Without a doubt, here’s your quote of the day. Not because it was said in an incredibly memorable way, but simply because of the content — and all it implies. From the Washington Post:
“And in a broad swipe at the Bush administration’s lawyers, Obama nullified every legal order and opinion on interrogations issued by any lawyer in the executive branch after Sept. 11, 2001.”
The Fray
Leland says:
They have to commit crimes first.
President Obama promised to end the war on terror. Looks like he is making good on that promise.
We lost.
gnomic says:
Great. Lets have an investigation and, if necessary, a prosecution. I don’t care if they are put in jail or not, so long as justice is done.
And we lost the war long before Obama came to office. It was lost when Bush went to war without a plan. It was lost when Bush lied and subverted democracy. It was lost when Bush spent us into fiscal ruin. It was lost when Bush illegally wiretapped Americans. It was lost when Bush’s minions outed a covert CIA agent for political purposes. It was lost when Bush suspended HAbeous Corpus. It was lost long before 4,000 of our finest died for no good purpose.
If Bin Lauden hands out awards, his highest award should go to Bush for damaging America for more than Bin Lauden dreamed.
Leland says:
Gnomic, it is amazing that who can write as well as you do can also believe the complete bunk you post here.
Richard says:
Ditto, gnomic.
How can you win or lose a war on a friggin’ tactic, Leland, … except by using one terrorist attack to turn the country into a police state and usurp your own citizens’ rights?
Remind me, Leland: When was the last terrorist attack on U.S. soil? Also remind me who “hates our freedoms.”
Nice work, Osama bin Laden and all those who bought into Bush’s scare tactics.
gnomic says:
“Believe the complete bunk?” To which bunk do you refer. All of these are well documented, at least to the extent that the Bush administration couldn’t hide thier crimes through classification, obstruction of justice, and using 3rd parties to accomplish thier crimes.
And if theier defense to these crimes is that “they saved us” then why should they fear justice? That’s why we have juries. Surly 12 reasonable people could conclude that that they were innocent if they can make a case for thier actions. I’d sit on that jury and might conclude that they had to act as they did despite my loathing. Of course, I don’t think that I could find him not guilty of betraying his oath of office, specifically to “defend the constitution” since his administration did everything but wipe thier collective backside with it.
BTW, has anyone found “executive privledge” in the constituion? I found congressional oversight in there. For a self-proclaimed “strict constructionist” his claims seem pretty odd. Perhaps that phrase doesn’t mean what his thinks it does.
tommy says:
A war against terrorism is a war which can never be won, based simply on the fact that it is a war.
We never could have ‘won’ such a war; the best we could have done was political masturbation, and even at that, we failed. Yet we still have to wash our hands.
Mission Accomplished.
gnomic says:
The question remaining is “Will the administration be held accountable for its past crimes?” Or will we violate several treaties, including the Geneva Convention, and leave it the world to convene a Nuremburg-style tribunal, putting future soldiers at greater risk of “enhanced interrogation techniques” by our enemies in future wars.