GDAE Podcast - Episode 19

Episode 19 - September 27, 2009 Human Exceptionalism

"Reality Sucks" might be the subtitle for Episode 19... Our exploration of "exceptionalism" leads to a realization that Americans are literally out of touch with reality... in part, because they know reality sucks and, in part, because many Americans believe that America is exceptional; They believe that our colonial founding was a stroke of genius unmatchable elsewhere in the world, and that this, and our uniquely American "can do" attitude, set us apart from other nations. We are bred to believe we are "the best," which means we must lead and we must have special rights to perform that noble mission. That is, the US must have special latitude to carry out it's leadership role. This invokes a pattern of questionable behavior by the US in which the "means justify the ends," because the "ends" are the ends of the exceptional, democratic United States.

This is just one chain of logic that emerges from exploring the concept of American exceptionalism. This exploration also steers us to observe the deep-rooted similarities between American conservatives and liberals who have the same breeding on American exceptionalism. Traditional exploration of the subject is strongly oriented toward foreign policy matters rather than domestic, in part because the subject is "the nation" and nations tend to interact with other nations.

However, a broader exploration sees the impact at home. American's in-grained cultural belief that they and their nation are "exceptional" is reflected in basic behaviors that some would say are unhealthy. One example is a "resting-on-laurels" orientation; "We're great by definition. We don't have to try to be great." In not trying to be great, many take on an attitude of... not trying in life in general. The daily world around is complicated. But there's an attitude that, "I'm an American; I don't need to worry about those complications." Chris Hedges observes that American's prolonged exceptional attitude has left many unequipped to function in society... for example illiterate and thus dependent on television and radio for their information... media that are corporate and right-wing celebrity dominated. You can see where this is going... now you can listen.

This subject was introduced in GDAE Podcast Episode 18 (see below). Episode 19 is a continuation.

• Human Exceptionalism: Insights from the book "Ishmael" by Daniel Quinn. Rickback Bookbock joins for a reading.
• MUSIC: 6th Avenue Heartache by the Wallflowers... CSN "In My Dreams" Excerpt.
  
• American Exceptionalism: Andrew Bacevich on false notions of military power and living beyond our means... Chris Hedges on Americans being out-of-touch with reality.
• Prosecute Bush: The Supreme International Crime by Nuremberg Trial Judge Robert Jackson.

Play GDAE Podcast Episode 18 from this page.

Previous Episodes & 60-Sec Promo:

GDAE Podcast 60-Second Promo

GDAE Podcast Episode 18 September 16, 2009
GDAE Podcast Episode 17 August 31, 2009
GDAE Podcast Episode 16 July 30, 2009
GDAE Podcast Episode 15 June 17, 2009
GDAE Podcast Episode 14 June 10, 2009
GDAE Podcast Episode 13 May 22, 2009
GDAE Podcast Episode 12May 5, 2009
GDAE Podcast Episode 11 April 24, 2009
GDAE Podcast Episode 10 April 9, 2009
GDAE Podcast Episode 9March 28, 2009
GDAE Podcast Episode 8 March 15, 2009
GDAE Podcast Episode 7 March 1, 2009
GDAE Podcast Episode 6 February 17, 2009
GDAE Podcast Episode 5 February 6, 2009
GDAE Podcast Episode 4 January 24, 2009


Sources:

The Fair Trial of George Bush

In an essay, "Why Bush and Cheney Should Get A Fair Trial," Nightprowlkitty at Docudharma poses the question, Why should they get a fair trial? Much of the piece presents variations on the theme:

One reason is because so many have not gotten a fair trial, both here in the USA and abroad.

Underlying that theme is a message that the legitimacy of the United States system of Justice depends on it.

If we do not hold those in power accountable for their crimes, then who will ever believe the average American has any chance of a fair trial? Why should our faith in our justice system continue?

This is a very powerful rationale for letting blind justice take its natural course, rather than having the natural flow dammed by the establishment. But there is another powerful reason.

Impunity of the elite from justice is a certain path to social breakdown. We know the crimes committed by George Bush and others. In the words of chief American prosecutor at Nuremberg, Robert H. Jackson:

To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.

The crimes are not in question. The only question is whether society will allow Bush to get away with these crimes. If it does, the rule-of-law will become illegitimate in the eyes of many more people and the thread of civil order will unravel further.

Put another way, do the elites want orderly Justice or disorderly Justice? I saw the dot-com bubble burst coming, I saw the Bush wars coming, I saw the housing bubble-burst coming, I see inflation coming and I see social breakdown coming if Bush and his associates are not prosecuted.

Psssst... Do Something

• Contact the Broadcast Media
  
• Contact the Newspapers
  
• Contact the US Senate
  
• Contact the House of Representatives

Bush and Conspirators Should be Investigated for Crimes Against Peace

The principles of the London agreement of August 8, 1945, for the trial of major European war criminals, and the accompanying charter of the International Military Tribunal (Nuremberg Principles) should be applied to George W. Bush, the signatories of the Project for a New American Century, and others who conspired to commit fraud in marketing the Iraq war to the US Congress and general public.

Crimes Against Peace*:

i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;

(ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).

Other Nuremberg Principles:

The charter enacts the principle that individuals rather than states are responsible for criminal violations of international law and applies to such lawbreakers the principle of conspiracy by which one who joins in a common plan to commit crime becomes responsible for the acts of any other conspirator in executing the plan.

It also prohibits the plea of "acts of state" as freeing defendants from legal responsibility, the charter refuses to recognize the immunity once enjoyed by criminal statesmanship.

Soldiers and officers who are refusing to serve in Iraq are supported by the charter principle, which provides that orders of a superior authority shall not free a defendant from responsibility. [1]

During the Nuremberg trials, the chief American prosecutor, Robert H. Jackson, stated:

"To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole." [2]

In this view, despite statements by both Democrats and Republicans that much of the violence in Iraq is the blame of the Iraqis themselves, the ultimate responsibility for these accumulated evils are those who conspired to start the war of aggression against Iraq.

A former federal prosecutor named Elizabeth de la Vega has drafted a hypothetical indictment of President Bush, Vice President Cheney and other top officials for tricking the nation into war and for conspiracy to defraud the United States. The evidence and arguments are laid out in a new book entitled United States v. George W. Bush, et al.. [3][4]

But George W. Bush and his immediate conspirators may not be the only people who are exposed to legal action. Some British citizens are probably also culpable. In addition, some U.S. members of Congress could be legally exposed.

The U.S. Congress passed the 2006 Military Commissions Act, which among other things revises the 1996 US War Crimes Act to provide retroactive protection to George W. Bush and his conspirators. The War Crimes Act establishes serious punishments for people in the Executive Branch who violate the Geneva Conventions, including the death penalty for grave breaches. This recent action by Congress exposes their concern that certain people in the Executive Branch may be guilty of such crimes. Some have argued that Congress members who voted for this Act could be tried as accomplices under principles of obstruction of justice.

The Iraq War is Illegal

"The UN charter states that only the Security Council can authorise the use of force (except in cases of self-defence). ...[I]t is clear that in terms of the resolutions presented by the UK itself, the subsequent invasion was not authorised by the Security Council and was thus illegal. The clearest evidence of this is the fact that the UK sought an authorising resolution and failed to get it."
-- Carne Ross [5]

Sources, Notes and More Links:

* The definition of "crimes against peace" was first incorporated into the Nuremberg Principles and later included in the United Nations Charter. The United States has adopted the UN Charter as a treaty, ratified by the US Senate. Treaties form part of the "supreme law of the land" under the Constitution, Article VI, Clause 2.

[1] Much of the material preceding this reference number is taken directly from Yale University's Avalon Project.

[2] Wikipedia. Crimes against Peace, Nuremberg Principles.

[3] DemocracyNow! December 8, 2006.

[4] Text of the IndictmentCommondreams November 29, 2006, from TomDispatch.com

[5] Transcript of Carne Ross Testimony to Butler Inquiry

Who is Carne Ross: Ross was First Secretary in the UK Mission to the United Nations in New York from December 1997 until June 2002. He was responsible for Iraq policy in the mission, including policy on sanctions, weapons inspections and liaison with UNSCOM and later UNMOVIC.

During that time, he helped negotiate several UN Security Council resolutions on Iraq, including resolution 1284 which, inter alia, established UNMOVIC (an acronym Ross coined late one New York night during the year-long negotiation). He took part in policy debates within HMG and in particular with the US government. He attended many policy discussions on Iraq with the US State Department in Washington, New York and London.

British Diplomat's suppressed document lays bare the lies behind Iraq war

The Crime of War: From Nuremberg to Fallujah, a review of current international law regarding wars of aggression, Nicholas J.S. Davies.