Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiThe CIA calls them "enhanced interrogation methods."
The rest of the world calls it torture.
Despite the denials of the Bush administration, the United States -- aided and abetted by Congress -- stands accused of torturing detainees in the so-called Global War on Terror.
There is plenty of blame to go around, starting with the Democrats. Earlier this month, The Washington Post reported that since 2002, the Bush administration had regularly briefed leading Congressional Democrats on the House and Senate Intelligence Committees about the CIA's use of torture. On every occasion, lawmakers not only failed to object to these policies, but vigorously supported them.
Many of the Democrats who received these briefings went on to support the Military Commissions Act of 2006, the legislation that not only suspended the right of habeas corpus, but also explicitly authorized the CIA to continue to use interrogation methods that are illegal under the Geneva Conventions.
In the end, the supposed opposition party enabled and affirmatively supported the worst aspects of the Bush administration's foreign policy. They not only allowed illegal acts to happen,they also acquiesced to passing laws to immunize government officials from prosecution for their wrongdoing.
A couple of weeks ago, the U.S. House passed a bill to prohibit torture. Virtually every Republican member of the House -- 189 in all voted it against it. At least the Republicans are honest about their love of torture.
The bill has gone nowhere in the Senate and has already been threatened with a veto by President Bush. Neither is surprising. Our leaders in Washington are all complicit in the carrying out of war crimes.
Sound extreme? According to the Geneva Conventions, that's what the use of torture against detainees is -- a war crime. And one of the smoking guns is the case of Abu Zubaydah, an al-Qaida operative who was captured in Pakistan in March 2002.
Zubaydah was allegedly taken to Thailand to receive what President Bush called "an alternative set of procedures" which were "safe and lawful and necessary."
What Zubaydah got, according to what current and former intelligence officials told The Washington Post, were weeks of torture that
included hypothermia, sleep deprivation, long periods of standing and multiple sessions of waterboarding. All these acts are illegal under U.S. and international law.
The kicker to all this was that Zubaydah was, according to FBI sources, mentally unstable and not very important to al-Qaida's plots. The weeks of torture yielded all sorts of information, but none of it was true.
The torture of Zubaydah was taped by the CIA -- hundreds of hours of abuse caught on videotape that would definitively settle the question whether the Bush administration authorized the torture of detainees. Naturally, the tapes were destroyed.
What makes Zubaydah's case more significant than the other prisoners who have been abused and, some cases, died in U.S. custody in the past five years? Because several courts have cases pending based on testimony from Zubaydah's interrogation. Destruction of evidence is a serious legal matter, and the destruction of the videotapes of Zubaydah's interrogation constitutes obstruction of justice.
The Bush administration is claiming legal immunity on a technicality -- that the interrogation took place outside the U.S., so the
courts have no jurisdiction. That's the argument that has been used for imprisoning hundreds of terrorism suspects at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba or for having the CIA conduct its "enhanced interrogation" in places such as Egypt, Jordan and Uzbekistan.
But apparently there are more than a few professionals in the U.S. intelligence community who are willing to risk their careers to leak the details of this lawless behavior to the press. Supposedly, at least four senior Bush administration aides -- including David Addington, one of the chief legal architects of the administration's detention and interrogation policies -- were approached for advice about what to do with the tapes. None have admitted recommending their destruction.
Jose Rodriguez, the former head of the CIA's clandestine service who ordered the destruction of the tapes, has been subpoenaed by the House Intelligence Committee. The Justice Department has begun its own inquiry into the tapes. And we now know that the 9/11 Commission was lied to by the CIA about the existence of the tapes.
Everything adds up to a major scandal, but does anyone in Washington have the guts to do anything about it, especially in an election year?
The Democrats are compromised, because their Congressional leaders knew what was happening and failed to stop it.
The Republicans won't stop it because they have become the party of torture. They have enthusiastically supported every action of the Bush administration, legal or not.
Perhaps our only hope is that enough members of the intelligence community -- sickened by the things they've done and afraid of being made scapegoats for an administration that has flouted international law -- will step forward and blow the whistle on Bush and Cheney.
Are we still a nation of laws, not men? We will find out in 2008 whether that is still so.
© 2007 The Brattleboro Reformer
29 Comments so far
Show AllYour post hits on a key insight, though. The most significant difference among authoritarians on the so-called "right" and so-called "left" is which freedoms they want to undo. In the modern world, they are married to a common spouse in a 3-way love triangle: money. They belong to political parties like marriages of convenience.
I see the real political scrimmage line as top vs. down, not left vs. right. The only sensible place I see is to scope out a progressive populism which supports the ENTIRE Bill of Rights.
1st Shirt,
Thanks for the response, and providing more details on how terribly screwed up our system is: how martial law trumps civilian law. In any case, I see that the law of land warfare owes part of its existence to the Geneva Conventions. These have largely been obsoleted under Bush, Rumsfeld, and a potted plant Congress.
Warrantless wiretapping, extraordinary rendition, secret prisons in Eastern Europe and elsewhere, and a few more recent bills may congeal into a catch-22. If the government says you are an enemy combatant, aiding such a combatant, or if the government THINKS you are advocating such behaviors (whether or not true), your martial law can then kick in. You'll be guilty until proven innocent, possibly hauled away and tortured, and denied legal representation in a civilian court.
I have no use for socialism or corporations, or the modern-day marriage of the two.
There are paradoxical people out there. Advocating the 2nd Amendment in the name of some nebulous freedom from martial law, but perhaps having no problem burying the other amendments and calling fascism by some other name.
I may be the last of a dying breed in this country, but I support ALL of the amendments.
MikeBinSC, I was not looking for a thoughtful response. . . simply an answer to my questions. Your reply degenerating into sixties protest rants can only mean you are most likely a professor at anyone of our "institutions of indoctrination" where any opposing viewpoints are not allowed. Once the historical facts are put forth, then the postings slide into a pit of human fecal matter.
No wonder Ann Coulter has so much fun with you folks. Clearly the CD site is worthy of one's spiritual nourishment.
"Veritas Vos Liberabit!"
I told you that it didn't warrant a thoughtful response!
I think he confused "Capitalist Pig" with "Imperialist Dog", or maybe I did.
In any event, when the Idiot-In-Chief imposes martial law, and the next version of the "Patriot Act" is rolled out, which will require all arms to be turned in to the government, 1st Shirt will be at the head of the line to turn his in, and he'll also tell them where you hid yours!
I think if we drop the "r" from his name......
HAPPY NEW YEAR!!
Oh yeh, And down with the capitalist, imperialist, pig, dog, military-media-industrial-complex,.......
"Thank GOD our troops are protecting your right to spew your foul garbage, because if they weren't the last sound you might hear is the blood spewing gurgle as one of Mohammad's pigs sever your head from your SHOULDERS!"
Sorry, for the mispelled word and how rude of me! HAPPY NEW YEAR!
"Veritas Vos Liberabit!"
MikeBinSC writes: "1st Shirt, you are nothing more than a racist, xenophobic, constitution squashing, imperialist pig, and you need to crawl back under that rock you came out from under to spew your venom. Your comments display a level of ignorance that does not even warrant a thoughtful response." My, my it didn't take long to get a cute response. Needless to say, once the intellectually vacuous are exposed then their marxist rhetoric is regurgitated! Spot on!
BeforKids writes: "1st Shirt, the Iraqi people are not responsible for Saddam's behavior as a dictator. The insurgency is resistance to our invasion and occupancy." So how do you explain mohammad's murderers Al Qaida massacring all those innocent Iraqi men, women and children? They seem to be missing a whole lot of American troops!
BeforKids continues: "The US has been assassinating and overthrowing democratically elected governments all through history if they resist US corporations exploiting their resources and people. And that is the real reason why they "hate" us." Again, historical revisionism is a trademark of marxists, fascists, and nazis. Please explain how Saddam was able to nationalize the Iraqi Oil Company to enrich his own tribal thugs? How was Saddam able to enrich himself and his terrorist buddies through the United Nations Oil for Food scam?
BeforKids writes, "1st Shirt, we know what NAZI stands for, and it was a corporate fascist party." With Gadfly Philosopher following with, "Fascism in both Germany and Italy was mainly characterized by the collapse of state and corporate power,"
Look folks you can't have it both ways, I know you hate corporations (A First Amendment right "of the people to peacebly assemble" in this case to combine into a business entity for profit) and that you hate the capitalist system, but Nazi Germany was nothing but a political system that opposed democracy, allowed only a one-party system, infiltrated every aspect of German social life, worked to destroy the family, integrated racial hatred and eugenics (Hitler's eugenics was lauded by the wonderful American socialist Margaret Sanger - the mother of abortion and sterilization of undesirables). Hitler's aim was all about controlling the very minds of the German people not allowing any political discourse such as we have here (Hitler's tactics we call today "political correctness" - and anyone who challenges that orthodoxy is labeled . . . well just read MikeBinSC above and prime candidates for re-education camps). Again, the parallels with marxism, fascism, and American leftists is obvious.
Now what does this have to do with allowing "illegal combatants" rights under our Constitution? Notice there is no retort from the myrmidons to the World War II actions of the sanctimoniously holy FDR. . . How could he during a time of war get away with military tribunals followed by executions of illegal combatants? Explain!!!!
Thank GOD our troops are protecting your right to spew your foul garbage, because if they weren't the last sound you might hear is the blood spewing gurgle as one of Mohammad's pigs sever your head from your soldiers!
"Veritas Vos Liberabit!"
1st shirt
The National Socialst Wrker's Party had nothing to do with socialism, anymore than it had to do with worker's rights. Fascism in both Germany and Italy was mainly characterized by the collapse of state and corporate power, the crowning achievement of which was "free labor in the work camps, come death camps. It was the genius of Hitler's slogan "arbeit mact frei" that bamboozled many people. Proof that this was the case was the reparations exacted after WWII and the liberation. We, in America, have moved very close to this idea with "Employment at Will" (Not, of course, the worker's will, but the employer's will!)
What Jihadi sites have you visited? I suspect none, because you'd probably have already been hauled in for questioning for merely viewing such sites under the bush crime syndicate.
Racism goes hand in glove with fascism, so thank you for revealing your true colors in your largely incoherent, entirely uninformed, rants.
1st Shirt, you are nothing more than a racist, xenophobic, constitution squashing, imperialist pig, and you need to crawl back under that rock you came out from under to spew your venom. Your comments display a level of ignorance that does not even warrant a thoughtful response.
… yep they "hate our {fascist} freedoms" that have been enslaving their peoples and resources for ~ a century …
You're Damn Right I'm Angry. Why Isn't Everyone?
1st Shirt, the Iraqi people are not responsible for Saddam's behavior as a dictator. The insurgency is resistance to our invasion and occupancy.
When Saddam Hussein approached the George H W Bush administration about Kuwaiti encroachment on oilfields that were primarily located in Iraq, he was assured that the US had no concern about that matter (they lied).
The US has been assassinating and overthrowing democratically elected governments all through history if they resist US corporations exploiting their resources and people. And that is the real reason why they "hate" us.
BeForKids and MikeBinSC,
So what do your posts have to do with giving Osama Bin Slaben's butchering pigs "rights" under our Constitution?
You folks need to lay off the kool aid and hope that you never have to suffer the horrors at the hands of these butchering dogs. Have any of you visited the jihaddi web sites to view their butchering our troops? Or do you idolize these islamic dogs? Perhaps you savor our surrender or do you demand our defeat?
I've been to Iraq, the hatred and mistrust was planted by George Bush 41, he instigated the uprisings throughout Shiite Iraq during the first Gulf War and blaming our United Nations mandate to only liberate Kuwait, forced us to set on the side line while Saddam brutally put down their rebellion. The aftermath of that brutality I saw while manning a checkpoint on Highway Eight still haunts me today!
Saddam knew then that he couldn't trust his own military and from then on made deals with the various Islamic terror groups throughout the lovely world dominated by the "religion of peace." That was Mohammed al Duari's job to act as religious liaison, he is comfortably hanging out in Syria avoiding the hangmans noose.
Saddam then manipulated the media to force the U.N. and wild Bill Clinton to provide him "oil for food" which turned out to be a dictator and terrorist enrichment program. Everytime a loving islamist palestinian became a homicide bomber, Saddam would send their family a nice check for about $25,000 celebrating their son's slaughter!
You know so little . . . these jihaddi pigs will do anything to manipulate the compliant media to win your discontent. . . Saddam learned well from our Vietnam experience. You apparently haven't.
Veritos Vos Liberabit!
1st Shirt, we know what NAZI stands for, and it was a corporate fascist party. I have to doubt the depth of your understanding of Thomas Jefferson and Ronald Reagan if you can lump them together. Jefferson for one would be horrified.
In your first post, you vilified the insurgents as hating our culture. But in reality, until we invaded them dropped bombs on their heads, kicked down their doors, dragging them out into the street in their nightshirts, and shot their wives and children at checkpoints, they didn't exist as insurgents. Before the invasion, they liked Americans and Iraqi streets were far safer than American streets. Also, before we got there, they had an ancient culture with modern cities, and treasures from the oldest civilization in world history. But we wiped that out, along with everything else they had except for their oilfields and the oil ministry. We have given them ample reason to hate us.
The terrorists joining the fight are mostly from Saudi Arabia, but since we have to buy their oil instead of stealing it, we aren't making a fuss about that.
Even neoconservative Alan Greenspan admits we're there for their oil, and they all know it, since they are better informed than people who get their news from FOX.
1st Shirt, you need to crack open another beer and sit back down in front of the TV, I think FOX is doing another comparison of Iraq to WWII, or is it Vietnam or Korea, I forget. In any event it would be better than showing your ignorance here at CD.
Dear Progressive Paul,
You wrote: "Innoncence/guilt in a country under rule of law (not martial law) is determined only after a fair hearing, with access to legal counsel, etc." The Law of Land Warfare does not address American Constitutional Due Process as it pertains to American Citizens. It pertains to illegal combatants captured on foreign soil during war. Illegal Combatants deny or ignore even the basic tenets of the Law of Land Warfare, witness the horrific murders of our captured troops. I am sorry the mainstream media fails to publicize the graphic images you can find on any jihaddi website!
You write: "Blatantly absent from Brown Shirt's commentary above is who gets to decide innocence, and under what authority?"
First I regret your insult refering to my comments and invoking, "Brown Shirt." For the historically illiterate, Brown Shirt is associated with Nazis. NAZI was short for "National Socialist German Workers Party." Socialists are more akin to "progressives" or "neo-marxits" basically anyone who uses the government to impose socialist control every aspect of our lives, such as what car we can or cannot drive, how large a house we can or cannot have, where we can or cannot live, what words we can or cannot utter, what thoughts we can or cannot have, etc.
I am more akin to philosophies of John Locke, Adam Smith, Thomas Jefferson, George Mason, John Adams, Ronald Reagan, all who saw government's responsibility to protect life, liberty and property. Not Engels, Marx, Lenin, Goebbels, Mao, Pol Pot, John Edwards, Hillary Clinton, et al, who wish to dictate who lives or dies, what liberties we are allowed to have and how much of our property they will confiscate or or in the words of Hillary, "take."
Progressive Paul writes, "Presumption of innocence is a cornerstone in any democracy. Martial law is a cornerstone in any fascism." Apparently, Paul forgot that these are "illegal combatants" not covered under any democratic system.
The great Progressive Socialist FDR and his worshippers never seemed upset that he used military tribunals to try and execute German illegal combatants when they came to our shores. Today's jihaddis held in Gitmo still have their heads, and don't forget, Paul, they still want to kill you, your family, and your friends.
You wrote,
"Seems the earlier poster is hoping to slip this under the rug — all the while perpetuating the myth that everyone in opposition to this administration is a gun control advocate" OK only Governor Richardson supports the Second Amendment and is actually endorsed by the National Rifle Association. . . the rest are reminiscent of past Marxist, Nazi, and Fascist regimes that successfully disarmed the citizenry.
"Waiting periods are only a step. Registration is only a step. The prohibition of firearms is the goal." Janet Reno, longest serving and most incompetent Attorney General appointed by Hillary Clinton, annointed by Bill.
"Veritas Vos Liberabit!"
Check out the guy's logic.
Innoncence/guilt in a country under rule of law (not martial law) is determined only after a fair hearing, with access to legal counsel, etc. Blatantly absent from Brown Shirt's commentary above is who gets to decide innocence, and under what authority?
Presumption of innocence is a cornerstone in any democracy. Martial law is a cornerstone in any fascism. Seems the earlier poster is hoping to slip this under the rug -- all the while perpetuating the myth that everyone in opposition to this administration is a gun control advocate.
Wow, I didn't realize that FoxNews has a plant in the CD blog! What a crock of propaganda and spin. I suppose all thowe vicious vile people turned in for ransom just hate our (uh-hum) freedoms?
Wake up and smell the sulfur.
I am sorry to break the ice here in such a blunt way. . . Those fine fellows we are holding in Gitmo are not privy to the U.S. Constitution, as they were actively attempting to detroy us, the U.S. that is. . . our laws don't cover their worthless souls. They hate our culture because they don't want their sons to grow up to be like Michael Jackson. They don't want their daughters to grow up to be like Britany Spears and they certainly don't want their wives to be like Rosie O'Donnell!
As for waterboarding, please note that these vile, vicious, vulgar animals who wish to kill you, your family and your friends, still have their HEADS! Our troops captured by Mohammad's butchers have been castrated alive, disembowled, and beheaded. So please, the next time you snivel for those dog's of Mohammad, just remember the violations of international law of land warfare committed by these butchers. I just wish the American Criminal Lovers Union (ACLU) would please travel to Iraq and defend our troops legal rights!
What's next, disarming law-abiding Americans!
Where is the new Dan Ellsberg who will leak copies of the tapes to the press?
Spreading the complicity is common in criminal enterprises. And employing euphemisms for the likes of torture and other war crimes is a way of minimizing what is really taking place. What was once extraordinary, even taboo, is now commonplace; we acquiesce to the horrors, and we swallow like cows, and we forget.
And when they come for us, there will be no one left to scream for help.
'Zubaydah was allegedly taken to Thailand to receive what President Bush called "an alternative set of procedures" which were "safe and lawful and necessary."'
If the procedures were "safe and lawful," why was it necessary to take Zubaydah to Thailand? This statement is a smoking gun: Bush was knowingly complicit in the commission of war crimes. And by refusing to impeach on that basis, Democrats in Congress are accessories after the fact.
Torture is a clear indication of personal moral bankruptcy. Too many Americans seem financially secure but morally bankrupt. Where are the voices of our legal and medical institutions? Where are the voices from higher education?
They are absent! Our trusted institutions are failing us. The risk has all been shifted to the individual citizen. The political leadership will not act. So once again it all begins in our own personal heart and mind. It starts with me.
John Freeman, I completely agree with you. This is nothing new, it is only just now becoming publicly acknowledged. And in some ways, that's even scarier. But maybe that's the purpose. Isn't that the purpose of torture, to create a climate of fear? Have to come up with something if color coding isn't working any more.
Well, now we know why Nancy Pelosi's impeachment is off the table. She is complicit with the war crimes. Her hands are dirty. Run, Cindy! The rot and corruption in our government is everywhere.
If we can't have Dennis, I'll take Edwards.
I am encouraged that the decades long practice of torture by the CIA has been brought into the light and openly supported by the Republican administration. They obviously feel in control enough to get away with establishing their obsenity as "The way we do it in America". So, now it remains to us to either wipe out the practice altogether or accept a LOT more of it. If we wait too long, it will be all of us at daily risk of the CIA, FBI, Blackwater and whatever other rent-a-cop organisation who has a permit to 'extract' information. Along with your teeth and fingernails.
Veteran '66-68
The point of torture isn't to get information.
EVERYone knows coerced "information" is worthless.
The point of torture is to create a climate of fear, of "terror,"so that no one wants to even APPEAR to dissent.
Liberty & Justice,
SJ
www.spartacusjones
David:
"There is no outrage, ipso facto, no one is paying attention in any kind of meaningful way."
Please.... try to paint with a less broad brush. Many of us who are outraged will not protest because A: where is the protest being held? how do we find out about it? (answer: it's not covered in your local news because your local news ISNT LOCAL ANY MORE) and B: your photo, your name, your license # and social security # etc will all be filed by your local police (esp. here in Denver! but elsewhere too) and made available to the FBI and Homeland Security. That information will put you, at the least, on a 'no fly list' and at worst, be available in a background check by a potential employer. Tried to get a job interview that doesn't include one of those lately? (answer: good luck!)
In other words, it may seem like walking down the street with a sign is a relatively harmless way to show at least a modicum of concern and protest, if you can find out where the protest is being held ...but it is far from being harmless to the person carrying the sign or joining in the march (again, if you can find it). The consequences can be real. My theory is that people are too conscious of the consequences, and not conscious enough of where protests are actually being held.. if they are.
Why is torture necessary when the U.S. Government has thought reading technology?
How is the government going to answer that question when this technology is finally exposed?
We are all compromised because we have failed to take to the streets, to become lawbreakers, to demand an accounting. There is no outrage, ipso facto, no one is paying attention in any kind of meaningful way. Our democratic republic's politics is dead; fascist tyranny has replaced it. Thank god, it's "wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross" as Sinclair Lewis predicted.
"The Republicans won't stop it because they have become the party of torture. They have enthusiastically supported every action of the Bush administration, legal or not."
I admire the editors of the Reformer for saying this and the sentence before it, "The Democrats are compromised, because their Congressional leaders knew what was happening and failed to stop it."
It's a sorry statement to make that few other states have a paper as good as Vermonters and that very few citizens are as informed and as politcally active.