arab Emirates, Belarus and Saint Kitts and Nevis.

The United States, which claims to be the Moral Leader of the world, which consistently attacks other countries for Human Rights Violations, uses the death penalty and torture (until the recent ban by President Obama). We are one of the most violent societies in the world. More crimes are committed in the United States than in any other nation. Only 4 countries have more murders: India, Russia, Columbia and South Africa.

The US is far less than it pretends to be. Insisting that we should not investigate and prosecute our own war crimes ensures that we will commit war crimes in the future.

McCain Opposes Torture But Wouldn't Prosecute

McCain was on Face The Nation on April 26 to confirm that he is opposed to using torture but would neither investigate the matter further nor prosecute anybody involved. He said that the U.S. understands that the use of torture was wrong and will not use torture in the future. He said the country needs to move on. McCain feels that enough is known about what happened, how it happened and who was involved. He's concerned that if we criminalize bad legal advice, others will refuse to serve. He feels that the torture of detainees in Abu Ghraib lead to an increase in the number of people joining the Iraqi insurgency, however, he isn't concerned that other nations will ignore the Geneva Convention ban on torture because they know that they will held accountable if they do. Throughout the interview McCain maintained a straight face, appearing to believe everything that he was saying, and apparently confident that the majority of the TV audience would also believe him.

McCain is wrong. The people responsible for the use of torture do not agree that they were wrong and, led by Dick Cheney, continue to argue that waterboarding is not torture and in any case it was justified by information extracted from the detainees. As long as the debate exists there is a chance that future administrations will resort to torture. The U.S. does not know the process by which waterboarding and other forms of torture were approved. The U.S. does not know who was involved. I am not concerned about any person who will refuse to work for the government because he/she will be prosecuted if they violate the law or approve of others violating the law. I don't want people like that serving in our government in any capacity. The majority of U.S. citizens wants this matter investigated so that those responsible for approving and ordering the use of torture are punished according to the law.

The U.S. should punish its own violators to the same extent that past violators have been punished by the U.S. and to the same extent that we would punish other countries if they torture in the future. The U.S. is not above the law or the treaties it has signed and cannot be held to a different and more lenient standard. McCain's attitude that we need not punish ourselves but we will certainly punish others is unacceptable to me, unacceptable to the majority of our citizens and certainly unacceptable to the rest of the world.

McCain felt that President Ford did the right thing for America when he pardoned Richard Nixon and McCain feels that it would be appropriate for Obama to do the same thing by pardoning everybody that was involved in the torture of detainees. The situation is by no means the same. The U.S. thoroughly investigated and prosecuted everybody involved in the Watergate Break in and its cover-up. Only Richard Nixon was spared legal prosecution, however, he was not spared punishment. The country as a whole condemned his actions and he resigned the presidency in shame. Recent war crimes by the U.S. have not been investigated adequately. We do not know who is ultimately responsible for the crimes. The U.S. government has not determined officially that its treatment of detainees was a war crime. The U.S. government has not denounced those that continue to justify how the detainees were treated.

We have always prosecuted war criminals even when the crime was committed by our military. We should not make an exception for the war crimes committed during the Bush administration. To do so increases that likelihood that the U.S. and other countries will commit these crimes in the future.

The End does not always justify the Means

I'm shocked that so many people who were or are involved in governing the United States of America believe that torture is justified as long as it yields beneficial results. Is rape justified if the rapist has an orgasm? I say it is not and I feel the same way about torture.

Dick Cheney is calling for the government to release documents that will prove that beneficial information was gained through the use of torture. It doesn't make any difference; torture is wrong. Rape is wrong. Cheney was and is wrong.

I think that Obama made a mistake when he ordered that no CIA personnel could be punished for using torture. I think his recommendation to look forward and not into the past is foolish. All crimes are acts of the past; should we not punish all criminals? Following orders is not an excuse. 9-11 is not an excuse. Protecting America is no excuse for torture. We punished, in fact we executed, many government officials and military personnel that claimed that they were only following orders when they used torture during WWII. Was that time less dangerous than during the Bush presidency after 9-11? No. Are our torturers less guilty? No.

In my opinion Obama is obligated to enforce the laws of this country and our treaties. The Dept of Justice should investigate and prosecute these "admitted" crimes without exception. High rank and high office does not put one above the law and exempt from punishment. Nixon was wrong when he said "it's not a crime when you are the president." It is, in my opinion, a bigger crime deserving of harsher punishment when it is committed by the president.

If these criminals, especially those responsible for justifying and ordering the use of torture, go unpunished it will open the door for future leaders to do the same when they feel events justify it. Who have we become if we do less?

Bush's Greatest Regret

Recently Bush has been focusing his efforts on improving his reputation - creating a positive, albeit false, legacy. His efforts are no less unsuccessful than the whole of his presidency.

When asked what he considered his greatest regret Bush stated, "I regret that we did not find WMD (weapons of mass destruction) in Iraq." We have learned that Bush had no evidence of WMD before he invaded Iraq, yet, he convinced Americans and our allies that such evidence existed. Without WMD the war in Iraq is unjustified. He could have said that he regrets having started the unjustified war in Iraq that has, so far, resulted in the deaths of more than 100,000 Iraqis and almost 5,000 American and allied soldiers but he didn't say that because he wanted the war in Iraq - his “gut feeling” told him that the war was necessary. However, without WMD he can’t prove that his “gut feeling” was correct! That is his ONLY regret. He doesn’t regret the massive loss of life. He doesn’t regret the destruction of Iraq. He doesn't regret America's loss of standing in the world. He ONLY regrets not being able to find WMD with which to justify the war that he was going to wage whether WMD existed or not.

Bush isn't a good man because he lacks compassion for others. Bush was not a good leader; he used his presidency to serve himself rather than the people. His legacy consists, in part, of an unjust war of his making, the deaths of more than 100,000 innocents, the destruction of Iraq and violations of our laws, our Constitution and our treaties. I say "in part" because the war in Iraq was only one of many disasterous products of his presidency.

War Criminals Must Be Prosecuted

Obama and his appointees seem reluctant to investigate U.S. war crimes committed while George W. Bush was president. We should not treat our war criminals differently than we have treated war criminals from other countries. War crimes were committed; of that there is no question. We already know at least two of the people who committed these crimes. In the last few weeks President Bush and Vice President Cheney admitted on television that they ordered the use of torture in violation of U.S. law and multiple treaties. In spite of their claim, being President and Vice President does not put them above ANY U.S. law or treaty. They asked a Bush appointed Department of Justice lawyer if the types of torture that they wanted to use were legal as if that was enough to protect them from prosecution. If we let these crimes go unpunished we are as guilty they are.

This is not a party issue or liberal versus conservative or Christian versus non-Christian. Some of the people who support Bush and his use of torture will use the Iraq war, the defense of our nation and patriotism as justifications. Bush’s supporters will accuse me of being anti-war, weak on defense and/or unpatriotic. These, true or not, have nothing to do with my call for war crimes prosecution. These acts were criminal regardless of the context within which they were committed.

Torturing prisoners of war and “detainees” did not save any lives and it did not prevent other terrorist attacks on the U.S. Experts, including the FBI, have always maintained that torture does not yield valuable information and, in spite of such claims by Bush and Cheney, investigators say that none of the information obtained was helpful. What we know to be true is that torturing cost American and allied lives in the war in Iraq. It was a rallying call to all extremist Muslims to join the fight in Iraq. It inspired the enemy to begin beheading their captives, both military and civilian.

If we let our war criminals go unpunished we send a clear message to all future presidents that they are above the law and free to violate international treaties. If we let them go unpunished we will lose the respect of other nations and the right to expect them to honor our treaties.

I call for Obama to investigate all claims of war crime and to prosecute the criminals without prejudice or favor.

Censoring Library Books - Palin like Bush

I can't find the part of the U.S. Constitution that empowers GW Bush and Sarah Palin to censor books in a library. I'm sure, very sure, that I will not find it. Yet, they both feel empowered to censor.

GW Bush has been censoring books for years. The order was issued by the Office of the Inspector General in the Justice Department. The Justice Department took this action to keep prisons from becoming:
“… recruiting grounds for militant Islamic and other religious groups. The Justice Department defended its effort, which it calls the Standardized Chapel Library Project, as a way of barring access to materials that could, in its words, “discriminate, disparage, advocate violence or radicalize. Christian books were not purged.

Sarah Palin has acknowledged that in 1996, while she was the mayor, she asked the librarian how books could be removed from the library. Later, Palin said it was only a rhetorical question but at that same time Palin's church was pushing for the removal of a book titled "Pastor I am Gay" from local bookstores. According to coverage in the local newspaper, the Frontiersman, Palin asked the librarian at a meeting "if she would object to censorship even if people were circling the library in protest about a book." The librarian is reported to have replied, "I will fight anyone who tries to indicate what books can go on the library shelves." Later the same week, Palin fired the librarian, claiming she was not "loyal" to the new administration and had supported Palin's opponent in the election. The good news is that the townspeople came to the support of the librarian and Palin rehired her.

Bush and Palin as with so many of their Evangelical brothers and sisters disregard our First Amendment right to Religious Freedom. They believe that the United States of America was founded by Christians for Christians and given the chance to do so, they both act according to that belief when governing.

Such people will not protect our individual rights and should never hold public office.

Troop reduction postponed to help McCain and Bush

Gen. Petraeus has recommended to the Joint Chiefs a delay of the large scale shift of troops from Iraq to Afghanistan, which he had predicted for this autumn. Troop reduction in Iraq will be delayed until Bush has left office in January. Bush and McCain take credit for the troop surge that has reduced the violence in Iraq and although neither feels that the US can pull out completely at this point they both characterize the was as won.

Bush wants to leave office having achieved victory or at least the appearance of victory. McCain claims that his role in the surge proves that he is qualified to be Commander-in-Chief and that Obama is not qualified because he opposed the troop surge. Victory or the appearance of victory in Iraq, especially due to the troop surge, is critically important to McCain campaign.

Experts feel that a troop reduction at this time and perhaps at any time in the next several years will result in a resumption of violence and a collapse of the Iraqi government. If this were to happen before the November election, McCain could lose the election because of it. If this were to happen before Bush leaves office then his already disasterous presidency would also be remembered for having never caught Bin Laden and losing the war in Iraq. If Bush can leave office while the war appears to be won, the next president will bear the responsibility for the outcome of the war.

A similar manipulation was carried out at the end of Jimmy Carter's presidency. George Bush, #41, GW's daddy, struck an aggreement with the Iranians to release the US Embassy hostages only after Ronald Reagan was sworn in as president. A petty act to be sure, yet not one that cost American lives.

On the other hand, keeping our troops in Iraq has and will continue to cost American lives. Having inadequate troops in Afghanistan also costs American lives. But, Bush is willing to pay that price with the lives of others so that he can claim a victory no matter how brief. And, McCain and the GOP are willing to sacrafice American lives so that they have a chance of winning the presidency. Just a chance. Just a few lives.

Finally, remember that we only invaded Iraq to destroy Saddam's weapons of mass destruction. Remember that weapons of mass destruction did not exist. Remember that Bush and the CIP intentionally lied to the American public and the world when they told us that the weapons existed.

Ask yourself if it is important to continue fighting and dying in an unjust war just to be able to say we won. Then cast your vote wisely on November 4th.