Showing posts with label cheney. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cheney. Show all posts

Bad Advice: Bush's Lawyers in the War on Terror Review

Bad Advice: Bush's Lawyers in the War on Terror
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
Are you looking to buy Bad Advice: Bush's Lawyers in the War on Terror? Here is the right place to find the great deals. we can offer discounts of up to 90% on Bad Advice: Bush's Lawyers in the War on Terror. Check out the link below:

>> Click Here to See Compare Prices and Get the Best Offers

Bad Advice: Bush's Lawyers in the War on Terror ReviewWe are now in an intense national debate about Bush administration policies that affect persons suspected of attacking America on and after 9/11. If you want to understand the role of indispensable players in the formulation of these policies -- the lawyers who advised President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and others in the Executive branch -- you will read "Bad Advice." The author, Harold Bruff, a leading expert on the separation of powers (see another of his books, "Balance of Forces"), tells the story with great care and without ideological bias; the book may be profitably read both by supporters and critics of the Bush administration. Mr. Bruff looks at dilemmas long faced by advisors who want to support their president, while at the same time giving him opinions consistent with the law. He analyzes how President Bush's lawyers fared in three cases: authorization of warrantless surveillance, detetion and trial of suspected enemies, and interrogation of detainees.
Although all lawyers will want this book on their shelves, it is by no means just for insiders. Bruff, ever attentive to the human element, gives insights into persons currently in the news -- Alberto Gonzales, John Yoo, Jay Bybee, David Addington to name a few -- and others from earlier times, including Sir Thomas More, Abraham Lincoln (his own best lawyer), and Robert Jackson, FDR's Attorney General, a Supreme Court Justice, and lead prosecutor at Nuremberg.
In the tradition of all good books, "Bad Advice" not only informs, it entertains.Bad Advice: Bush's Lawyers in the War on Terror Overview

Want to learn more information about Bad Advice: Bush's Lawyers in the War on Terror?

>> Click Here to See All Customer Reviews & Ratings Now
Read More...

How Bush Rules: Chronicles of a Radical Regime Review

How Bush Rules: Chronicles of a Radical Regime
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
Are you looking to buy How Bush Rules: Chronicles of a Radical Regime? Here is the right place to find the great deals. we can offer discounts of up to 90% on How Bush Rules: Chronicles of a Radical Regime. Check out the link below:

>> Click Here to See Compare Prices and Get the Best Offers

How Bush Rules: Chronicles of a Radical Regime ReviewBy virtue of being an organized series of past short columns, most two pages to three pages in length, this book may be off-putting to the average reader, but for either insiders or those who care deeply about moral legitimate governance, this is a real page turner.
The author renders a valuable service in providing an original 23 page "tour of the horizon" that captures many but not all of the impeachable offenses of the Bush-Cheney team. In Florida, for example, his emphasis is on Bushophiles stopping the recount, not on the fact that Greg Pabst broke the story BEFORE the election that 35,000 people of color had been disenfranchised by Jeb Bush in a calculated plan to cheat the American public out of an honest election.
As someone who has read most but not all of the books covering this era (it merits comment that in its radical being, the Bush-Cheney Administration has inspired more books of the moment than any other previous President, as best I can tell), I found the collection of essays logical, reasoned, relevant, and depressing. This is a litany of high crimes and misdemeanors that demands the question: why hasn't this pair been impeached? The obvious answer is because they own Congress, which has abdicated its roles at the first (Article 1) branch of government, the less obvious answer is because the public has become both ignorant and inert, the worst nightmare of Thomas Jefferson and Justice Branstein combined.
A few highlights along the trail:
Intelligence wars, with Cheney first trying to intimidate the CIA, then ignoring it.
Cheney killing the policy process, ruling by dogma.
Rice negligent & incompetent, as well as disloyal to Scowcroft, subversive of Powell, and ultimately the "butterfly of the State Department."
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence betraying the people's trust and its responsibility, the majority concealing and delaying accountability.
Bush leveraging religions, creating the first major violation of the Founding Fathers' insistence on a secular state with tolerance of all religions.
Government in crisis, Bush-Cheney at war with the professionals.
Iran, not US, winning in Iraq.
Bolton as a "neo-primitive" (for the cognoscenti, the author renders gifted turns of phrase at every turn).
Catholic Church as a neo-fascist extreme right element more in harmony with the Bush regime than any protestant might imagine.
The invisible shrinking president seeking to uphold a doctrine of presidential infallibility.
The summary at the beginning of the book is alone worth the price of the book, and takes this collection of insightful and well-sequenced essays from four to five stars.
My one thought in putting the book down was that the author may have been unduly kind to Cheney. If one reads the The One Percent Doctrine: Deep Inside America's Pursuit of Its Enemies Since 9/11 it is clear Cheney has mounted an internal coup d'etat and is NOT briefing Bush, is actively WITHHOLDING from Bush critical information, and appears to be deliberately REVERSING decisions by Bush made in Cabinet sessions and the over-turned in the dark. The full story on Cheney's machinations remains to be told.
EDIT of 10 Dec 07: We now know that Dick Cheney is a nakely amoral person and has committed 25 documents acts of commission or omission that in my judgement demand that he be impeached. See, in addition to One Percent Doctrine, Vice: Dick Cheney and the Hijacking of the American Presidency. My review there items 23 act, the other two are in One Percent Doctrine.
The book has an index, mostly of names.How Bush Rules: Chronicles of a Radical Regime Overview

Want to learn more information about How Bush Rules: Chronicles of a Radical Regime?

>> Click Here to See All Customer Reviews & Ratings Now
Read More...

In the Shadow of the Oval Office: Profiles of the National Security Advisers and the Presidents They Served--From JFK to George W. Bush Review

In the Shadow of the Oval Office: Profiles of the National Security Advisers and the Presidents They Served--From JFK to George W. Bush
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
Are you looking to buy In the Shadow of the Oval Office: Profiles of the National Security Advisers and the Presidents They Served--From JFK to George W. Bush? Here is the right place to find the great deals. we can offer discounts of up to 90% on In the Shadow of the Oval Office: Profiles of the National Security Advisers and the Presidents They Served--From JFK to George W. Bush. Check out the link below:

>> Click Here to See Compare Prices and Get the Best Offers

In the Shadow of the Oval Office: Profiles of the National Security Advisers and the Presidents They Served--From JFK to George W. Bush ReviewIn the Shadow of the Oval Office is an impressive summary of the duties, inner-workings, and conflicts inherit in the role of National Security Adivsor. The authors, Ivo Daalder and I.m Destler write with a brillant command of the subject matter and without political agenda. The narrative is remarkably consistent in style; one would think there was a single author, not two.
What impressed, and somewhat frightened, this reviewer is how much the effectiveness, or lack there of, the National Security Advisor is based upon personality of the NSA and the presonality of the President he or she serves. If there is a single thesis in this book, it would be that the country is well-served when there is good match between NSA and the President, and the country, if not the world, is poorly served if there is poor match.
But Daadler and Destler are primarily not interested in advancing an academic theory, rather they are more interested in just telling the story correctly. The reader sees how national policies are developed in the context of management styles and inter-personal dynamics involved as well as the relevant historical perspective.
In short, In the Shadow of the Oval Office is a triumphant combination of polictical analysis, historical re-telling, and character study.In the Shadow of the Oval Office: Profiles of the National Security Advisers and the Presidents They Served--From JFK to George W. Bush Overview

Want to learn more information about In the Shadow of the Oval Office: Profiles of the National Security Advisers and the Presidents They Served--From JFK to George W. Bush?

>> Click Here to See All Customer Reviews & Ratings Now
Read More...

Torture Team: Rumsfeld's Memo and the Betrayal of American Values Review

Torture Team: Rumsfeld's Memo and the Betrayal of American Values
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
Are you looking to buy Torture Team: Rumsfeld's Memo and the Betrayal of American Values? Here is the right place to find the great deals. we can offer discounts of up to 90% on Torture Team: Rumsfeld's Memo and the Betrayal of American Values. Check out the link below:

>> Click Here to See Compare Prices and Get the Best Offers

Torture Team: Rumsfeld's Memo and the Betrayal of American Values ReviewPhillipe Sands book brings together a lot that was already known with some new information provided by interviews. This book was valuable in that it places the information in a coherent narrative. Sands lets his Interviewees speak for themselves and succeeds in not judging them personally, nor questioning their motives, but only points out where the International and US law may be used to judge them and their possible guilt. He interviews Jim Haynes, General Hill, Doug Feith, Diane Beaver, General Myers and others, devoting a chapter to each interview. The overall effect of these interviews is at times startling.
Sands focuses his main argument on the fact that lawyers were not guided by law in their memos and advice to the President, VP, Secretary of Defense, and others, but were subservient to the policy choices of our leaders. To use a phrase of Vice President Cheney, the Pentagon and Justice Department lawyers tried to write the law from the "dark side." We the readers are the jury who will decide if they stayed within the bounds of the rule of law.
I think Sands does show, in disagreement with Alberto Gonzalez, General Myers, and Jim Haynes that the mistreatment of prisoners in Guantanamo was not in response to a request for guidance from below but was the premeditated, concerted effort of the lead Principals and Lawyers in the Bush Administration to bypass Army FM 34-52. The timeframe of the discussions, memos and interrogation policies of Guantanamo all support that conclusion. There can be no question of coincidental connections.
Phillipe Sands convincingly connects the dots in my opinion. President Bush and his advisors made two momentous decisions. First, they set aside the Geneva Conventions and second, they augmented FM 34-52 with 18 interrogation techniques used separately and in concert. These interrogations left Al-Qahanti, the first target of this new policy, in the words of one Army interrogator, with "eyes, black as coals."
In his interview with Dr Abigail Seltzer, psychiatrist, and medical expert who has had extensive experience with torture survivors, we learn that deciding whether techniques are torture, a lot can be gleaned from the reaction of the victim. The interview, based on the actual interrogation logs of Mohammed Al-Qahtani, Detainee 063, is chilling, to say the least.
Critics may find that Sands spends too much time on Mohammed al-Qahtani Detainee 063 and exaggerates the importance of the treatment of one detainee, but I believe he shows how the part reveals the whole. Philippe Sands is very thorough in his analysis of detainee 063's case. He speaks with lawyers and medical experts to determine whether the treatment of 063 crossed the line into torture. His concentration, primarily on one case, did not detract from his book but strengthened it in my opinion. Sands also makes the point that illegal activity in regards to violations of Geneva Art. 3 can be imputed to a defendant based on only one case.
In one interview with an International Judge and Prosecutor, Sands quotes them as saying the Administration Principals and lawyers' attempt in the Military Commissions Act to immunize themselves from prosecution in the treatment of detainees before the passage of the Act was stupid and may come back to haunt them. In rejecting U.S. courts oversight of their cases they open themselves up to judgment by International Commissions and Courts. It could lead to a tap on the shoulder if the Principles visit other countries, much in the same way that Pinochet was arrested in Britain for crimes committed while he was the leader in Argentina.
Underlining the seriousness of this book and its charges, Sands quotes Justice Anthony Kennedy who wrote that acts against Geneva Art 3 are war crimes. The Supreme Court, in Hamdan vs Rumsfeld, overturned the President's decision and OLC and Pentagon lawyers' position that Geneva Conventions did not apply to Al Qaeda.
Critics are not going to like his drawing on the Nuremburg trials with inference that the US leaders and lawyers can be compared to Nazis. Sands is very careful to note that it is not his intention to make such a comparison, but only to use the legal principles derived from that era that are still applicable today. Mr. Sands does all this without swamping the average readers with a lot of legalese and jargon. Anyone with a patience and openness can follow his common sense approach.
Sadly this story is not over and much more is to come about meetings and involvement of top officials in the US government with torture. The Torture Team will provide an excellent bridge to future revelations and responses.
Postcript: On May 19th, Phillipe Sands revealed in the Manchester Guardian that the Pentagon has dropped all charges against Mohammed Al-Qahtani Detainee 063.
Postscrpt 2 Jan 14, 2009 "We tortured [Mohammed al-] Qahtani," said Susan J. Crawford, in her first interview since being named convening authority of military commissions by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates in February 2007. "His treatment met the legal definition of torture. And that's why I did not refer the case" for prosecution.
Crawford, a retired judge who served as general counsel for the Army during the Reagan administration and as Pentagon inspector general when Dick Cheney was secretary of defense, is the first senior Bush administration official responsible for reviewing practices at Guantanamo to publicly state that a detainee was tortured.Torture Team: Rumsfeld's Memo and the Betrayal of American Values Overview

Want to learn more information about Torture Team: Rumsfeld's Memo and the Betrayal of American Values?

>> Click Here to See All Customer Reviews & Ratings Now
Read More...

Madison's Nightmare: How Executive Power Threatens American Democracy Review

Madison's Nightmare: How Executive Power Threatens American Democracy
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
Are you looking to buy Madison's Nightmare: How Executive Power Threatens American Democracy? Here is the right place to find the great deals. we can offer discounts of up to 90% on Madison's Nightmare: How Executive Power Threatens American Democracy. Check out the link below:

>> Click Here to See Compare Prices and Get the Best Offers

Madison's Nightmare: How Executive Power Threatens American Democracy ReviewThis book is much more about what the problem is than how to solve it, but the two things are not really separable, and the analysis of the problem here is invaluable.
This is a detailed and extensively researched look at the interactions among the three branches of our federal government, and the checks and balances employed - or the lack thereof. Shane takes a long view and sees 1981 and the Reagan presidency as the most radical break with the past, albeit the creation of a new era dramatically advanced by George W. Bush, following lesser advances by his father and Bill Clinton. Shane looks at domestic governance as much as foreign policy, and examines the relationships that departments and agencies have with the White House and with Congress.
It is now routine for the White House to send cabinet secretaries to swing electoral districts for political purposes. No department head sneezes without the president's permission. And the entire federal government is thought of as part of the executive branch -- with the exception of Congress, which is left to constitute the legislative branch all on its own. But look at how the Constitution viewed things. It devoted Article I and over half the length of the entire Constitution to Congress, which it gave virtually every power conceived of, touching on many of the current departments of the federal government, and then explicitly stipulating that Congress should have any other necessary powers as well. Congress, according to the Constitution, has the power . . .
"To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States or in any Department or Officer thereof."
Stubby little Article II gives very few powers to the president, nowhere suggesting that he or she should have ownership or command over the various agencies of government, and in fact not mentioning any other than the military, except to say that the president can make appointments, and to say this:
"He may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices."
This does refer to the departments as "executive departments," and Article II does begin by giving "the executive power" to the president. But it's worth pausing and stepping outside our own era for just long enough to wonder what "executive" means. Article II also says what the president is required to do, namely:
"He shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed."
Congress, until relatively recently, was understood to be central to our government. Only Congress is given the power to borrow money, to regulate commerce with foreign nations, to handle immigration and bankruptcies and the creation of money, transportation, the post office, the punishment of crimes, establishment of courts, defining and punishing crimes by other nations, declaring war, ending war, raising and spending money, creating and maintaining and overseeing the military, repelling invasions, and so on. These days, the White House is considered central to everything. Laws are made by "executive order" (an "executive order" is something like a faithful betrayal, a self-contradiction), by "signing statement" (a "signing statement" is a statement that one is NOT signing a bill as written) and by drafting legislation in the White House and insisting that Congress pass it out of loyalty to the president.
Imagine the absurdity today of suggesting that a president has the right to ask department heads to report on what they are doing. They are doing what he has told them to do. What Shane suggests is not that the EPA or the Department of Labor should be moved from the executive branch to the legislative, but that there are appropriate roles for both Congress and the president, not just the latter.
I cannot touch here on all of the rich and informed discussions in "Madison's Nightmare," which include perceptive condemnations of the secretive and unaccountable decision-making processes that led to wars in Vietnam and Iraq. I would fault Shane here only with too much generosity in assuming that the presidents in these cases were trying to learn anything that they failed to learn. But Shane is right that Congress must not only have the power to declare war or refuse to; it must also have the power to make public the deliberations that precede that decision. Shane is wrong, however, in my opinion -- and this seems to follow from his analysis -- in omitting from his recommendations at the end of the book any sort of accountability, prosecution, impeachment, or punishment. He does propose that the lawyers who facilitated torture be fired. However, they are -- with a couple of key exceptions -- already out of office. And why would someone as smart as Shane believe that lawyers should be dismissed for writing what they were asked to, but propose no penalty whatsoever for the president or vice president who did the asking? Indeed, how does Shane not notice that (had his book come out earlier) it would have been the torturer in chief who would have had to dismiss his own obliging lawyers?Madison's Nightmare: How Executive Power Threatens American Democracy Overview

Want to learn more information about Madison's Nightmare: How Executive Power Threatens American Democracy?

>> Click Here to See All Customer Reviews & Ratings Now
Read More...

Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil Review

Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
Are you looking to buy Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil? Here is the right place to find the great deals. we can offer discounts of up to 90% on Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil. Check out the link below:

>> Click Here to See Compare Prices and Get the Best Offers

Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil ReviewRegarding the review from the_mirror.
I have never considered either Timothy McVeigh or Terry Nichols to be American heroes. Pawns, patsies and not very bright, yes; Heroes, never. Further, like many who are moderately familiar with the OKC bombing, I have serious doubts as to the government's version of events there and I also seriously doubt that a truck bomb caused all that damage based upon hard science.
Neither do I advocate or even remotely endorse any form of violence against the government, especially a cowardly attack against innocent women and children. I never have.
These convenient attempts to discredit me and Rubicon with associations we have never been a part of are transparent efforts that have been easily recognized by Amazon reviewers thus far.
I am, however, humbled and personally gratified by the reviews I have seen. They prove that people are getting it!
Michael C. Ruppert
Author
"Crossing the Rubicon"Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil Overview

Want to learn more information about Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil?

>> Click Here to See All Customer Reviews & Ratings Now
Read More...

The Co-Presidency of Bush and Cheney (Stanford Politics and Policy) Review

The Co-Presidency of Bush and Cheney (Stanford Politics and Policy)
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
Are you looking to buy The Co-Presidency of Bush and Cheney (Stanford Politics and Policy)? Here is the right place to find the great deals. we can offer discounts of up to 90% on The Co-Presidency of Bush and Cheney (Stanford Politics and Policy). Check out the link below:

>> Click Here to See Compare Prices and Get the Best Offers

The Co-Presidency of Bush and Cheney (Stanford Politics and Policy) ReviewI received my copy of The Co-Presidency of Bush and Cheney, and I can hardly put it down. Shirley Warshaw has written a tour-de-force that explores and probes the two principals of the Bush-Cheney Administration. An exhaustively researched work of scholarship of the highest standard, this book is highly readable and not just for the policy wonks and political junkies. Dr. Warshaw has taken pains to present a thorough analysis and fair investigation of the last administration, and every citizen who reads it will find his or her understanding of executive power greatly enriched. The Co-Presidency of Bush and Cheney is a powerful, thought-provoking must-read for every voting American.The Co-Presidency of Bush and Cheney (Stanford Politics and Policy) Overview

Want to learn more information about The Co-Presidency of Bush and Cheney (Stanford Politics and Policy)?

>> Click Here to See All Customer Reviews & Ratings Now
Read More...