by BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley
Afraid that “some of the defendants might actually be acquitted,” President Obama “is considering resuming the use of military tribunals to prosecute Guantanamo detainees.” And some of the defendants might be tried on American soil, something even George Bush feared to do. What has emboldened Obama? “He was never called to account by self-described progressives during his presidential campaign. The same individuals who chose to silence themselves throughout 2008 have continued to act like doormats for president Obama,”
Freedom Rider: Is Bush Still President?
by BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley
“Obama’s acquiescence to the old regime is outrageous in part because it is politically unnecessary.”
On January 20th of this year, George W. Bush left Washington and headed back to Texas after the inauguration of Barrack Obama. Or are those memories merely figments of our collective imagination? A quick perusal of government policy has to make one wonder, is Bush still in the White House? According to the New York Times, the Osama administration is considering resuming the use of military tribunals to prosecute Guantanamo detainees.
Candidate Obama claimed to “reject the Military Commissions Act.” Now as president, his administration makes the case for maintaining it. It is important to remember that prior to the Bush administration, terror suspects were tried in open court where they had the right to counsel and to jury verdicts.
It seems that the Obama administration is afraid that some of the defendants might actually be acquitted. Judges might ban evidence discovered under torture or the hearsay evidence of intelligence reports. Defendants would have the right to question their accusers, in this case the intelligence operatives who may have participated in their torture.
“Judges might ban evidence discovered under torture or the hearsay evidence of intelligence reports.”
Reports of the resumption of military tribunals are not the only bad news on Guantanamo and Bush era justice. In congressional testimony, Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced that Guantanamo detainees may be held on American soil. The Obama administration is going where even the Bush administration dared not. The Guantanamo apparatus was set up precisely to avoid any Constitutional inconveniences and to keep prisoners out of sight and out of mind. They didn’t want to risk waking Americans from their slumber and possibly encourage them to oppose this clear abuse of law and morality. Apparently Barrack Obama has less concern for American public opinion than did George W. Bush.
The reasons for Obama’s nonchalance are obvious. He was never called to account by self-described progressives during his presidential campaign. The same individuals who chose to silence themselves throughout 2008 have continued to act like doormats for president Obama, who as a result has the best, cushiest catbird seat of any president in recent memory.
The acquiescence to the old regime is outrageous in part because it is politically unnecessary. Only 21% of Americans are willing to claim an affiliation with the Republican party. The only good news for Republicans is that their brand can’t fare any worse than it is now. Conversely, Obama has a 68% approval rating that bests all of his predecessors at the 100-day mark. The fear of public opposition to doing the right thing is completely unwarranted.
“Obama was never called to account by self-described progressives during his presidential campaign.”
There is no rational political reason for the embrace of Bush policy. Most Americans do not trust the official explanations given for the September 11th attacks. Obama could not only close Guantanamo as he promised but he could free even those accused of planning 9/11 without fear of public disapproval outside of the Republican dead-ender crowd.
Barrack Obama is in a position to do almost anything he wants. If he keeps the military tribunal system or moves Guantanamo prisoners to the United States it is because he wants to. He believes in the rule of the ruling classes more than he believes in true democracy. Challenging that belief would have made him unacceptable as a presidential candidate.
Dismantling the Bush regime would mean dismantling the prerogatives and assumptions of entitlement carried by the people who run the country. The ruling classes like to know that no one, especially not the president, will get any big ideas about disrupting their rule. Osama is the perfect president for them.
The names change but the system doesn’t. Perhaps the president’s name should be changed to Bushama. There would no longer be any excuse for confusion. We would all know where we truly stand.
Margaret Kimberley's Freedom Rider column appears weekly in BAR. Ms. Kimberley lives in New York City, and can be reached via e-Mail at Margaret.Kimberley(at)BlackAgandaReport.Com.
Comments
Hundreds of links of london
Hundreds of links of london jewellery in stock,Free Gift Wrapping,Complete links of london jewellery collection,including necklaces,bracelets,earrings. links of london store linksoflondon links of london Bracelet links of london Charms Cheap Links Of London,Fast Deliv ery!linksoflondon silver range for 2009 including linksoflondon necklaces,Links Of London Earrings,Charms,and Bracelets links of london links of london Bracelet Earrings links of london Bracelet Necklaces The love for beauty is a nature of all human beings; the love for links jewelry is a habit of the public since various smashing links of London necklaces tiffany jewellery
The share market reacted that
The share market reacted that Obama has collected a command of economic advisers - supporters of an additional package of stimulation of economy. This package will be offered after the new president and new structure of the Congress will start the duties. Optimism of the market is caused by hope that the new government will pour in the huge sum of money of the most suffered from crisis economy sector. Other question - what there will be more remote results of such steps. Because there is a question which now do not wish to set and which Obama does not wish to answer now - whence it takes money for stimulation?
The president Bush and the Congress have already allocated 700 billion dollars to the aid of financial sector. Half of this sum is already spent. Administration Obamy at Congress support speaks about a new package of stimulation in the sum from 500 to 700 billion. In general, we speak about more than billion dollars. Agree, it is not not enough. And the government should take this money whence. For this purpose or it is necessary to raise taxes, or somewhere to borrow, or to address to the Federal reserve with the request to print more than new denominations. To raise taxes during the strongest economic recession when one bankruptcy follows another, Obama hardly will dare. To borrow? In home market - there is nobody, for banks in very heavy position. On external how it became earlier? But whether China, Russia, Saudi Arabia if it is not clear will lend to America, whether can return the USA these loans, moreover with percent? After all it is a question of billion! Then it is possible to undertake additional manufacturing of money. It conducts to even more inflation.
Any of these measures can become short-term stimulus for economy, but can deepen even more crisis later, lower dollar cost, raise inflation. Now we do not wish to think of it, but the future problems caused by such measures cannot be ignored. Obama promises to create 2,5 million workplaces by government programs of building and repair of highways, bridges, schools and so on. But this program will work, while the state in a condition to spend for it money and to pay in the worker the salary. As soon as the government will slow down or in general will stop this program, workplaces will disappear, because they are created by artificial image, they - time, they are not connected with long-term and stable manufacture which is possible only at real restoration of economy. All it, I repeat, short-term measures, instead of far-reaching decisions.
konferens
After all, the beauty of
After all, the beauty of democracies is being able to prove one's case in court and with the proper evidence. I do not know why innocent nations or leaders would refuse to show up to such a pesky little UN Conference on Racism, but I guess having to use the pen to prove one's case on a fair playing ground is harder to do when all you know is exiling people off their land.
Thanks for sharing.
regards, Light Fixtures
We have changed presidents,
We have changed presidents, but not the owning classes. Regardless of popularity, presidents who do not play the game of the ruling classes get threatened first, and if they still refuse to conform and acquiesce, they get impeached or worse even shot. The owning classes do not get touched as a result of elections. They manage ( Accounting Dissertation ) and manipulate these elections. This is especially true in these United States of America. To impact or overturn the owning classes, a good deal of initiative is needed from below in the form of massive demonstrations, protests, and general strikes. Maintaining our faith and hope in the system or the Administration ( University Dissertation ) can only prolong the pain and suffering of the majority of the working people. This might sound like pure rhetoric to some people, but try being one of the millions and millions of Americans who die of no health care coverage ( Graduate Dissertation ) , who lose their jobs, their homes, their pensions, their dignity, and I can tell you I have seen few places in the world where poverty is criminalized the way it is in this country.
550
Greetings to all,
I am an Africancan American man and I believe in the second amendment.
I do not leap to the assumption that gun ownership is is an indication of
ones criminality; of one being right wing or one being a racist. My politics
are left of center. I believe in a sane national defense policy and I believe
in eradicating crime by eradicating poverty. Those of us who are on the
left or progressives cannot leave these issues to the right wing only.
If we do its our own fault.
For two years of my youth I livded in Alaska. A state in which many people own
firearms. Those guns are used for hunting. Many there eat the game they shot.
Some people in the South still eat what they shot. Back in the 1990's I knew a
man who did that.
The Black community needs to get as involved in gun ownership as much as the
white community is. If we do not avail ourselves of the second amendment rights
its would our own fault.
I don't know why there is an increase in firearms purchases, or if whites ar the only
ones doing the buying. It would be great for someone to ask the gun ownwres and
gun sellers why this activity is going on in a time of recission. Lets find out rather
than jump to conclusions.
I like your work Ms. Kimberly. Carry on.
Eric
Military High Jinks Act
Thanks Miss Kimberly for another visit with the Truth. What did the Obama bots expect??? Most of the detainees being kept are not guilty of ANYTHING!!! They rounded up a whole lot of folks based on hearsay and bribery locked them up and threw away the key. Then torture them until they admit/confess to something. The ONLY way to get convictions would be with the military tribunals created by the Military Commissions Act. In a regular court of law most evidence that the government clams it has would NOT hold up or would not be allowed. The Bush cabal knew this, which is why they created the Military Commissions Act trying to wrap the whole charade with legal duck tape thinking nobody would see past the BS. Obama must be thinking the same thing too.
Look at the acquittals of 9/11 suspects in Germany http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4076346.stm or Spain http://www.libertysecurity.org/article2366.html, and least we forget the Liberty City 6. Two trials have already ended in mistrials (you think that the government would get a clue) but NOOOO they are on trial for a THIRD time (if at first you don’t succeed try try try and keep on trying). Reestablishing the Military Commissions Act and the CURROUPT and RIGGED show trials that would follow is the ONLY way that any of the detainees will be convicted. We have to convict SOMEBODY. We have to have some patsies to take the blame for 9/11, Iraq, Afghanistan, torture and any anything else that the government can hang on them. Besides that if we let them go then they (the detainees) will confirm for the world what we already know that WE TORTURE (Yes We Can/Do).
We just can not let all these blatant crimes go unpunished someone has to be brought to justice. We can NOT and will NOT bring the lawyers and government officials to justice NO NO NO (JUST US!!!). We can NOT and will NOT bring the Banksters to justice NO NO NO (JUST US!!!). We can NOT and will NOT bring the telecoms to justice. NO NO NO (JUST US!!!). If no one is tried and convicted for these crimes then people might start thinking that maybe just maybe all those 9/11was an inside job nuts just might be RIGHT (Oh no you didn’t). I mean they LIED to us about torture then and now. They LIED to us about the financial meltdown then and now, they LIED to us about domestic spying then and now, they LIED to us about WMD/IRAQ then and now. With all these lies now out in the open stinking up the joint ya think that they might have, could have, possible have LIED about 9/11???? Food for Thought….
Peace
S Murph
I wonder why people lament on
I wonder why people lament on missing real change after Obama historically changed color ( Economics Essay ) at the White House on January 20th, 2009. It sounds as if it were a surprise. His declaration at the annual meeting of AIPAC last year that he has “understood the Zionist idea” and the choice of his cabinet was a clear indication, who this guy is. Those happy Latinos ( Technology Essay ) and Blacks who ignored Nader and voted for this eloquent opportunist have secured the misery in the U.S. and many parts of the world for the next 4 years. Enjoy your Black Messiah tearfully and have a nice time. Drink some coca cola, eat some popcorn made of genetically modified maize, watch FoxNews and do not lament too much.
Ever Since He Was Elected
ever since he was elected guns and ammo sales have exploded. The stores have trouble keeping up with demand. What this mean is that he also has to contend with populist right-wing forces (read white supremascist) that would need only a demogogue (Rush Limbaugh anyone) and an excuse to launch the war to tke back the country from "socialist" (meaning Black) Obama.
I think it is interesting that your automatic assumption is "white supremacists" are buying up all the guns and ammo. Did you ever stop to think that there might be a more sensible explanation than that? People who are gun enthusiasts and hunters (white, black, and all shades in between) are sensing that they may no longer be able to obtain these things under this administration - or that the cost will become prohibitive. Other people probably sense a business opportunity to be had, as the demand goes up, and are investing in something for resale. Finally, in bad economic times budgets are cut and police departments and emergency services are no exception. You've heard the saying, "When seconds count, the police can be there in minutes." ? It is only more true in times of cut backs, and a lot of people would rather defend themselves if necessary, rather than gamble on the timeliness of emergency services.
Interesting Indeed
Well, it is interesting that out of my whole commentary you zero in on my take on the expanding gun sales. You seem to think the reasons you give for this increase in sales is more sensible than mine. While I grant that the reason you give are also factors, you are not seeing the context from which I am coming from. If you look at the states that lack gun control laws, or at least laws as restrictive as New York, my home state, the states with the most lenient gun control laws are those of the Old Confederacy (http://www.newsbatch.com/gc-stateglaw1.html).
There are important historical reasons for this. For one, during slavery gun ownership amongst the white population was seen as a bulwark against any possible slave uprising. They certainly did not want to see another Nat Turner. Second, after losing the Civil War, Reconstruction was undermined by the not so benign negect of the federal government and finished off, often through brutal means (through "vehicles" such as the KKK), by the former planter class who was ultimately restored to their dominant position. Finally, as seen by the spate of recent mass killings, mostly by white males (see here: http://www.alternet.org/rights/139834/why_are_we_surprised_when_white_pr...), there seems to be a strong link between something in white culture, guns and mass murder.
What that might be? Considering that this is a country founded atop genocide, disposession, occupation, and slavery it is not a reach to conclude that white supremacy, as well as the rule of the gun, is fairly well entrenched in white society. We all saw how the likes of Palin and even Clinton, in more coded language, attempted to whip up this sometimes latent and sometime not racism in the tried and true electioneering methods of what is known as the "Southern Strategy". This same appeal to racism was also ised in the lead up to the attack on Iraq with talk of "shock and awe" and the painting of Saddam as the "new Hitler." Let's also not forget the recent scapegoating of Mexican immigrants and the whole Border imbrigolio where armed "patriots" took it upon themselves to patrol the U. S.-Mexican border. No, stirring up hatred of the other is as American as apple pie. Naturally, this makes the use of force of arms all the more appealing.
Again, I am not saying that your reasons are not sensible but that mine is not any less sensible considering the history of this country. In addition, why "People who are gun enthusiasts and hunters (white, black, and all shades in between) are sensing that they may no longer be able to obtain these things under this administration - or that the cost will become prohibitive[?]" They did not seem to sense this under past administrations; including Democratic ones. What is everyone getting ready for . . . white or black? If it is because of some possible future lack of police protection, which many Black folks would likely welcome (see any of the many of BAR's pieces on incarceration), what does that suggest about what state society would have reached at that point?
Perhaps another lesson from history, which I debated with a very good friend who is a Holocaust survivor, is in order. Any student of history learns that there is a pattern that seems to stand out with countries or empires that have decayed, such as Germany did towards the end of the Weimar Republic, to the point we are now witnessing with this country. Almost invariably, authoritarianism, often in a populist guise, takes hold and some minority group (guess which group is the likely candidate here) is made to be the scapegoat. We all know what follows. To close, I must add that my earlier comments were reflexive but I think understandably so. I was writing from the perspective of a commentator writing on a website that is billed as "The Journal of African-American Thought and Action." My comments thus were the expression of a Black man speaking to a Black audience. In other circumstances I would have been more expansive in my thinking. However, if history is any judge, you can call me narrow but you can't call me crazy.
Not so fast
Not so fast Ms. Kimberly. I agree with the thrust of your comments and I am certainly fan of Obama, but there is another reason to consider as to why Obama has gone in the direction he has. Recall, that a number of weeks ago after he had released the torture memos he had to hot-foot it over to CIA headquarters in Langley and mollify the spooks; there will be no prosecutions over the activities revealed in the memos.
Also recall that two weeks ago, an aircraft, supposedly Air Force One, hovered around lower Manhattan, inluding over the former WTC site, for about a half hour. This, so they could create some sort of "photo op." According to what I've read, Obama only knew about this misadventure at the eleventh hour and became absolutely furious over it. Needless to say it rattled the natives. Do you think that the brouhaha that followed was not expected? Why rattle people's cage when using photoshop would have been so much easier?
A more deeper analysis of this incident was published on the WSWS (http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/apr2009/over-a29.shtml) and it raises the same questions and comes to an uncomfortbale, but apparent, conclusion. That is, while Obama objectively and outwardly seems to have all the political capital, to use a term from the Bush years, subjectively and hidden are forces more powerful than him that he has to answer to. I do not just mean Wall Street, though that is one factor, I mean the security and military apparatus. That he was forced to kneel in front of the men-in-black at Langley and didn't even know until it was too late to stop, the wayward travels of his own Presidential jet seems to indicate his hold on power is tenuous. Should he confront these forces, it seems a coup and/or assassination would be a scenario he'd have to face.
Add to this, that ever since he was elected guns and ammo sales have exploded. The stores have trouble keeping up with demand. What this mean is that he also has to contend with populist right-wing forces (read white supremascist) that would need only a demogogue (Rush Limbaugh anyone) and an excuse to launch the war to tke back the country from "socialist" (meaning Black) Obama. As I said at the top, I am no fan of Obama. I think he is a disgrace who would be disowned by Malcolm and Repudiated by Martin. However, it seems clear to me he is afraid of something and understands that as a Black person, though he is still "loved" by many, that can turn on a dime and the forces arrayed against him will, if not leave him strung up to dry, will actively string him up should he start taking the Hope and Change bit seriously.
And expanding Bagram Prison
The excuse for continuing some of the Bush "state secrecy" request in
federal court was, "we are new". Sigh. And Bagram prison is being made larger.