Obama Team Feared Coup If He Prosecuted War Crmes

[Empty Hands]

We say we are the god guys. There are things we would never do because we are the good guys. However, we then proceed to do the things that we said we would never do. Either we are a nation of laws or we are not. There is no in between.

Most people in this country don't really believe it. Their actions belie the assertion. "The Good Guys" and "liberty" and "freedom" and "nation of laws" have become just another tribal marker, a brand by which some define themselves without ever engaging in the hard work of actually living it. They don't believe in being Good, at least when their atavistic impulses go against what being good would require, and they certainly don't believe in freedom and liberty. And there can be no finger pointing at a discrete group. The American people as a whole are fully complicit. We could demand change, we could demand that our government live up to the hype, but we prefer the empty and easy words to the difficult reality. Truly, we have inherited the situation and the government we deserve. Shame on us.

 

[billc]

From another victim of actual war crimes, Congressional medal of honor winner Bud Day:

I just talked to MOH holder Leo Thorsness http://www.pbs.org/weta/americanvalor/stories/thorsness.html who was also in my sq in jail…. as was John McCain … and we agree that McCain does not speak for the POW group when he claims that Al Gharib was torture… or that “water boarding” is torture.

Point out the stupidity of the claims that water boarding …which has no after effect… is torture. If it got the Arab to cough up the story about how he planned the attack on the twin towers in NYC … hurrah for the guy who poured the water.
BUD DAY, MOH

 

[Twin Fist]

Vile, inhuman, and illegal. .

and your legal credentials would be............................................?

 

[Twin Fist]

everyone in this thread who have just talked about america, and how bad we are these days can get the **** out if they really feel that way.

hey, i dont stay in a movie i dont like

i dont watch shows i disagree with

you think america is a bad place? quit yapping and start packing

nut up or shut up

 

[Makalakumu]

Would be nice, but the islands I keep landing on get gobbled up by the Empire.

 

[Empty Hands]

and your legal credentials would be............................................?

Genius. Would you believe me if I said theft and murder were illegal too, or would you solicit a lawyer's opinion first?

 

[Empty Hands]

you think america is a bad place? quit yapping and start packing

No.

A perfect demonstration of my point how some would rather simply call themselves Good rather than struggling to actually be that way.

 

[billc]

You could live on one of these Islands:

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout...artificial-libertarian-islands-140840896.html

Pay Pal founder and early Facebook investor Peter Thiel has given $1.25 million to an initiative to create floating libertarian countries in international waters, according to a profile of the billionaire in Details magazine.Thiel has been a big backer of the Seasteading Institute, which seeks to build sovereign nations on oil rig-like platforms to occupy waters beyond the reach of law-of-the-sea treaties. The idea is for these countries to start from scratch--free from the laws, regulations, and moral codes of any existing place. Details says the experiment would be "a kind of floating petri dish for implementing policies that libertarians, stymied by indifference at the voting booths, have been unable to advance: no welfare, looser building codes, no minimum wage, and few restrictions on weapons."

 

[billc]

Here is a scenario:

An unlawful enemy combatant, a known leader of a terrorist network, is captured on the battle field, in a foreign country. It is determined that this terrorist leader is involved in planning attacks around the world. Intelligence sources have information that this terrorist leader has launched an attack that will occur in the next two weeks and the target will be a civillian transportation site in either the U.S. or Great Britain. If successful, the attack may kill or injure hundreds of people. How many people on this site would okay waterboarding, as performed by the U.S. and detailed in the above linked memo? It is not the waterboarding done by the Japanese, the Inquisition or the Kmer rouge or any other type of waterboarding, but is the type described in the memo.

To add a little to the debate, in the attack at least one, innocent human being will be killed or horribly maimed in the attack, with the possibility that hundreds more will suffer the same fate. I would Okay the waterboarding of that terrorist in those circumstances. Would you?

 

[Empty Hands]

I would Okay the waterboarding of that terrorist in those circumstances. Would you?

Only if I wanted to increase the chances of false information and dead civilians.

Even if it worked though - again, are you actually interested in following the law and being good at all times, or only when it is expedient? The law is for times of crisis and emergency when the impulse to ignore everything that makes us good and civilized is at its highest. What good is the law or our morality if we throw it out the window every time circumstances get tough? Of course, law ignored during crisis tends to become normalized and ignored during the non-crisis times too. Civilization is a fragile structure that must be built up and defended with hard work at all times. It is all too easy to come crumbling down.

We could probably decrease dead innocents if we turned the US into a fully militarized police state. Or decrease crime with intrusive surveillance in our homes. Or decrease strife and discord by outlawing political speech. I'm sure you wouldn't be too hard to convince.

 

[Touch Of Death]

everyone in this thread who have just talked about america, and how bad we are these days can get the **** out if they really feel that way.

hey, i dont stay in a movie i dont like

i dont watch shows i disagree with

you think america is a bad place? quit yapping and start packing

nut up or shut up

This is not an argument. Its ok to disagree with what is going on. That is what being American is about, and if you want a third world torturing dictatorship, perhaps you should move to one, and let us get back to bitching about how things are being run.
Sean

 

[Empty Hands]

I would Okay the waterboarding of that terrorist in those circumstances. Would you?

Oh, and if for some reason I did decide that breaking the law and torturing unarmed prisoners was necessary, I wouldn't be a pants-******** coward about it like Bush and his lackeys. He and they hid and lied about their actions to the fullest extent possible in an attempt to avoid accountability. If it was me, Bill my boy, I would not have lied and hid like a criminal coward. The moment the crisis was over, I would have addressed the nation and told them exactly what I did and why. Then I would have resigned, and pled guilty to the charges that I would insist be brought against me so that the entire nation could see that not even a President is above the law.

Why would i do all that? Because despite the stupid assumptions of the "love it or leave it" crowd, I actually care very deeply about my homeland, and want to see it become a better place in actuality, not in empty words. My responsibility as a leader and my own beliefs would demand that I live in a nation that does not normalize torture and law breaking by the powerful. Being accountable for my unlawful actions would be the only way to prevent that.

If Bush had acted like a true leader in that fashion, then I could respect, if not agree with, what he had done and believe he had the best interests of the country at heart. Instead he lied, his followers have gone all in on defending a regime of torture and contempt for the rule of law, and we are now left with the consequences for many years to come.

 

[billc]

On SERE training, using waterboarding on our special forces candidates and the success rate of getting the toughest of the tough to cooperate:

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/sere_training_and_torture/

However, that wasn’t the point, as psychologically the waterboard produced capitulation and compliance with instructor demands 100 percent of the time. During debriefings following training, students who had experienced the waterboard expressed extreme avoidance attitudes such as a likelihood to further comply with any demands made of them if brought near the waterboard again.

 

[billc]

From the passion of the response to waterboarding, the least harmful of almost all of the enhanced interrogation techniques, I have to assume that everyone who would prohibit waterboarding is also a pacifist who is completely against the use of armed force to defend the country from enemies as well. That is if they want to be consistent in their moral stance.

 

[Big Don]

Why is this thread still going? Bill Mattocks killed the idiotic, loony, conspiracy theory, two friggin pages ago. Shut up!

I went and read the original article carefully. This was not easy to do, because quite honestly, it's not well-written. And it's simply being quoted over and over again from one blog to another; a true echo chamber. It gets worse each time it's repeated. Now it is mostly "Obama Feared Coup," with absolutely was not said by anyone but the blog writers themselves.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Obama-Team-Feared-Coup-If-by-Andrew-Kreig-110907-156.html



Note the use of the word 'revolt' and not 'coup'. They are very different words, and mean very different things. A coup is a revolt, of course, but it means that the government it toppled by illegal means. A 'revolt' is:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/revolt



Note that definition #1 above is the same as an attempt at a coup. But none of the other definitions are anything like that. One meaning I find most likely in Edley's response to the author is #2 above, "To oppose or refuse to accept something."

Note also that it was the transition team that feared this revolt; not Obama. Yet many of the echo-chamber blogs now headline that Obama himself feared a 'coup'.

Not often quoted in the various blogs is this bit:

http://www.justice-integrity.org/in...h-if-he-prosecuted-war-crimes&catid=44:myblog



OK, so what I'm reading here is that Edley (and the transition team, NOT OBAMA) feared that the military leadership (not the troops), the CIA, and the NSA might 'revolt' AND he adds that there was a fear that a prosecution might thwart the Obama agenda in Congress.

Now, tell me this. If you fear a COUP, meaning your government has been utterly overthrown and the president is no longer president, in what way do you ALSO fear that your president's AGENDA is going to be thwarted in Congress? If you are ousted in a COUP, you haven't GOT an AGENDA anymore, do you?

So I am satisfied that what Edley was saying was that the transition team feared that if they instigated war crimes investigations, they'd have huge problems with angry military leaders and the heads of the CIA and NSA (and not surprising, since it would be their asses on the chopping block). And the backlash of an investigation in Congress would harm the Obama agenda right off the bat. Revolt? Yes, in the sense that some senior generals and admirals and the head of the CIA and NSA would say "Shove it up your butt, Mister President," forcing them to be fired and causing all kinds of bad will with Congress right off the bat.

At no point did Edley say or imply that the transition team feared a coup - and definitely not that Obama feared one.

I wish people had better reading skills. It is pretty clear to me that the first person to blog this read 'revolt' as 'coup' and it was off to the races.

It's really kind of sad.

And both sides do this; this is not a slam on the left or the right. Idiots with agendas abound. Nobody gives a crap about facts, it's all about attacks.

 

[billc]

Other issues were brought up and as long as Makalakumu doesn't mind, we'll keep exploring them. So, stay if you want, otherwise, leave us to our little discussion.

 

[billc]

Also, for those interested, Dick Cheney's new book:

http://www.amazon.com/My-Time-Perso...=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1315529419&sr=1-1

[h=3]Product DescriptionIn his unmistakable voice and with an
insider's eye on history, former Vice President Dick Cheney tells the story of
his life and the nearly four decades he has spent at the center of American
politics and power.
About the AuthorDick Cheney served at the highest levels of
government and the private sector for more than forty years. He was White House
Chief of Staff under President Gerald Ford and Secretary of Defense under
President George H.W. Bush, overseeing America’s military during the 1991
Operation Desert Storm. Elected six times to the U.S. House of Representatives
from Wyoming, he eventually became House Minority Whip. As the forty-sixth Vice
President of the United States, he served two terms under President George W.
Bush during the dawn of the Global War on Terror, playing a key role in events
that have shaped history.[/h]

[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

 

[billc]

Honestly, I don't get it. Some people are discussing something and a third party doesn't like it...and feels the need to comment on it rather than go to a different thread. Where does that come from?

 

[Makalakumu]

Why is this thread still going? Bill Mattocks killed the idiotic, loony, conspiracy theory, two friggin pages ago. Shut up!

This thread actually ended for you before it even started. LOL! "Revolt" can mean many things, duh...

If people want to discuss whether the Bush administration and their anal raping, kiddo testicle crushing ways are war crimes, by all means discuss. It should be obvious though. And it should also be obvious that people who would do this, would do anything, including an outright coup.

 

[Twin Fist]

Would be nice, but the islands I keep landing on get gobbled up by the Empire.

try cuba, no one tries to GET there