Tuesday, June 9, 2009

Lieberman and Graham push for opaque government

Bookmark and Share
When Barack Obama decided to try to stop the release of detainee photos, I had a feeling that this was going to open a can of worms. I should have known those worms where going to the Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC).

Obama has been slow playing any move toward investigating potential war crimes, i think because his domestic agenda would be stalled and in this economic climate I can kinda understand why he would try to stop the release of the photos. I can also understood that with the new administration coming in they felt they had to do something public to protect the Department of Defense and the CIA in order to build loyalty and marginalize Bush moles. Appealing a court ruling to release the photos would have, most likely, just been a delaying tactic. Obama would look like he tried to stop the release, and he may have delayed the release past some of the statute of limitations. That was until Lieberman and Graham got an idea.

They decided it would be a great idea to include an amendment to H.R.2346 Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2009, called "Detainee Photographic Records Protection Act of 2009." It is basically an end run around the Freedom of Information Act. The brilliance of it is that Obama can't come out against the amendment or he will look like he's just pretending to be against the photos. The Senate Democrats are no good either because they're so balless they have yet to even stand up once to the Republicans and force them to actually filibuster a bill.

So it all looked bleak until the House Democrats looked at the bill, the Senate approved of, in conference committee. They, acutely having some guts, got the amendment stripped. HURRAY!!!

Well that is when Droopy Dog, Girlie Cracker decided to have a tantrum.

Sens. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) lambasted transparency advocates at a press conference Tuesday, when they renewed their promise to bring Senate business to a halt until their bill blocking the release of detainee photographs becomes law.

"We're not going to do any more business in the Senate," Graham said, his face flushed red. "Nothing's going forward until we get this right."

While I would like to make fun of the dumbasses for inviting ridicule upon themselves. That would be missing the point. Their argument is that releasing the photos would put US troops in harms way. The thing is yes, troops are going to be in more danger but not because the US may release the photos. The photos are not the problem the actions in the photos are the problem.

The photos are going to be released eventually. No matter what these asshats think they are doing, it is not saving US troops. They are just delaying the justified outcry from the Muslim world. They, like Obama, want to avoid an actual transparent investigation into the possible war crimes committed under the Bush Administration. When these photos are released there will be an outcry from the US public along with the rest of the world for accountability. Obama, Lieberman and Graham don't want one for varying reasons but they are taking it too far. By their actions they are condoning the actions of the detainee photos.

Though no one in the public knows exactly what is in the photos, the effort that many are taking to delay if not indefinably prevent the release of them, makes me cringe with disgust. The dialog in the US should not be about the status of the photos it should be who is responsible for shaming the US and dragging its name into the dirt and throwing the filth of war crimes onto our record.

2 comments:

  1. At the same time a realease of that kind could even further the distance between the "Two" America's. I completely see your point but Obama is just keepin it cool , he's got alot more on his plate. What goes around comes around eventually. Anway we dont need the muslims more pissed than they already are. I guess thats what "Change" was supposed to be. A new way of handling politics rather than be as dirty handed as the last administration. Thus, the speach ....

    ReplyDelete
  2. The problem is if you do not prosecute individuals before the statute of limitations has passed then future administrations will feel that they can do the same thing. That is why we have these laws on the books. Its not just for retribution it is to prevent future criminal acts. It would be as if I robbed a bank and said "Oh that was like 2 days ago, we're in the future don't look back at that, look foward." The law of the land must come before implementation of public policy.

    ReplyDelete