Regarding Torture…

What more can be said on the topic of torture?

We’ve known for years that the Bushistas sanctioned “enhanced interrogation techniques” for agents of the U.S. to use against prisoners. When that wasn’t sufficient, they created a network of secret prisons and rendition flights that allowed other governments to do the inhumane work for them.

Memos, meeting minutes, public statements, back-door agreements to allow certain methods some form of legal gray-space – it’s all been there in the public domain. This blog was started three years ago in response to outrageous behavior at the Guantanamo Concentration Camp. Many of us have written letters, signed petitions, made phone calls, faxed, written un chingo de blog posts, yet there’s been little to nothing regarding accountability among this crew of war criminals.

Why is that?

Well, I came to the unfortunate conclusion years ago that there are far too many U.S. born Americans™ who think it’s fine to treat “terrorists” any way we choose. The moral compass of this country was shattered and pulverized into a dust as fine as the cloud of filth that blanketed Manhattan in the days following September 11, 2001. Inhaling the fumes of that toxic cloud, either through direct contact or the screens of televisions, a bloodlust gripped/grips the national psyche in such a way that waterboarding, and other unspeakable acts that we don’t even know about, are given the thumbs up.

If there is any reason I have been in full support of impeachment from the early days of Bush’s Two-Term Tantrum, this is it. We have an obligation to uphold boundaries of civility whether we get the same deference from “enemies” or not. That obligation was shat upon a long time ago, but since it’s the Shining Beacon on a Hill doing it, will we see the same end game as those who committed identical atrocities decades ago?

Time will tell.

 

Scarier Than La Llorona

And that’s saying a lot…

The department issued another still-secret memo in October 2001 that, in part, sought to outline novel ways the military could be used domestically to defend the country in the face of an impending attack. The Justice Department so far has refused to release it, citing attorney-client privilege, and Attorney General Michael Mukasey declined to describe it Thursday at a Senate panel where Democrats characterized it as a “torture memo.”

linkage

 

BREAKING: John McCain Actually Voted Today

And guess what? He voted to give a green light to waterboarding, even though he was a victim of torture years ago in Vietnam.

Today, the Senate brought the Intelligence Authorization Bill to the floor, containing a provision from Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) that establishes one interrogation standard, requiring the intelligence community to abide by the same standards as articulated in the Army Field Manual and banning waterboarding.

Just hours ago, the Senate voted in favor of the bill, 51-45.

linkage

McCain voted no.

Of course, this is not really breaking news since he scored a deal with the Torturer in Chief over a year ago to provide a loophole for “enhanced interrogation techniques”.

Then came that dramatic December 15th handshake between Bush and McCain, a veritable media mirage that concealed furious back-room maneuvering by the White House to undercut the amendment. A coalition of rights groups, including Amnesty International, had resisted the executive’s effort to punch loopholes in the torture ban but, in the end, the White House prevailed. With the help of key senate conservatives, the Bush administration succeeded in twisting what began as an unequivocal ban on torture into a legitimization of three controversial legal doctrines that the administration had originally used to justify torture right after 9/11.

In an apparent compromise gesture, McCain himself inserted the first major loophole: a legal defense for accused CIA interrogators that echoes the administration’s notorious August 2002 torture memo allowing any agents criminally charged to claim that they “did not know that the practices were unlawful.”

Amnesty International

As an Arizonan, I can’t decide which is worse: John McCain conveniently, and repeatedly, stepping out of votes for fear of accountability, or actually having him show up and endorse the most egregious actions by government interrogators. Either way, he is unfit for President.

 

Impeach The Torturers

Have we experienced so much horror in the past seven years, that we all engage in a collective yawn when the Executive Branch admits openly to sanctioning torture?

WASHINGTON – The White House on Wednesday defended the use of the interrogation technique known as waterboarding, saying it is legal — not torture as critics argue — and has saved American lives.

President Bush could authorize waterboarding for future terrorism suspects if certain criteria are met, a spokesman said.

A day earlier, the Bush administration acknowledged publicly for the first time that the tactic was used by U.S. government questioners on three terror suspects. Testifying before Congress, CIA Director Michael Hayden said Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Abu Zubayda and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri were waterboarded in 2002 and 2003.

Waterboarding involves strapping a suspect down and pouring water over his cloth-covered face to create the sensation of drowning. It has been traced back hundreds of years, to the Spanish Inquisition, and is condemned by nations around the world.

linkage

Via Andrew Sullivan, of all people, we’re reminded that the Bush Administration is using the exact same argument for “enhanced interrogation techniques” as Nazi commanders who were eventually convicted as war criminals.

The victims, by the way, were not in uniform. And the Nazis tried to argue, just as John Yoo did, that this made torturing them legit. The victims were paramilitary Norwegians, operating as an insurgency, against an occupying force. And the torturers had also interrogated some prisoners humanely. But the argument, deployed by Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and the Nazis before them, didn’t wash with the court. Money quote:

As extenuating circumstances, Bruns had pleaded various incidents in which he had helped Norwegians, Schubert had pleaded difficulties at home, and Clemens had pointed to several hundred interrogations during which he had treated prisoners humanely.

The Court did not regard any of the above-mentioned circumstances as a sufficient reason for mitigating the punishment and found it necessary to act with the utmost severity. Each of the defendants was responsible for a series of incidents of torture, every one of which could, according to Art. 3 (a), (c) and (d) of the Provisional Decree of 4th May, 1945, be punished by the death sentence.

linkage

It’s revolting to ponder how many hands are dirty in this dark episode of U.S. history. So many branches and offices of government, that I fear accountability will be escaped because of the mass participation. Yet another symptom of 9/11 Fever that exposed a country’s moral compass wrought with vengeance and fear.

Perhaps the international community will again exert their influence…one can only hope. Torture is never acceptable.

 

Tortured Politics

The U.S. continues to torture unabashedly. That’s the only conclusion I can come to when forked-tongue individuals are given a pass.

WASHINGTON – The Judiciary Committee advanced Attorney General designate Michael Mukasey’s nomination to the Senate floor Tuesday, virtually ensuring confirmation for a former judge ensnarled in bitter controversy over terrorism-era prisoner interrogations.

The 11-8 vote came only after two key Democrats accepted his assurance to enforce any law Congress might enact against waterboarding.

linkage

So here’s what will happen next:

• Congress may get around to outlawing waterboarding
• Junior Caligula will veto the legislation since he has nothing to lose and already has approval ratings lower than La Llorona.
• Impeachment will remain off the table.
• Torturing will continue while the Democrats slap each other on the back for “doing something about it”

Let’s see if there’s any truth to this:

But Specter, of Pennsylvania, said that outlawing waterboarding rests with Congress. He revealed that he had talked with Mukasey a day earlier and received an assurance that the nominee would back up any such legislation and quit if Bush ignores his opinion.

Since, you know, officials never go back on their word.

 

Headlined Understatement of All Time

Oy.

Bush leaving some problems to successors

WASHINGTON – Over and over, President Bush confidently promised to “solve problems, not pass them on to future presidents and future generations.” As the clock runs out on his eight-year presidency, a tall stack of troubles remain and Bush’s words ring hollow.

Iraq, budget deficits, the looming insolvency of Social Security and Medicare, high health and energy costs, a national immigration mess — the next president will inherit these problems in January 2009.

linkage

Some problems? Some? May I add to the lacking list of already craptacular items? That was rhetorical, I’m gonna do it anyway and take the You Forgot Poland! track.

You forgot…

• Government-sanctioned torture
• Government-sanctioned rendition flights so other countries can torture
• Secret prisons where said torture takes place
• Non-secret prisons where said torture takes place
• the usage of the Magna Carta as toilet paper (probably during torture sessions)

Other examples? There’s a plethora

 

Torture Lawyer Withdraws Nomination

I guess he didn’t have the ganas to undergo an interrogation himself, after admitting that he was one of the people who gave approval to the United States’ torture policies.

At the hearing in June, Rizzo said he did not object to the 2002 memo that said for an interrogation technique to be considered torture, it must inflict pain “equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death.” He said he later deemed the document an “aggressive, expansive” reading of U.S. law.

Human rights groups had urged the Senate to reject Rizzo’s nomination because of his stated views on torture. In a letter to the intelligence panel, a coalition of advocacy groups cited Rizzo’s June testimony, in which he had not objected to the so-called “torture memo” the Justice Department prepared in 2002.

linkage

Now if only the Congress will undo the damage done by Rizzo, Yoo, Gonzalez, Rummy, Cheney, Bush, etc. etc. etc.

 

At Least He Didn’t Commit Adultery…

….because, you know, that would definitely be grounds for Impeachment.

But torture? Nah

Cheney and his allies, according to more than two dozen current and former officials, pioneered a novel distinction between forbidden “torture” and permitted use of “cruel, inhuman or degrading” methods of questioning. They did not originate every idea to rewrite or reinterpret the law, but fresh accounts from participants show that they translated muscular theories, from Yoo and others, into the operational language of government.

Gutting Habeas Corpus? Pfffft!

…Two that particularly worried him involved U.S. citizens — Jose Padilla and Yaser Esam Hamdi — who had been declared enemy combatants and denied access to lawyers.

Federal courts, Olson argued, would not go along with that. But the CIA and military interrogators opposed any outside contact, fearing relief from the isolation and dependence that they relied upon to break the will of suspected terrorists.

Flanigan said that Addington’s personal views leaned more toward Olson than against him, but that Addington beat back the proposal to grant detainees access to lawyers, “because that was the position of his client, the vice president.”

Above the will of the people, despite this being a so-called democracy? Meh

Eager to put detainee scandals behind them, Bush’s advisers spent days composing a statement in which the president would declare support for the veto-proof bill on detainee treatment. Hours before Bush signed it into law on Dec. 30, 2005, Cheney’s lawyer intercepted the accompanying statement “and just literally takes his red pen all the way through it,” according to an official with firsthand knowledge.

Addington substituted a single sentence. Bush, he wrote, would interpret the law “in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President to supervise the unitary executive branch and as Commander in Chief.”

Cheney’s office had used that technique often. Like his boss, Addington disdained what he called “interagency treaties,” one official said. He had no qualms about discarding language “agreed between Cabinet secretaries,” the official said.

Go read the whole thing. This is part 2 of 4 of a WaPo exposé on Dick “Dick” Cheney.

 

A Torturer’s Tortured Conscience

Another crack in the doorway that reveals the festering monster that has been created in the laboratory known as the Global War on Terror:

“I tortured people,” said Lagouranis, 37, who was a military intelligence specialist in Iraq from January 2004 until January 2005. “You have to twist your mind up so much to justify doing that.”

Being an interrogator, Lagouranis discovered, can be torture. At first, he was eager to try coercive techniques. In training at Fort Huachuca, Ariz., instructors stressed the Geneva Conventions, he recalled, while classmates privately admired Israeli and British methods. “The British were tough,” Lagouranis said. “They seemed like real interrogators.”

But interrogators for countries that pride themselves on adhering to the rule of law, such as Britain, the United States and Israel, operate in a moral war zone. They are on the front lines in fighting terrorism, crucial for intelligence-gathering. Yet they use methods that conflict with their societies’ values.

The border between coercion and torture is often in dispute, and the U.S. government is debating it now. The Bush administration is nearing completion of a new executive order setting secret rules for CIA interrogation that may ban waterboarding, a practice that simulates drowning. Last September, President Bush endorsed an “alternative set of procedures,” which he described as “tough,” for questioning high-level detainees. And in Iraq last month, Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander, warned troops that the military does not sanction “torture or other expedient methods to obtain information.”

linkage

As you’ll read in the final excerpted paragraph, George is seeking to further legitimize in law the abhorrent practices that have already soiled the reputation of the United States and its troops. The situation is changed now, however, because he will have to get the Democratically-led Congress to go along with his evil plans.

It’s changed right?

No. Not at all.

More than any other issue than I can recall, aside from the original Shocking and Awful campaign in Iraq, the torture debate has made me feel like a crazy person. How can a society and government look the other way on a topic that causes such a deep revulsion inside my soul? Clearly there’s something wrong with me.

Only, I’m not the only one who recognizes that morality’s boundaries have been raped.

So where is the leadership on this facet of modern-day U.S. policy that should finally have its coffin nailed shut? Lukewarm responses to ‘calls to action’ from the public are unacceptable by the Democrats. And opposition to torture is certainly not going to come from the GOP. Recall this during the 2008 Campaign’s First Presidential Debate last month:

During tonight’s presidential debates, candidates were asked whether they would support the use of waterboarding — a technique, defined as torture by the Justice Department, that simulates drowning and makes the subject “believe his death is imminent while ideally not causing permanent physical damage.”

Both former mayor Rudy Giuliani and Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO) suggested they would support using the technique. Specifically asked about waterboarding, Giuliani said he would allow “every method [interrogators] could think of and I would support them in doing it.” Tancredo later added, “I’m looking for Jack Bauer,” referencing the television character who has used torture techniques such as suffocation and electrocution on prisoners.

The audience applauded loudly after both statements.

Think Progress has the video

There is a large base of people that have sold their souls in exchange for winning against terrorists at any cost. Of course, they do so without having any clear definition whatsoever for either term – “winning” or “terrorists”. Enough propaganda and lack of critical thought processes has allowed a faceless caricature to become the enemy – muslim and/or brown-skinned. If a target meets those criteria, then any action we take against them becomes acceptable to the sheeple.

Is there a light at the end of the tunnel yet? Has the United States woken from its revenge-induced coma following 9/11 (even though Iraq had nothing to do with it)?

I don’t think so

The Revs. Louie Vitale and Steve Kelly kneeled to pray at Fort Huachuca and now face a trial in federal court in Tucson that will decide whether they will go to prison.

On Nov. 19, the Catholic priests were part of a small protest against torture that activists claim the U.S. uses against war captives.

The priests asked to see the head of intelligence or the officer of the day at the fort but were denied access to the fort.

So they began praying, refused to leave and were arrested.

We have not reached the point where public outcry would fight the injustice rained down upon the Fathers, who could really be any protester exercising their right to assembly. Nor has this incident spurned additional protests that raise the volume of opposition. Instead, the military campaign goes on unabated, without the introspection that is required to regain any semblance of morality.

When’s it gonna end?

When’s it gonna end?

Crossposted at Booman Tribune

 

A Quick Reminder About John McCain

You know, John McCain, who has milked his experience as a tortured Vietnam Prisoner of War so hard that the teets of that particular sacred cow are bloated and cracked?

Well, he squandered any opportunity to receive deference for his encounter with “alternative techniques” on the military battlefield when he caved to the Bush White House in 2005

Then came that dramatic December 15th handshake between Bush and McCain, a veritable media mirage that concealed furious back-room maneuvering by the White House to undercut the amendment. A coalition of rights groups, including Amnesty International, had resisted the executive’s effort to punch loopholes in the torture ban but, in the end, the White House prevailed. With the help of key senate conservatives, the Bush administration succeeded in twisting what began as an unequivocal ban on torture into a legitimization of three controversial legal doctrines that the administration had originally used to justify torture right after 9/11.

In an apparent compromise gesture, McCain himself inserted the first major loophole: a legal defense for accused CIA interrogators that echoes the administration’s notorious August 2002 torture memo allowing any agents criminally charged to claim that they “did not know that the practices were unlawful.”

Amnesty International

Defenders of the Senator, who is announcing his pro-war/pro-Bush Doctrine bid for President today, will likely point out that McCain fought the White House on the torture rules; but, just like with every other maverick sleight-of-hand maneuver he has conned the people and media with – in the end, he votes with the BushCo. party line – or doesn’t bother to vote at all.

He can’t have his cake* and eat it too.

* Mmmmm, cake. No better time for it than when an entire U.S. city drowns in toxic stew