The New York Times Goes After Dick Cheney "He Offers A Twisted Version Of History"

Editorial
Dick Cheney’s Version

Mr. Cheney, who did not hesitate while in office to mislead (Americans)when it suited his political aims.

Published: September 2, 2009

After the C.I.A. inspector general’s report on prisoner interrogation was released last week, former Vice President Dick Cheney settled into his usual seat on Fox News to express his outrage — not at the illegal and immoral behavior laid out in the report, of course, but at the idea that anyone would object to torturing prisoners. He was especially vexed that the Obama administration was beginning an investigation.

In Mr. Cheney’s view, it is not just those who followed orders and stuck to the interrogation rules set down by President George Bush’s Justice Department who should be sheltered from accountability. He said he also had no problem with those who disobeyed their orders and exceeded the guidelines.

It’s easy to understand Mr. Cheney’s aversion to the investigation that Attorney General Eric Holder ordered last week. On Fox, Mr. Cheney said it was hard to imagine it stopping with the interrogators. He’s right.

The government owes Americans a full investigation into the orders to approve torture, abuse and illegal, secret detention, as well as the twisted legal briefs that justified those policies. Congress and the White House also need to look into illegal wiretapping and the practice of sending prisoners to other countries to be tortured.

Mr. Cheney was at the center of each of these insults to this country’s Constitution, its judicial system and its bedrock democratic values. To defend himself, he offers a twisted version of history:

more:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/03/opinion/03thu1.html?_r=2

After eight years of fawning stories and gullible reportage by the likes of Judith Miller and Elisabeth Bumiller, I didn't think the Times even noticed anymore in their rush to put even the most dubious crap spewed by Bush administration officials. But now that a lot of the heavy lifting has been done by others, the Times bravely follows along to timorously say that, hey, maybe some of this activity deserves a closer look. Why, some of it looks almost criminal! Why hasn't anyone looked into this before?!

Very brave, New York Times.

who said he would not visit the US because he had written a LTTE that had been critical of Bushco, and truly feared he might disappear via rendition if he came here, like the Canadian man did. How many will not visit here for those very reasons?

We have to prosecute these villains and make sure their ilk never come into power again.