The antiwar crowd is heating up the call for a Bush era 'truth commission.' They are being led by Senator Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. This group opposed the war on terror. They think we can stop al Queda by using the criminal justice system. Giving terrorists, who are willing to commit suicide for their cause, a lawyer and threatening them with a few years in jail will not be enough to deter them. Why is it okay for police to taser a uncooperative drunk, but torture when the military pours a little water up a terrorist's nose?
Calls grow for Bush-era 'truth commission'
Debate is heating up in the United States on establishing a "truth commission" to investigate whether the Bush administration abused its legal powers under the guise of its "war on terror."
"Nothing has done more damage to America's place in the world than the revelation that this nation stretched the law and the bounds of executive power to authorize torture and cruel treatment," said Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
He opened a hearing on Wednesday pressing for such an investigation saying it was badly needed as each week brought new revelations of alleged abuses under the administration of former US president George W. Bush. (excerpt) read more at Breitbart.com
With the economy still in trouble, this won't get off the ground. I just don't think people are interested in prosecuting Bush for things in the past when everything in the present and future is uncertain. And even though Bush exceeded his power, nobody is going to actually prosecute anybody. Bush expanded the powers of the presidency and Obama wants that power, too, and he has it. Bottom line: this is just a bunch of bluster.
As far as being against the "War on Terror," it might be useful to consider an alternative to the current course. I'm pretty sure there is a better way to battle al-Qaeda than getting into nation-building, especially in nations where al-Qaeda does not reside. Getting bogged down in the internals of Iraq and Afghanistan have made the apprehension of al-Qaeda and/or bin Laden next to impossible.
You don't have to be a pacifist to be against our current wars. Pat Buchanan being an example. There are plenty of nationalists who don't think foreign wars were called for. They supported a strike against our foes but no occupying forces.
I think it odd that these big tough guys talking about doing what needs to be done, claiming they are doing the right thing, are hiding from the light. If they are right, why do they fear the truth getting out about how they used the resources we lent them? If we torture the opposition to scare them straight, then it doesn't make much sense to hide the fact.
Carl: You give them too much credit. I seem to remember when the war on terror was central in peoples minds, Congress decided it would be a good time to look into steroid abuse in baseball. I don't think anyone of importance would do time over this, but I do think Congress would entertain it. Battling Al-Qaeda is best done by cutting their funding, precision strikes with tech, financial pressure on local governments, and removing their motivations (our subservience to Israel)
So you're OK with Bush using obviously faked data to lie us into war with Iraq? You don't want to hold a president accountable for illegal actions while in office?
I'll have to remind you of this stance when Obama is out of office.
Post a Comment