The Disturbing Truth: Our Government is Protecting Us from Nothing

Dig that crazy redaction! It's like the FOIA request from the ACLU that got this doc released got us
a whole lot of nothing--of course, despite appearances, it gave us enough rope to hang the Bushies
with... if only the Obamites will bother...

After reading today's column from Andrew Sullivan at TheAtlantic.com, I have had my fears reinforced and have come to feel that the United States Government has been and continues to be a sociopathic entity. Sullivan's column is called "The American Way Of Torture" and includes select quotes from the Office of the Inspector General's report on how the CIA systemically tortured terror suspects during the Bush years. There are some disturbing truths that Sullivan's piece forces us to consider:

1) this new OIG report pretty much damns the Bush Administration by proving they not only endorsed torture, but did so in writing.

2) this was definitely torture--what else do you call it when detainees are left in their own excrement?

3) Sullivan makes the point best:

In the past, the US was known for being a country whose soldiers would never mistreat prisoners; now, the US wants the world to know that US custody is something to be dreaded.

This is the same technique used by Grand Moff Tarkin in the original Star Wars movie--his exact line was "Fear will keep the systems in line..."

So yes, all those Daily Show jokes about Cheney were accurate: the United States was run by an evil, cartoonish bad guy.

Now this next part popped into my head thanks to Democracy Now, quoting one leader who spoke about Afghanistan:

The insurgency in Afghanistan didn’t just happen overnight, and we won’t defeat it overnight. This will not be quick nor easy. But we must never forget, this is not a war of choice. This is a war of necessity. Those who attacked America on 9/11 are plotting to do so again. If left unchecked, the Taliban insurgency will mean an even larger safe haven, from which al-Qaeda would plot to kill more Americans. So this is not only a war worth fighting; this is fundamental to the defense of our people.

That's not an old quote from Bush--that's Obama speaking at the Veterans of Foreign Wars national convention in Phoenix, Arizona, last week.

So, here comes Obama, explaining that we have no choice but to be in Afghanistan, mimicking the same rhetoric that came from the Bush 43 Admin for so many years. We did it because the Taliban were harboring Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda. My question is, how big a threat is Al Qaeda to America? OK, fine, Obama, they're plotting
against us--but how many of us can they really kill?

In 2008 34,017 Americans were killed in car accidents according to the DOT.

In 2005 (the most recent year numbers are available) 159,217 Americans died of lung cancer alone according to the CDC.

In 2007 around 2 million people worldwide were killed by AIDS according to Avert.org.

In 2007 terrorism caused 22,685 deaths worldwide according to the US National Counter Terrorism Center. The number of American civilian deaths by terrorism is almost non-existent since Americans have to leave the country to be killed by a terrorist.

What this all means is that terrorism is a tiny, tiny, tiny threat to the American way of life. Yet, the Bush administration and now the Obama administration thinks it's worth ignoring our morals and our principles to stop the killing of less than 23,000 Earthlings while seven times that number die of lung cancer in America, alone. 53,005 died of colorectal cancer, 27,259 American women died of gynecological cancers, 41,116 American women died of breast cancer--and I could go on.

So, in the end, our government is "protecting" us from nothing. We're spending over a trillion dollars in Iraq and Afghanistan to stop this threat which does not even really exist. My only conclusion is that our government actually enjoys being horrible to people--it's literally sociopathic. Either that, or our government is too addicted to fear, or rock-stupid, to check and compare the statistics, which took me about 30 minutes to do.

With all these people dying of Cancer in the US right now, wouldn't it be nice to have a War on Cancer, instead of a War on Terror?

Dems Debate Whether to Investigate Crimes of Bush Admin or: Why I Refuse Party Affiliation

Dems Debate Whether to Investigate Crimes of Bush Admin or: Why I Refuse Party Affiliation, originally uploaded by thepetecom.

Geh... This is just sad beyond words. WashingtonPost.com is reporting that the Democrats in Washington are torn as to whether or not to go after Bush Admin officials for approving torture.

So, FOR YEARS there have been loads of evidence that the Bush Administration committed crimes. The GAO actually found that they had violated federal law (go to the GAO website and do a search for "covert propaganda"). We all know that acts of torture were committed in Iraq, we know the Bush Admin misled us into war in Iraq and mismanaged our war in Afghanistan.

Yet, no investigation let alone impeachment hearings for any Bushites.

The excuse while Bush was in office was "We can't impeach him now, there just aren't enough votes."

Then, once the Democrats took the majority in Congress, the excuse became "Well, there's not enough time left before Bush steps down."

For anyone who thinks the law should be enforced the last eight years have been very hard.

But it's not getting any easier now. If EVERYTHING ELSE wasn't enough for you, Obama just released memos PROVING Bush officials were down with torture--those of us with morals would THINK we'd finally see some criminal charges.

Maybe we still will--but not before the Democrats debate about WHETHER TO ENFORCE THE LAW.

This is why I refuse to be in either political party. The Democrats are wondering if international and US law needs to be enforced and the Republicans feel the law can go to hell if the cause is just.

The most depressing thing of all is that Obama was supposed to change all of this. Now we see that Democrats and Republicans, alike, believe that the law is to be enforced on the little people and that for the rich (mostly white) folks in government, the law is simply not a concern if one's motives are pure.

I said mostly white, above, because now, apparently, Obama is in violation of the law too--international law demands that war crimminals be prosecuted.

So while I'll never call him "King Barry," Barack Obama is, and will continue to be, above the law until he goes after the Bush Administration.

Progress?

Iowans Get Arrested Trying to Arrest Rove

Wow, to think I was going to ask if anyone knew if the mainstream TV media was covering this. I got this from CBSNews.com (here: http://www.cbsnews.com/…7842.shtml ) so, color me surprised that CBS, in any incarnation, would cover this story at all (yes, I know it's actually an AP news story, but still).

Of course, the irony after you get past CBS actually covering this kind of story is that the people hoping to citizen's arrest Rove ended up being arrested, themselves, and charged with "trespassing".

And you get a nice side-order of irony when you consider that the citizen's-arresters were all Christian activists--hey cops, what ever happened to forgiving those who trespass against you?

Hey, future citizen's-arresters--wake up! Karl Rove is above the law, just like his pals in the White House! You'd probably cause more headlines if, instead of trying to citizen's arrest Rove, you tossed a pie or something at him. That'd be way funnier anyway.

Mobile post sent by thepete using Utterz.  Replies.

Vermont Town to Vote on Arresting Bush & Cheney

The above screencap comes to us from: http://www.rutlandherald.com/…ll/article

Bloody brilliant this is!

I just hope they vote to do it.

LET'S HEAR IT FOR STATE'S RIGHTS!!

After that it'll be about getting Bush and Cheney to set foot in Vermont :)

Oh and in case you're not convinced Bush and Co. have broken the law, go to www.GAO.gov and do a search for "covert propaganda" (or just go here: http://thepete.com/…law-again/ ).

If that's not enough, check out the part of the UN Charter that says no sovereign member can be invaded without invading someone else first. Then check out the part of the US Constitution that says international treaties we enter into become law for all of us domestically (or just go here: http://thepete.com/…k-illegal/ ).

Weeee!
Post sent by thepete using Utterz.  Replies.