I'm with the Kurts. Bravo, MK.

 musik_knut wrote: 
Well put Mr Knut.

No governement, not even the USA will ever prosecute itself for torturing the enemy.  By the time you declare war, and start the killing, you are pretty certain that you are right and have already forgiven yourself everything to come.  In our case revenge against twenty people from one country, or at least one mission, is enough to spur the torture of many in another country completely unrelated except by religion ... but I digress.

Until we have an international body with some moral authority, we in the western world just need to vote for people with a conscience. 

By the way, it's very possiblem, and rumors have always been, that all our Presidents have sent, or "had" certain people sent to detention camps known for using "harsh questioning techniques".  It may not be as unusual as we think, so let's not act like we're totally shocked.

 musik_knut wrote: 

Well said, thanks.

 musik_knut wrote: 
The memos were released because an unknown party sued using the Freedom of Information Act, so they were going to be released anyway.

I don't care what they did. We don't do that. That is why we are not terrorists. That is why we are "the greatest country in the world." We have rights, protected by the Bill of Rights, and it doesn't say just Americans.

 Welly wrote: 

Mr. Bush rode off to the sunsets of Texas. He has kept to his word not to criticize Mr. Obama. That's how it was done for the longest time. And then, Al Gore pretty much broke the mold *someone on another thread wrote how Mr. Gore had kept his nose out of politics, that is patently false* by repeatedly attacking not only Mr. Bush's policies, but Mr. Bush himself and in one of the more disgusting attacks against a sitting US President and his policies and done so while on foreign soil, Mr. Gore blistered US Policy in front of a very approving and appreciative audience in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. In my political memory, there are two national politicians who did not honor the code of silence, if you will, and they are Mr. Carter and Mr. Gore. *as a throw away point, Sen. Kerry too,  found it accetable to attack US Policy while on foreign soil*
As for Mr. Cheney. He feels actions taken while he and Mr. Bush were in power, are being distorted, twisted if you will, and all for political purpose. He would like the story set straight, at least on intel matters.
Would you not fight for materials that prove your points? Materials held by those who spear you at every turn? I know I would.
This is a big deal South of the 49th. Our Speaker has called out The CIA. The CIA, under a former Rep. in The House, a Democrat, has called her on her call. Some are almost asking the certain individuals be boiled in oil, while those claiming innocence or understandable actions, are blocked at each turn. This is both a national security fight and a Party free for all, including in-Party fighting *see: Speaker Pelosi and CIA Director and Former US Rep, D-CA, Leon Panetta*. Mr. Obama would like to appear to be beyond the fray in this matter, but he authorized certain memos for release, those which question Team Bush actions, and blocks those which would prove some actions taken by Team Bush, were of great benefit to the safety of The People, here and abroad.
Some good old fashioned bare-knuckle politics in full view.

 musik_knut wrote: 
No, sorry,  I meant in general. Not on this most recent topic (which seems to have utterly entranced everyone south of the 49th).
Cheney has been the go-to talking head for the right-hand side of the equation since he left office. I guess things are just done differently here. When you lose an election you go off and retire and write a book or something and let the new blood take over.

 Welly wrote: 

They don't have a leader that has broad appeal to non-base-Republicans. I'm okay with that. Let them run Palin in 2012, or whoever. Won't matter. Anybody remember Wendell Wilkie?

 Welly wrote: 

Real simple: Mr. Obama authorized the release of certain memos pertaining to those detained in Gitmo, memos that outlined certain enhanced interrogation techniques. The revelation of such techniques were used to thrust attacks against Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney. Mr. Cheney asked that memos showing invaluable intel was gleamed from some of those detained at Gitmo, intel that might well have saved  perhaps hundreds of thousands of lives. No, those can't be released, they would compromise methodologies used. Well, that is exactly what the released memos did. So, in short, Mr. Cheney asks that memos which would support his contention that lives were saved by employed methods, be released given that memos that were released clearly had a political purpose. That purpose was two-fold: what was done at Gitmo and who authorized it. It was a blunt political club wielded by Team Obama. I think in fairness, Mr. Cheney's requests should be honored. As an added bonus, Mr. Cheney's requests, if honored, would buttress the contention that certain interrogation techniques did/do save lives. A point supported by President Obama's intel czar, Mr. Dennis Blair.
Why not offer the additional memos for public review? Mr. Obama has already compromised sensitive national security information. It can not be further compromised. So, why not honor the requests of Mr. Cheney? Politics, raw, pure and simple won't allow it.
As for why is he still talking? Last I heard, he was still a free man in a free country. We've not yet reached the point that ousted public servants are subject to exile, even though some seem to move along those thought lines. May they never realize such a goal.

 dionysius wrote: 
Is it because the Republican party doesn't seem to have a leader right now - no one with authority to represent their views?

Oh and BTW -

 Welly wrote: 

There is still a constituency—small, and thankfully powerless, as of this moment—in the US for his point of view, if (pur)blindness can be considered a point of view. There's no fool like an obstinate fool.

 oldslabsides wrote: 

I didn't mean literally! "Modern" Americans don't have balls, as may be, but they do have mouths.

Cheney, 'Dick' - what an apt description.

Why is this man still talking and, more to the point,  why is anyone, including the media, listening?

 dionysius wrote: 
I don't that's even a remote possibility - modern Americans don't have the balls.

Prosecute - to the fullest extent of the law.

 oldslabsides wrote: 

Bingo. We do agree, capitalist roader. But presidential pardons can do the heavy lifting of censure, without the downside of a civil war between Blue and Red over actual trials. Let them retire to well-deserved ignominy. Best thing next to Leavenworth, which should save for the hands-on terrorists.

 hippiechick wrote: 

I didn't address the issue of torture anymore than I touched on the preposterous notion of a coup.
With that said, Mr. Cheney must know something if he asks that memos outlining successful stops on planned attacks be released. Again, those previously released revealed methodologies, those being held back are done so in order to protect methodologies. Sorry, but that puts two actions in opposition to each other while they share a common point: methodologies.
Raw politics from Team Obama. Again, nothing new and not remotely change.
When someone calls someone else a liar, they should prepare to support that. Mr. Cheney is prepared to stand by certain documents. Mr. Obama is prepared to play political games. Lets not tap dance around the point that the  memos released were done so in order to take a jab at the previous administration, something that seems to increasingly occupy Mr. Obama's time and thoughts. A simple request from Mr. Cheney doesn't seem out of bounds, especially when if, as he states, they would show there was some solid intel gain from those held at Gitmo. By the way, torture is taking off someone's head, slowly, after hours of mental torment. And how best to make the beheadment, torturous? Use, as they did, a dull blade. No one on the LEFT talks of that. No, they prefer to work worry beads because some low life scum committed to killing any and all of us, got a face full of water. Pardon me while I don't join the latest save-a-committed jihadist movement or might we better call it a pity party for the type of dark souls who would reward any kindness by assuring you your death.

 dionysius wrote: 
Delusion is a hallmark of the megalomaniac mind.

As for accountability and prosecution, I'm all for it.  Until we hold people accountable for their actions, we can expect continued bad behavior.

 Zep wrote: 
He must know he already stands convicted in that court. I think that his recent mouth motions are more motivated by tainting the jury pool in other, more literal courts. If not for him personally, for toadies like Libby. If he really thinks he's spinning the "objective judgment of history" then he's delusional as well as mendacious.

Otherwise, I do like what Lazy8 has to say on this subject below. And I still believe that blanket pardons issued by Obama could give the Bushies an ethics spanking while also sparing the country the trauma of trials or even truth commissions.   

 musik_knut wrote: 
I disagree. Torture is wrong...period. And Cheney is a liar.

 hippiechick wrote: 

Mr. Cheney asked that those memos which would show attacks that were thwarted, be released. That request was denied, in part on the premise to do so would reveal intel methodologies. And the memos that were released didn't do just that?
Some folks might not like it, might not wish to hear it, but the President who has told us to look forward, spends an inordinate amount of time looking backward. Releasing memos Mr. Cheney says would shed light on successes would remove one of the attacking points expressed while looking backward.
Those memos released served a political purpose. Those being held might do the same, only they might be of benefit to someone on the other side of the political aisle.
Raw politics in action...again, not a sign of change.