We Make Mistakes

I don't think there's anything wrong in making a well-intentioned mistake, but there is something wrong in not correcting it as quickly as possible, and something worse in making it uncorrectable. While Lakhdar Boumediene was not waterboarded, he was an innocent Algerian family man detained in Guantanamo for seven years:

In what he describes as an ugly mistake by U.S. authorities, Boumediene, an Algerian citizen, had spent seven years there as terrorism suspect No. 10005. Later he became the plaintiff in a landmark Supreme Court case, Boumediene v. Bush, that in June 2008 gave Guantanamo detainees the right to seek judicial review of their imprisonment.

Boumediene, in a lengthy interview in a Paris suburb, said he joined the case to represent the scores of prisoners held at Guantanamo charged with being "enemy combatants" and having no power to challenge the accusation in court...

Boumediene said he was interrogated more than 120 times during his stay in Guantanamo's Camp Delta, mostly about Arabs and other foreign Muslims in Bosnia. "At first I thought they were honest, and when I explained they would see I was innocent and would release me," he recalled. "But after the first two years or so, I realized they were not straight. So I stopped cooperating."

During one 16-day period in February 2003, he said, the interrogations went on day and night, sometimes with tactics such as lifting him roughly from the chair where he was strapped, so the shackles dug into his flesh. The interrogators, some dressed in military uniforms and others in civilian clothes, were assisted by Arabic interpreters who seemed mostly to be from Egypt and Lebanon, he recalled, and later included a few Moroccans and Iraqis.

"They were dogs," Boumediene said of the foreign interpreters, in his only show of anger. "They were dogs. They often started doing the interrogations themselves. They would tell the interrogators they could get more information."

This is yet another reason why torture is such a bad idea: we don't always collect only the guilty. Seven years of a man's life; imagine losing your life from age 36 to 43. At least he wasn't tortured beyond the description above.

And don't get me started on summary execution -- especially the Cheney kind.

Man of his Word

A friend of mine who worked for George Bush in 2000, turned against him but abstained in 2004, and worked for Obama in 2008 always used to say that he couldn't vote for any politician if he didn't know where he stood. Case in point was Hillary Clinton, who's famous "triangulation" meant that he was never sure if she meant what she said or would flip it around based on political winds. Same with John Kerry -- not enough definition.

Hence his staunch support for Barack Obama, and here's yet another case study from just a couple days of actual governance that our new President meant what he said:



And yet another:

Seems almost lost in the hub bub of all that is happening these past few days, but yesterday President Obama issued an order that eliminates one of George Bush and Alberto Gonzalez's first vile collaborations.

A nasty little executive order Bush issued to make secrecy the rule of his administration.

Executive Order 13233 limited access to the records of former United States Presidents. It was drafted by then White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales and issued by President George W. Bush on November 1, 2001.

At the time it was issued in November of 2001, the Society of American Archivists and the American Library Association felt that the order

"violates both the spirit and letter of existing U.S. law on access to presidential papers..." and "potentially threatens to undermine one of the very foundations of our nation."

...Well yesterday when President Obama issued his Executive order to

...establish policies and procedures governing the assertion of executive privilege by incumbent and former Presidents in connection with the release of Presidential records by the National Archives...

Reading though that order I was struck by his assertion that outside of certain

"Presidential records (that) might impair national security (including the conduct of foreign relations), law enforcement, or the deliberative processes of the executive branch.

There is now established a specific way for these records to be released. There is also a bill H.R.35to codify "procedures for the consideration of claims of constitutionally based privilege against disclosure of Presidential records." But until this happens this is a good start and makes me feel all the more confident in our new President and his intention to act as a real agent of change.

I was just so heartened to get to the end of reading the Executive Order and reading the words...

Sec. 6. Revocation. Executive Order 13233 of November 1, 2001, is revoked.

When the history of Obama's transition and first 100 days is written, it will be as textbook.

This is how it is done.

Peace Talk

So Egypt has brokered a tentative truce between Israel and Hamas regarding Gaza. Who knows if it will hold but it is, as always, long overdue. The skinny:

• The truce takes effect at 6 a.m. Thursday (11 p.m. EDT Wednesday).

• All Gaza-Israel violence stops. After three days, Israel eases its blockade on Gaza, allowing more vital supplies in.

• A week later, Israel further eases restrictions at cargo crossings.

• In the final stage, talks are conducted about opening the Rafah crossing between Gaza and Egypt and a prisoner exchange to free Cpl. Gilad Schalit, held by Hamas-affiliated groups for two years.

Freeing the 21-year old Schalit is a very big deal, captured at 19 and held since then. Jimmy Carter, among others, helped mediate. This has been an open wound for the Israeli people for two years, the first Israeli soldier captured by Palestinian militants since 1994.

Meanwhile, the worst negotiator in America accuses a British journalist of slandering America when he brings up Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and illegal rendition in an interview.

Wait, is that guy still President?

Double Impeachment

For well over a year I've been saying that whatever you imagine is going on inside the Bush Administration, the truth is going to be much, much worse.

As predicted, whoops, there it is:

Just past the Oval Office, in the private dining room overlooking the South Lawn, Vice President Cheney joined President Bush at a round parquet table they shared once a week. Cheney brought a four-page text, written in strict secrecy by his lawyer. He carried it back out with him after lunch.

In less than an hour, the document traversed a West Wing circuit that gave its words the power of command. It changed hands four times, according to witnesses, with emphatic instructions to bypass staff review. When it returned to the Oval Office, in a blue portfolio embossed with the presidential seal, Bush pulled a felt-tip pen from his pocket and signed without sitting down. Almost no one else had seen the text.

Cheney's proposal had become a military order from the commander in chief. Foreign terrorism suspects held by the United States were stripped of access to any court -- civilian or military, domestic or foreign. They could be confined indefinitely without charges and would be tried, if at all, in closed "military commissions."

"What the hell just happened?" Secretary of State Colin L. Powell demanded, a witness said, when CNN announced the order that evening, Nov. 13, 2001. National security adviser Condoleezza Rice, incensed, sent an aide to find out. Even witnesses to the Oval Office signing said they did not know the vice president had played any part.

Excellent reporting (finally!) from the Washington Post. A big two-part article, sheer terror, like a Tom Clancy novel gone bad.

Just how neutered, how "owned" was the rest of the White House help:

Powell asked for a meeting with Bush. The same day, Jan. 25, 2002, Cheney's office struck a preemptive blow. It appeared to come from Gonzales, a longtime Bush confidant whom the president nicknamed "Fredo." Hours after Powell made his request, Gonzales signed his name to a memo that anticipated and undermined the State Department's talking points. The true author has long been a subject of speculation, for reasons including its unorthodox format and a subtly mocking tone that is not a Gonzales hallmark.

A White House lawyer with direct knowledge said Cheney's lawyer, Addington, wrote the memo. Flanigan passed it to Gonzales, and Gonzales sent it as "my judgment" to Bush [Read the memo]. If Bush consulted Cheney after that, the vice president became a sounding board for advice he originated himself.

Remember, this is Cheney's M.O. He did this with the bullshit leaks about Iraq having WMDs, owning Tim Russell by appearing to corroborate a story his chief henchman Scooter Libby had leaked to Judith Miller at the New York Times.

He did this when he chose himself as Bush's Vice Presidential running mate -- remember when he was running the search committee and ended up recommending himself...surprise surprise?

But it's not just Cheney to blame. Per Steve Benen at TPM:

The article is not explicit, but an underlying theme of the Washington Post's profile on Dick Cheney is that his unprecedented power is only possible because Bush is anxious to get out of the way...

...I'm reminded of the embarrassing point in 2004 in which the President agreed to talk to the 9/11 Commission, but only if Cheney could sit with Bush, and help answer questions, during the discussion...

...Cheney has routinely been the "surrogate President," with Bush putting his signature on the VP's ideas (military commissions, domestic warrantless-searches) because the VP told him it was the right thing to do.

Indeed, when it came to ignoring the Geneva Conventions, Cheney made his decision before Bush did...

...Meet George W. Bush, the not-so-innocent bystander of his own presidency.

Last month at the first Republican 2008 Presidential candidates debate, Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney cried out, "Double Guantanamo!"

There's only one sane response. Two-for-one these guys. Hello President Pelosi.

The Torture Party

Thanks to President Cheney and Co-Presidente Bush, and the emasculating lock-step loyalty the Republican Party leaders feel they have to maintain with their crime-ridden Administration, every GOP candidate on stage at Tuesday night's South Carolina debate except for John McCain came out proudly for torture as an American military interrogation policy, reversing two hundred thirty years of U.S. policy, reinforcing our newly minted image as villains to the world, and laying bare the willful self-bankrupting of morality in hysterical pursuit of desperate political advantage.

Check out this terrifying segment, commencing with a hypothetical concoction that plays like a plug for Fox's own 24 series, how odd considering they were co-sponsors broadcasting the debate. The undead Brit Hume intones that "the questions in this round with be predicated on a fictional but we think plausible" multiple shopping mall bombed terrorism on U.S. soil scenario.

That's right; this supposedly serious GOP debate descends into a network consumer products spin-off product -- 24: The Party Game.

McCain leads off the question of how hard much you'll unleash your thug class in Guantanamo, like that prison has always been a standard institution of our country, like the question isn't how you get the information, it's just how quickly and completely you are willing to shed your scruples. As a criteria for President, no less. As criteria for manliness, in some berserk Sin City America 2007.

McCain, to his credit and an absolutely silent response in the hall, lays out a simple and moral opposition to torture:

"When I was in Vietnam one of the things that sustained us as we underwent torture ourselves was the knowledge that if we had our positions reversed and we were the captors, we would not impose that kind of treatment on them.

How odd that suddenly no soldier can be sure of this from his government. To hear these commandantettes speak, no soldier could doubt that somewhere else we are torturing a suspected enemy. Think of our three soldiers still held in an unknown location by Al Queda. Now that we're a torturing country, what's to hold any of these three together when their thumbs are shoved under the screws?

Giuliani, Tancredo and Romney all handle their Dantesque embrace of fascism with different flavors. Former mayor Rudy goes for repressing the thought, giving carte blanche to whatever thugs and turning back to the dinner party as if nothing is happen, ignore the screams in the cellar:

In the hypothetical that you gave me, which assumes that we know there is going to be another attack and these people know about it, I would tell the people who had to do the interrogation to use every method they can think of. Shouldn’t be torture, but every method they can think of.

Nicely equivocated, revealing an empty vessel of a man. At least Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO) goes for the crazy:

You say that nuclear devices have gone off in the United States, more are planned, and we are wondering about whether waterboarding would a bad thing to do? I’m looking for Jack Bauer at that time, let me tell you.

Fox must love this. Another plug! Unsolicited!

But the medal for most brazenly hollow, a man who's sole driving ambition appears to be the picture in Webster's when you look up the word "pandering," is moral midget former Governor Mitt Romney:

Now you said the person's going to be at Guantanamo. I'm glad they're at Guantanamo. I don't want them on our soil, I want them on Guantanamo where they don't get the access to lawyers they get when they're on our soil. I don't want them in our prisons, I want them there. Some people have said we ought to close Guantanamo. My view is we oughtta double Guantanamo.

Double Guantanamo. To the most wildly enthusiastic applause of the night. It even sounds rehearsed, his poor, doomed soul.

And here Mitt is explaining why we have a gulag of ex-Soviet republics we have sent prisoners through in hiding. Because to him and his kind Guantanamo isn't America, it's a kind of way station America. It's a protectorate, a Guam, a place that we don't have to behave morally because he's demarcating it as a twilight zone of American moral principle. Oh, it's the American military operating on American-owned soil. But you don't get your right to legal representation there, you don't get treated like a citizen even if you are one. You are in Bush's, Cheney's and, he can almost taste it, Romney-directed thugland.

Double Guantanamo. Did he intend for that moniker to stick? Is it a badge he hopes to ride to the election?

Judging by the response of the GOP stalwarts and elites in the room, they want to be the Torture Party. They've already sold their soles, a Tony Soprano breaking out in every one of them. Their sense of their own rightness is their new religion, and it justifies inflicting anything on another human, guilty upon capture, if they're just dropped in the twilight zone and the fiction is allowed to usurp true reality.

Here's the scoop: the ends don't automatically justify the means. They didn't for Nixon with Watergate and don't for George Bush or Dick Cheney when they willfully deceived America into their misbegotten war. The means themselves quickly metastasize into Original Sin, the shit you can't wipe off your shoe, no matter how hard you try to mask the stink with misleading, self-hypnotizing rhetoric.

McCain is right. Only when you actually have the moral high ground through your actions, not your exceptionalism, can you ever find peace, no matter what you might be forced to endure. America won't be at peace with itself until these men and their medieval ways are banished to the dustbin of history.

The alternative can only be the decline and fall of our very own civilization.