Torture and the Bush/Cheney policies....

[keyser soze]

Ah yes the argument for torture...softened to 'rendition'....when will these trials take place?


Witness for the Prosecution

By Scott Horton (http://www.harpers.org/subjects/ScottHorton)

Yesterday the Obama Administration, after a delay of several years, released an important document relating to the Bush Administration’s torture policies: amemorandum by Philip Zelikow (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20120403/docs/Zelikow Feb 15 2006.pdf), a high-ranking State Department lawyer and confidant of Condoleezza Rice, which aggressively refuted Justice Department memoranda that sought to authorize the use of thirteen “enhanced interrogation techniques” used by the CIA. Zelikow’s memo concluded that the use of these techniques would constitute prosecutable felonies—war crimes. As Zelikow explained (http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2009_hr/051309zelikow.pdf)in an appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2009, his memo, when it was circulated in February 2006, caused senior figures in the Bush White House to go ballistic—they actually sought to collect and destroy all the copies.

The memo is not only a significant historical document, it may also provide important evidence in future criminal prosecutions arising out of the Bush-era torture programs. Indeed, the Bush White House fully appreciated this possible consequence, which explains why they tried so hard to make the memo disappear and why Bush-era officials apparently pressed their successors to withhold the memo, delaying its release for three years.

Conservative defenders of the Bush torture team argue that even if the techniques used constituted torture or cruel, inhuman, and degrading (CID) conduct, they were entitled to rely on advice from Justice Department lawyers that said the opposite. In order for a prosecution to succeed, a prosecutor would have to show that the accusedunderstood that what he was doing was a crime. In United States v. Altstoetter (http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/nuremberg/alstoetter.htm#U.S.A. v. ALSTOETTER ET AL (The Justice Cases):), a case in which government lawyers were prosecuted for their role in, among other things, providing a legal pretext for the torture and mistreatment of prisoners, the court fashioned a similar rule, saying that the law requires “proof before conviction that the accused knew or should have known that in matters of international concern he was guilty of participation in a nationally organized system of injustice and persecution shocking to the moral sense of mankind, and that he knew or should have known that he would be subject to punishment if caught.”

The Zelikow memo satisfies both of these elements—it makes clear that the techniques the Justice Department endorsed constituted criminal conduct, and it applied the “shock the conscience” test of American constitutional law to help reach that conclusion. It could therefore be introduced as Exhibit A by prosecutors bringing future charges.

The Zelikow memo also helps correct a popular misconception about Bush-era torture memoranda generally. DOJ public-affairs flaks routinely claim that they were authored by John Yoo and Jay Bybee in 2002, then withdrawn and reversed in later Bush Administration years after Assistant Attorney General Jack Goldsmith discovered them.

Almost every element of this position is misleading—in fact, a long chain of memoranda authorized torture, and it involved a substantial number of lawyers working in the Justice Department long after both Yoo and Bybee had departed; moreover, Goldsmith withdrew only one of the Yoo–Bybee memos, leaving another in place. He also worked on another memo (http://www.justice.gov/olc/18usc23402340a2.htm) that ultimately approved some torture techniques, though he departed before it was finalized and issued. The Zelikow memo was prepared long after Goldsmith’s departure, and focused on a series of memoranda condoning torture issued by Acting Assistant Attorney General Steven G. Bradbury.

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2012/04/hbc-90008548 (http://www.harpers.org/archive/2012/04/hbc-90008548)

[Peter1469]

Had our human intelligence (HUMIT) capability not been pretty much dead after 9-11 perhaps we would have had some knowledge of what al Qaeda was up to and capable of. Then there would have been no need for enhanced interrogation techniques. As it was, the Administration was playing catch up and could not afford another 9-11 attack on the nation.

[keyser soze]

It wasn't dead. Bush/Cheney ignored it....and the 9/11 commission was a joke...but that's aside. Bush/Cheney and all their personally picked minions are war criminals.

[Peter1469]

It wasn't dead. Bush/Cheney ignored it....and the 9/11 commission was a joke...but that's aside. Bush/Cheney and all their personally picked minions are war criminals.

Of course it was dead. We had no sources inside al Qeada.

You don't know what you are talking about.

[keyser soze]

We surely didn't after Cheney outed our operative....Valerie Plame.

[keyser soze]

Spencer Ackerman (http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/04/secret-torture-memo/), whose persistence is to be credited for the publication of Zelikow’s memo, astutely pressed its author to answer this question: Why, in light of Zelikow’s findings, did the special prosecutor appointed by Eric Holder to investigate the legality of CIA interrogation techniques fail to bring charges?

“I don’t know why Mr. Durham came to the conclusions he did,” Zelikow says, referring to the Justice Department special prosecutor for the CIA torture inquiry, John Durham. “I’m not impugning them, I just literally don’t know why, because he never published any details about either the factual analysis or legal analysis that led to those conclusions.”


Durham has so far refused to offer any explanations for his decision, and given the expiry of the statutory mandate for a report, it’s unlikely that we will ever hear one. Durham’s decision was probably driven at some level by the Obama Administration’s decision to refuse to “look back,” and at another level by the institutional interests of the Justice Department. After all, in the Bush years, senior DOJ lawyers wrote opinions that aimed to induce CIA agents to use these techniques, promising them they would not face prosecution if they did so. Pressing charges against agents now would entail investigating the criminal culpability of DOJ lawyers, and the DOJ has repeatedly said it will not examine the criminality of its personnel in this sordid affair.

Criminality.....'justice for ALL' American style.

[Peter1469]

That wasn't Cheney and it wasn't his lawyer, Libby. It was Richard Armitage- Colin Powell's man. And the Special Prosecutor know this before they targeted Libby.

[Peter1469]

Criminality.....'justice for ALL' American style.


They didn't do anything that they don't do to US servicemen every day in military training.

[Conley]

Had our human intelligence (HUMIT) capability not been pretty much dead after 9-11 perhaps we would have had some knowledge of what al Qaeda was up to and capable of. Then there would have been no need for enhanced interrogation techniques. As it was, the Administration was playing catch up and could not afford another 9-11 attack on the nation.

Why do you say our HUMIT capability was dead after 9-11? The attack on the Pentagon or... ?

[MMC]

Which means John Kerry knew. Nancy Pelosi knew. Rangel, knew, Biden knew, Dodd knew, Joe Liberman and Bernie Sanders knew and of course this mean Hillary Clinton knew and so to Bilbo the Clown. Every Democrat on the Armed Service Committee knew and was all part of it. Can't just attempt to blame Bush and Cheney.

[keyser soze]

Which means John Kerry knew. Nancy Pelosi knew. Rangel, knew, Biden knew, Dodd knew, Joe Liberman and Bernie Sanders knew and of course this mean Hillary Clinton knew and so to Bilbo the Clown. Every Democrat on the Armed Service Committee knew and was all part of it. Can't just attempt to blame Bush and Cheney.
You obviously haven't read the thread...or what was posted in the OP...here, I'll help...

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/2800-Torture-and-the-Bush-Cheney-policies?p=58885&viewfull=1#post58885

If you're going to list those you feel are culpable in selling the war then please remember to list Fox News....they were the official mouthpiece for the Bush/Cheney admin.

[Alias]

You obviously haven't read the thread...or what was posted in the OP...here, I'll help...

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/2800-Torture-and-the-Bush-Cheney-policies?p=58885&viewfull=1#post58885

If you're going to list those you feel are culpable in selling the war then please remember to list Fox News....they were the official mouthpiece for the Bush/Cheney admin.

Do you believe waterboarding is torture and a violation of due process?

[Peter1469]

Why do you say our HUMIT capability was dead after 9-11? The attack on the Pentagon or... ?


It was dead prior to it as well. Congress neutered the Intelligence agencies over the years.

[Conley]

It was dead prior to it as well. Congress neutered the Intelligence agencies over the years.

Got it.

[MMC]

It was dead prior to it as well. Congress neutered the Intelligence agencies over the years.

Thanks for showing why things were the way they were Pete. You, youself,as VET, knows most sheep don't know anything about Clandestine Services or Consular Ops other than what they see on TV.

[keyser soze]

That was the meme passed around but not how it was...not at all. So it seems all of you wil cling to your talking point that torture was justified...criminals....we have a lot of them. I hope they're prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, every last one of them.

[Conley]

That was the meme passed around but not how it was...not at all. So it seems all of you wil cling to your talking point that torture was justified...criminals....we have a lot of them. I hope they're prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, every last one of them.

You know that Obama's Department of Justice will never do that though, right?

[Mister D]

There was a time when "war criminal" was a serious charge.

[MMC]

That was the meme passed around but not how it was...not at all. So it seems all of you wil cling to your talking point that torture was justified...criminals....we have a lot of them. I hope they're prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, every last one of them.


Thats okay you seem to justify people killing innocents by the thousands. Would call him enemy. Yet state he has some sort of rights due to him being a human being.

[keyser soze]

You know that Obama's Department of Justice will never do that though, right?
Of course...'we won't look back...we'll just change as little as possible and keep the GOP policies, including the unitary presidency that Bush/Cheney set up.

But Obama may not be the last word...there are others in the world who try war criminals.

[keyser soze]

Thats okay you seem to justify people killing innocents by the thousands. Would call him enemy. Yet state he has some sort of rights due to him being a human being.
You're full of it and a perv to boot.

[Conley]

Of course...'we won't look back...we'll just change as little as possible and keep the GOP policies, including the unitary presidency that Bush/Cheney set up.

But Obama may not be the last word...there are others in the world who try war criminals.

True enough...with Cheney's health condition I'm not sure how much longer he'll even be around.

[Peter1469]

Of course...'we won't look back...we'll just change as little as possible and keep the GOP policies, including the unitary presidency that Bush/Cheney set up.

But Obama may not be the last word...there are others in the world who try war criminals.

What about Obama signing executive orders for the assassination of US citizens? I would rather have water dripped on my face than have a Hellfire missile blow me up.

Better yet I will opt for the "panties-on-head" torture.

[Alias]

You're full of it and a perv to boot.

Do you believe waterboarding is torture and a violation of due process?

[ramone]

It sounds like the Congress was rather seriously misled by the Bush administration on the subject of the use of torture. If you listen to all the allegations being made about "who knew what and when" and what the documents reportedly reveal, it is apparent that members of Congress were "papered" - a deceptive tactic, which, under the guise of providing full disclosure, is designed to conceal the truth. No doubt investigation will uncover that, buried somewhere in the voluminous documents of the security briefings of the CIA to Congress, there will be a some oblique reference (e.g., a footnote in a cited study report) on the effectiveness of "waterboarding" characterized, euphemistically, in memoranda under "enhanced interrogation techniques"; which cryptic reference will be incorporated in carefully crafted letters of counsel that, while not directly representing the truth of the matter, at least imply that such measures are necessary, authorized and lawful. In the morals of the marketplace, the so-called "fine print" is often shrugged off as "sharp business practice"; however such deception can have no place in the councils of government and the law. If there is any truth to what is being asserted, there are some Department of Justice lawyers that are in "deep kaka."

I assume kind of like the subtle approach to locking all of obammy's records to the public while all other presidents besides one who was found out years later as a fake. Sort of the same thing here with the most unknown president of all time. I know more about the guy I see a few times a week that mows the neighbors yard than I do about our president.

Now on to the torture aspect, like Peter said. Our troops are subjected to the same thing, it's not torture. It is a means of extracting information. No physical damage is done and it is usually over in a matter of a few seconds.

Personally I'd do much worse to keep my family safe. If you want to lay down and let the sands and commies take over then thats your choice but don't expect any help from people who are informed. Go ask the occupy people, I'm sure they will give you whatever you want. Problem is that they won't have anything at that point.

[dadakarma]

What about Obama signing executive orders for the assassination of US citizens? I would rather have water dripped on my face than have a Hellfire missile blow me up.

Better yet I will opt for the "panties-on-head" torture.

Right - that's all they did to Dilawar, right Pete?

[Mainecoons]

Come on Pete, executing U.S. citizens without due process is a lot better than a little torture. Now of course if Mr. Bush had taken this action, can you imagine the shit storm from Dada and her ilk? Pretty much anything is OK if Barak/Barry/? does it.

[Peter1469]

Right - that's all they did to Dilawar, right Pete?

That case lead to prosecutions.

What about Obama signing executive orders for the assassination of US citizens? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki

[dadakarma]

That case lead to prosecutions.

What about Obama signing executive orders for the assassination of US citizens? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki

It's fucked up. No question about it. Does that excuse what was done under Bush/Cheney, which you now acknowledge went beyond panties on heads and water dripping on faces?

[dadakarma]

Come on Pete, executing U.S. citizens without due process is a lot better than a little torture. Now of course if Mr. Bush had taken this action, can you imagine the shit storm from Dada and her ilk? Pretty much anything is OK if Barak/Barry/? does it.

See? There you go again, making an idiot of yourself. I didn't vote for Obama. You're incapable of constructing a sound argument because you're stuck on dumbed-down generalizations. Been hanging out with that language butcher MMC too long, I guess. :)

[Peter1469]

It's fucked up. No question about it. Does that excuse what was done under Bush/Cheney, which you now acknowledge went beyond panties on heads and water dripping on faces?

I acknowledge that crimes were committed in the handling of prisoners.

I was just wondering whether you thought that they only occurred under the Bush administration.

[dadakarma]

I acknowledge that crimes were committed in the handling of prisoners.

I was just wondering whether you thought that they only occurred under the Bush administration.

Of course not. One of the greatest disappointments about the Obama administration is the ways in which it resembles Bush's. Bagram is a repeat of Abu Ghraib. Obama knows and knew all about the abuses carried out there.

[MMC]

See? There you go again, making an idiot of yourself. I didn't vote for Obama. You're incapable of constructing a sound argument because you're stuck on dumbed-down generalizations. Been hanging out with that language butcher MMC too long, I guess. :)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VdNYcPZyHc

Blame Me.....thats okay, I understand your personal attack and agree with you that you are able to recognize at least one of your weaknesses.

[dadakarma]

Blame Me.....thats okay, I understand your personal attack and agree with you that you are able to recognize at least one of your weaknesses.

Awww. Hurt feewings. Get over it, crybaby. :)

[MMC]

Awww. Hurt feewings. Get over it, crybaby. :)

Oh did you think I was crying.....AHahahahaha after our guests watch that video. I think thats the last thing that will be on their mind. Although with what I am showing about you. Now thats a different story. :grin: :kiss:

[dadakarma]

Oh did you think I was crying.....AHahahahaha after our guests watch that video. I think thats the last thing that will be on their mind. Although with what I am showing about you. Now thats a different story. :grin: :kiss:

All you're "showing" me is that you use an egg beater to construct sentences. I don't watch your stupid videos.

[MMC]

All you're "showing" me is that you use an egg beater to construct sentences. I don't watch your stupid videos.


Thats okay.....all other other regs do. Plus all those watchers outside the front window do. Plus then they see who I am talking to, and then whereever you go with this Scname. Those that are in on the knowing. Well lets just say they'll know how to deal with you while you are doing all that explaining. :laugh:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nym7GgWfmE


But don't you worry one day you will.....Figure it out! :wink:

[dadakarma]

^ whatever the fuck that gibberish means...

:roflmao:

[MMC]

^ whatever the fuck that gibberish means...

:roflmao:


How lame you really are.....thats the best you can do with the diss? Wow you can laugh with yourself. Guess I can laugh with you too.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H91kWpUNiwU

But puuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuullleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeezeeeeeee ee biznitch.....Never step up to the stage unless you are willing to be the Xzibit! :evil:

[MMC]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMjp7EvpFaQ&feature=related

Hurry back with with Your Walk ON.....now. :wink:

[Mainecoons]

Come on Pete, executing U.S. citizens without due process is a lot better than a little torture. Now of course if Mr. Bush had taken this action, can you imagine the shit storm from Dada and her ilk? Pretty much anything is OK if Barak/Barry/? does it.

Dada, your exercise for now is to identify in this sentence:

1. Where I suggested anyone voted for Obama.

[dadakarma]

Yeah. (*&%$)())* right back to ya, MMC. :)

[MMC]

Yeah. (*&%$)())* right back to ya, MMC. :)


Here dada.....since the Rap stuff is above and beyond your understanding and comprehension.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJ6sAc4gZgc

Try Plain English! :kiss: :evil:

[dadakarma]

^ unwatched. I don't watch your videos, MMC. Enjoy yourself.

[MMC]

^ unwatched. I don't watch your videos, MMC. Enjoy yourself.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMUknpEJdl4

Thank you I did.....well I should say we did. As a few of us thought it was amusing with your call out. Like I said.....even the Watchers and those that come in and read the threads. Thanks for for trying to put on a show. Clearly you are out of your league. :kiss: :evil:

[dadakarma]

Thank you I did.....well I should say we did. As a few of us thought it was amusing with your call out. Like I said.....even the Watchers and those that come in and read the threads. Thanks for for trying to put on a show. Clearly you are out of your league. :kiss: :evil:

I think you'd be surprised at the number of people who don't watch your videos. ;)

[MMC]

I think you'd be surprised at the number of people who don't watch your videos. ;)


"What" you and your pals? Okay.....thanks for agreeing to being in the minority. But tell you what.....why don't you go and check with the Admin on that one. :wink:

[dadakarma]

"What" you and your pals? Okay.....thanks for agreeing to being in the minority. But tell you what.....why don't you go and check with the Admin on that one. :wink:

Who cares? I don't need to check with anyone about it.

[Mister D]

Who cares? I don't need to check with anyone about it.

Oh...granny is gettin' feisty now. No more emoticons! :shocked:

[Peter1469]

Of course not. One of the greatest disappointments about the Obama administration is the ways in which it resembles Bush's. Bagram is a repeat of Abu Ghraib. Obama knows and knew all about the abuses carried out there.

I agree, Obama is Bush Jr.'s third administration. Of course I am more concerned with his unsustainable spending.

[dadakarma]

I agree, Obama is Bush Jr.'s third administration. Of course I am more concerned with his unsustainable spending.

I'm not an economist but one doesn't need that expertise to know that the spending has been unsustainable since Bush's first term.

[MMC]

Who cares? I don't need to check with anyone about it.


Then why did you bring it up if you didn't care.....huh? Well then once again you prove you don't know what you talking about. I am all for that.




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwwuZr6H1LQ
Good thing they didnt let you Ride on that Little Yellow Bus! :kiss: :evil:

[Peter1469]

I'm not an economist but one doesn't need that expertise to know that the spending has been unsustainable since Bush's first term.

Agreed.

[keyser soze]

He's still doing a better job with the economy than Bush did...and the spending is down but unless we let the Bush tax cuts go and end these wars and stay they hell out of wars well follow Russia. We're building countries overseas when our own country needs massive infusions. It makes no sense until you realize it has nothing to do with anything but profit...our owners are profiting at our expense, as usual.

[MMC]

He's still doing a better job with the economy than Bush did...and the spending is down but unless we let the Bush tax cuts go and end these wars and stay they hell out of wars well follow Russia. We're building countries overseas when our own country needs massive infusions. It makes no sense until you realize it has nothing to do with anything but profit...our owners are profiting at our expense, as usual.

Do you have a link Keyser that the spending is down? According to the CBO and all other sources of an Independant nature, all state Obama is spending more money. Why would you try and spin this any other way.....

http://blog.heritage.org/2012/03/16/cbo-shows-obamas-budget-produces-even-more-staggering-spending-and-debt/
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimate (http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/03-16-APB.pdf) of the President’s budget reveals a reckless fiscal plan that shirks the spending cuts in the Budget Control Act and increases spending by more than $1 trillion over the next 10 years. It confirms that Obama is the first President to preside over four years of deficits in excess of a trillion dollars. Moreover, it deepens the debt by $3.5 trillion. A few details:

Higher Total Spending. In the CBO’s analysis, the President’s spending is $1.15 trillion higher between 2013–2022. Roughly half of the increase comes from policy changes and the other half from increased interest payments. The President’s record total spending would hold above 22 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) throughout the decade, “well above the 21.0 percent average seen over the past 40 years,” CBO says.

Looks like you got those facts confused again.

[Stoney]

If we doubled the capital gains tax, and investments stayed in this country, the projected deficit for 2012, the projected borrowing for 2012, would be reduced from 1.33 trillion dollars to 1.29 trillion dollars. That's using the White House's estimates for deficit spending and the generally accepted 4 billion dollars in revenue achieved if capital gains taxes were doubled.

[MMC]

If we doubled the capital gains tax, and investments stayed in this country, the projected deficit for 2012, the projected borrowing for 2012, would be reduced from 1.33 trillion dollars to 1.29 trillion dollars. That's using the White House's estimates for deficit spending and the generally accepted 4 billion dollars in revenue achieved if capital gains taxes were doubled.


Morning Stoney.....I have some other stats up in the other thread on it, including the hidden crap from this Adminsitration and Congress.

[Stoney]

Thanks, I'll take a look.

I wanted to comment on this phoney class warfare argument here. I kinda wish the Dems could get the Buffet Rule passed so we could get back on serious subjects. BTW, with Buffet fighting so hard against paying current rates they might need to change the name of the rule.

Good Morning!

[Mainecoons]

Yes, as I posted on another thread, the Buffett rule should be passed so that everyone can see that this is nothing more than more of Obama's divisive class warfare with the main purpose of diverting everyone's attention from the out of control spending and the gross failure of his administration.

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.mx/2012/04/buffett-tax-proposal-hype-or-reality.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:+MishsGlobalEconomicTrendAnalysi s+(Mish's+Global+Economic+Trend+Analysis)

Check this out. Shows you just what a joke this is when it comes to seriously reducing the deficit. And this model doesn't compensate for revenue reduction from higher tax rates as people move and shelter money to escape taxes. Ask the State of Maryland how that worked with their "millionaires tax."

Let's pass it. Then Obama will have no place to hide other than to continue stoking racial divisiveness.

[Peter1469]

He's still doing a better job with the economy than Bush did...and the spending is down but unless we let the Bush tax cuts go and end these wars and stay they hell out of wars well follow Russia. We're building countries overseas when our own country needs massive infusions. It makes no sense until you realize it has nothing to do with anything but profit...our owners are profiting at our expense, as usual.

Spending is through the roof. Repel the Bush tax cuts and collect enough money to cover 1/10th of Obama's yearly deficit. That won't get you anywhere. And that doesn't factor in growth or retraction of the economy because of the tax increase. And the lowest tax bracket will get a 50% increase in its taxes.

[Mainecoons]

Hmm, the last year the Republicans had control of Congress and the White House, 2006, I believe the deficit was 285 billion, or about the amount that could be covered by repealing the "Bush" tax cuts. Today, that same repeal is a drop in the bucket.

In the first place, it is not the "job" of the Federal goernment to manage the economy and when they try as Obama's administration has, the results are just as crappy as when Carter's administration tried it and Roosevelt's administration turned the usual two year panic/crash into a 10 year depression that required a world war to end it.

This is why liberalism is a form of insanity, Keyser. Time and time again, you've been shown by actual events that you can't manage the economy, that when government is out of the way the economy manages itself quite nicely, and still you don't get it. So you keep trying to do the same thing over and over again with the same result.

Perhaps if you had been around for the Johnson and Carter disasters as I have been, you would understand.

[keyser soze]

I have yet to hear any of you 'patriots' talk about where all this debt came from...where it really came from. Until you can get honest with yourselves all you do is repeat talking points. You can't give huge tax cuts to the 1% and run two wars off budget without incurring a huge debt...why can't you understand that?

[Peter1469]

I have yet to hear any of you 'patriots' talk about where all this debt came from...where it really came from. Until you can get honest with yourselves all you do is repeat talking points. You can't give huge tax cuts to the 1% and run two wars off budget without incurring a huge debt...why can't you understand that?


Both parties are to blame for deficit spending. The only time we had an official balanced budget in recent years was when Clinton had a GOP Congress. But Dems spend more than the GOP.







NPR tells us that the huge debt is caused by this:






Kotlikoff explains that America's "unofficial" payment obligations — like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid benefits — jack up the debt figure substantially."If you add up all the promises that have been made for spending obligations, including defense expenditures, and you subtract all the taxes that we expect to collect, the difference is $211 trillion. That's the fiscal gap," he says. "That's our true indebtedness."We don't hear more about this enormous number, Kotlikoff says, because politicians have chosen their language carefully to keep most of the problem off the books."Why are these guys thinking about balancing the budget?" he says. "They should try and think about our long-term fiscal problems."According to Kotlikoff, one of the biggest fiscal problems Congress should focus on is America's obligation to make Social Security payments to future generations of the elderly."We've got 78 million baby boomers who are poised to collect, in about 15 to 20 years, about $40,000 per person. Multiply 78 million by $40,000 — you're talking about more than $3 trillion a year just to give to a portion of the population," he says. "That's an enormous bill that's overhanging our heads, and Congress isn't focused on it."http://www.npr.org/2011/08/06/139027615/a-national-debt-of-14-trillion-try-211-trillion