The coming 9/11 trial is designed to impact the election - yes or no?

[JackRiddler]

Six years plus later, invocation of September 11 has lost its currency as the most effective fear card in the Bush propaganda arsenal. (See the demise of the Giuliani campaign and, as an indicator, the film "Cloverfield" which turns the destruction of New York into entertainment without outcry from anyone).

The 9/11 Commission itself has lost remaining credibility after the latest revelations of Zelikow's chummy relationship with the White House (thanks to Philip Shenon's book "The Commission") and news stories about its reliance as its main source on CIA summaries of interrogations taken under torture (of which the video records were supposedly destroyed).

The sudden decision to put the "high value" Guantanomo prisoners on trial and seek the death penalty seems like it may have two functions:

a) give the official story a new boost, a new central narrative to replace The 9/11 Commission Report

b) affect the election. Force debate to center on "war on terror." This favors the Republican candidate, more importantly disciplines the Democrats.

And will any of the proceedings be made public, even in the form of transcripts? That has yet to be made clear.

Says Chris Floyd today:

Wow, who ever could have seen this coming? The Bush Administration is going to haul six captives before its kangaroo military commission and put them on trial for the 9/11 attacks -- right smack dab in the middle of a presidential election! What's more, the putschists have already confessed to illegally torturing the chief morsel being offered up at the trial, alleged attack mastermind Khalid Shaikh Muhammad. Thus the "debate" over the Administration's admitted use of waterboarding -- which has been an illegal torture in American law, including American military law, for more than 100 years -- will be bound up inextricably with endless images of the hairy-backed monster of al Qaeda facing justice for the mass murder of innocent Americans. Think we'll hear a peep out of the Democrats on torture and civil liberties -- or any challenge at all to Bush's gulag, Terror War and other Republic-gutting, world-engulfing "national security" policies -- while this deathporn rules the airwaves?

But perhaps we're being unfair. For it's certain that the Democratic candidate will have at least one thing to say on these issues: a solemn vow to be "even tougher" than Bush.

http://www.chris-floyd.com/

Discuss.

[thunder rising]

1. The Bush admin soooo screwed this up. If a real court were to see it it would be thown out.

[EFerrari]

2. What else to they have?

And, if Congress were doing its job, they wouldn't have this either.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

3. "Discuss" what? It's an opinion piece?

:shrug:

[aquart]

12. Don't you love when you get instructions?

Takes an impressive arrogance.

[JackRiddler]

14. Yes, and this is an opinion board, in case you didn't notice.

I say something and invite debate on it from willing participants, and this is apparently "arrogance" to some.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

4. Everything they do is politically motivated.

[Wizard777]

5. This will blow up in his face and Rove can't help him now.

Soon the rats will begin to devour each other trying to keep their own asses out of jail. All fingers will point up. America will officially begin playing the blame game with these trials. Bush will wish that he did this sooner than later.

[scarletwoman]

6. Does the sun rise in the east? k&r (nt)

[bigbrother05]

13. Good question

misread, I thought you said, a uprise in the east

[susankh4]

23. Haha.... my thoughts exactly....

Especially when you take into account Bush's recent statements about Barack on Fox:

"I don't know him. I don't know what he stands for. I know he wants to attack Pakistan. I know he wants to embrace Iran."

The next line will be "we can't risk an untested president in a time of war."

Any Democrat that cannot see what's coming..... hasn't been a democrat for long.

[2Design]

7. if they were captured in iraq they had nothing to do with 911 - but

if they were captured in saudi arabia with BFEE buddies then they are possibly guilty - but their brains are so fried - death might be welcomed at this time versus more of BFEE torture - except - maybe they have something to tell us and like Sadaam who knew too much about the BFEE and cheney and rumsfeld - they had to silence him like the mob used to do - we now have presidential people doing the same thing and getting away with it

[whatchamacallit]

8. Without fear the repukes have nothing

Their domestic "policies" have utterly failed the majority of Americans. Unless they can get folks pissing themselves over terrorism, they don't stand a chance. So yeah, I guess they had better trot-out whatever bogeymen they have left to exploit.

[radfringe]

22. actually they have 2 things - Fear and SMEAR n/t

[susankh4]

24. And boy are they good at it!

The whole reason why "let's all get along" doesn't work in D.C.

[ThatPoetGuy]

9. I'm sorry, but this argument makes no sense.

Right now, the Creepublicans are down to two possible candidates: frontrunner McCain and Huckabee. McCain and Huckabee have both been outspoken in their opposition to torture.

This coming election won't be a referendum on torture. It might be a referendum on Iraq, or on the economy, but all the candidates are opposed to torture.

[JackRiddler]

15. I'm sorry, but I didn't make the argument you refer to at all.

I didn't say the intent was to insert torture as a debate in the election.

The intent is to keep 9/11 and the "war on terror" alive as the most important debate in the election.

[salin]

26. it only works if the trial presents a cut and dry case...

so much of what has been touted as a "clear win in the war for terror!" trials have come off looking as bufoonary, and ultra-hyped - only throwing red meat to the freeper types who need no red meat. So while this may be the intention per the timing of the trials, it is a risky "campaign" strategy for the GOP, who has moved into looking incompetent and decietful - and would risk appearing as a whole party as a farcical caricature - though I think their two main candidates for president already do that.

[JackRiddler]

28. Okay, yes it's risky, but gamblers...

on a winning streak (the Bush mob, for example) are not known for leaving the poker table in advance of their crash.

As for cut and dried, hasn't that already been arranged? The conditions of the proceeding as set up guarantee that it can construct a cut and dried case.

[wildbilln864]

10. Check this out...

Bush Lays Guantanimo Trap :hi:

on edit: added a snip from the article...

"But as today's articles note, it is unlikely, with appeals and the like, that any conviction and death penalty could be carried out as quickly as January. That lays the problem on the lap of the next president -- regardless of whether it's McCain, Clinton or Obama -- who would have to either affirm the military tribunals, or else declare on the first day of their presidency that one of their first officials acts will be to overturn a death sentence for a 9/11 mastermind.

That's a classic Rovian political trap if I ever saw one. And it's more proof that undoing the nightmare eight years of Bush and Cheney is going to be a lot more work than simply placing a right hand on the Bible."

[catnhatnh]

11. Wild Bill is Dead right....

I said it earlier.The program will be trials, convictions, and the death sentences before the election. After you have 4 possible outcomes...

A:Democratic newcomer commutes sentences=soft on terrorism
B:Democratic newcomer supports sentences=complicit in war crimes
C:Republican newcomer supports sentences=tough on terrorism
D:Republican newcomer commutes sentences=distance from Bush

See???No matter what a Democrat does there will be blame and no matter what a Republican does there will be praise...that is Bushes real legacy-that he will have left no room for our ideals,just shameless pandering and partisan advantage.B&C are crimes against humanity and A hurts democrats and D removes accountability.The last screwing is that in case C they believe they can delay accountability past their lifetimes using the Unitary Power privelege which they built...of course a democrat is supposed to surrender this...just because the constitution says so...

[annabanana]

25. BINGO!

Rachel Maddow ran down the list of recent revelations (we DID waterboard, we might again, the trial of one of the waterboardees. .) "they're picking a fight"

I think the timing you suggest is 100% correct.

(I think this ought to be it's own post)

[Jeffersons Ghost]

16. K&R

[Psyop Samurai]

17. It's a sham, and they're sure of their ability to gain mileage out of it.

IMHO.

Wish I had the optimism of Wizard777 up-thread, but I don't.

And, in other news...

Chris Floyd has been hacked!! The perpetrators were kind enough to leave their web address and everything.

:eyes:

[malaise]

18. We had two threads on that

Friday and Monday. DUers can't be played. This is how Rethugs look for votes.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2848212
edit headline

[JackRiddler]

19. DUers can't be played (for the most part) by this kind of

transparent propaganda operation, no. But can they do anything about it, or about how so far the majority has allowed themselves to bey played?

[JackRiddler]

20. kick

[malaise]

21. Well as Chris Dodd said

we can only hope that a minority becomes a majority

[mmonk]

27. Yes, and to save their asses

by making barbarism popular with an ignorant public unfamiliar with historical echos.