Comments on: Wilkerson: al-Libi’s Waterboarding

By: DLoerke

DLoerke — Fri, 15 May 2009 11:41:42 +0000

Survival is the #1 way to protect the Constititon. As for the links between Saddam and Osama, they were proved to my satisfaction. The British and the Mossad STILL believes there was operational alliance. No, they don’t like each other, but they work together when they feel it will hurt the USA. The only way to stop the terrorists is to eliminate them.

By: alinaustex

alinaustex — Fri, 15 May 2009 08:47:17 +0000

should have edited this more -please forgive the typos and bad grammar

By: alinaustex

alinaustex — Fri, 15 May 2009 08:44:32 +0000

Dloerke,
Do you really believe that former Vice President Cheney was protecting and defending the Constitution and our beloved Nation by taking down Saddam – who we know now for sure was not opeartionally linked to al Qaida-and still left UBL atanding ? Why did the Sheik get to escape at Tora Bora ? There are rouge elelments of the ISSI that are operationally linked to al Qaida and other Islamic terrorist groups ( that we helped fund and train during the first AfPak engagements with the Russians back in the day – RE “Charle Wilson’s War “)..now DLorke if we wanted to go Saddam on someone why not the rouge elements in the ISSI ?
Also you might think again about the Libyan stand down from the WMD – The Brits under Tony Blair had a long series of negoiations with Tripoli – this disarmament had more to do with carrots then sticks – you and the rest of the neocon apologist apppear to never let the facts stand in the way of your parochial vision of some type of new world order overseen by a Pax Americana. In my view the neo con disassembling re the forged Niger document -is a factually a more clear and presemt danger to our Nation and our Constitution then Qaddafi ever proved to be -Remember please Dloerke the oath says to defend the Constitution from enemies both Foreign and Domestic ,

By: DLoerke

DLoerke — Fri, 15 May 2009 04:04:39 +0000

Think again…they got rid of their WMDs because Qaddafi was sure we were going to do a Saddam on him. This proves that the United States, when it acts from a position of superior military strength gets what it wants. Only when the United States apologizes for its actions do we look weak and tentative. And the terrorists think they can act with impunity. He who apologizes for his actions does not act in the best interest of the USA. The former Vice President could not have committed War Crimes because he was acting in the service of his country protecting and defending the Constitution and the survival of the Nation.

By: MarkH

MarkH — Fri, 15 May 2009 03:19:15 +0000

Only if the Libyans want it done, and I can’t imagine they would.

By: MarkH

MarkH — Fri, 15 May 2009 03:09:23 +0000

Was al-Libi Saudi, like Zubaydah?
Were any other Saudis held at Gitmo?

By: readerOfTeaLeaves

readerOfTeaLeaves — Fri, 15 May 2009 03:01:58 +0000

Then add in credit default swaps that are totally unregulated.
Wanna place a bet on the liklihood that the dollar will sink by 30% before July, or that the Taliban will overrun {name preferred city here} by August? Totally and completely unregulated, and you don’t have to put up the money to cover your ‘hedge’.

Then add in Tax Havens.
I keep waiting to hear how many of those Al Quaeda has created in the Caymans, the Jerseys, Switzerland, and heaven only knows who else.

As for Bush and Cheney; they’re both complicit in ‘plausible deniability’, IMHO. I remain convinced that part of the reason they never thought they’d be caught was because:

1. They could release information to — or about — people who then could not disclose the information (think reporters, and also think ‘Pelosi’ and ‘Rockefeller’ who by law could not divulge what they were told by CIA).

2. They destroyed evidence: emails, video, you name it.

I realized earlier that I’ve seen more of Dick Cheney the past two weeks — in terms of video clips — than I saw of him in 2005, 2006 combined.

By: MarkH

MarkH — Fri, 15 May 2009 02:56:26 +0000

You’ve put a hex on us!

By: MarkH

MarkH — Fri, 15 May 2009 02:54:33 +0000

After reading how many times they did a water-boarding I wondered, on a blog, why not one more time. Why stop at that point? If the record shows they stopped when they got the Iraq-AQ tie-in from another water-boarding, then it’s pretty good circumstantial evidence they weren’t looking for other actionable intelligence. They were just looking for a pretext to go into Iraq.

By: readerOfTeaLeaves

readerOfTeaLeaves — Fri, 15 May 2009 02:52:27 +0000

I happen to be acquainted with 3 families of people serving in Iraq-Afghanistan currently. Hard as it is to say, if the military is concerned about the dangers… it’s a tough call, but I would not be able to look any of those family members in the eye if I thought releasing the photos would further endanger those (bright, tough) members of the military.

What I would do is:
1. Keep in mind what Janice Karpinski said on Olbermann, which is, “don’t politicize this!!”

2. Keep focused on what Whitehouse is doing, along with Leahy and Levin — figure out what happened, much in the way that any company does a through, complete investigation after an accident so that processes and procedures can be fixed.

3. **IF** it turns out that illegalities occurred, THEN prosecute those. But they’re not the main event.

4. It’s evident that Cheney had Bolton spying on Powell at Dept of State, and that Bolton was coordinating with Hadley (Condi’s #2 at NSA). When Wilkerson made his comment about the troops being people that Cheney does NOT care about, that was **huge** in my mind. Maybe people around here didn’t really listen to that part of what Wilkerson said, but I suspect that a whole lot of other people heard it.

5. IMHO, both Wilkerson and Powell have done their utmost to try and pick up some of the broken crockery. Why waste energy skewering them?

Does it bother me those photos won’t be released? Of course.
But this is not an easy decision; there are two rights. And two wrongs.

I do want the photos entered as evidence into the criminal trials of Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Feith, et al…