NY Times Editorial Slams Bush Administration on the Rule of Law and Human Decency

by: wvblueguy

Mon Dec 31, 2007 at 15:17:56 PM EST

The Editorial today in the NY Times speaks for itself... I think they've got it right particularly when they say theres even more issues not covered in the editorial. Read it by clicking here.

There are too many moments these days when we cannot recognize our country. Sunday was one of them, as we read the account in The Times of how men in some of the most trusted posts in the nation plotted to cover up the torture of prisoners by Central Intelligence Agency interrogators by destroying videotapes of their sickening behavior. It was impossible to see the founding principles of the greatest democracy in the contempt these men and their bosses showed for the Constitution, the rule of law and human decency.

It was not the first time in recent years we’ve felt this horror, this sorrowful sense of estrangement, not nearly. This sort of lawless behavior has become standard practice since Sept. 11, 2001.

The Editorial finishes up with an important message to the voters of our nation...

These are not the only shocking abuses of President Bush’s two terms in office, made in the name of fighting terrorism. There is much more — so much that the next president will have a full agenda simply discovering all the wrongs that have been done and then righting them.

We can only hope that this time, unlike 2004, American voters will have the wisdom to grant the awesome powers of the presidency to someone who has the integrity, principle and decency to use them honorably. Then when we look in the mirror as a nation, we will see, once again, the reflection of the United States of America. (emphasis mine)

It is so important that this message gets out to our nation not just to the readers of the NY Times.

Senator Rockefeller at Center of Torture Storm

by: wvblueguy

Sun Dec 09, 2007 at 22:32:21 PM EST

Today the Washington Post in an article written by Joby Warrick and Dan Eggen titled Hill Briefed on Waterboarding in 2002... In Meetings, Spy Panel Chiefs Did Not Protest, Officials say. Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) was one of those leaders...

Yet long before "waterboarding" entered the public discourse, the CIA gave key legislative overseers about 30 private briefings, some of which included descriptions of that technique and other harsh interrogation methods, according to interviews with multiple U.S. officials with firsthand knowledge.

With one known exception, no formal objections were raised by the lawmakers briefed about the harsh methods during the two years in which waterboarding was employed, from 2002 to 2003, said Democrats and Republicans with direct knowledge of the matter. The lawmakers who held oversight roles during the period included Pelosi and Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) and Sens. Bob Graham (D-Fla.) and John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), as well as Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-Fla.) and Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan).

As a result of this article which can be read here, the blogs are full of criticism of Democratic Party leaders who were thorughly briefed by the Bush administration on the use of torture starting in 2002. These included our own Senator Jay Rockefeller and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. With one exception virtually every blog I have read faults these two for just going along with the concept of torture. Rather than reiterating everything that has been said I suggest reading Glenn Greenwald at Salon (watch the ad to see his post) by clicking here.  Glenn wastes no words with his feelings about Democratic Party leaders and Jay Rockefeller...

Jay Rockefeller was one of the key Democrats briefed on the torture methods who never objected. But it's far worse than that. In September, 2006, Rockefeller was one of 12 Senate Democrats to vote in favor of the Military Commissions Act, one of the principal purposes of which was to explicitly authorize the CIA's "enhanced interrogation program" to proceed (even though it continues to be illegal under the Geneva Conventions). Thus, not only did Rockefeller remain silent when continuously briefed on illegal torture methods by the CIA, he then voted to legalize those methods by voting in favor of one of the most Draconian laws in modern American history. That law also retroactively immunized government officials from any liability for past lawbreaking.

Rockefeller is not just any Democrat. He is the individual whom the Democratic Senate caucus thereafter elected -- and still chooses -- to lead them on all matters relating to intelligence. Just consider how compromised he is and they are when it comes to investigating abuses by the intelligence community over the last six years. Rockefeller was complicit in all of those abuses, and the Democrats voted for him -- and still support him -- as their Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. How can Rockefeller possibly preside over meaningful investigations into conduct and policies -- including the destruction of the videotapes and the conduct which those videotapes would reveal -- of which he approved? And how can Senate Democrats pretend to be outraged at such policies when the leader they chose supports them?

Virtually every major blog I have read on the Post article expresses outrage and disappointment in our party leaders that acquiesed to the thought of torture.  There are a few that have excused the acceptance of torture in light of the proximity to September 11th.  It is not acceptable... Senator Rockefeller needs to stand up and say he was wrong in tolerating torture maybe then he at least can in some measure stand up to the horrible wrong doings of the Bush administration.  I for one look forward to his answers on this topic.

Senator Rockefeller does not have to worry about reelection, however, we do deserve an explanation as to why he again has disappointed so many of us by his behavior.