« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Propaganda To Discredit Andover Dean's Call For War Crimes Indictments of American Officials
Massachusetts School of Law Dean Lawrence R. Velvel is planning a September 2008 conference to discuss war crimes prosecutions against United States officials, contractors, and other personnel:
Conference: "Planning For The Prosecution Of High Level American War Criminals" (Press release)The conference is in the planning stages, but the propaganda to pre-emptively discredit the results are surfacing.
One of the lessons of Nuremberg was the extensive propaganda to dissuade civilized conduct and legal compliance. It's an open question how this White House is using its connections with the media and legal community to derail the war crimes conference:
"The Nazi conspirators imposed a supervision of all cultural activities,And
controlled the dissemination of information and the expression of
opinion within Germany as well as the movement of intelligence of all
kinds from and into Germany, and created vast propaganda machines." From
"When their expanding aims and purposes became finally so great as toOne area to monitor is the President's propaganda to undermine, discredit and marginalize the conference, as we saw with the DoD military analyst emails.
provoke such strength of resistance as could be overthrown only by
armed force and aggressive war, and not simply by the opportunistic
methods theretofore used, such as fraud, deceit, threats, intimidation,
fifth column activities, and propaganda, the Nazi conspirators
deliberately planned, determined upon, and launched their aggressive
wars and wars in violation of international treaties, agreements, and
assurances by the phases and steps hereinafter more particularly
described." From
Notice the flawed arguments to dissuade action on an investigation and war crimes prosecutions:
Appeal to intelligence, 1996 Andover Graduate: "The dean is really too smart to believe this unpatriotic rhetoric." FromIt defies reason to argue someone be "too smart" to do something, absent an investigation to consider the next steps. Those who launched the illegal war of aggression appealed to "patriotism" to squelch dissent.
This is an appeal to emotion, and fails to explain how an investigation in 2008 will defame someone for actions in WWII:
Irrelevant, appeal to emotion: "Something like this certainly defames my father's memory" FromThe comparison between FDR's WWII and this President's war crimes is absurd. Unlike WWII where FDR waged lawful combat against illegal activity, this President illegally mobilized the nation for war on a false pretense. Civilized nations are only "legitimate" if they follow and enforce written laws. Investigation of these war crimes has nothing to do with "defamation" but with rescuing United States' government legitimacy and sovereignty.
Here's the insinuation that there might be trouble simply discussing what to do about war crimes:
Appeal to fear, uncertainty: "I would certainly feel much better if this [war crimes conference] isn't held on campus, if for no other reason than a matter of safety" FromThe above argument is implicitly suggests, "If we practice democracy, we're going to die." How silly, especially without any evidence of trouble.
The Nazis had a bad habit of making inconvenient things -- war crimes evidence -- disappear. If there was "nothing wrong," the GOP and US government should be willing to let their "great actions" be subject to public scrutiny, celebrated, and memorialized.
It defies reason to destroy CIA tapes of interrogations after the DOJ OLC warned POWs might have standing to bring suit. Foreseeable litigation would well establish a requirement to retain data, especially after Addington and CIA's Rizzo visited Guantanamo. The only reasonable explanation for the CIA tape destruction was an alleged criminal enterprise to thwart war crimes prosecutors, and subsequent war crime.
Advertisement
Comments (14)
Here is something similar to the "take impeachment off the table"-argument. It's the appeal to harmony:
What a disappointment. Fortunately, DOJ OLC well advised the government that US government officials could be extradicted for war crimes.
This circular argument absurdly-implicitly suggests criminal activity should be expected or required of public servants:
Did you get that: "If we enforce the Constitution, that will cause instability in government." But the framers in Federalist 77 said stability and safety were the fruit of enforcement:
If there is evidence of criminal activity, that evidence should be presented before a tribuanl.
The leaders had a choice: Follow the law; remove themselves; or do something illegal. They chose to stay. The question is whether their conduct was or wasn't within what the law permitted.
One absurd argument is that law enforcement is a threat to democracy. How willy. The Constitution requires enforcement of the law.
It is speculative that law enforcement will undermine the government. Those who say a prosecution "will" criminalize public service and dissuade public service, fail to address how a legal compliance program would attract the public to government service.
July 20, 2008 5:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
A flaw of the Administration's defense:
Once they argue the orders were "bottom up", and there was "no" top-down direction, they implicitly admit:
- They were not in command, as required by the laws of war for lawful combatants [Someone was in command, or should have been after Congress issued the AUMF];
- The President was not, as required, controlling military forces under his lawful control [This clailm defies reason, as he did order the troops into combat];
- Those under his command, but "not" following lawful orders, were unlawful combatants [This is a possible argument to justify stripping Americans of some Geneva protections.].
Either:
B. The President leaves all other US government officials hanging out to dry, suggesting that they alone were responsible.
That's hardly an example of leadership, command authority, or a model the US government and GOP can credibly argue for voter support or greater access to power.
The President has no credible defense. He can only shift the burden and war crimes liability. This hardly buries the war crimes problem, only creates more contradictions within their fleeting defense.
July 20, 2008 5:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are seriously deranged. Sadaam broke the terms of the 91 cease fire agreement by firing on planes in the no fly zone. Bush was authorized under that agreement to resume the war. IT makes no difference what other reasons Bush may have presented to further justify his actions, it is not a war crime. This is a sad commentary on the level of stupidity at our universities.
July 20, 2008 6:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is a sad commentary on theCleverBulldog's ability to think.
July 20, 2008 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, there ya go, a slam dunk argument for invasion.
Funny how Bush never brought it up during the run-up to the invasion.
Smoking gun... mushroom cloud....
Right.
July 21, 2008 4:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, Testing, for keeping these issues from falling into the memory hole.
recommended.
July 20, 2008 10:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
yeah, Bull's another case of trickle-down dementia and corruption.
thanks, testing! The whole world will rejoice to have our criminal admin prosecuted according to the laws of civilizations everywhere ...
July 20, 2008 10:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
It only takes one with hope to show why the propaganda will fail.
You -- yes, you reading this TPMM comment thread, now -- are one of those people. You are not alone. The hopeless, forced to rely on propaganda, want to avoid the needed discipline required to ensure they remain civilized. The rules were clear. It is our job to enforce them.
They will learn. The hopeful will compel them to embrace the education through prosecutions. This was foreseeable.
July 21, 2008 2:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Chime me in!
Nice work as I always say, Testing.
Bravo!
Now, if only WE could ITMFA.
July 21, 2008 2:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Memo:
There will be no justice served.
Thanks for reminding me of this maddening fact.
Back to your cubicle.
July 21, 2008 3:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
testing ,
Thank you for your perserverance and excellent research . Now we all need to stand togather in defending our Constitution, -against 'enemies foreign & DOMESTIC" ( did you read that Clever Bulldog ?) .
And Centerpunch - there will be justice - there are more of us then there are of them -
This is far from being over ,,,,gwb 43 is on notice now for war crimes ,,,repeating there are more of us , then there are of them,,,( did you also read /copy that Bulldog ? )
July 21, 2008 7:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
testing
July 21, 2008 9:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am the Canadian coordinator for the war crimes conference. I am having trouble with Toronto Police protecting me -- yesterday, both me and my son were nearly run over by Blackwater trucks (They've been harassing me since way back in November, and I've nearly been killed twice by MOSSAD !!). They allow my information to be stolen, too, inside my apartment. If anyone would like to assist us, the phone number for my local precinct is 416 808 5300. My son's division was a lot more accomodating when I called them, but they can be reached, too at
414 808 1300.
Many thanks to anyone who will call them. It's VERY scary going out into the street anymore.
July 22, 2008 6:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Lady,
It is clear that you are suffering from paranoid delusions. Please seek medical assistance before you hurt yourself and others.
July 26, 2008 2:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment