BLOG VIEW | HEADLINE VIEW

ALL

GEEK

Who�s Our Best War Criminal?

TUESDAY APRIL 15 2008 6:00 AM

Submitted by FearTheReaper. Edited By erin_broadley.

TAGS: War Crimes, Waterboarding, Dick Cheney, Bush Administration

It really is difficult to pick the best war criminal in the White House. And make no mistake about it; several members of Bush�s cabinet are war criminals. Last week, ABC broke the story of their torture discussions and Bush backed the story up a couple of days later. If you don�t think they are war criminals, then you are a fucking idiot.

Highly placed sources said a handful of top advisers signed off on how the CIA would interrogate top al Qaeda suspects -- whether they would be slapped, pushed, deprived of sleep or subjected to simulated drowning, called waterboarding.

The high-level discussions about these "enhanced interrogation techniques" were so detailed, these sources said, some of the interrogation sessions were almost choreographed -- down to the number of times CIA agents could use a specific tactic.

Nice work, peeps. You are officially no better than the Japanese during WWII, some of who we prosecuted for waterboarding.

In the war crimes tribunals that followed Japan's defeat in World War II, the issue of waterboarding was sometimes raised. In 1947, the U.S. charged a Japanese officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for waterboarding a U.S. civilian. Asano was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor.

Back in the '60s, we still seemed to think it was a bad thing.

On Jan. 21, 1968, The Washington Post ran a front-page photo of a U.S. soldier supervising the waterboarding of a captured North Vietnamese soldier. The caption said the technique induced "a flooding sense of suffocation and drowning, meant to make him talk." The picture led to an Army investigation and, two months later, the court martial of the soldier.

Now, it is apparently different here in the good old USA. We have tossed our laws out the door and are having a torture party. Of course, the international community is not as retarded and villainous as the Bush Administration, and they still classify waterboarding as torture.

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

Shit, even crazy John McCain calls waterboarding a war crime.

... following World War II war crime trials were convened. The Japanese were tried and convicted and hung for war crimes committed against American POWs. Among those charges for which they were convicted was waterboarding.

The ABC News revelation of torture meetings in the White House is disturbing. Sure, we all knew they did it, but now it has been confirmed. And here are your war criminals!

They used to gather at the White House and sit around listening to stories from the CIA about how they were going to torture people. And not just once in a while � they heard about EVERY SINGLE PERSON TORTURED.

"It kept coming up. CIA wanted us to sign off on each one every time," said one high-ranking official who asked not to be identified. "They'd say, 'We've got so and so. This is the plan.'"

Sources said that at each discussion, all the Principals present approved.

You�d think these morons would have done everything they could to keep themselves out of the loop. Apparently they are actually dumber than I suspected. The CIA covered its ass and had these idiots sign off on every torture. Nice work.

Only Johnny Ashcroft was said to have been concerned about the blatant stupidity - which is pretty amazing considering how stupid he is.

Then-Attorney General Ashcroft was troubled by the discussions. He agreed with the general policy decision to allow aggressive tactics and had repeatedly advised that they were legal. But he argued that senior White House advisers should not be involved in the grim details of interrogations, sources said.

According to a top official, Ashcroft asked aloud after one meeting: "Why are we talking about this in the White House? History will not judge this kindly."

So, it�s legal, but it shouldn�t be talked about in the White House. Got it.

Now, one would expect our president to deny these accusations, right?
No. And why should he? Our press certainly won�t follow up � not when Obama is running around using the word �Bitter.�

"Well, we started to connect the dots in order to protect the American people." Bush told ABC News White House correspondent Martha Raddatz. "And yes, I'm aware our national security team met on this issue. And I approved."

Uh. What? Did you just�? Um. Man, I wish somebody cared, because you just threw yourself under the bus. Add one to the War Criminals list.

George W. Bush

But, nobody cares. It�s just a few war crimes. Take a look at this sweet AP headline about the horrifying revelations.

Cheney, others OK'd harsh interrogations.

�Harsh?� Seriously? "Harsh" is when you tell someone to fuck off. Pouring water into someone's mouth so their brain thinks they are drowning is "heinous." Wait, I want to write headlines for the AP.

Cheney Gives The Okey Dokey To Bad Boo Boos.

Cheney And Pals Say �Super� To Mouth Water Parties

Cheney Makes Water Sandwich For Bad Guys

Currently, the way things stand here in the US, if Congress does not forbid specific torture techniques as illegal, then they are totally legal. That�s how we are doing things. The Bush Administration claims that �severe mental or physical pain or suffering� is too broad.

They are just ignoring the fact that we prosecuted Japanese, our own soldiers and that Nazis were prosecuted by Norway for waterboarding. It is settled law. Hell, they are giving the finger to the Geneva Conventions.

We just don�t give a shit. Congress even amended the War Crimes Act, retroactively, to make sure those who committed war crimes would not be prosecuted. The Abu Ghraib scandal broke in early 2004. Any idiot breathing knows that was approved at the highest level, but we still re-elected Bush in 2004. The abuses of people at Guantanamo are well known to most. And the vast majority of people tortured in those two prisons are innocent.

Certainly nothing will happen in this country, but I wouldn�t write off the rest of the world. Augusto Pinochet was arrested in the UK in 1988 for war crimes in Chile. Our very own Henry Kissinger is wanted for questioning in France, Brazil, Chile, Spain, and Argentina because of Operation Condor. The people we have tortured in prisons have come from all over the world; they are citizens of many countries � all of whom can now attempt to prosecute these idiots for war crimes. Hopefully the number of countries Dick Cheney and his buddies can visit in the future are very limited.

123 Comments

PAGE:

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

... 9

Bastardo

Boston, MA

January 2005

APR 15, 2008 09:02 AM

I don't think they're stupid, I think they're incredibly delusional. Like real sick person crazy.
Either that or our administration is being run by sociopaths with no regard for human life.

PointBlank

New York, NY

November 2004

APR 15, 2008 09:09 AM

FearTheReaper said:
And here are your war criminals!

Gotta Catch 'Em Aaaallll! ! ! !

AmbientLight

Huntington Beach, CA

March 2005

APR 15, 2008 09:25 AM

"9/11..."

gogogone

I'm lost

May 2004

APR 15, 2008 09:38 AM

Thanks, FTR....One line that made me giggle out loud was definitely "Cheney Makes Water Sandwich For Bad Guys." Thanks for the great summary on this issue of retardation and hypocrisy that is the Bush administration.

rudeboy71

Chicago, IL

December 2004

APR 15, 2008 09:42 AM

Why do you think the CIA had them sign off on every torture technique? So it won't bite them on the ass later and the president and his cronies could just say they don't know what the CIA is talkking about. Just glad they (CIA) finally got smart and covered their asses.John Ashcroft was the only one uncomfortable with signing off on torture. He said that history will judge them harshly for this. No Shit!

livertarian

Fairfax, VA

February 2008

APR 15, 2008 09:53 AM

Disgusting. Torture is useless. We have no control over these madmen whatsoever. All you big government lovers: Suck it. Create an all-powerful government that doesn't answer to anyone, and look at the assholes who get the jobs.

livertarian

Fairfax, VA

February 2008

APR 15, 2008 10:11 AM

PointBlank said:

FearTheReaper said:
And here are your war criminals!

Gotta Catch 'Em Aaaallll! ! ! !

They won't get caught. You could elect an entirely Democratic federal gov't, and these assholes will still go free. Vote third party if you have any balls whatsoever. Reduce power for all, equally.

gogogone

I'm lost

May 2004

APR 15, 2008 10:13 AM

livertarian said:
Disgusting. Torture is useless. We have no control over these madmen whatsoever. All you big government lovers: Suck it. Create an all-powerful government that doesn't answer to anyone, and look at the assholes who get the jobs.

Huh? So suddenly government intervention (i.e., the larger group supporting the smaller group, like Medicare, Social Security) needs to "suck it" just because the same Bush Co. was elected twice?!?! I don't get it. If you go for the "not accountable to anyone" argument, I can't buy it...because isn't it your responsibility as an american citizen to make sure they do their jobs? I'm confused....(and american)

gogogone

I'm lost

May 2004

APR 15, 2008 10:16 AM

i suck at edititing! Sorry! (I also, don't think I can spell correctly the job of the person who grammar and edit checks...it's called something like "edditing."

...sidenote, I am a little drunk.

gogogone

I'm lost

May 2004

APR 15, 2008 10:23 AM

it's late in Japan!

bean

STAFF

Los Angeles, CA

APR 15, 2008 10:26 AM

I thought this was extremely relevant, so it's worth quoting...

Philadelphia Daily News asks Obama about ABC Report:

Here's his answer, in its entirety:

What I would want to do is to have my Justice Department and my Attorney General immediately review the information that's already there and to find out are there inquiries that need to be pursued. I can't prejudge that because we don't have access to all the material right now. I think that you are right, if crimes have been committed, they should be investigated. You're also right that I would not want my first term consumed by what was perceived on the part of Republicans as a partisan witch hunt because I think we've got too many problems we've got to solve.

So this is an area where I would want to exercise judgment -- I would want to find out directly from my Attorney General -- having pursued, having looked at what's out there right now -- are there possibilities of genuine crimes as opposed to really bad policies. And I think it's important-- one of the things we've got to figure out in our political culture generally is distinguishing betyween really dumb policies and policies that rise to the level of criminal activity. You know, I often get questions about impeachment at town hall meetings and I've said that is not something I think would be fruitful to pursue because I think that impeachment is something that should be reserved for exceptional circumstances. Now, if I found out that there were high officials who knowingly, consciously broke existing laws, engaged in coverups of those crimes with knowledge forefront, then I think a basic principle of our Constitution is nobody above the law -- and I think that's roughly how I would look at it.

The bottom line is that: Obama sent a clear signal that -- unlike impeachment, which he's ruled out and which now seems a practical impossibility -- he is at the least open to the possibility of investigating potential high crimes in the Bush White House. To many, the information that waterboarding -- which the United States has considered torture and a violation of law in the past -- was openly planned out in the seat of American government is evidence enough to at least start asking some tough questions in January 2009.

Coyotemike

Kearney, NE

May 2006

APR 15, 2008 10:33 AM

bean said:
I thought this was extremely relevant, so it's worth quoting...

SPOILERS! (Click to view)

Philadelphia Daily News asks Obama about ABC Report:

Here's his answer, in its entirety:

Worth quoting, but are there extradition treaties with Paraguay?

OpticNerve

Waltham, MA

November 2003

APR 15, 2008 10:45 AM

This administration is so fond of allying themselves with Jesus, yet they forget this choice nugget of wisom from him: 'Whatsover you do to the least of you, you do to me'.