Bush's tribute to Reagan: "I can't remember" torture
Bush was asked yesterday point-blank to say he rejects torture, instead of hiding behind legalese. He refused:
Q: Mr. President, I wanted to return to the question of torture. What we've learned from these memos this week is that the Department of Justice lawyers and the Pentagon lawyers have essentially worked out a way that U.S. officials can torture detainees without running afoul of the law.
So when you say that you want the U.S. to adhere to international and U.S. laws, that's not very comforting. This is a moral question: Is torture ever justified?
BUSH: Look, I'm going to say it one more time. Maybe I can be more clear. The instructions went out to our people to adhere to law. That ought to comfort you.
We're a nation of law. We adhere to laws. We have laws on the books. You might look at these laws. And that might provide comfort for you. And those were the instructions from me to the government.
The laws that Bush refer to involve the Conventions on Torture that Reagan signed and is therefore the law of the land. They state there are no exceptions at any time in any way to using torture. But the memorandum concluded Bush did not have to adhere.
And in an apparent tribute to Reagan, Bush said “I can't remember” when asked about seeing the legal memorandum that concluded he was above the laws concerning torture.
Beat one for the Gipper
Various sites within the Reagan Cult are fantasizing about physically attacking anyone who criticizes Reagan, but Sarah-in-the-Hole gets so into the idea of beating-up Reagan critics that she extends it to physically attacking anyone who dares say the Iraqi invasion had anything to do with oil.
Sarah outdoes herself yet again by seeing vindication for the Occupation in an article reporting that the USA is spending two billion dollars per year to buy oil and import it to Iraq. To the loony toon warcheerleaders, this isn't more outrageous waste of US taxpayer money in Iraq. No, to the Attack Iraq pep squad, it is heartwarming proof that the US did not invade Iraq to steal its oil! Clinging to the most simplistic level of the lies, they refuse to "grok" that occupying the Middle East is about the control of oil, the control of the Caspian, and eventually the control of future pipelines from Uzbekistan, driving out influence from Russian, China and Turkey (never mind generally increasing the militarization of the US economy. Add your further reasons here). Or are the half-dozen US military bases being built in Iraq just for the excellent sand dune volleyball practice?
Of course, vitriolic attacks on the just-deceased Reagan don't exactly further peace in the world, either.
Of the ongoing damage that the Reagan govt. caused in the USA, the one getting least mention is how his administration destroyed any idea of fairness in the broadcast media. People all across the political spectrum will complain about how TV lacks content and has a ridiculous amount of commercials (though the right loves its monopoly on talk shows, televised or on the radio) without realizing it was Reagan that struck down the fairness rules, equal time rules, limits on commercials, and guidelines mandating that stations consult their local community as to their needs. In a country where TV is the main common culture (watch two Americans from different parts of the country start up a conversation and see how long it takes TV to be their main topic), this part of the dreadful Reagan Revolution continues to be the one dragging America down to the level of reactionary couch potatoes.
....and aim the cannon at the moon. Shoot his coffin up into orbit to float around like a Star Wars Defense System, his loony toon plan inspired by a children's movie that served to transfer billions of dollars to his friends in the military corporations.
After wreaking havoc in the world and megaprofits from taxpayers while overseeing the largest transfer of wealth from the have-nots to the have-lots in US history, he retired to a Bel Aire mansion that was "donated by friends". Hilariously, the street number was 666, the biblical number of the antichrist, and he died on 666, too -- sixth day of the sixth month and the year 2004 adds up to six (2+0+0+4 = 6). You would think that would give pause to Ashcroft and the other fundamentalist whackos. Still, Reagan died without any of his apocalyptic wet-dreams coming around, so most likely he wasn't the Great Satan. Too banal for that.