Obama’s Cheney Dilemma

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Dougie @ 01/13/2009 9:39:52 PM

    And while he is leveling with the American people, he can tip his hand to the terror networks and assist them first hand in developing strategies to offset his. Brilliant. Headsup, appeasement does not in this war.

    • Posted By: Doc Howl @ 01/14/2009 8:27:28 AM

      Clue to the clueless: Your fearmongering crap doesn't work anymore.

  • Posted By: BOFORCE @ 01/13/2009 10:31:22 PM

    I watched Bush peformance for 8 years the only qualification he has is how to doge and duck size 10 shoes...well done Bush...... otherwise you are Dumb Idiot

  • Posted By: Dougie @ 01/13/2009 9:36:55 PM

    And I suppose at the same time he is leveling with the America people he can tip his hand to the terrorists. Brilliant.

  • Posted By: chris_holte @ 01/13/2009 8:53:51 PM

    Agreed with other commentators. This is an awful article that sounds like something that Goebbels, Pol Pot or Pinochet or his followers would write. It is full of lies and misrepresentations about the value of torture. It tries to justify the unjustifiable. I only hope that they don't get away with this, because if they do, it becomes a precedent for future administrations. Even if the administration bans torture, unless these people are brought to justice, we will never be free of the stink. If the authors of this article have any case at all, it needs to be set before a jury. These people need to get the same opportunities to defend themselves we gave Germans and Japanese who did the same things.

  • Posted By: lucy2008 @ 01/10/2009 10:04:21 PM

    This is a shallow, one-sided, full of fiction article. What is wrong with Newsweek? You can do better than this. There is nothing wrong with following our constitution and rule of law in war time. There is everything right. There is everything right following the Geneva Conventions and not using torture. Torture does not work. There are plenty of other methods to use that work to interrogate and get information from people. All you had to do is ask a few more people with experience, case studies, and real science. Talking about "swinging the other way" and "a feeble Presidency" are loaded words. Why do you talk like this? This is why I don't subscribe to Newsweek. The level of reporting is sad and embarrassing.

    • Posted By: rewinn @ 01/13/2009 6:37:28 PM

      What is wrong with Newsweek?

      They're part of the Corporate media. They lean toward whatever their owners want, and their owners are quite happy about Bush's extremely profitable war. Jailing torturers would be very inconvenient because, under threat of jail, they might testify against their higher-ups.

      This is part of a coverup, nothing more.

  • Posted By: rewinn @ 01/13/2009 6:32:17 PM

    These punks are saying "To save the Constitution it is necessary to destroy it."

    Taylor and Thomas lack faith in America. Forget them, and forget any rag that prints their garbage.

  • Posted By: Maezeppa @ 01/13/2009 6:13:49 PM

    Bin laden wasn't a "political leader" that falls under the aegis of the EA this author cited.

  • Posted By: crescentdave @ 01/13/2009 2:43:57 PM

    So much for journalistic credibility. The list of falsehoods, deliberate distortions and failure to accept the consensual assessment of failed American policy is breath-taking. News for all the tools who made torture and failed occupations possible: We also had 7 years of no attacks on American soil before the Supreme Court appointed Bush president in 2000. Of course, at that point in time, it is a well-documented fact he ignored the Clinton administration's specific warning that terrorists were planning to use airplanes to conduct acts of terrorism.

  • Posted By: Captain Goto @ 01/13/2009 2:30:37 PM

    Nauseating.

    Messrs. Thomas and Taylor are disgusting shills for disgusting, inhuman policies which were and are blatantly illegal, never mind the fact that they have been proven time and again to be utterly useless as investigative tools.

    That this piece of hackwork was chosen for the *cover* of your magazine only compounds the mind-numbing moral decrepitude displayed by the editorial 'brain' trust.

    Pardon me while I vomit.

  • Posted By: GeminiLLC @ 01/13/2009 2:16:15 PM

    to Sinnotti,

    Baloney...American property and military forces were attacked during the Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush, and Clinton administrations, but American's slumbering and complacent people, including liberals, refused to see anything behind it, preferring as always to blame the soldiers for being attacked and killed. What are you smoking?

  • Posted By: Transporter @ 01/13/2009 1:10:05 PM

    I hope Obama changes the military colors to pink.

    • Posted By: catspaw @ 01/13/2009 2:08:48 PM

      Pink doesn't hide things very will.

  • Posted By: calross @ 01/13/2009 1:13:14 PM

    Stuart Taylor has long since moved over to the dark side. Now Evan Thomas joins him. When your reporting isn't accurate, and it results in distortions to the point of lies (e.g. no direct link reported between the White House and torture, ha!), you disgrace yourselves and move your whole magazine over into the category of Bush/Cheney shills. You're out of touch with both reality and the American people. How can we take you seriously, unless it is to resist your nonsense at every turn?

    • Posted By: catspaw @ 01/13/2009 2:08:08 PM

      You can tell by the cover, the article is personal opinion.

  • Posted By: Ridgetop @ 01/13/2009 2:01:31 PM

    To Keith V. Glenn: They are already doing it to us and our soldiers. Everyone else pretty much already does it.

  • Posted By: admiralh @ 01/13/2009 12:31:34 PM

    My favorite quote from the article.

    "Many federal officials have grown risk-averse, fearing that they will be prosecuted or dragged before a congressional committee for fighting too hard against terrorism."

    "Fighting too hard against terrorism"? What a ridiculous statement. They aren't fighting "too hard." They are breaking the law. They are violating the Constitution. There are plenty of ways to combat terrorism without violating the Constitution, but the Bush Administration was never willing to follow any rules because they were certain they were correct. A dangerous certainty, without evidence, which has brought us closer to a monarchy than we have been since the time George Washington refused to allow himself to be a "King."

    The laws against warrantless wiretapping, torture, detention without charge or a speedy trial, etc. were put in place for a reason. Governments abuse these laws, all in the name of "keeping us safe." Every person we brand a war criminal claims they were "keeping my country safe." From Robert Mugabe, to Charles Johnson, to the Shah of Iran, to Pol Pot, to Stalin, and on and on, the crimes against humanity were to "keep us safe."

    I think the authors of this article need to stop watching "24" and thinking that events from that show have any relation to the real world.

    • Posted By: Rosebush Native @ 01/13/2009 1:41:22 PM

      Wait til you see the king that emerges from eight years (yes, the GOP is hopelessly gutless) of media, hollywood, and pop culture fawning. You left out the four-term king FDR.

  • Posted By: Sinnotti @ 01/13/2009 1:37:17 PM

    Let's see, according to Stuart Taylor's logic. Hmm. America was never attacked in Nixon's, Ford's, Carter's, Reagan's, or Clinton's years in office. But America WAS attacked during the Bush-Cheney watch. Therefore, hmm, Obama must adopt the policies of Bush-Cheney. Hmm.

    This is professional journalism?

  • Posted By: calross @ 01/13/2009 1:12:29 PM

    Stuart Taylor has long since moved over to the dark side. Now Evan Thomas joins him. When your reporting isn't accurate, and it results in distortions to the point of lies (e.g. no direct link reported between the White House and torture, ha!), you disgrace yourselves and move your whole magazine over into the category of Bush/Cheney shills. You're out of touch with both reality and the American people. How can we take you seriously, unless it is to resist your nonsense at every turn?

  • Posted By: NewsWkDickG @ 01/13/2009 12:43:40 PM

    If there is real concern for turning things around then there is one thing that has to be done first, one thing that when not done has proven to make everything else meaningless. That one thing is the development of a sincere and honest concern for getting it right to benefit the majority of Americans, to drop the preoccupation with justifying and rationalizing the self-indulgence and the focus on benefiting Special Interests and a select few, who return benefit. Over the last eight years in particular we have clearly seen and been subjected to the free wheeling and arrogant subterfuge constantly offered to cover over just those actions and we now are living with the total devastation that brings. If the politicians continue to focus on themselves, if the issue is whether Republican or Democrat, or conservative or liberal, if their efforts are really just more disguised manipulation appealing to people???s biases to justify benefit for limited interests, then we will just continue to pay the penalty. The only way they can effectively make the right decisions on how much money to give who, on what qualifications and controls must be put in place, on what regulations and regulatory enforcements have to be enacted, on what comes first and so on, is when they are truly and honestly concerned for more than just what advances their personal interests. Whenever we have seen them expending great energy and rhetoric to block or advance a cause, it has always been for a partisan self-interest, no matter how rationalized. Turning that around should be the real goal; good luck!

  • Posted By: waddy84341 @ 01/13/2009 12:26:50 PM

    Forgive them Father, they know not what they say.

  • Posted By: rperrye @ 01/13/2009 12:14:27 PM

    You've got to be kidding me. All last year, I read the Newsweek articles posted here and, I don't think I imagined this, sat by as the Newsweek elitists crucified Pres. Bush for all the harm he caused. NOW I read an article that tacitly, if not expressly, encourages Obama to "stay the course"???? WTF!!!!

    Put a fork in Newsweek, I think they're done as serious journalists. Perhaps if you had done more work at the beginning and tried to discover the reason behind Pres. Bush's policies, you may have just discovered that there was a method behind the madness. What are you going to do when the "Messiah" appears to walk "lock-step" with the Satan you portray Pres. Bush as being.

    All of you, reporters and editors alike, should be ashamed. Unfortunately, I think the concept of shame is also something you just don't understand.

    cheers!

  • Posted By: buckguy @ 01/13/2009 11:35:24 AM

    i don't know what's worse--Evan Thomas & Stuart Taylor tacitly endorsing torture or the knuckledraggers posting here. Either way, Newsweek seems finished as a serious news outlet.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse