Friday, April 24, 2009

More Pathetic, Media Excuses For Not Prosecuting Torture

This video shows yet more pathetic, faux discussions about torture among our media personalities where they provide excuse after excuse for why we shouldn't prosecute. They decide in advance they don't want prosecutions and then work backward to provide excuses for why they are right. Amazing.  

They also bemoan that this issue is turning into a "political" fight when it is they themselves who have framed this issue as a political one by once again characterizing it as coming from people on the "left". 

There are many mind numbing comments made in this "discussion" but these two in particular stood out for me.

Pat Buchanan: ...we know what happened to these people, we know who did it, we know who authorized it, we know the deciders decided -
people on the other side, I would say on the left are coming to this saying look this is Nuremberg, we have crimes against humanity here, they've already decided in their hearts this is evil, wicked and wrong and when you have those things the people that made the decisions have to be prosecuted because that's the right thing to do. In other words they come to it with conclusions already and this is what you're running into on the other side.

So Pat Buchanan tells us that "we know what happened", "we know who did it", "we know who authorized it" and "we know the deciders decided" yet he thinks people who advocate for prosecutions for what was done (people on the "left") are somehow unreasonable for coming to the same conclusions that Pat did. We know what happened, who did it, and who authorized it just like Pat. The only difference between our two positions is that Pat won't admit that the evidence shows that we used torture. Pat and others like him can't admit that what we did was torture because to do so means that he'd have to then admit that the Bush administration authorized crimes and if they authorized crimes they need to be prosecuted for them.  

But Joe Scarborough figures out how to eliminate that problem by saying:  

Scarborough: What we need to figure out is, in this new world. what is torture?

Yup, ole Joe figures the only way out of coming to the logical conclusion to prosecute for torture is to try to change the definition of torture just like the Bush administration did in the first place when they wanted to manufacture faux legal cover to in order to torture. 

Yeah, Joe, it's all about the definition, just like when Clinton wanted to define the meaning of what the word is, is. Right.

No comments:

Post a Comment

* If you post using the "anonymous" profile you can still include whatever name you wish to use at the end of your comment.