Students at Stanford stood still as they listened to former Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice speak. As the scholars pondered the words of the prominent woman who presented her case for waterboarding, many mused; "Is it Richard Nixon, or Condoleezza Rice? Which person thinks a President is above the law?" One might wonder. Those who viewed a video taped classroom conversation with Secretary Rice, today express astonishment as well. In her defense for actions she took to advocate for this extreme interrogation techniques Condoleezza Rice both blamed her former boss, George W. Bush and justified his decision.
"The president instructed us that nothing we would do would be outside of our obligations, legal obligations under the Convention Against Torture."
In his attempt to counter a perceived threat to America, Philip Zelikow, the policy representative to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and the National Securities Council (NSC) Deputies Committee, unexpectedly became the threat from within the White House.
The Bush Administration believed the best way to deal with suspected terrorists was to inflict extreme physical and psychological pressure on these perilous persons. Mister Zelikow offered his dissent. In a written and verbally stated opinion, Philip Zelikow contradicted what the occupants of the Oval Office accepted as necessary. "Individuals suspected of terrorism, can be legally tortured."
A short time after the Office of Legal Council (OLC) issued the now infamous judgments which allowed for officially sanctioned torment, Mister Zelikow, his superior, who was then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and her Legal Adviser, John Bellinger, gained access to the torture memos. After a review, Philip Zelikow stated his concern. He sensed others within the Administration might share his angst. However, no one, inclusive of Mister Zelikow, publicly voiced an apprehension, that is, not until this past week.
I am a discontent and distressed taxpayer! "Disgruntled" is a word that might describe my deep dissatisfaction with how my tax dollars are spent. Yet, on April 15, 2009, typically thought of as "Tax Day," I felt no need to join my fellow citizens in protest. I did not attend a "Tea Party". I too believe, in this country, "taxation without representation" is a problem. One only need ponder the profits of lobbyists to understand the premise. Corporate supplicants amass a 22,000 percent rate of return on their investments. The average American is happy to realize a two-digit increase. Nonetheless, as much as I too may argue the point, assessments are paid without accountability, what concerns me more is my duty dollars did not support what I think ethical projects.
Millions in America were focused on the future. Billions, worldwide, anxiously awaited change. On January 20, 2009, the Presidential Inauguration was broadcast hither and yon. Barely a television, radio, computer monitor, or big screen was turned off. Most all tuned in to see Barack Obama take the Oath of Office. Nary a one were as moved as they were on that occasion.
Even several Republicans said they were excited. For countless, it seemed a light was turned on. Finally, the American people, our allies, and those who are often characterized as adversaries, had hope. We, collectively, believe it was possible to walk through the din that had been our doom and envision an Earth united.
The world was wowed with thoughts of what would be, as were many Constitutional scholars, concerned citizens, and Senator Sheldon Whitehouse. Yet, there remained a persistent thought; our potential would not be fully realized. Several understood, as Senator Whitehouse so solemnly expressed in a speech presented on the Senate floor, a day after the festivities, As We Look Forward We Must Also Look Back. Few had an opportunity to see or hear an oration that was perhaps as honest and historic as the Presidents.
It was 11:22 Ante Meridian, on January 21, 2009. I did as I rarely do. I stood silently and watched television. As one who listens to what is aired, and does so from another room, this was an unusual occurrence. However, the Cherokee wisdom of wolves, an illustration that represents the internal strife within every human being beckoned me.
Then, at the very same hour on the very next day, again I was compelled to do what is odd for me. I did not say a word as I glared at humanitarian actions took place on the screen. President Barack Obama proclaimed, by Executive Order, the United States would not torture. Nor would we, as a nation, detain presumed "combatants" without a just trial. On each occasion, I was in awe as I gazed upon what I had not imagined would come to pass. Upon reflection, the two events seem to be related.
There was a break in the news. On Cable News Network Wolf Blitzer was noticeably moved. He excitedly reported; Dick Cheney confessed. Broadcaster Blitzer's words were a bit more tempered. He said, "This just coming into The Situation Room. The Vice President, Dick Cheney, has given ABC News an interview and confirming now publicly that the Bush administration did engage in the very controversial interrogation tactic of waterboarding." The Commentator then asked America to listen to the clip. ABC News Correspondent Jonathan Karl inquired of the outgoing high-level government official, "Did you authorize the tactics that were used against Khalid Sheikh Mohammed?" Without hesitation, the Vice President responded. "I was aware of the program, certainly, and involved in helping get the -- the process cleared, as the agency, in effect, came in and wanted to know what they could and couldn't do. . . . (T)hey talked to me, as well as others, to explain what they wanted to do. And I supported it.
Viewers vented. Some shifted nervously in their seats. However, The Judicial Watch was not amused. Nor were they elated. The answer was not the one this Conservative organization, hoped for, groped for, and searched for though the courts, for all these many years. Vice President Cheney did not confess to sins conceived long before September 11, 2001. He told said nothing of the maps and charts of Iraqi oil fields. Foreign suitors for Iraqi oilfield contracts were not discussed as they had been in March 5, 2001, six months and six days before the infamous September 11 attacks.
It is amazing to me how the Republicans and all of their right-wing friends are trying to minimize the total repudiation they and their policies received at the hands of the electorate. According to these "objective" viewers there was no political realignment. The fact that Obama carried states that hadn't been carried by a Democrat in years and put into play states that had been lost to Democrats for a generation does not mean that there was a redrawing of the electoral map according to these illustrious men.
Their goal is simple to try and keep President Obama and the Democrats from enacting any sweeping legislation, instead hoping that they stay small and do little if anything. My guess is that they hope by trying these scare tactics and keeping the Dems thinking small that in four years if they accomplish little or nothing the Republicans can highlight how a majority Party did nothing to help the voters that elected them.
Of this, I believe. I believe in honesty and empathy. I trust in reports that reveal in 2002, the Department of Justice assured the Central Intelligence Agency interrogators who violated anti-torture laws they would be safe from prosecution. Emissaries only need a sincere "faith they caused no "prolonged mental harm." I believe that neither branch of government cares for what I hold dear.
We, the people of the twenty-first century may not have been present when the original Constitutional Congress met; still, we feel the depth of distress our forefathers did. Today, we express as our ancestors had. It is time to submit our own Declaration of Independence. Perchance, this statement of duress is long overdue.
When in the course of human events the government becomes destructive of the ends for which it was established, it is the Right of the People to alter it and demand restoration of those Constitutional Principles that have so long assured their Liberty, Safety, and Happiness. Therefore, on the anniversary of our Independence, we offer this new declaration for our times.
Americans each have taxied to the dark side in recent years. Vice President Cheney, with the blessings of George W. Bush, was our guide. We were the followers. Citizens of the United States claim to care. Yet, collectively, we allow an Administration to torture detainees in Guantanamo Bay and at Abu Ghraib prison. Our fellow countrymen once honored the Rules of the Geneva Convention. This standards are now thought quaint. Americans no longer subscribe to the theory that intentional physical and psychological torment is a abhorrent. Violations of human dignity are accepted, even endorsed.
"The tragedy of our day is the climate of fear in which we live and fear breeds repression.
Too often, sinister threats to the Bill of Rights, to freedom of the mind are concealed under the patriotic cloak of anti-Communism
[terrorism, nationalism, or compassionate Conservatism.]
It's far easier to fight for principles than to live up to them."
~ Adlai Stevenson. 1952 [Governor of Illinois, Democratic presidential candidate]
It was a quiet day in America; yet, the feeling of fear was palpable. Oceans away, in Baghdad, the air was filled with the smell of napalm. Frightened, as the young contemplated their future, seventy some courageous and committed students filed into the Morton West High School cafeteria in Berwyn, Illinois. Trepidation for their lives, and the lives of friends, family, and those innocent Iraqi citizens they never met prompted these pupils to take action. The young and eligible enlistees protested the war in Iraq.
It has been tried before. Efforts failed. Nonetheless, I remain hopeful. I have always believed, "Never, never give up!" Thankfully, several Human Rights organizations in the United States and Europe trust in the same principle. They persevere. On Thursday, October 25, 2007, the International Federation for Human Rights, the French League for Human Rights, and the Center for Constitutional Rights in New York, filed a formal grievance in a Paris court. The complaint stated former Secretary of Defense, Donald H. Rumsfeld authorized torture at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, The writ states, Rumsfeld violated the 1987 Convention Against Torture Act.
While Rumsfeld wrestled with his past, on the floor of United States Senate Judge Michael B. Mukasey pondered his future. This Bush appointee was asked if "enemy combatants" were tormented, would he, as the Attorney General deem himself accountable. Senators questioned Michael B. Mukasey extensively, albeit civilly. They inquired, if he were approved for the Attorney General position would he accept responsibility for reprehensible actions, or did he not think torture wrong. The nominee hedged and hummed just as Rumsfeld had in the past.
Sit down my child and you shall hear the tale I tell of what was once revered. I know you are sleepy and need your rest. Perhaps, this parable will be the best anecdote for a body too busy to slumber. Close your eyes and count the sheep, as I whisper words that might make you weep. The fable is horrific, as most fantasies are. Nonetheless, my hope is the narrative will bestow great wisdom. When we contemplate the harsh realities of life we learn lessons. There are principles to digest, my darling. Too few discover; too many forget.
The question is often posed. Each day a few Progressives ponder the possibility and offer their plea. Conservatives on the "Right" and "Left' languish when they discuss what may be apt. They state there is no time. Some posit, impeachment will distract a nation at war. Ah, how the White House welcomes that theory. Many dismiss the notion. They question the feasibility. Others are ready, willing, and waiting to start the impeachment proceedings. Rants, rage, reasons fill the air; they flood the airwaves. Cyberspace is clogged with conversations. Congress declares the topic is "off the table." Yet, here it is. Few have stated the rational so concisely. I present the position for impeachment as detailed by the Voice of the Environment. I invite a discussion.
Voice of the Environment's August 9, 2007 advertisement appeared in the San Francisco Bay Guardian, Santa Monica Mirror and New York Times.
Subscribe to Site [RSS]
