Posted on 02/01/2009 10:30:58 PM PST by season_bug
It sounds sadistic but the deafening cry of the socialist Left and their radical Liberal satellites to hang the former Republican president and vice president for alleged “war crimes” is reaches far beyond Bush and Cheney themselves. The sword of anger is drawn not only to get them but also to strike down all U.S. presidents living or dead accused of genocide by foes abroad and by the enemy within.
Let us clear this confusion generated by victorious socialist Democrats who are now publicly perceived as intoxicated by their newly found power since Obama won the last presidential election.
The radical Left and their socialist Liberal colleagues are even more angry and restless now that Bush has left office because I think in his absence, they have to look for another punching bag. But if anyone thinks they have forgiven Bush of his alleged “war crimes” -- real or imagined -- that would be an embarrassing assumption.
Obama’s legal hatchet men who are in many ways declaring that vengeance is ours and sweet, argue that Bush and Cheney violated the law against “torture” and must be persecuted – I mean prosecuted -- because it is the law, and if found guilty hanged by the neck … but was not torture called “waterboarding” which they claimed is a crime against humanity justified on record under the dicta of the military tribunal also created by law?
When those apprehended terrorists detonate their dirty bombs, would anyone very much dead and buried under the ground care about violation of their human rights? A realist once copy-furnished me a copy of his e-mail addressed to what he thought were terrorist human rights coddlers in this country: Save me first by not being killed by your terrorists, before you talk to me of “torture” in violation of the terrorists’ human rights!
To prevent any emotional reactions to this very controversial issue from turning into a vitriolic word war, let’s define and confine this accusation of “war crime” only on “torture” and “who” were tortured if such is the case, for public discussion purposes. Outside of this perimeter, reactions like attacks on personalities would be irrelevant.
For example, in responding, let’s not react by simply saying that Edwin Sumcad who is bringing up this matter for public scrutiny “is in the payroll of President Bush” or “Edwin, we know who is paying your bill” kind of childish shenanigans and immature stuff that distract us from focusing on the problem.
These delinquent biases are too retarded to carry as a personal baggage into print, and will not produce any intelligent discussion in this Forum.
The problem is more serious than it is seen in the surface. Our homeland security and intelligence officers, let alone the entire U.S. Armed Forces, knowing pretty well that to obey the command orders of the President of the United States who is their Commander-In-Chief, were in fact willingly participating in committing crimes against humanity – as Bush’s accusers want the American public to believe.
Shall we round up thousands of them who actually did it, be investigated together with their Commander-In-Chief as accomplices in committing “war crimes”, and if found guilty should also be hanged by the neck until dead? Whose vengeance is sweet in this regard? We need to clear this absurdity if indeed it sounds like insanity.
One last reminder: If you think “torture” was conducted solely for the amusement of sadistic and sick individuals in the military, move over I am joining your protest against it.
If the government is doing this for fun as you think it is, the Libertarian in us although I am not a Libertarian, will find the likes of me in the forefront of the campaign against this atrocious violation of our liberty and freedom.
Unfortunately “torture” strictly for fun as a crime against humanity is not the subject of discussion.
So there we are. The perimeters within which we may debate this problem are clearly drawn. Let’s do it for the interest of the American public, and for the commonweal.
Let’s consider it a duty of every American citizen to clear up this absurdity – if indeed it is – of investigating past presidents who one way or another have been accused of “war crimes” by enemies outside of our borders that in the past we have vanquished and some of them we are still vanquishing in today’s on-going wars, together with Bush and Cheney who were accused by the enemy within of having committed not only “genocides” or crimes against humanity but against the people of the United States.
We have fought many wars the results of which had shaped up our destiny. Since in fighting those wars U.S. presidents living or dead have been accused of genocide by foes abroad and by the enemy within, this precedent that has no parallel in history about to be created and established under the Obama regime, may make the hanging of a U.S. president possible within the vortex of a promised change in the coming of an African-American Messiah. # Read full story in …Hanging: The Light To Share
© Copyright Edwin A. Sumcad. Freerepublic.com access February 2, 2009.
The writer is an award-winning journalist. Know more about the author by reading his published editorials and feature articles or you may e-mail your comment at ed.superx722@yahoo.com.sg
For those lurkers who aren’t sure about this war crimes thing — I’ll help you out.
President Bush did not commit war crimes.
Vice-President Cheney did not commit war crimes.
Those who “perceive” that they did are today’s
STUCK ON STUPID winners.
While I agree with the points attempted in this article outtake, I find the sentences needlessly long, and the language and grammar to be stilted and unwieldy in structure, lacking in clarity.
I am accustomed to reading writing which poses a genuine challenge - such as William F Buckley, Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Leo Tolstoi...so it is not the density of ideas that perturbs.
I find it challenging to look at this as the work of a seasoned and award-winning journalist. I believe another pass at this subject could yield better results, and an argument that would render the subject matter accessible and understandable, not clouded and distant would benefit supporters of this POV.
A.A.C.
What does #8220 mean?
“ and ” translate to “ and ”Ahhhhhhh, I’ve always wondered what that meant. Thanks!
Would the editorial staff please answer this question?
If you studied Literature which include poetry and prose among other things as well as editorial writing in Development Journalism -- all offerings of knowledge in the academe -- you will find the answers to your questions.
The first thing you will know is that writing style is like a fingerprint that only identifies a particular writer.
The second thing you will know is that Shakespeare is a famous violators of the rules of grammar.
By the way, in the school of literary discipline where I have taught writers to become journalists, you will learn which rules of grammar can be at play. The grammar you have learned in school, may be identifiable from others. For instance, if you can apply the rules of grammar used in creating/writing the greatest literature in the world -- the Holy Bible -- you will know that the language and syntax are stilted and unwieldy in structure, lacking in clarity ... your own words. Boris Pasternak, one of Russia's great litterateurs has this identifiable style.
If you are a writer, I bit you have your own fingerprint in writing. The Holy Bible can only be written with such a peculiar style. You do not read the Bible and understand it, like the way you do a news report in The Washington Post. I have my own style too. Different styles in editorial writings, more so in Development Journalism, can win you awards, like I have received in more than 45 years of writings. It depends on how unique it is when it drives home a point from out of the thoughts you wish to convey. If like Shakespeare you have to violate conventional grammar in doing it, don't hesitate to do it before you lost that thought in lingual niceties. If you can move your readers that way, then you have a great potential.
Cheers!
Welcome ;-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.