Brodner's Cartoon du Jour: Crusading and Morally Downright Upright Spanish Judge of the Day
SIX of the Bush gang are under special consideration for indictment by Baltasar Garzón, the Spanish investigative judge who ordered the arrest of Augusto Pinochet. It is said that it is "highly probable" that the case will go forward and arrest warrants will be issued. The charges will be for torture and mistreatmant of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay under the Geneva Conventions. ALBERTO GONZALES, JOHN YOO, DOUGLAS FEITH are the names we see in the paper. Of course the US is expected to ignore calls for extradition. And it may be difficult for evidence to be compiled. But isn’t it possible that the evidence is in mountains and there for the asking? And, tried in absentia, these party animals could find themselves prisoners forever in the US. And maybe have enough leftover hubris to travel and wind up cooling their heels in some foreign hoosegow? One never knows, does one.
Page 1 of 1 
They did what they did in order to protect the country
-
tagged as:
- solution
If the one world government types put out an arrest order like they illegally did for Pinochet, interfering in the solidarity of Bolivia by arresting that man when his own country should have been given the authority to do that.
The Bush administration did what they had to do to protect Democracy from the incursone of totalitarian terrorists. America will not let this gang of one world order mafia typpes arrest our great leaders. It is a time of war and we will not be safe until Osama Bin Laden is caught. Democrats will not do this, because is takes Republicans. And so you see, they cannot be held responsible for what they were forced to do while in office, no matter what the Obama administratin tells the U.N. to do.
Instead, they should be admonished for what happened. That should be all that is necessary. Punishing them beyond that would be like punishing Abraham Lincoln for winning the Civel War.
Re: They did what they did in order to protect the country
Troll alert!!!
Torture, et al.
Deane:
If I did not know better I would be guessing that you are sarcastically mocking yourself. While the pending incitements may not be legitimate, some of these assholes, especially Gonzales, did far more to torture we the citizens of the USA (by brokering influence in the US courts) then anything he possibly could have done in GitMo
Respectfully submitted~
Absolute leader of the Troll Kingdom (for life)
Terror Terrorism Terrorist
Hey Deane, Wake Up! No one even knows what terror, terrorist or terrorism means and this is the real problem.
Since 2001 when Bush declared war on “terrorism” I have basically said the same thing over and over again like a broken record
Terrorism must be defined since we are war with it. At present we are at war against an indefinable term, hence an ambiguous enemy, which in essence means the entire apparatus for this war is from a legal standpoint a sham and represents a form of terrorism itself. When the state imposes itself upon citizens under the umbrella of all that the term terrorism embodies in the sense of say the Patriot Act or the new FISA and does so falsely; that is if the Big Brother O’Brien’s from Ministry of Love (the house torture) make a mistake and arrest an innocent citizen (and what citizen is innocent when they are all guilty of thought crime) then for those affected the state suddenly becomes an organ of tyranny. (acts sanctioned by the government which are diametrically opposed to the very foundation of our democracy—in fact we can find in the patriot act and the new FISA the very grounds for why Thomas Jefferson penned the Declaration of Independence—the very grounds for why our forefathers stood on the battlefields of this nation to win our independence from the tyranny imposed upon us by King George)
That is the problem and the paradox. Calling this paradox by a new name (apparently the new head of Homeland Security wants to call terrorism a new name) will not remove the inherent tyranny. The tyranny can only be removed by limiting the scope of what is often called “terrorism” so that we do not find ourselves using the term loosely but rather in a well defined manner.
I do not think we should come up we a new term for terrorism but rather must seek out to define terrorism from a legal standpoint and then propose this definition in a formal manner before the UN and whereby an international agreement can be arrived upon which the world community as a whole agrees to. When that or if that is accomplished then we can speak intelligently about who the enemy is—until that occurs we are engaged in a war against an unknown undefined enemy which represents a sort Kafkaian realm of terrorism in its own right in which any of us could find ourselves held in the dungeon of a Pit and the Pendulum like condition—that is a world that is against our better natures.
For the sake of elucidating the present state of the Union I offer a quote on the nature of doublethink from the novel 1984!
“The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them....To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies — all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth.”
