And this will do nothing.

No one is surprised.

No one has stood by their moral convictions.

No one has done or will do anything to change things.

We are all apathetic hypocrites.

CtrlAltDelete: And this will do nothing.

No one is surprised.

No one has stood by their moral convictions.

No one has done or will do anything to change things.

We are all apathetic hypocrites.

Yup. Pretty much.

CtrlAltDelete: And this will do nothing.

No one is surprised.

No one has stood by their moral convictions.

No one has done or will do anything to change things.

We are all apathetic hypocrites.

i hope you're wrong.

Like this really surprises anyone?

I don't think I am a hypocrite: I stand by my apathy four square.

Sad, but true.

CtrlAltDelete: No one has stood by their moral convictions.

I've stood by mine...
And Bush has stood by his lack of moral convictions the whole time.

CtrlAltDelete: And this will do nothing.

No one is surprised.

No one has stood by their moral convictions.

No one has done or will do anything to change things.

We are all apathetic hypocrites.

whatever...

Myownepitaph: Like this really surprises anyone?

it's not so much whether or not we're surprised. it's a matter of the fact that there is now strong evidence and an admission of guilt.

I've always accepted that our government tortures, assassinates, and whatever other nasty things it has to do. I don't like it, but I always felt that's just the way the world goes.

Good thing "impeachment's off the table". Thanks, Nancy.

oldebayer: I don't think I am a hypocrite: I stand by my apathy four square.

Sad, but true.

You could always join the Apathetic Militants League. I was too bored to send in the application.

wejash: You could always join the Apathetic Militants League. I was too bored to send in the application.



Pickles: I was actually president of the official Voting Sucks Club in high school.
Nathan: Oh, really, how'd that go?
Pickles: Well, I wasn't re-elected.

"Same as it ever was" is not acceptable anymore. These war criminals should be brought to justice. They're supposed to be a representative government. These criminals do not represent me.

I love the smell of feigned outrage in the morning.

I keep trying to figure out when Obama's going to visit Cincinnati, because I've got a pertinent question I want to ask him.

The Yoo Memo said that the administration had concluded that an Executive Order (or whatever the hell they're calling it) overrides any and all Federal laws in a time of war (as defined by the president).

So...when Bush pardons himself and everyone connected with this at the end of his term, can the new President declare a state of war, issue one of these Executive Order things and essentially ignore the pardons (based as they are in Federal law), arrest the lot of them, and turn Bush & Co over to the Hague for war crimes or such? It seems that the legal precedent is set....

"Hoisted by his own petard", I believe, would be the appropriate turn of phrase.

/I would LOVE to hear the response from any of the candidates on this.

I'm not apathetic. I just don't give a shiat.

Ah-MEEER-ica, Ah-MEEEER-ica, God shed a tear for thee.
You've drowned thy good
with crony-hood
from sea to shining sea.

The fact that this administration is still in office speaks loudly enough. The United States of America is dead. An impostor stands in its place.

nashBridges:
I think they'd have to release another Executive Order declaring the past acts to be a crime first. It would also have to be declared an act of aggression against the US in a time of war in such a fantasy. In short, the Yoo memo covered military acts dictated by the President. In order for a new President to arrest an old President, the new President has to write up an order saying the old President's acts actively work against the interests of the US in the present war AND that the old President is working against the interests of the US at the time.

And contrary to popular belief, the US is not gung ho on the authority of the International Criminal Court.
...
The next President could well be hampered by a Supreme Court ruling.



Leaving aside the Hague (in part because I agree with what you're saying), then there's nothing besides the Supreme Court standing in the way of such a thing happening because all it would take is the new president writing the order to make it happen. While there's a lot of stuff (as you correctly point out) that would have to actually be written out, the fact that the only actual obstacle to such a thing happening is the new prez taking the time to do so is somewhat disturbing.

It'd also be cathartic as hell.

The thing about the courts is that the government is quite good as acting as though the courts are in their favor until it actually says that they can't. And since I can practically guarantee that this issue re: presidential orders won't be decided by the SCOTUS by next January, the new prez could, in fact, do exactly what I describe (leaving out the whole international justice thing) as soon as he or it took office.

It also means that the government will have basically died, because we'd be right back to an imperious leader making decrees, "I say it is so, thus it will be!"

This is a crime, right? I mean, the Bush justice department won't do anything about it, but in less than a year they are going to be gone.

What is stopping the next justice department from prosecuting this man for the crime he has admitted to?

Yesdog: Good thing "impeachment's off the table". Thanks, Nancy.

fark impeachment, I want indictment.

ABC news: "Lets twist a story"
Truthout: "Lets take ABCs twisted story and twist it some more."
KOS: "Let's take the now almost unrecognizable hyperbole garbage that Truthout has spun up for us and put our own highly biased spin on it too."

Ta-daaah!

Seabon: fark impeachment, I want indictment.

Poor thing, doesn't know how it works.

I'd love to see some top American politicians and such - Republican, Democrate, as long as they deserve it - arrested for war crimes.

If it happened just once we'd hear a lot of politicians start talking about how they've always been against anything that could be construed as a war crime. The rule of law, let me show you it.

I'm not even convinced we shouldn't ever torture people. I understand that in *very rare* cases reasonable, intelligent law enforcement agents might truly believe a national emergency is at stake. But if they believe other people can be tortured for something, a good litmus test might be their personal willingness to face charges for it.

/actions, meet consequences
//you two are gonna be hard to tear apart, I can tell

Seabon: fark impeachment, I want indictment.

How about a lynch mob instead? At this point, it might be an improvement for law and order in this country.

Democrate = Democrat

Me = Need sleep now

Add this to the list of 10,000,000,brazilian other lies that people haven't given a crap about.

abb3w: How about a lynch mob instead? At this point, it might be an improvement for law and order in this country.

"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." ~ Ed Howdershelt



How are those soap, ballot, and jury boxes working out for you folks?

Let's see now... Free Speech Zones, vote-rigging, and jurors being rejected because they know their rights as jurors...

So Clinton lied about getting a BJ, and has to go through the impeachment process, while Bush lies about torturing people and it's just a news bulletin?

Okay, so why do people still like and defend this president? I don't get it. It frustrates me more and more. I know at least 3 people that would vote for Bush again if they could. WHY? What isn't clear to them? I know there are more who dislike him than like him, but what is wrong with the few that like him?

Sorry for the rant. I got laid off today. :(

Clarinch: So Clinton lied about getting a BJ, and has to go through the impeachment process, while Bush lies about torturing people and it's just a news bulletin?

Yes. Don't wanna lose those swing states.

The piece of shiat Bush and the rest of his corrupt administration should be sitting in federal prisons right now awaiting trial if not already convicted of many crimes. But frankly I doubt they will even be charged with a single offense. He will finish his term and be allowed to retire to his ranch and live richly the rest of his life. I find this truely disgusting.

We should treat these war criminals the same way we treated the German and Japanese war criminals after World War Two.

Pr1nc3ss: Sorry for the rant. I got laid off today. :(

You're in Texas AND got laid off? I'm so sorry.

Pr1nc3ss: but what is wrong with the few that like him?

"Only two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity. And, I'm not certain about the universe." - Albert Einstein

Yeah tell me about it.

Pr1nc3ss: Okay, so why do people still like and defend this president? I don't get it. It frustrates me more and more. I know at least 3 people that would vote for Bush again if they could. WHY? What isn't clear to them? I know there are more who dislike him than like him, but what is wrong with the few that like him?

Sorry for the rant. I got laid off today. :(

Sorry you got laid off. Anyways, I always assumed the people who still like Bush are the people who completely ignore the news for months at a time.

From the AfterDowningStreet Link: The boys were sodomized with the cameras rolling. The worst about all of them is the soundtrack of the boys shrieking that your government has.

God, to think sick motherfarkers like you Americans are our "allies".

CtrlAltDelete: And this will do nothing.

No one is surprised.

No one has stood by their moral convictions.

No one has done or will do anything to change things.

We are all apathetic hypocrites.

Yep. . . But don't suggest God wouldn't like us, or we'll never elect any of your friends president.

/I'm gonna get a beer
//fark that, whiskey.

Congress needs to declare war on the U.S. and then Bush needs to order the military to nuke D.C. off the map.

After all he's done, people still defend Bush.

Some people will never be able to admit their mistakes.

MrEricSir: After all he's done, people still defend Bush.

Some people will never be able to admit their mistakes.

Even scarier: Some don't think this was a mistake.

After the way they went after Clinton, if the media doesn't push this, then it proves that they're in bed with Bush and the Republicans.

"I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever."

-- Thomas Jefferson

oh c'mon, you apathetic mofarkers. Who cares if the 28%'ers hold out for glory? What else do you expect from them? In the reality-based community:

burndtdan: it's not so much whether or not we're surprised. it's a matter of the fact that there is now strong evidence and an admission of guilt.

THIS.

RemyDuron: CtrlAltDelete: And this will do nothing.

No one is surprised.

No one has stood by their moral convictions.

No one has done or will do anything to change things.

We are all apathetic hypocrites.

Yep. . . But don't suggest God wouldn't like us, or we'll never elect any of your friends president.

/I'm gonna get a beer
//fark that, whiskey.

Would it kill you and the other Farkers in this thread to take ten minutes to write a letter to your congressperson?

The man blatantly lied to the people of the United States as well as the Congress of the United States to manipulate us into an unwinnable war. I'd rather see him go to jail over that, but this would be OK as well.

/obligatory

CtrlAltDelete: And this will do nothing.

No one is surprised.

No one has stood by their moral convictions.

No one has done or will do anything to change things.

We are all apathetic hypocrites.

No, I'm no hypocrite. Nor am I apathetic. Exactly what would you like me to do? I have voted for all the right people; who have been trounced in the general elections. I have written my congresspeople, who have failed to display the spines and balls I was promised when I voted for them. I have given my support to anti-torture groups, which have made strongly-worded statements of dissent against torture, which have proven absolutely nothing and stopped exactly no one.

Since I am only one person, and cannot travel to Syria, Jordan, Pakistan or other outsourcing nations, murder torturers, rescue the victims; and since I'm not the type of person to assassinate the President or his lackeys; what else do you want me to do to prevent torture?

How is this not a war crime and how is this not breaking the Geneva Conventions? One doesn't need to be POW to be covered.

If this happened to Americans, you can bet the US would be demanding the Hague to be involved. Sorry, but the SCOTUS is trumped by the international court in this case. Bush can pardon himself all he wants, he's still guilty as hell and deserves to rot in prison somewhere, preferably in the middle of Baghdad where he'll live decades in the sweltering heat and substandard conditions. Then after that, he'll rot in hell.

Remove all Republicans:
Hey, there's enough truth there that it's alright.

If by 'enough truth' you mean 'none at all' then I suppose you might be on to something. This story does not support what the subby says, what most liberal responders are saying, what Daily Kos said, or what Truthout said. It only just barely passes the sniff test for ABC news and they of course put their own spin on it.

EmmaLou: How is this not a war crime and how is this not breaking the Geneva Conventions? One doesn't need to be POW to be covered.

If this happened to Americans, you can bet the US would be demanding the Hague to be involved. Sorry, but the SCOTUS is trumped by the international court in this case. Bush can pardon himself all he wants, he's still guilty as hell and deserves to rot in prison somewhere, preferably in the middle of Baghdad where he'll live decades in the sweltering heat and substandard conditions. Then after that, he'll rot in hell.

Well, if you're not in the US, it probably is a war crime. However, you are very wrong to think that the SCOTUS is somehow trumped by an international court. You'll want to reread the constitution.