Kook Left Gets Kookier
July 19th, 2008 at 02:09am Mark Noonan
I mean, for crying out loud, these people are just nuts:
During Jane Mayer’s event today at New America promoting her penetrating new book, The Dark Side, a topic came up during the Q & A that I’d like to expand on–the possibility of establishing a truth commission for the Bush administration’s transgressions. The idea has been getting some play recently, both from Nick Kristof in the NYT and scattered across some lefty blogs (a funny parody here, another suggestion here). The South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission is generally held up as the model for such bodies, which don’t have formal judicial power but instead serve primarily as instruments for the discovery of past wrongdoings by governments.
So far, when each instance of misconduct has been revealed — from the destruction of CIA interrogation tapes and waterboarding to extraordinary renditions and habeas-corpus-free detention of prisoners at Guantanamo — individual solutions have been sought and some individual actors have been put forth to be held accountable. But this approach is piecemeal at best and does not get at the connective tissue and the systematization of abuses.
A truth commission, however, would provide a more holistic approach to the violations that have been committed or ordered by individuals and agencies within the government. A commission would serve as an opportunity to look back and expose where the administration started to go wrong in its decision-making process; allow those whose rights have been violated to be heard; and give Americans on the whole a chance to cleanse our national conscience–and our image abroad.
I guess they really believe their own press releases - these people haven’t entirely been playing a political game (though there’s a huge amount of that in this); they seem to actually believe that we’re out there violating the constitution, torturing prisoners, randomly wiretapping innocent Americans, and generally acting like the worst people, ever. This is what they think about a center/right GOP President who regularly ticked off his own conservative base by reaching across the aisle to work with Democrats. Can you imagine what they’d feel like with a completely conservative President who was determined to fight it out tooth and nail on each issue?
This insanity on the left really has got to stop - this is the stuff with which civil wars are made. You keep talking yourself into thinking that you’re boxed in with no way out, and you’ll then start thinking of turning to violence. I think the only thing keeping the lid on these kooks is the fact they are convinced that Obama will win…but what if Obama loses? People who think we need a Truth and Reconciliation Commission simply will not accept an Obama defeat…they will very swiftly convince themselves that they have been robbed…and thus be convinced that there is no way to work within the normal political framework.
Look, lefties, President Bush really isn’t evil…and he really isn’t dumb…and he really didn’t deceive us into liberating Iraq. All of that BS was cooked up by the leftwing ANSWER right after 9/11…the typical lies communists put together about anything America does. Think about it - President Bush is being accused of the very same crimes as Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon and Reagan were accused of. Unless you want to believe that all of these men were criminals, you should grow a little suspicious that every time since WWII (ie, since we stopped being allied with communism) that we’ve engaged in any sort of warfare, the US President is accused of using chemical warfare, torturing prisoners, fighting for money, spying on Americans…its all a bunch of nonsense, people. The most transparant and stupid anti-American propganda…garbage even Goebbles would be embarrassed to use. Stop buying it - understand that the people we elevate to the White House are generally decent human beings who sincerely want to do whats best…and the servants of your goverment, especially those in the military, are so honor-bound and professional that they just wouldn’t do the sort of acts they are accused of doing.
Wake up. Stop being kooks. Get a grip on reality.
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Kook Left, President Bush, War on Terror
32 Comments
1. french student | July 19th, 2008 at 4:47 am
Torturing prisonners? Photos have been released. the fact that one or two sergeants have been used as fuses to protect the higher-ups may have been enough for you, but believe me the rest of the world is not fooled.
Wiretaping innocent americains? The “terror watch list” has reached a million people. A million terrorists or terrorist sympathisers would not NEED to be sneaky. They could take out Washington DC , wipe both chambers out and have a decent shot at the president, all using only legally-bought firearms. I think it is fair to say some of these are innocent americains… And that some of those were wiretapped.
Breaking the constitution? You can argue about the letter of it, but I think its intent has been violated rather clearly.
I do think it is high time something was done to study the actions of this white house as a whole.
If screwing an intern was enough to get demands of resignation , I cannot fathom the reason why screwing two countries over elicits fervent support from the diehards and only a mild reaction from the majority. Dammit, there have been more americain soldiers killed in Iraq, which had nothing to do with 9/11 and was therefore an unwarranted war of aggression, than there were civilians killed on 9/11.
And seeing the price of that war and its results, incompetence alone, even the ADMITTED incompetence on the intelligence and planning fronts, should be enough for any honest president to resign in shame and go breed goats in the appalachians.
2. bongoman | July 19th, 2008 at 6:22 am
Not sure if a Truth & Reconciliation Commission is what is called for, but something needs to be done about this Administration’s insistence that the President has the power to arrest U.S. citizens and legal residents inside the U.S., and imprison them indefinitely in a military prison, without charging them with any crime, based on his assertion that the imprisoned individual is an “enemy combatant.”
That sounds tyrannical to me. Add torture and warrantless eavesdropping to the mix and it starts to look really bad.
3. Treeline | July 19th, 2008 at 7:02 am
This is truly the first administration that is challenging the basis of our checks and balance government. From what I see it is kind of scary.
Take the firing of the U.S Attorneys. Bush said he had nothing to do with their firing and didn’t know about it. Fair enough, then how in the next breath can he claim executive privilege for Karl Rove. And now you have Rove thumbing his nose at Congress and the American people. Don’t even the wingnuts, not the average Republican, see the danger here and the precedent for future Presidential power grabs?
4. Chester Llymol | July 19th, 2008 at 8:33 am
Personally, when it comes to Bush, I would prefer Nuremberg Trials from Germany over Truth Commissions from South Africa.
5. neocon | July 19th, 2008 at 8:56 am
Our liberals want to prosecute the Bush administration for war crimes because of the administrations war, and impending victory, against an oppressive ideology that has killed tens of thousand of people across this planet for three decades.
Now, which party truly stands for life, liberty, freedom and democracy?
Maybe if we give the jihadists proper burials, the left will feel a little better. It’s a sad day in the liberal world when an oppressive ideology is confronted and defeated.
6. Magnum Serpentine | July 19th, 2008 at 10:19 am
Nicely said French and bongoman. Neocon, if someone committed a crime you haul them befor a court of law.
Besides Warcrimes, george has wiretapped citizens with-out warrents, held peace activist to keep them from attending peace protest. Locked up average citizens for months on end just because they oppose him.
Need I go on? Oh yes then there is that disastrous george war in iraq.
A vote for McSame is a vote for the third term of george.
7. neocon | July 19th, 2008 at 10:31 am
Mags,
I think I prefer McSame to Obush. Amazing how much Obush is sounding like george these days huh? 2nd amendment, FISA, faith based, etc…..
Secondly, let’s then prosecute the entire body of Congress who gave the authorization to the President, let’s prosecute Bill Clinton for mandating the “regime change in Iraq” policy.
And you didn’t provide any evidence of average citizens being spied on, locked up or held back from protesting. Why?
Mark, seldom do I advocate banning a poster, but Mags needs to go away. He offers nothing but baseless propaganda and completely juvenile, immature, ill informed rants which have grown tedious. Please elminate this moron from the ranks of the more reasoned liberals that post here.
adios maggie
neocon
8. bagni | July 19th, 2008 at 10:31 am
markier
we’ve found it’s the terrestial extremists
the earthlings who preside on the far right and left
that are the kookiest
so to your point, would agree the far left = kooky
and since you are the far right
you’re quite kooky too
which means you and neocons
galactic grip on reality could also be questioned??
9. neocon | July 19th, 2008 at 10:46 am
bags,
your assertion that mark and I are far right
demonstrates your lack of intellectual might
in your struggle to label us
you ignore a noble effort that is just
and indirectly perpetuates Islams crimes against humanity
and that clearly exposes your insanity
have an inter-gallactic day
peace, neocon
10. Mark Noonan | July 19th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Bagni,
You know better than that - I’m not so much “far right” as, well, Catholic…which means, with proper respect due to my non-Catholic brothers and sisters, that I’m right about everything.
:o)
11. Mark Noonan | July 19th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
neocon,
He is annoying, but he’s mostly on topic and no obscene…so, like our brother Jeremiah, he’s entirely cool even when he says things I find rather astounding.
12. Mark Noonan | July 19th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
french, bongo, treeline and chester,
The really sad thing is that you believe that nonsense…honestly, you have to stop. Its unhealthy for you, unhealthy for America. Purge yourselves of the ANSWER poison…you have, indeed, been lied to, but not by President Bush.
Think about it - you can oppose him and work for Obama’s victory in the hope of a complete change in policy; that is fine…but to think of President Bush in any way, shape or form as a criminal? That is just insane.
13. Sarah Bloch | July 19th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
“This insanity on the left really has got to stop - this is the stuff with which civil wars are made. ”
Nope this is the stuff that the end of the Nixon adminsitration was made of. What’s the problem with this really? i’ll tell you. It has no judicial power but it will allow the Truth to be told. If a handful of people from the Bush administration come forward and tell the truth about the energy meetings and the e-mails say then all the defenses by pundits like youself will be rendered nothing more than the political grandstanding we always suspected they were.
As long as the real story remains unknown you can claim the moral high ground. When the members of the administration who want to clear their consciences as McClelland has done start to come forth then the soil on that high ground start to get a little muddy and eventually begins to slide you down in the valley with the rest of the partisans.
So you are willing to say Noonan that no one in the Bush White House has done nothing on direct orders from a member of the Bush inner circle Chief of Staff, White House Counsel, Political director, VP Chief of Staff that would politically embarass the President if it were known?
14. Fredrick Schwartz | July 19th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
5. neocon | July 19th, 2008 at 8:56 am
Jingoistic nonsense.
15. french student | July 19th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
Mark
What exactly have I said that is a lie?
Were photos not released of actual torture in an americain military prison?
Did or did not the terror watch list reach a million name a few days ago?
Did or did not more americain soldiers die in Iraq than civilians on the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the WTC?
Did or did not Saddam have ANYthing to do with said terrorist attack? If the answer is no, how is the war in Iraq anything else than a war of aggression and conquest? (hint : you were not invited by the population)
Do these things not violate the spirit (if not the letter) of the constitution?
Is your country safer now than it was in 2002, Mark?
You even tout as a success in Iraq a drop in violence that brings the levels back to 2004, a year after your invasion. That is not peacetime violence rates, Mark.
You can accuse people of lying. It is your right. If you do, though, you’d better be specific, and document your proof, or you just seem stupid.
16. Tractatus | July 19th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
Mark Noonan telling people to “get a grip on reality” = pot ranting about the kettle’s coloring. You’ve been out in the ether for a very long time, Noonan. “Reality” is not a strong suit of yours at all. Your refusal to acknowledge very basic facts that contradict your preferred narratives ensures that reality will continue to be a foreign land to you. It’s unhealthy to put so much time and effort into creating an alternative world, Noonan. Reality may be messy sometimes, but it’s much easier to deal with in the long run. You really should join us here sometime.
Oh, and still agitating for civil war? That’s just plain sad.
17. neocon | July 19th, 2008 at 3:26 pm
french,
Hard to believe you’re still seeking answers to 3-5 year old questions. Do you have a learning disability? Or are you just disingenously offering up more propaganda in an effort to look enlightened?
I vote for the latter.
peace, neocon
18. french student | July 19th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
Neocon
Mark hes implied that the points I made were false. I merely ask him to detail his position. You are welcome to point out where I said anything false if you will.
19. neocon | July 19th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
french,
I grow very tired of answering the same question by liberals year in and year out. I could literally go back to 2005 and find the EXACT SAME questions by one of your deluded liberals that was debated and debunked and I just don’t care to rehash the same garbage.
Evidently you seem to think circular arguments are topical and enlightening, when in reality they are sophmoric, pedestrian and tedious.
It does explain your mindset though that you are unable to advance past years old propaganda.
have a deluded day
peace, neocon
20. french student | July 19th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
Then please by all means post a link. Let me read your answer that you gave then.
What did I say that was not true, Mark, Neocon?
21. neocon | July 19th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
I will let you do your own circular, mindless search for the previous posts french. Why do liberals always want someone else to do something for them???
Although much of what you posited is a matter of opinion, therefore can not be proven one way or the other.
Evidently though you like to wallow in rehashed history, so I will give you an assignment. Tell us all how those points you raised are relevant, and how they will further liberty, and freedom from oppression.
have fun
neocon
22. neocon | July 19th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
french: Is our country safer than in 2002?
YES.
prove me wrong.
neocon
23. Mark Noonan | July 19th, 2008 at 4:18 pm
french,
Well, I guess if having someone naked in a picture is torture, I suspect you’ll want to bring the porno industry up on charges before the International Criminal Court…sorry, torture is, well, torture. Bamboo shoots up fingernails, burning people with lighted cigarettes, depriving them of food and water, breaking their kneecaps…you know, absolutely horrible and inhuman things…a few soldiers violating orders and good discipline doesn’t rise to that definition.
Now, as for the watch list -
It is a catch-all database of everyone suspected of being connected to terrorism - by its nature its going to get a lot of people on it who are either not connected at all, or who are connected very slightly. But what we’re trying to do is monitor very secretive organizations which have highly complex relationships, some of which fall into the legitimate world. It ain’t easy, in other words, figuring out who, exactly, is the primary threat…so, you bundle it all together and then sift it in order to figure out who’s the real threat. If you’d bother checking the source of your source, you’d find that the underlying data is a report which clearly indicates that there are a lot of people on it and that quality control needs a lot of improvement, and such improvement is ongoing.
You’ll also find that between 2003 and 2007 the watch list was hit 99,000 times with 53.4% of the hits resulting in a match to someone we have to keep an eye on. Pretty useful tool, if what you’re trying to do is prevent another 9/11 type of attack.
You have to think, french, and then you’ll start to understand.
Do you know how Arabic names work? Aren’t you supposed to be so much more in tune with foreign cultures than I am? Well, Arabs have a very non-western way of reckoning their names and Abdul Rahman can also be Rahman Mohammed, depending on how he chooses to use the names he has. I’ll bet that given the mere oddities of Arabic names plus the prevalent use of aliases amongst terrorists that a large percentage of the million names in the data base are actually the same person. You’re acting like we’ve just got a million names willy-nilly in their for Lord only knows what nefarious purpose and because you hate President Bush, you won’t even consider the possibility that its not evil at all.
As for the number of soldiers - vastly different set of moral implications when its 3,000 innocent people instantly murdered by criminals and 4,000+ volunteer soldiers dying over a five year period fighting against the very sort of people who murdered 3,000 innocents. Only your hatred of President Bush prevents you from thinking a bit on this and realising how amazingly obtuse your comparison is.
As for Saddam and Iraq - no, we weren’t invited by the Iraqi people, but we weren’t un-invited by them, either, as their sovereign right to invite or un-invite had been usurped by Saddam’s regime…in other words, in March of 2003 there was no legitimate entity able to say “yes” or “no” to a US-led liberation of Iraq. Only after Iraq was liberated was such an answer possible, and the answer was “yes”. And of course Saddam wasn’t responsible for 9/11 - but he was a terror-sponsor and was in material breech of the 1991 cease fire agreement and US law since 1998 called for our government to overthrow Saddam’s government - in the post-9/11 world, failure to remove Saddam would have been an error of the first magnitude.
And are we safer - you bet. Vastly so. And we’ll get safer yet, as we withdraw with victory in Iraq as a lesson to the terrorist sponsors that (a) democracy can be implanted in a Moslem nation and (b) the United States, is spite of its defeatist left, can sustain a lengthy, costly battle.
24. neocon | July 19th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
Mark,
Brilliant rebuttal.
25. french student | July 19th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
So, out of all my questions, you only answer to one. And the answer is one single word. No reasonning. No studies. in other words, faith.
So tell me, how do you figure your country is actually safer when Iraq has been such a fertile recruiting and training ground for terrorists? (don’t ask me, ask the 2006 NIE)
How is it safer now that it is poorer of 476 B$, with an estimated total cost in the trillions?
26. neocon | July 19th, 2008 at 4:47 pm
french,
It’s 2008 now!!!! And AQ is defeated in Iraq and making a fast retreat back to the mountains of Afghanistan, only to soon get their ass kicked there.
Try and keep up. ROTFLMAO.
neocon
P.S. Please respond to Mark. He took the time to rehash the same arguments in brilliant fashion and I look forward to your response.
27. Mark Noonan | July 19th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
neocon,
Thanks much - but, it seems I was just wasting bandwidth. You’d think I’d have learned by now that actually answering a lefty objection is a waste of time as their brains are so keyed on hatred that they can’t read, comprehend and apply the data to the relevant situation.
French,
You really need to get some help with your hatred - I’m sure there’s some version of RCIA somewhere near you, drop in this week and just listen for a week.
28. french student | July 19th, 2008 at 5:47 pm
That is, of course, forgetting the photos of people standing, arms apart, with electric wires protruding. That is also forgetting that waterboarding was torture when done by japanese people on americains, but magically was not when americain personnel did it on ohers. and that is of course forgetting the whole concept of psychological torture.
Mark, every person in the world is connected to every other by a chain of less than 5 “people I know”. By your definition, anyone can end up on that list.
In other words, everyone is guilty until proven innocent.
If that improvement were efficient, the number of names would decrease. Or else you are really asserting that there are a million terrorists, and that sends us back to the fact that a million terrorists do not need to hide. A million people is not a terrorist organisation, it is an overt army.
You’ll also find that between 2003 and 2007 the watch list was hit 99,000 times with 53.4% of the hits resulting in a match to someone we have to keep an eye on. Pretty useful tool, if what you’re trying to do is prevent another 9/11 type of attack.
define “hit” and define “person we have to keep an eye on.
even if this list was saving your country, it does not change the fact that everyone on this list is guilty until proven innocent, and punished for being on the list every time thay want to take a plane. Plus, thair right to privacy (against unwarranted search and seizures) is violated.
People can be put on the list for flimsy reasons (otherwise there would not be a million people on it) and it is very difficult if not impossible to be take off that list. It is, therefore, a modern and watered-down version of the “lettres de cachet” that made the people of paris storm the Bastille in 1792.
Two things here.
Even if each terrorist has ten aliases and appears ten times in the database, a hundred thousand people are still enough to conquer washington DC wit weapons bought in the very stores of the city.
secondly, I do not hate president Bush. I disagree with him, i feel he is not worth an ounce of my respect, and I believe he is, if not a criminal, then criminally incompetent. But I do not hate him, I rather despise him.
the very sort of people.
you see, this is where there is a problem.
You did not go to iraq to defend yourself, or to avenge these people who died in the WTC.
Whatever the reason, it was not this, because the Iraqis had nothing to do with 9/11. It has been said, repeated and even admitted by GWB.
You are punishing “the very same sort of people” (and that could be debated, saddam was in no way a jihadist, and Bin Laden is no head of state, only related to the saudi kings) but not the people that attacked you.
Tell me, if someone was shot in the street, would you send to death row the brother in law of the man that shot him?
Would that be “justice”? Sure the brother in law may be an asshole, and he may even have a gun at his home, but he is not the one that did it. Executing the brother in law of the guilty is not justice, it is more murder.
Therefore all these people, these 4200 soldiers, did not die to avenge the people killed on 9/11, they fought because one man (and his political team) chose that they would die. And that is little different than dying because eleven men with boxcutters decided they had to die. And this has een my point all along.
And now that you ARE being uninvited, you still root for the guy that does not want to leave…
He was in material breech of a cease fire agreement?
What a casus belli.
I mean, it is much more important than , uh, catching the guy that actualy DID perpetuate 9/11?
I mean of course you have the power to do both at the same time, but… How many people did you send after Bin Laden in afghanistan again? Compared to the 130000 or so troops in Iraq (one soldier for every 200 man, woman and child).
But all that of course is not the point I was making, and is therefore off topic to your disputing my point.
You really believe you are safer?
For five years, you have handed every terrorist in the world the best recruiting PR tool: you have let Bin Laden escape, his family is priends with the americain government. You have proven to the world that you actually ARE the evil, greedy empire that Bin Laden said you were all along. (note : this is the terrorist recruiting speech, not my opinions) When given a pretext, you invaded another country, wreked it, said it was for the good of the people and let riots in the streets rage while you were securing the petrol production facilities. and then, after sayng you were there “for the people” you actually stayed for five years while getting SHOT AT by the people in question.
And while giving this wonderful terrorist recruiting speech with a little bow on top of it, you have managed to drive your economy into a pit. And now you have been paying your ennemies not to shoot at you any more for a while, please, so you can claim a drop in violence and put some lipstick on this trillion dollar pig.
29. neocon | July 19th, 2008 at 6:30 pm
I’d say you messed up the entire response, which were nothing more than paranoid musings. Very weak.
But I am just a typical white person.
peace, neocon
30. bagni | July 20th, 2008 at 1:12 am
markneo
yknow
sometimes it takes an outside orbital perspective
so
sorry to intergalactically inform you
but you’re both super righty and tighty
briefs not boxers…correct?
31. Mark Noonan | July 20th, 2008 at 1:46 am
french,
What would constitute “psychological torture” is entirely too subjective for definition, and so is something we can’t even concern ourselves with except on a case by case basis. As for the electrode pictures - you do realise the electrodes weren’t hooked up to anything, right?
Meanwhile, the rest of your comment is just more of the same exhausted talking points…such as that the only reason for a drop in violence has been by bribing the enemy to stop fighting…something easily ascertainable as false as soon as you check primary source documents about Iraq.
You hate President Bush. You refuse to think in line with the normal intellectual incuriosity of the left. Those are your two problems.
Fix them, and then get back to us.
32. Mark Noonan | July 20th, 2008 at 1:47 am
bagni,
I am not Bill Clinton and thus make at least an attempt at being a gentleman, so the answer to that question will remain ever unknown save by myself and Mrs. Noonan.