------------------------------
Olbermann: And lastly, as promised, a Special Comment tonight on the signing of the Military Commissions Act and the loss of Habeas Corpus.
We have lived as if in a trance.We have lived… as people in fear.
And now — our rights and our freedoms in peril — we slowly awake to learn that we have been afraid… of the wrong thing.
Therefore, tonight, have we truly become, the inheritors of our American legacy.
For, on this first full day that the Military Commissions Act is in force, we now face what our ancestors faced, at other times of exaggerated crisis and melodramatic fear-mongering:
A government more dangerous to our liberty, than is the enemy it claims to protect us from.
We have been here before — and we have been here before led here — by men better and wiser and nobler than George W. Bush.
We have been here when President John Adams insisted that the Alien and Sedition Acts were necessary to save American lives — only to watch him use those Acts to jail newspaper editors.
American newspaper editors, in American jails, for things they wrote, about America.
We have been here, when President Woodrow Wilson insisted that the Espionage Act was necessary to save American lives — only to watch him use that Act to prosecute 2,000 Americans, especially those he disparaged as "Hyphenated Americans," most of whom were guilty only of advocating peace in a time of war.
American public speakers, in American jails, for things they said, about America.
And we have been here when President Franklin D. Roosevelt insisted that Executive Order 9-0-6-6 was necessary to save American lives — only to watch him use that Order to imprison and pauperize 110-thousand Americans…
While his man-in-charge…
General DeWitt, told Congress: "It makes no difference whether he is an American citizen — he is still a Japanese."
American citizens, in American camps, for something they neither wrote nor said nor did — but for the choices they or their ancestors had made, about coming to America.
Each of these actions was undertaken for the most vital, the most urgent, the most inescapable of reasons.
And each, was a betrayal of that for which the President who advocated them, claimed to be fighting.
Adams and his party were swept from office, and the Alien and Sedition Acts erased.
Many of the very people Wilson silenced, survived him, and…
…one of them even ran to succeed him, and got 900-thousand votes… though his Presidential campaign was conducted entirely… from his jail cell.
And Roosevelt's internment of the Japanese was not merely the worst blight on his record, but it would necessitate a formal apology from the government of the United States, to the citizens of the United States, whose lives it ruined.
The most vital… the most urgent… the most inescapable of reasons.
In times of fright, we have been, only human.
We have let Roosevelt's "fear of fear itself" overtake us.
We have listened to the little voice inside that has said "the wolf is at the door; this will be temporary; this will be precise; this too shall pass."
We have accepted, that the only way to stop the terrorists, is to let the government become just a little bit like the terrorists.
Just the way we once accepted that the only way to stop the Soviets, was to let the government become just a little bit like the Soviets.
Or substitute… the Japanese.
Or the Germans.
Or the Socialists.
Or the Anarchists.
Or the Immigrants.
Or the British.
Or the Aliens.
The most vital, the most urgent, the most inescapable of reasons.
And, always, always… wrong.
"With the distance of history, the questions will be narrowed and few: Did this generation of Americans take the threat seriously, and did we do what it takes to defeat that threat?"
Wise words.
And ironic ones, Mr. Bush.
Your own, of course, yesterday, in signing the Military Commissions Act.
You spoke so much more than you know, Sir.
Sadly — of course — the distance of history will recognize that the threat this generation of Americans needed to take seriously… was you.
We have a long and painful history of ignoring the prophecy attributed to Benjamin Franklin that "those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
But even within this history, we have not before codified, the poisoning of Habeas Corpus, that wellspring of protection from which all essential liberties flow.
You, sir, have now befouled that spring.
You, sir, have now given us chaos and called it order.
You, sir, have now imposed subjugation and called it freedom.
For the most vital… the most urgent… the most inescapable of reasons.
And — again, Mr. Bush — all of them, wrong.
We have handed a blank check drawn against our freedom to a man who has said it is unacceptable to compare anything this country has ever done, to anything the terrorists have ever done.
We have handed a blank check drawn against our freedom to a man who has insisted again that "the United States does not torture. It's against our laws and it's against our values" and who has said it with a straight face while the pictures from Abu Ghraib Prison and the stories of Waterboarding figuratively fade in and out, around him.
We have handed a blank check drawn against our freedom to a man who may now, if he so decides, declare not merely any non-American citizens "Unlawful Enemy Combatants" and ship them somewhere — anywhere — but may now, if he so decides, declare you an "Unlawful Enemy Combatant" and ship you somewhere - anywhere.
And if you think this, hyperbole or hysteria… ask the newspaper editors when John Adams was President, or the pacifists when Woodrow Wilson was President, or the Japanese at Manzanar when Franklin Roosevelt was President.
And if you somehow think Habeas Corpus has not been suspended for American citizens but only for everybody else, ask yourself this: If you are pulled off the street tomorrow, and they call you an alien or an undocumented immigrant or an "unlawful enemy combatant" — exactly how are you going to convince them to give you a court hearing to prove you are not? Do you think this Attorney General is going to help you?
This President now has his blank check.
He lied to get it.
He lied as he received it.
Is there any reason to even hope, he has not lied about how he intends to use it, nor who he intends to use it against?
"These military commissions will provide a fair trial," you told us yesterday, Mr. Bush. "In which the accused are presumed innocent, have access to an attorney, and can hear all the evidence against them."
'Presumed innocent,' Mr. Bush?
The very piece of paper you signed as you said that, allows for the detainees to be abused up to the point just before they sustain "serious mental and physical trauma" in the hope of getting them to incriminate themselves, and may no longer even invoke The Geneva Conventions in their own defense.
'Access to an attorney,' Mr. Bush?
Lieutenant Commander Charles Swift said on this program, Sir, and to the Supreme Court, that he was only granted access to his detainee defendant, on the promise that the detainee would plead guilty.
'Hearing all the evidence,' Mr. Bush?
The Military Commissions act specifically permits the introduction of classified evidence not made available to the defense.
Your words are lies, Sir.
They are lies, that imperil us all.
"One of the terrorists believed to have planned the 9/11 attacks," …you told us yesterday… "said he hoped the attacks would be the beginning of the end of America."
That terrorist, sir, could only hope.
Not his actions, nor the actions of a ceaseless line of terrorists (real or imagined), could measure up to what you have wrought.
Habeas Corpus? Gone.
The Geneva Conventions? Optional.
The Moral Force we shined outwards to the world as an eternal beacon, and inwards at ourselves as an eternal protection? Snuffed out.
These things you have done, Mr. Bush… they would be "the beginning of the end of America."
And did it even occur to you once sir — somewhere in amidst those eight separate, gruesome, intentional, terroristic invocations of the horrors of 9/11 — that with only a little further shift in this world we now know — just a touch more repudiation of all of that for which our patriots died —
Did it ever occur to you once, that in just 27 months and two days from now when you leave office, some irresponsible future President and a "competent tribunal" of lackeys would be entitled, by the actions of your own hand, to declare the status of "Unlawful Enemy Combatant" for… and convene a Military Commission to try… not John Walker Lindh, but George Walker Bush?
For the most vital, the most urgent, the most inescapable of reasons.
And doubtless, sir, all of them — as always — wrong.
Joe Scarborough is next.
Good night, and good luck.
Video - WMV Video - QT


Comments: 35
Could Margaret Atwood be prescient?
My Pet Goat - a book that will forever live in infamy.
I wish everyone could read this. It's alarmingly true.
Deep breaths...
And then there are the 'law writers' who bring the unsigned laws to the table for signing.
Dick
Will K Evans is one of our most exciting new writers and philosophers, whose energy in political debate and ability to find the exact apercu to fit the burning issue at hand and bring it to the level of the tesseract in the square's extended hologram, is only matched by his passion for the most verifiable truth, since he knows he lives sincerely in a world of prevaricators and unreliable witnesses.
Keith Olbermann is clearly a Paul Goodman meets William Morrow for our times: Just as Garrison Keillor two weeks ago eloquently lamented the infringement on civil rights in America in Bushland as an ominous sign of a changed view of our very Constitution, Olbermann in this riveting and rousing speech attains a sort of collective authority of deep wisdom that he transmits into a scathing indictment of lies covering failed policy shrouding over an unspeakable (and in my mind, traitorous) agenda of an arrogant President who has been propelled by his spider czar Veep Cheney and his city-state style consiglieri Rove to imperial hubris and a cynical vision of our polis and the nations greater purpose. We have become the worst of ourselves, instead of the best, torturing innocents and claiming divine dominion over earth, sea, sky, firepower, and now space. This Administration has done more harm to America's definition of its own sovereignty because of unlimited power (which is a dangerous Texan fantasy, just as the appalling 'iteration' of the country's "greatness" that is the bext index of its precipitous decline under this absolute nadir of Presidential authority and American prestige.
Thank you, Will, for your courage and civic-mindedness. I see you got into the low '8's on this one, which suggests you've been doubly flamed. I was glad to see Ali back you on this one.
And even gladder--a complete non sequitur-to see Adam Crossland's handsome face for the first time. Adam, when did you shed the superhero costume? I've been gone for a while. I like the Crossland mug--you've got a face that should be in a Cassavetes film.
I am absolutely amazed that all the Bushies havent found this article to blast with their GOP propaganda.
Looney? hmmm - please define, site examples from which we can all draw and derive the same from your inductively arrived argument as to lunacy. Finally - if serious, don't play with people who know argument and logic unless your serious. We play here - and that's good - but when we play the argument game - bring a logical framework to fire your arrows. I refer you humbly, sir, to my article from a long ass time ago (May, 2006) on just that thing -
Introduction to Logic on Gather.
http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474976751924
- Look forward to more discussion on this.
-w
Adam, I hear ya there. (and yes, Screw Xmas)
ordered a martini,
and pured it on the floor of Charlies
at lunch today --
for our fallen homie.
R.I.P.
Well, speaking of ad hominum attacks thanks for that one, sort of hypocritical of you but I guess we'll ignore that! Actually I started with a question, when did K.O. turn into a weathervane of truth and defender of the faith? That is what I started with. I watch K.O. from time to time and he uses a great deal of drama in his "lectures", my opinion. Your ad hominum references might be better applied to him (You spoke so much more than you know, Sir., We have been here before — and we have been here before led here — by men better and wiser and nobler than George W. Bush.) But, that would be your decision.
Maybe K.O. is voicing his opinion which you seem to accept, or allow. Oddly, you do not extend that same courtesy to me. My opinion, K.O. rants, a little too dramatically for me, and he sounds a little loony as well. But that is my opinion. I submit the following (If you are pulled off the street tomorrow, and they call you an alien or an undocumented immigrant or an "unlawful enemy combatant", Just the way we once accepted that the only way to stop the Soviets, was to let the government become just a little bit like the Soviets., We have accepted, that the only way to stop the terrorists, is to let the government become just a little bit like the terrorists., And now — our rights and our freedoms in peril — we slowly awake to learn that we have been afraid… of the wrong thing., These things you have done, Mr. Bush… they would be "the beginning of the end of America.", Habeas Corpus? Gone. The Geneva Conventions? Optional.) My opinion is that's a lot of alarmist hyperbole and it makes him sound loony. My opinion, no need for you to posture with your arrogant presumed intellectual superiority over anyone
Individual points in history can be used to make any point. The country survived the Espionage Act, survived the Alien and Sedition Acts, survived "McCarthyism" oh and for the record, McCarty was right. The upper levels of our government were riddled with soviet spies and informants. The Venona papers show that to be true. While his methods may have been crude he was right.
The good senator from California, Diane Feinstein investigated over 700 presumed civil rights violations by the Patriot Act. Now, Sen. Feinstein is not exactly part of the "vast right wing conspiracy" the results of her investigation resulted in total of "0" (that's zero) actual violations, None. Habeas Corpus is not Gone. The Geneva Conventions has not been deemed Optional. There is plenty of information on enemy combatants and how they are to be treated in the Geneva Conventions. If you haven't read it, do so, if you have read it again. Military tribunals have been used before, successfully and will again.
So in conclusion, spare me your arrogant hypocrisy. You accuse me of ad hominum attacks and attempt to lecture me with, ad hominum attacks. I thought this was a place for discussion but you have proven your inability to engage in any that isn't in total agreement with you.
I conclude this post with my original question. When did K.O. transform into a weathervane of truth and defender of the faith?
The country did survive the Espionage and Sedition acts (the Americans imprisoned, denied fundamental rights, or killed because of that act -- not so much).
McCarthy was right?
Really?
And then true colours are shown. Should I continue - or should we sit and ponder all the ways that the McCarthy era was a good thing for America. That loyalty oaths are really and american ideal, that unsubstantiated character assassination is upholding the best and brightest ideals of this republic? Do you really believe this?
His old career is relevant to the point of whether he knows what he opines on. It is not an ad hominum attack but a question of his validity. K.O. was a over the top sports anchor, suddenly he is a constitutional expert? He was a very successful sports anchor, but does he know of which he speaks now. That is still my basic question. My opinion is he may not. Nightly broadcasts of "Bush is Wrong" will get some ratings but he is consistently in the bottom of the ratings if not last. Now, ratings may not be the measurement of knowing of what one speaks on but it can be an indicator. So when you say "I would argue that a person's previous career does not at all change the truth of what they speak." you accept what K.O. says as truth. On what grounds I ask? Looking up K.O. credentials shows he received a bachelor's of science degree in communications arts from Cornell University. I'm neither a constitutional law expert nor an expert on law in general but I do not believe a communications arts degree makes one an expert on law or the constitution. So when K.O. gives an over the top commentaries on the Bush administration I have to take into account the speakers credentials. But you have taken his commentary as gospel. Just because K.O. says it, is it so? He brings up good examples from American history but they are also the most obvious examples. It is yet to be seen whether this act will follow suit or not. Here is a cut/paste from an article describing the act. "On 29 September 2006, the U.S. House and Senate approved the Military Commissions Act of 2006, a bill which would suspend habeas corpus for any alien (noncitizen) determined to be an "unlawful enemy combatant engaged in hostilities or having supported hostilities against the United States. Notice the "alien (noncitizen)" staement So when K.O. rants about the constitution being discarded, I must take pause.
It will be in the courts immediately if it is not already. The Habeus Corpus act has been expanded and narrowed many times in the past and most likely will in the future. It was last narrowed in 1996, were you outraged then. Was that described as evisceration of the Constitution?
Please do not pretend to know my true colors from two posts to this site. And please do not misrepresent what I said. My original post stated "McCarty was right. The upper levels of our government were riddled with soviet spies and informants. The Venona papers show that to be true. While his methods may have been crude he was right." I clearly state his methods were crude but in his basic assertion he was correct. The soviet union had infiltrated our government at high levels. Much of what is attributed to McCarthyism actual happened before his time during the House Un-American Committee.
So yes, you should sit and ponder. Ponder why you must misrepresent others comments to gain an air of superiority. Ponder why you are not open to discussion with others who do not echo your own thoughts. Reviewing the posts here I see I'm the only one who posted something other than a congratulatory pat on the back. My omission was to question K.O.'s credentials. Tie me to the post and light the wood!
Here is an example of someone who did the homework when changing careers. Peter Weller is an actor of some measure. Weller also holds a masters degree in Roman and Renaissance art, and is an occasional lecturer at Universities on the subject of Hollywood and the Roman Empire. He was a featured commentator on the History Channel's documentary, Rome: Engineering an Empire. So when Peter Weller speaks on these subjects he has the credentials to be taken seriously. He has done the homework. K.O. gives no indication he has done any homework on constitutional law and his "opinion"" should be given the appropriate weight, which in my opinion is light weight. High drama antics should not be mistaken for knowledge.
I like that you know the U.S. is a Republic and that this is a "great experiment in Democracy" I forget whose quote that is but I like that you know it. Well, this post was better than the first reply. You may get the hang of a "discussion" with others of differing opinions yet. Discourse among those who do not differ is consensus not discussion.