Guess which torture method was used

In a Michigan speech, Bush spoke out about his administration's efforts to combat terrorism.

Up until yesterday, when former Pres. George W. Bush seemed happily ensconced in his new Dallas home, we hadn’t heard much from him on the torture debate.

We’d heard plenty from former VP Dick Cheney, but not the former president.

That’s over.

In his speech Thursday, Bush did say this:

“Nothing I am saying is meant to criticize my successor. There are plenty of people who have weighed in. Trust me, having seen it firsthand. I didn’t like it when a former president criticized me, so therefore I am not going to criticize my successor. I wish him all the best.”

That tone is less sharp tone that Cheney’s, at least. Bush is in Toronto today to appear at a forum with former Pres. Bill Clinton.

I know we’ve already talked about releasing those damning photos — the content of which seems up for debate — but much of this talk would be moot if the American public was in on some secrets. Yes, I know information is a weapon in times of war, but so is withheld information. The talk around what went on during those torture sessions is increasingly awful. Tell us. Show us. Let us decide.

Published by datingjesus

Just another one of God's children.

Join the Conversation


  1. As soon as the most vocal members of society demonstrate their ability to thorough research, understand current law, and engage in reason discussion, then I will support your “Tell us. Show us. Let us decide.”

    Until then, I think it would be a pointless exercise in teaching monkees to throw crap.

    1. Meaning the monkeys already know how to throw crap? I am judging America based on what corner I know and I think — I honesty do, naive though this sounds — that the American people are smart enough to make their decisions for themselves, given all the information.

  2. “given all the information.”

    …and with as little spin as possible, thank you very much.

    1. Absolutely. Which I know is wickedly hard to do, but if I didn’t think Americans couldn’t make good decisions given the proper information, I’d get out of journalism as what would be the point?

  3. I suggest you do some reading on the economics of information and how much is needed for effective decision-making. “All” tends to be way too much and causes people to resort to emotion or anecdote.

    Look again at the gay marriage issue: Is there really any information missing to cause people not to make the right decisions?

    Look at voting patterns across the nation. Are people making good decisions? Are they even reading all the information available before voting?

    yes, I’m cynical. But I study decision-making and how to provide data and information to improve decisions and policy.

    1. So what is missing in the information provided to make a good decision about gay marriage? I think in that instance, you’re going up against tradition and religion — some people’s interpretation of it, anyway — and what’s needed is more information on both counts, but especially, religion. It is a fascinating study, though, huh?

  4. I’ve been struggling to make sense of the unprecedented presence of the former Vice-President and now former President in the torture debate. Besides resorting to the usual Bacevich/Niebuhr resources, I’ve even dug out the Talmon and Marcuse. (I know. Marcuse? Something about those Germans.) If one buys into the Bacevich view of the defacto one party state, it makes the rereading of “Totalitarian Democracy” and “Repressive Tolerance” positively unnerving.
    I’m convinced we’ll never see the evidence in question. We’ll never know the true extent of the depth of the torture conspiracy, how far it reached into Congress, the DOJ and the mainstream media. I see the public rationalizations by Cheney and others in the previous administration, and Obama’s (orchestrated?) tolerance of those views as collusion to avoid any prosecutions or truth commission, and as a way to draw attention away from subjects the current administration wishes would escape mainstream critical scrutiny.
    But I could be just paranoid.

    1. If you’re paranoid, then maybe I am, too. I don’t even know what I’m asking for when I say we should get more information on this — we being the American people. I am never comfortable with someone not telling me something “for my own good.”

      1. I don’t know what to ask for, either. The conglomeration of information out there is daunting. What do we know? What don’t we know? The cherry-picking and spinning of information in the media has me wishing Spain would take a more decisive step toward pursuing it’s United Nations mandate. I don’t think we can get an objective critical analysis at home.

        1. It sounded for a while as if Spain would take the lead and you’re right; that might have been the best way.

Leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: