Corn on Hardball: Prosecute Cheney? (Video)

Amen to previous entry. There seems to be 2 contradictory views to this system. Conservatives appear to be comfortable with a model that the government is there to make our decisions and to protect us from harm. Liberals demand a place at the table and require our government officials represent them by voting as we instruct - thereby making government our servant rather than our master. We MUST have access to information in order for us to exercise our rights. Bush had it wrong. We are the deciders.

It's a nice idea to "look forward" and to get past what has been done wrong during the Bush administration. Our policies will hopefully change but why not seek to prosecute those who were responsible? Dick Cheney seemed (and seems) especially scornful of the law and should be at the top of the list of those to be prosecuted. I'm not a lawyer, but I have always believed the "War on Terror" is NOT a war, but rather a policy.

Without any real time oversight, accountability is always found looking back.

It is not regression it is justice.

Hang these slugs from the yard arm or have them answer in the dock at the Hague.

One or the other.

The reality of authority is simple. We are for the most part slaves to authority—it is Hollywood that paint the false reality of people being "heroes." (well they show us the exception not the rule) As long as that which stands on the top of the hierarchy of authority are morally corrupt we will by means of our obedience to authority commit the atrocities asked of us to commit, but for our loyalty to this perversion we will be held accountable and not those who asked us to commit the atrocity—that is the truth of the Bush administration, it is their trade mark in regards to how they operated.

It has been clinically shown that around 65% of the population will obey orders from a person of authority where by most people will be coerced into committing an act that would have resulted in the death of an individual. This person of authority does not need to be a General or Captain in the military but rather a simple actor dressed in a laboratory jacket who is playing the role of a researcher doing an important study and who will pay you 150 dollars if you will simply ask a person some questions and if the person answers the question wrong you will then be asked to push a button. Each time the answer is incorrect you are told to push the next button—there are five buttons and when you get to button five (65% of the population on average reaches button five the dose of electricity would correspond to a lethal dose of electricity). Thus when the question of who should be held accountable for the Abu Ghraib atrocity I think we can say it is those who are in charge—because a military prison in a time of war is not Mchale's Navy. People obey orders and if they do not obey orders they are shot! That is the punishment for refusing a direct order in a time of war. So the real question in regards to Abu Ghraid is who was giving the orders?

But what of this war on terrorism?

Security is not mafia like protection—where a couple of thugs enter your store walk over to cash register and take your money and say, «now you are safe» but if you refuse to pay they'll beat you to death—nothing like protection.

The protection and security of the society builds first from having and respecting one another's rights. These rights are not obvious but they are written down in the constitution. These basic concepts were derived from the realities imposed upon our nation in its birth. The Declaration of Independence is a wake up call in regards to those «protections» good government must ensure and uphold if the members of society are in fact to be protected. Terrorists as the Bush administration will have us fight are by the very nature of our laws, not terrorists but criminals who must be brought to justice for crimes they commit when they commit them here in the US and not «over there» in foreign lands where we have no jurisdiction and where it is up to the governments of those nations to deal with.

A basic sampling of our concept of being protected and having security builds from these 10 principles:

First Amendment – Establishment Clause, Free Exercise Clause; freedom of speech, of the press, and of assembly; right to petition
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Second Amendment – Right to keep and bear arms.
A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Third Amendment – Protection from quartering of troops.
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Fourth Amendment – Protection from unreasonable search and seizure.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Fifth Amendment – due process, double jeopardy, self-incrimination, eminent domain.
No person shall be held to answer for any capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Sixth Amendment – Trial by jury and rights of the accused; Confrontation Clause, speedy trial, public trial, right to counsel
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

Seventh Amendment – Civil trial by jury.
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Eighth Amendment – Prohibition of excessive bail and cruel and unusual punishment.
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Ninth Amendment – Protection of rights not specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Tenth Amendment – Powers of states and people.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

A war on terrorism means to ensure that these rights are defended not removed! Remove them and you live under the rule of tyranny! It is that simple. It required a revolution to win these rights so do not give them up—because they are worth fighting for. The Declaration of Independence is a declaration about the abuse of power and the abuse of rights. A war on terrorism means a war to establish our rights, which cannot be done by taking them away!