Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiWASHINGTON - The Justice Department in 2002 told the CIA that its interrogators would be safe from prosecution for violations of anti-torture laws if they believed `in good faith' that harsh techniques used to break the will of prisoners, including waterboarding, would not cause "prolonged mental harm."
The newly released but heavily censored memo approved the CIA's harsh interrogation techniques method by method, but warned that if the circumstances changed, interrogators could be running afoul of anti-torture laws.
The Aug. 1, 2002 memo signed by then-Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee was issued the same day he wrote a memo for then-White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales defining torture as only those "extreme acts" that cause pain similar in intensity to that caused by death or organ failure. That memo was later rescinded by the Justice Department.
Waterboarding is a form of simulated drowning that critics call torture. CIA Director Michael Hayden banned waterboarding in 2006 but government officials have said it remains a possibility if approved by the attorney general, the CIA chief and the president.
Bush administration memos authorizing interrogation techniques have been leaked to the press and released under the Freedom of Information Act starting in 2004, when the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal revealed detainee mistreatment. Thursday's release adds to the growing record of the still secret program launched after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
The new Bybee memo was obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union, along with two other previously unreleased documents dealing with the CIA's interrogation program. The Bybee memo specifically approved proposed interrogation techniques that were devised for use against al-Qaida suspects who were resistant to traditional questioning methods.
The new documents indicate that senior Bush administration officials were aware of the controversial and potentially problematic use of certain interrogation methods, including waterboarding.
In a second memo, dated Jan. 28, 2003, then-CIA Director George Tenet authorized CIA officers to interrogate a terror suspect using an "enhanced technique" and ordered a record to be kept of it as the interrogation was happening. It was not clear whether such a record would be taken via notes, videotape or audiotape, but it was to include the "nature and duration of each such technique employed, the identities of those present" and other factors.
Tenet's memo also authorized the use of both "enhanced techniques" and "standard techniques," and said no other methods could be used "unless otherwise approved by headquarters."
Jameel Jaffer, director of the ACLU's national security project, said the Tenet document suggests the CIA at least contemplated "super enhanced" techniques that went beyond waterboarding.
He also said the interrogation records, if released, could be used as evidence by defendants in military tribunals at Guantanamo to prove they were tortured or coerced.
"They will be very interested to know that document identifies techniques, how long they were used and the names of the agents who inflicted the torture," Jaffer said. "It is very important to those tribunals."
A third document released by the ACLU Thursday is undated but likely was written in 2004, well after the last confirmed use of waterboarding against a CIA prisoner. It addresses a planned interrogation, saying that it should go forward only with the clear understanding of all policies pertaining to the treatment of prisoners.
That unsigned memo defends interrogations but warns those authorizing them to be fully aware of the then-emerging international and U.S. legal debate surrounding the issue. It appears to serve as groundwork to defend the legality of interrogations - including waterboarding - if necessary.
"Intelligence gained using the interrogation techniques has saved Americans lives and property," the unsigned memo states.
It pointed to the Aug. 2002 Justice Department opinion that concluded "interrogation techniques including the waterboard do not violate the torture statute."
For several years, the Bush administration relied on the findings in that 2002 opinion to maintain its interrogations did not amount to torture - and therefore had not violated any U.S. or international treaties on how detainees are treated.
However, the one-page undated memo highlights legislation by Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., prohibiting cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of detainees. The amendment was part of a 2005 budget bill authorizing military operations that became law in October 2004.
The memo noted that the Durbin memo was "not, as of now, law." It also notes a 2004 Supreme Court decision - which found that terror suspects held at Guantanamo Bay could challenge their detention in U.S. courts - that "raises possible concerns about judicial review of the program, and these issues."
The Bush administration maintains waterboarding was legal when it was used by CIA interrogators in 2002 and 2003 against top al-Qaida detainees Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri. CIA Director Hayden said waterboarding was used, in part, because of widespread belief among U.S. intelligence officials that more catastrophic attacks were imminent.
© 2008 The Associated Press
83 Comments so far
Show AllHey Mr. "Veracity,"
You go on and on and on, but make no sense at all, at all, at all. Just listen to yourself, unless your outsized ego prevents you from doing so.
In discussing the validity of torture, everyone forgets that the Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has consistently maintained that torture is not reliable in extracting information from the victims of torture. They will tell you anything in order to stop the torture. George Bush, Alberto Gonzalez, and John Yoo should be tortured so that they know what it is like.
They don't get the same level of satisfaction because I don't care about them.
K E M,
It's sad to me that you view above as berating and insulting you, when the intent was cautionary in an attempt to be sensitive, and avoid the over reaction pattern that we've built up.
OK, so that's your perspective and I can accept that as well as my being presumptuous with someone I consider a friend, too.
Yeah I tend to lecture a lot, when expressing my ideas, and if that comes across to you as my doing so to feel superior, I can accept that as well. And by that, I mean that I have learned from you, and never intended any disrespect or projecting some hidden agenda.
You like to group me with "G/W deniers", which is merely an 'ad hominem' slight of hand to appear to elevate your position, as reason alone lacks the force of your desired persuasion.
Perhaps I have been temporarily duped, but just as science continues to grow and adapt, so do I. I even let JAKENEWTON erode my understanding ( for a week or so ), in an attempt at being open and fair to thinking more skeptically. The problem with that is that there is far more to be skeptical about in any official narrative ( one of many theories of who conspired together ).
Yes being skeptical is at times going to place one into a vulnerable position, of doubting what is likely to be true, while attempting to avoid what is errant. I personally find that point of view better for me than the top-gun attitude of ego overtaking almost all doubt ( full speed ahead ).
I do find it strange that your usual generosity, reaches such a stark contrast when people choose not to agree with you about G/W's cause. As Aristotle postulated ( the flawed "Law of Excluded Middle" ), something is either "A" or not "A" ( white/black or true/false ).
A world filled with shades of gray and color, is what I cautioning you about above ( your perception of my "berating" you )With that said, it's nice of you to retain some respect for my opinions. Thank you.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
In my attempt at adhering to your request ( to avoid conflict ), if I do find reason to respond to something you say ( likely to aid another's understanding ), you can just consider or assume that it
wasn't directed at you at all,
( just what you said ) and you too can continue to scroll on by …
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
If you're at all interested in my real motivation, you might also consider that the reason behind my spending as much time as I do, responding to you, is that in so doing I am learning to be a better communicator. I want be the change I wish to see in the world.
How strange that those others who do actually want to rile, anger, and bait you ( and do directly denigrate, swear, and insult you ), don't get that same level of "satisfaction", that I find so accidentally ?
Namaste « Presence »
« We must be the change we wish to see in the world » — Gandhi
« There is a sufficiency in the world for man's need but not for man's greed » — Gandhi
« We adopt the means of nonviolence because our end is a community at peace with itself » — ML King
No, Mr ~VEROCITY- PRESENCE- NAMASTE~, or whichever name you decide to use, I am not at all comftorable with you continually coming on here at C/D, lecturing me and doing so as if I were a child or a under-educated dork.
You and I disagree on several issues, that's Okay. Fair debate is good. But don't be so presumptious as to act like you're my teacher and elevate yourself to the status of superior intellect and then berate me in public me as you often do anymore. It's insulting and you piss me off.
And since you have stated on another thread here this week, that you have finally ("come out of the closet on the global warming issue") and you have joined the G/W deniers like MIMICcS and ~Geo~, etc, I really do not have much respect for your opinions anymore. So I request that whenever possible, that you control your mouse and when you see a comment of mine, just scroll on by. ___ Thanks.
You're totally correct that I don't appear to understand you, and that you're very comfortable about that, and everything else.
"Perhaps" you were giving me lessons for all to read and stating this subject was outside of my "comfort zone". And there is no "PERHAPS" about it, that's what you did write. LOL. "Study" what you wrote, as obviously you have a problem with reaiding, remembering and or understanding even what you write, much less what I wrote.
"Perhaps", you failed to understand what I wrote. ___ I did not agree with the other blogger, when HE stated, that Bush's actions in regads to world affairs, etc, were understandable and somewhat excusable, as Bush was not the first president to so such things. I said that type of reasoning is silly bullshit, ___ and I still say so.
K E M,
Perhaps I used bu$h!t to refer to geo the inferior_impaler_of_truth ?
Perhaps I ambiguously was referring to bush as being corrupted by the status quo, and not living up to any standards, other than 'dance with the one's that brought ya' ?
Perhaps I believe that bush made things worse than the previous status quo, and he's culpable for his illegal acts ?
Perhaps the chance of bush doing anything actually constructive for the people of this country, is as likely as him being elected in 2008 ( which is constitutionally not possible ) ?
And as I also suggested, PERHAPS the possibilities for actual future statesmen ( acting like JFK was ) "fighting the DC powers", and making progressive changes is less likely than them being assassinated just like JFK was, for attempting to do that ?
Yes, we can agree that the status quo was being instantiated much prior to JFK's administration.
The ills of our fragile system of gov't started hundreds of years ago, and are only gradually corrected. Like by (i) A. Jackson for working class in ~ 1830s,
(ii) women's rights in ~ 1900s,
(iii) civil right in ~ 1960s, …
~Presence~ I disagreed with ~WSWS~ opinion on one issue. If you carefully study what I wrote, you "might" detect that what I referred to as "Bullshit", was anoyne excusing Bush and his admisistration for their actions, __ (because he's just doing t what previous administrations and presidents have done. ___ That's "bullshit".
Bush could have done it right for a change and he chose not to and there are no excuses. So don't lecture me ~PRESENSE~, when it's obvious you often have a problem understanding what others may write.
And what prior leaders have done wrong goes back a lot further than Nixon. Finally, when I referred to JFK, it was in referance as to how he "ended up", being murdered for at least trying to be a statesman and fight the DC powers.
Our first post
"PissantNobody July 24th, 2008 4:15 pm
"Imperialism is inherently corrupt and violent, because captalism really is a life and death struggle. War, massive poverty, and vile behavior are built into the system.
We must keep our eyes on the prize of global socialism, where competition for essential goods is eliminated, and all are economically equal. Achieving this will require a workers' revolution, with a Leninist party leading the way. Every other proposal can be reduced to a formula for continued imperialism."
-----------
Well, Lenin was involved in Terror and torture too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Terror
What kind of socialism are you promoting for our liberation?
Dictatorship of the proletariat again?
Is that progress?
There are many forms and they are theoretical because they all end up being part of a mix that evolves.
We vote for people not systems.
figure out a way to put Socialism on the ballot and you may get some votes, but the debate over what that means and how to do it will end that movement fast.
I didn't say what prior admisnistrations have done in the past is Bullshit ~NAMASZTE~ and if you can comprehend reading, you'd know it. As per your usual manner, you put words in my mouth and twisted what I wrote.
I said, ___ our president cannot have the "excuse" nor should any excuse him by stating, ___ that what previous administrations have done in the past, is acceptable and so it alright to to continue and even amplifoy their mis-deeds.
K E M,
Knowing you and your ideas, the following is outside of your comfort zone, although nonetheless very important to your possible growth and continued learning.
You've turned a continuously sampled ( grey scaled ) time accumulated reality into a stark black/white comparison, ( about the power of a single Prez ) when you state above"if we are to agree with some of your comments ~WSWS.ORG~ it doesn't matter who is ever elected as the president. …
I disagree with that and state again that any president can alter what we are currently doing and should alter it"As your evidence you assert that" no one should offer the excuse that Bush is only doing what has been done in the past and therefore he's not to blame for our current situations. He is to blame and he had the opportunity to be a great president"You conflate the evil of this administration as a function of a single President, while denigrating the long growing neoCONers agenda and implementations, since Nixon & Reagan.
Isn't a bit inconsistent to refer to the pre-bush years as that bu$h!t "went along with the status quo, because that's how Washington works"
It would be nice if any President had the opportunity to be a JFK, as you suggest, but that implies that the candidate selection process, in the status quo, is capable of fielding such a progressive potential leader and that jacka$$ sewer main stream media, could be convinced to go against their owners ( the bankers & MIC ).
I suggest that addressing the incremental decay having occurred over decades ( similar to weight gain ), must be addressed as a many year process of consistently choosing better candidates, as JFK was assassinated while attempting to revoke the Fed banker's ultimate power over the political processes.
Even so, the above is from the perspective of the fully physical actions undertaken by people organizing, communicating, and growing a potentially viable alternative power to thwart the status quo.
I suggest that that is not going to cut it anymore, and we need to invoke the full discipline of humanity's access to both physical and non-physical resources.
The current reign of propaganda is actually already in the later category ( PSYOPS works through our minds changing our perceived reality )
Namaste « Presence »
« We must be the change we wish to see in the world » — Gandhi
« There is a sufficiency in the world for man's need but not for man's greed » — Gandhi
« We adopt the means of nonviolence because our end is a community at peace with itself » — ML King
The entire Bush Crime syndicate needs a good swift kick in the balls...all in good faith of course
I used the word spoke twice, meant to say Pope! (in the above posting)
BORN FREE MAN & PLANTMAN 13: Great posts.
WSWS.ORG: Excellent broad discussion of the US legacy and how things have come to this deranged point. I am surprised few commented on your excellent posts. I suppose it's the way conscience recoils when it looks in the mirror, and by that I mean, the mirror of what American government has been up to for some time IN our name(s). The analogies to 1984 were exceptionally well done, and I thank you for the statistical chronicling of the net losses under the last set of presidents.
We like to think we can elect "a new leader" and that will truly change things, but as Eisenhower warned, the military industrial complex, an infant in his day has now grown into a many tentacled MONSTER. Nick Turse did a piece that was published on CD explaining the degree to which the MIC now has embedded a great many benign industries to supply our troops and 700 plus bases worldwide with all the "comforts of home." This monstrous killing machine is like a vampire that requires a constant diet of others' blood. IT is what must be disabled. Martin Luther King and the previous spoke spoke of the US death culture, that by investing the lion's share of its resources into weapons approached moral bankruptcy and spiritual DEATH.
At this point in time, in my view crossing the symbolic rubicon of the 21st century to see our nation still using the mentality of Roman gladiators now equipped with weapons of mass destruction is the central calamity of our times. The claim that such diabolical measures are wielded in good faith is its own treason to LIFE. The astrology is quite clear that karma's boomerang has been very patient with this land of plenty, but the planet directly associated with that which tears down to make space for that which will slowy be rebuilt is coming into direct OPPOSITION to the US sun (the heart of the nation) in the next few years. The media culture has made heros of war, uniformed soldiers, policing forces into idolatrous icons and sports have added to the fervor of team affilitations, tragically with religions too often following similar antics. So. Here we are.
I thought about the end of the Piscean Age with its fish opposing fish and the image came to me that the 2 fish TEAR IT ALL apart. And out of the center, like a seed split, comes that which will give birth to what is next. One fish symbolizes the sorts of person who identify with absolute power/authoritarianism/the anti-thesis of liberty and the ideals of a democratic society. In short they want their father figure/king/fuhrer to guide them, they live in the PAST. And the other fish are those seeking to better the world, to spread justice around, to bring fiscal autonomy to the poor, to find methods of commerce & agriculture that harmonize with nature. The two sects cannot abide together given that the first is ready to use nuclear weapons on "the other team." So it is not so much division nation by nation as consciousness! Some have awakaned and are prepared for a world that does not defend at gun point the artificial barrier between nations, but instead sees humanity as a family, and that family facing troubled condition (climate change, end of oil, fiscal injustices) must work together.
The "ending" to my story is not yet written, yet we, its actors help condition the outcome person by person, thought by thought, and yes, prayer by prayer. God-dess help us... of the fish/path less traveled by!
This is something that any itelligent person will do a double-take on.
"Not torture if it's done in good faith"
The comment is so grossly irrational that there's no way that a sane person can reason it out.
"Not torture if it's done in good faith"
There's no way to even comment on that.
It's a shame the memo didn't get munged by the White House's demonstrably faulty email system and come out saying "It's not 'torture' if it's done to Doug Feith."
Finally a logical defense of torture! This is just like its not RAPE if you buy her dinner first.
In good faith, I believed she would enjoy the sex especially after she ate the Big Mac. All that kicking biting and scratching was just showing she likes it rough.
The morals of all the people in power in this country seems to only reflect the golden rule, 'He who has the gold makes the rules'. Satan would feel queasy around these dickless wonders.
...and what level of outrage will actually get us to act??? I keep asking myself - not just write...
The I Ching says: "the way it begins is the way it unfolds..."
& this country began with Rape, Plunder and violence... Has it changed?
Who's the bad apple now?
"I was just simulating what torture would be like for this detainee if someone were to torture him."
"I water boarded him to give him the sensation he was drowning, because he was drowning, when I made him choke on soaked rags. But I stopped before he died, in good faith."
"The fat guy, Yoo, told me to do it. In good faith."
"In good faith sir, I swear I am not a bad apple. I'm just not into the whole Geneva Convention thing in the first place."
"WASHINGTON, July 24 (Reuters) - The United States wants a Rwandan general indicted for war crimes by a judge in Spain to continue as second in command of a joint U.N.-African Union peacekeeping force, the State Department said on Thursday."
It figures. Who else would America pick?
"WELLINGTON (Reuters) - A group of New Zealand students has come up with a novel way of protesting against a visit by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, offering a cash reward for her "arrest" over U.S. actions in Iraq."
Well if we are to agree with some of your comments ~WSWS.ORG~ it doesn't matter who is ever elected as the president. American foreign policies will continue as they have for the past 8, 16, 20 years becaue tht's how our congresional and political system works.
I disagree with that and state again that any president can alter what we are currently doing and should alter it and no one should offer the excuse that Bush is only doing what has been done in the past and therefore he's not to blame for our current situations. He is to blame and he had the opportunity to be a great president. Of course he chose another route and went along with the status quo, because that's how Washington works and he didn't wish to end up like JFK.
I wonder how well it would go over if, 'in good faith', I went to the local big box store and 'liberated' a shopping cart full of consumer crap?
If they actually believed further attacks were imminent, why was Coleen Rowley told on 9/11 and 9/12, there was no longer any public safety emergency and why was her request to consider questioning the one Al Qaeda suspect in custody (Moussaoui) repeatedly ignored in later months?
See 'Justifying' Torture: Two Big Lies http://www.consortiumnews.com/2008/071808e.html
Witness - I wonder how much longer we will have to wait to see Hagee and company start demanding 'purity' at home, enforced by the muzzle of a gun?
A major justification for torturing heretics was to save their souls by forced repentance. All in good faith, as they say.
Sorry for the dbl post I was trying to edit but I see the link didn't work so I'll try again.
http://tolfa.us/
Please read "The rise of the Fourth Reich" by Jim Marrs
He lays out what many including myself have discovered in recent years.
The National Socialists (NAZIS) didn't loose WWII.
In fact the ideals where not even conceived in Germany. The Zionists created National Socialism to defeat Russian Communist (which of course is no better than Nazism for they are both socialism and power will ALWAY abuse that kind of system.)The whole point was to keep the Rothchild Bankers in control of Europe and the rest of the planet for that matter.
This is why Hitler allowed the Brits to escape at Dunkirk. The Royalty in Germany and Britain were of course all related.
There were numerous U.S. corporations building Hitlers war machines.In fact if you research it you will find that GM sued the U.S.Government for restitution for the bombing of their Opel plant in Germany after the war and WON.
After the war thousands of Nazis were brought to this country to advance the space program and many others including their TORTURE programs.
Now we face "A Choice" between two men that are controlled by these same NAZIS.
Brizinsky and his son(Trilateral Comm.)control Obama.
Kissinger (Trilateral Comm.) control McCain.
They have brought their "Divide and Conquer" tactics to a new level.
The Torture is indeed to remind us all that anyone of us could be next.
What if they held an Election and nobody showed up?
Free your mind:http://tolfa.us/
CARPE LIBERTATEM
After all of this if congress does not have the willpower arrest that Bush attack dog Karl Rove for contempt of congress then all of congress should quit their jobs and get real jobs as garbage truck drivers. Then they could actually say they were doing real work instead of wasting tax-payers money.
To get a true sense of the surreal, take a look at the actual paragraph on "specific intent" on page 16, where the discussion of having a "good faith belief" is written:
http://www.aclu.org/pdfs/safefree/cia_3686_001.pdf
It is astonishing in its denial of reality.
When you declare something a war (even illegally) you can justify anything. It depends on whether you are the victor. In a thousand years when this current conflict ends and the historians are reading about this conflict they will all concur that(if we are victorious)the end justified the means. If we are not victorious we will be declared Hitlerist following our demented leader.
The number one rule of war is:
"There are no rules." If I am actively trying to kill you, why should you be limited in your response.
Hiding behind women, children, religion, human rights,legal,illegal, moral immoral, justified , unjust, all of the above means nothing. You, are trying to kill me,and I am going to use everything I know to prevent that from happening. If I have to kill your baby, who is strapped across your chest, while you are entering church, assisting a blind handicapped person, to get to you. Then you can consider yourself GOT. Remeber you declared war on me, I am merely trying to end the violence. I look at everyone in our government who decides we have to engage in war to accomplish our goals. And I wonder, HOW MANY OF THEM HAVE BEEN TO WAR and I don't mean just visiting; and of those who have been to war and they still advocate our involvement I don't trust them.
I have been there and I don't wish that horror on anyone,even people I don't like. There is always a recourse, finacially , diplomatically, up to and including sending in a Seal Team to eradicate the problem. I am a pacifist who helped "defend"our country, so I thought. Neverthelees I want you to understand where this rant is going. There are no rule in war!!! So do you think all this chatter is going to change anything. Oh it makes all of us aware of the problems but believe me NOTHING will happen to ALL THE KINGS MEN. This is not a partisan problem this is a political problem. This is about power. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Where can we go from here? Each of you can attempt to convince one other person that war is not the answer.
Actually, lenZimm, Bush Co. has rendered any discussion about the reliability of torture-induced information, unnecessary. The torture mongers have had years now to play their sick games and if there had EVER been one shred of real information aquired, we would have heard about it ad nauseum. The list of averted terrorist acts would have been on the front page of the govt propaganda sheet "The New York Times" and would have been reprinted in its entirety each time a new "intelligence victory" was accomplished. Certainly these scumdogs had no qualms printing a CIA agent's name for all to see so I doubt any "national security" concerns would stand in the way of making this info public to further the agenda of the fascists, if it actually existed. I would contend it does not. Seven years into this lawless administration and still the govt mouthpieces on the various talk shows and tv interviews cite only hypothetical reasons for the justification of torture. "If we know the suspect has information that could save lives, wouldn't you want the govt. to do everything in its power to find this info out?" This is the argument I heard on PBS just last week from some souless government lickspittle trying to justify the unjust actions of his masters. Yet despite the fact his daddy has been torturing people for years, he couldn't cite one instance where such information was reliably aquired through torture...NOT ONE! And after a person has been in custody longer then a week...any information they possess about future plans will be obsolete, yet our govt. tortures people for months,if not years.
The truth is, these scum are torturing to show the other side they don't care about human life...not even the lives of their own who will suffer in retaliation when they are captured. The message is,"we don't care about anything except domination and oil! Get in our way and see what happens to you!"
1930's Build up to the War in Europe and the Holocaust.
DHS---- is What???
Gestapo - contraction of Geheime Staatspolizei: "Secret State Police") was the official secret police of Nazi Germany
FEMA----is What??????
Under the overall administration of the Schutzstaffel (SS)
administered by the Reichssicherheitshauptamt (RSHA) ("head office of the Reich's security service") and was considered a dual organization of the Sicherheitsdienst (SD)
("security service") and also a suboffice of the Sicherheitspolizei (SIPO) ("security police").
The Gestapo had the authority to investigate treason, espionage and sabotage cases, and cases of criminal attacks on the Nazi Party and Germany. A law passed by the government in 1936 gave the Gestapo carte blanche to operate without judicial oversight. The Gestapo was specifically exempted from responsibility to administrative courts, where citizens normally could sue the state to conform to laws. As early as 1935, however, a Prussian administrative court had ruled that the Gestapo's actions were not subject to judicial review.[1]
A further law passed later in the year gave the Gestapo responsibility for setting up and administering concentration camps.
The power of the Gestapo most open to misuse was called Schutzhaft - "protective custody", a euphemism for the power to imprison people without judicial proceedings. The person imprisoned even had to sign his or her own Schutzhaftbefehl, an order declaring that the person had requested imprisonment (presumably out of fear of personal harm). In addition, thousands of political prisoners throughout Germany – and from 1941, throughout the occupied territories under the Night and Fog Decree – simply disappeared under Gestapo custody.
Our path in destiny for America is headed toward a head on collision with Germanys 1930-1945 history.
Have we forgotten how the Holocaust came to fruition?
6 million Jews taken, killed, disappereared.
BornFreeMen
LenZ,
I think the point of torture is not to get information, although at times the torturer may get what he feels he needs. I think the rationale is more along the lines of -- "We do it because we CAN do it."
This goes back to what Ron Susskind said when he interviewed one of Bush's people. The Bush functionary said (and I'm paraphrasing from memory): "We make our own reality. And while you're trying to figure out the reality we just created, we're busy making up a new reality."
So that, for the torturer, torture is something that's created on his own terms, and it's for *us* to figure out.
This is the essence of Orwellian power. Winston Smith in "1984" is not just tortured because he has commited crimes against the state, the most egregious of his crimes being "thought-crime." He is being tortured
because he must be shown just what the state can do: simply because it feels like doing it.
Winston's torturer, O'Brien, isn't torturing Winston for information, he's torturing him to make a point about the power the state has not just over him but over *everybody." Thus, the message to Winston is clear: "T.I.N.A." -- There Is No Alternative. The state, dear Winston, is the beginning and the end of power. All power resides in us. You must not just endure the state you must believe in it.
Whether it's a conscious or an unconscious thought on the part of Bush, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft et al, the idea is that when the general citizenry (you and me) see what American torturers are doing, it's supposed to send a message to us, and the message is simple -- "This is what we in power are capable of. This is how far-reaching our power is. We torture, now try to stop us. We torture, now what do you have to say?" (Recall the warnings after 9/11, many coming from mainstream media: "Watch out what you say.")
Moreover, Bush, Ashcroft, Rumsfeld et al -- they lie with impunity! But the lies don't matter; in fact, the lies are like the torture: they lie because they can lie, they torture because they can torture.
The truth is that with enough power the state can make 4 + 4 can equal anything it wants. If the state says we are at war with Iraq, we have always been at war with Iraq ... unless and until the state changes its mind and creates a new reality. Torture is simply a litmus test for just how much lying, i.e., how much "reality-making" those in power can perpetrate.
The state unchecked always moves toward absolute power. This is what the Founding Fathers understood and what makes America such a fragile experiment -- the fact that our system of government is based on checks and balances. But when the checks and balances break down ... another reality is created. ... and not by democratic consensus.
The US government has been torturing for many years, what's different now is how blatantly it's being done. Again: "We' do it because we can get away with it. There's no need to hide it from the public. In fact, quite the contrary, making the public aware of our torturing has a chiiling effect on *all* the citizenry."
Who can deny the fear and dread such power creates in the average person?
Finally, I don't think the "realities" created by the political establishment at this point are going to be altered by incremental measures, e.g., supporting the lesser-of-the-evils as far as voting is concerned. I think what's called for must be far more fundamental. The democratic will of the people has to start creating realities. And that starts with a rejection of the lies not just the Bushes and the Cheneys have perpetrated but the *fundamental* lies that underscore the entire political establishment in the United States.
I think everyone agrees torture is illegal and immoral. People argue about how much pain has to be inflicted before it becomes torture.
There seems to be little discussion of whether harsh techniques result in good information. Many psychologists say it does not. I remember John McCain saying to relieve the pain people will tell the interrogator what they think he wants to hear.
Maybe that explains why Bin Laden is still free?
LenZ
Harking back to the aftermath of World War II ...
The American judges at Nuremberg maintained that all Nazi war crimes emanated from one overarching crime -- the unprovoked invasion of another country (Poland, Czechoslovakia, etc.)
By that *American-established* standard then, modern-day American politicians are guilty of war crimes different in degree but not in kind, as per the Nazis.
And not just modern-day Republicans. One reason why the Democrats are not holding Bush and Co.'s feet to the fire over Iraq ia that they know that they are compliccit and therefore just as guilty as the Republicans in allowing this war to at first happen and now to continue.
As for the aftermath of World War II regarding Japanese war criminals ...
The American courts that tried Japanese generals for torture, BY THEIR OWN STANDARDS, would also find guilty current-day American generals in Iraq as well as their Washington superiors.
As currently constituted, the American political system will not bring those guilty to justice. What's needed is nit just an international war tribunal but also, and more importantly, a fundamental change in consciousness on the part of the American public as to what a government is and what it can and cannot do.
And this change in consciousness is not so difficult to imagine. In fact, it exists in large segemnts of the world's population. Do you think, for example, that the people in, say, Iceland or Norway feel that *their* government can do what the American government is doing? Of course they don't.
Personally, I'm optimistic about such a change in consciousness. I think the American public may be approaching a "tipping point" as far as what we expect from a government.
And it's that tipping point that worries the political establishment.
A political establishment that, keep in mind, is *dwarfed in numbers* by the general population.
Ah, lawlessone, I see you proposed the perps be given their own medicine already--
Didn't mean to rip you off.
Sounds more and more like the "IN-Justice Department" each day.
Didn't the AP (adulterated press) leave out the fact that the legal memoranda contradict our own Generals who court-martialed Vietnam soldiers who waterboarded?
I propose a test: bring in John Woo and Alberto Gonzales, and waterboard them for 30, 60, 90, 120 seconds, and keep on going. At each break in the action, when they stop coughing and spluttering, ask them: Is it torture yet, motherfucker?
Do it in front of Congress, on CSpan, and propose further that any Congresscritter who thinks it is not torture must undergo the same procedure.
If ANY of them maintain that waterboarding is not torture, then they should simply be taken to the basement and shot.
Jesus. What has happened to us?
Oh, and for any dunderheads reading this, the above is a bit of sarcasm. No one should be tortured, ever.
Those guilty of it, however, directly or by approval, should be imprisoned for life.
Peace.
DO NOT FORGET PEOPLE THAT BUSH IS A AMBASSADOR OF SATAN THE DEVIL, SO YOU CAN NOT EXPECT FROM SATAN NOR FROM BUSH TO PRACTIICE IN A CHRISTIAN WAY.
Would anyone here object if, in good faith, I were to HYPOTHETICALLY 'black bag' (kidnap) a visiting American soldier, and videotape him as his fingernails were pulled out with pliers, singe his genitals with a propane torch, and wire his manhood to household 220 volts, all the while demanding he tell what the US navy was planning to do, demand that he tell me the entry codes to the nuclear missile silos of North Dakota, demand that he tell me what George W. Bush really does when he has Barney the dog held in front of his crotch?
These HYPOTHETICAL questions in a HYPOTHETICAL setting are obviously beyond his HYPOTHETICAL pay grade and ability, but the answers would still be demanded, even though I know any HYPOTHETICAL answer I received would most likely be a lie.
If you object to that image... THEN WHY THE HELL WOULD YOU REMAIN SILENT WHEN IT IS DONE TO SOMEONE ELSE?
Kem Patrick,
Your post starts:
"You (that would be me) claim what is transpiring now in respect to our nation's foreign policies is not all the fault of the Bush Cartel's policies, because it was occurring previously."
You'll get no argument from me as to Bush's personal responsibility for the mess we're in, BUT WHAT ABOUT ALL THE OTHER POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS IN THE UNITED STATES?
-- What about the media?
-- What about the courts?
-- What about Congress -- in particular, the Democrats in Congress?
These are status quo institutions that have been complicit in murder and mayhem not just in Iraq but in many other countries as well.
... Murder and mayhem that are inherent in American foreign policy. ... American *bipartisan* foreign policy.
The Encyclopedia Britannica estimates that 2.25 Vietnamese were killed as a result of US aggression against that country; at least 1 million of whom were civilians. Who is responsible for those deaths? George Bush?
It's also been estimated that 14 million Indochinese have been either killed, wounded, or made refugees by the US war in Indochina (re. Vietnam, Laas and Cambodia). ... George Bush's fault?
In a previous post, I made the point that the economic sanctions against Iraq during the Clinton-Gore administration have caused as many if not more deaths than those in Gulf War II. ... Most estimates put THAT death-total at over 1 million. ... George Bush's fault?
Whatever "mess" George Bush has created, he's perpetrated because there is a political system in place -- and its been in place for many decades -- that thinks nothing of slaughtering and impoverishing millions of innocent people the world over. That this would "blowback" and affect the American citizenry -- oh that's quite another story, isn't it?
This time the chickens have come home to roost. America was not only invaded on 9/11, but the "mess" Americans now find themselves in is also an economic mess. And Americans don't like that! It's ok if "the mess" is in another country -- if it's another country's people who are murdered and economy destabilized -- but, hey, don't bring misery to OUR shores!
Everything that Bush is doing has its antecedents in previous administrations. ...
-- Clinton's Anti-Terrorism Bill is the forerunner of the Patriot Act.
-- During the Clinton administration Iraq was not only crippled by economic sanctions that resulted in the death of over 1 million innocent people, it was also regularly bombed: about once every third day.
-- The US' continued support of Israel's brutal treatment of the Palestinians is a *bipartisan* policy going back many years and implemented by many administrations, Republican as well as Democratic.
-- Torture as part of US foreign policy is certainly nothing new.
-- The US, along with the rest of the West, has raped and exploited the Middle East not just for decades but for *centuries*!
-- The military Bush has at his disposal -- how do you think it got so gigantic? Did it just spring up overnight?
-- The US has bombed 20 different countries since the end of WWII. Did George Bush give the orders to bomb all 20 countries?
Sure George Bush is a war criminal. You and I would no doubt agree on that. But where are the people in the political establishment bringing him to justice?
If they're not to be found, one can only conclude that there's something fundamentally wrong with the system, not just one or a few individuals.
If George Bush simply disappeared and "the good ole days" were to reappear, they'd only be good ole days for Americans, not for the rest of the world, especially for those countries the US turns a predatory eye toward.
Global politics breeds global suffering. And so the American public is getting a taste of what it's been handing out to other countries for a long time. And removing George Bush is only removing an *effect* of the system, not the system itself.
If I believe "in good faith" that there is neither brain nor soul inside W's skull, can I legally find out with whatever means are convenient?
Well, fellow AMERICANS, you did not think that the Ashkenazi Khazars that conducted the false flag attacks on the USA 11 Sept 2001 would balk at torturing and, yes, murdering, Arabs under the phony guise of a global war on terror, did you?? After all, these Eastern European, Polish and Russian Jews have had plenty of practice torturing the Palestinians as they steal their lands.
Water boarding is surfing. What they do is water torture. Can they change the discussion to get it right?
"demonstorm" and others are on point on several issues.
Waterboarding, formerly known as Asian water _torture_, is indeed TORTURE. And it is so because it is in fact _controlled drowning_. There is nothing simulated about it. Water enters the lungs and guts. If water saturates enough space in the alveolar sacs, one dies. If enough water enters the digestive tract one bloats and can suffer kidney damage and die. The pain and stress from water in the lungs is brutal. Anyone who has had a near-drowning experience can bear this out.
The person(s) inflicting this water torture _control_ the amount and flow of water entering the digestive tract and lungs. They know full well the stress and pain such water causes and they continue administering water because they suspect (actually "believe" as in _faith_) the result will be a person who will "confess" some dark secret.
Unfortunately for the torturer (s)he is in no position to know how painful, or stressful, or damaging the water torture is to his/her prisoner. Only a doctor could tell _as can the prisoner_.
Every human being is unique. The torturer operates on a statistical average, a model of human physiology; he does not work on the individual at his mercy. He dehumanizes the individual before him.
Sometimes that individual dies. Sometimes that individual tells the torturer what the torturer _wants to hear_ in order to stop the torture. The torturer will only stop the torture _if he BELIEVES_ his prisoner. Not if the prisoner is telling "the truth."
And that subjectivity destroys any and all potential legitimacy of torture.
There is no such thing as "good faith" torture. Only a "good faith" belief that this form of torture was sanctioned by our elected officials. So, it goes back to the Nuremberg defense, "I was following orders."
And those who gave the orders were absolute war criminals. W is a war criminal. As W _consulted the Congress_ for the go-ahead and he got it, those who voted with him are war criminals. War criminals are running the legislative and executive branches of this government. _We elected_ these criminals. And we pay for their crimes with our taxes.
What's the problem? Everyone who writes in these pages, including me, has the _absolute right_ to run for office to replace those criminals.
I repeat: what's the problem?
I suppose good faith torture makes as much sense as countless religious right wing fruitcake promotions: e.g. Karate for Christ, Bowling for God, Operation Desert Prayer.
And make no mistake, evangelical Christians with double digit I.Q.'s love wars, guns, torture,..."Kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out".
John Ashcroft, Ollie North, James Kennedy come to mind.
Gonzales, Ashcroft, Wu, Rumsfeld, Cheney and Bush could all easily prove once and for all that waterboarding is NOT torture. If they "in good faith" truly believed that, all they would have to do is each agree to be waterboarded by an expert for an hour or two and then tell us how safe and harmless it was. The expert torturer, I mean interrogator, would have to be indemnified and held harmless of course if he accidentally killed a couple of them, but as true patriots of the Cause, I'm sure they should be glad to sacrifice.
Moral bankruptcy is a major indicator of a corrupt nation state. To use the spirituality of any being in any way to justify intentional harm is a sign of arrogance in the extreme. It is what one would expect of a Duperpower, and is the ultimate form of duplicity to use 'faith' as an argument and justification for harm. America is *the* Duperpower and it has thugs in its administration, running its nation. Get the thugs out and prosecute them in the international courts, and let them learn what justice and mercy truly are.
The real superpowers of the world are the nations who do not engage in such inhumane methods of interrogation. Who do not rely on duplicity to conduct their business in the world with their own people and with the international community.
What twits!
How could we have ever let one of them become president!!?!
~PISSANT~ Obama is a sitting congressman too? __ Wow!
And put under the SCOPE if he's elected. Are you serious? __ Who's scope, Pelosi's?
oceangrrl July 24th, 2008 5:59 pm: Of course this has to do with Obama! He is a sitting congressman, and now presidential candidate, who has done nothing substantial to stop the madness. I don't recall any filibusters or other heroic attempts by this fake kinda-pacifist, nor any attempts by him to get to the bottom of the 9/11 false flag operation, nor any public denunciations of the role of the Democrats in all of this, nor, nor, nor... As the likely next President, he should be put under the scope about EVERY political issue of the day. Only an imperialism-enabling Obamaphile would think otherwise.
If we in "good faith" believe the neo-cons are using ways and means antithetical to the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence and will not respond to usual interrogation techniques, should we arrest Karl Rove, Alberto Gonzales and...
Ah! Alas no.
But why not? Is it our superior ethics? Should we have a meeting to decide what we should do about the situation in which we find ourselves?
Probably not. Unlike the Committees of Correspondence during pre-Revolutionary days, we don't really know of a good tavern where we could say our piece and be heard over the TVs, game machines and crowds.
But,would we trade our country's reason for being and all we've been taught and what our forefathers and mothers believed so that we can avoid exposing ourselves and our thoughts to our neighbors as if we really cared about something? Somebody might call us extremists.
~WSWS.ORG~ You claim what is transpiring now in respect to our nation's foreign policies is not all the fault of the Bush Cartel's policies, because it was occurring previously.
I wonder if you realize what CHILDISH BULLSHIT that type of thinking is? It most certainly is the fault of the Bush eight year era. Bush is the current president, he planned and started an illegal and unjust war and has by his actions near bankrupted the nation, among other corrupt things. In fact, we may already be bankrupt, the government's controlled bean counters just haven't admitted and announced it as yet.
Your thinking is like a ten year old telling his mommy that the he/she did it, becaue an older sister did it last year. Bush had the opportunity to correct previous mis-deeds and instead he amplified them a hundred percent.
And I notice you berate Obama and say he will continue that trend, ___ an opinion which I personally agree with. But what about McCain, is he going to stop the madness? Ha-ha-ha.
What it boils down to is, we don't have an honest STATESMAN or woman to vote for who has a prayer of being elected as our new leader and nothing much is going to change, except at the present time it looks as if we will likely have a smooth talking con artist in the White House. Our other option is an idiot who has brief moments of being a decent guy.
hahahah...i wont even bite at the title of this one.
Being the quintesential American white boy it will be hard not to be sophmoric...but for a chance at welcoming Ms. Peace in Utopia, ya gotta take a chance.
First, it's easiest to get there by yourself, another person doubles the complications, so does your request for directions include US all, even the Satanic? You see each person, creature or thing that you add or subtract creates a complication to the opening of the door to your chosen desire, so I'll need some more input from you before your quest can be mapped in detail. However, if you remember the simplicity of the riddle that the Fellowship of the Ring solved at the gate of ancient Dwarfdom...you'll be two giant steps in the direction of your quarry.
Ah...but there I go...J. R. Tolkin, that was 9th grade, not even a Sophmore...oh, well...it was worth the shot...it was worth the shot.
Just always remember my sweet, that Durga winks at our pains; and with that wink an echo that opens the eye of our hearts, and with it the seeing of all our senses with the passion of your Utopian desires.
OMG... I can't get away from you Anti-Obama guys! What the heck does this story have to do with Obama??? Your agenda is pretty clear. Can you talk about the bloody issue???
Hmmm... We are the terrorists.
I have long been sickened by the guatanamo bay thing which is similar. We are breaking our own (and international) laws. I seriously cannot believe people have been held for years with no trial.
Bush and his gang need to be tried for war crimes. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE
...(blink)...
Did I just read that right?
You can commit acts of torture and barbarity 'in good faith'?
(looking around)
Did I just step through the Looking Glass? Is Lewis Carrol running the world now?
WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?
When other countries commit acts of this nature, the US used to scream it's collective head off.
Now the US IS the one committing these acts. And there is fearful silence.
While we are at it, why not have Nazi Pope Ratzenberger declare the Inquisition is back in vogue, and start the Burning Times all over again? Why not start accusing that sweet young thing who won't sleep with you of being in league with Satan? Or declaring that you neighbor is a heretic so you can have his house and bank accounts after he's dead?
Honestly, the economy and technology can not collapse fast enough to punish the US. You deserve every bit of nasty, vicious blowback that is coming your way.
Karma is a bitch.
'interrogators' are not qualified to evaluate what does and does not result in 'prolonged mental harm' nor are they inclined by mandate to be concerned with the future well being of their victims. thus, even someone's 'sincere' opinion that their techniques wouldn't do lasting harm is irrelevant.
Lemme try the last part of my post again; this time with corrections ...
As for torture, I'm sure all commondreams.org readers know that torture has been around for a long time, and with *bipartisan* support.
And bloodthirsty political functionaries? Guess what, they're not all Republicans, not by a long shot. ... How's this for bloodthirsty -- how's this for "writing off" the lives of half a million children http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1084
The neo-colonial militarism Obama supports is what the US has presented to the world for many, many decades. It's nothing more than wanton, murderous imperialism.
Afghanistan is the 20th country the United States has bombed since the end of World War II. Put another way: if the Bush Administration is a horror, it's a horror that's a logical extension of what's gone on before it. In short, the problem is not simply Bush. The problem is the military-industrial complex. The problem is the United States government's fervent belief that it has the right to bomb and invade and subvert and overthrow the governments of other countries. And Obama questions none of that. Were he to do that, question that bloodshed, question America's "imperial prerogatives," he'd have the support not just of the vast majority of Americans but also the *overwhelming* majority of men, women -- and children -- who inhabit this earth.
Yeah, and the USA nuked innocent people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki so as to "save Americans lives."
After 9/11, where did the USA go seeking 'security'?
After the dot-com bubble burst in 2000, Israel's economy was devastated, but then came 9/11, and "suddenly new profit vistas opened up for any company that claimed it could spot terrorists in crowds, seal borders from attack and extract confessions from closed-mouthed prisoners…Many of the country's most successful entrepreneurs are using Israel's status as a fortressed state, surrounded by furious enemies, as a kind of twenty-four-hour-a-day showroom--a living example of how to enjoy relative safety amid constant war…Israel now sends $1.2 billion in "defense" products to the United States—up dramatically from $270 million in 1999…That makes Israel the fourth-largest arms dealer in the world…Much of this growth has been in the so-called "homeland security" sector. Before 9/11 homeland security barely existed as an industry. By the end of this year, Israeli exports in the sector will reach $1.2 billion--an increase of 20 percent. The key products and services are …precisely the tools and technologies Israel has used to lock in the occupied territories. Israel has learned to turn endless war into a brand asset, pitching its uprooting, occupation and containment of the Palestinian people as a half-century head start in the "global war on terror… Israel's policy of erecting walls and checkpoints to seal off the occupied territories are also "laboratories where the terrifying tools of our security states are being field-tested Palestinians--whether living in the West Bank or what the Israeli politicians are already calling "Hamasistan"--are no longer just targets. They are guinea pigs…"
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070702/klein
"The methods and photos from Abu Grahib and Guantanamo were no shock to any Palestinian who had been in prison between 1967 and the '80's. All the methods used in Abu Grahib were normal procedures against Palestinians. In 1999 Internationals, Palestinians and Israelis for human rights threatened a boycott against Israel and that is what forced the Supreme Court to address the torture issue. They did not ban torture and the General Prosecutor can choose not to prosecute those who still use it."-Ala Jaradat,spokesman for ADAMEER [Arabic for conscience]in Ramallah to this reporter on January 5, 2006, during my 2nd of 5 trips to occupied Palestine.
Eileen Fleming, Reporter and Editor WAWA:
http://www.wearewideawake.org/
Author "Keep Hope Alive" and "Memoirs of a Nice Irish American 'Girl's' Life in Occupied Territory"
Producer "30 Minutes With Vanunu" and "13 Minutes with Vanunu"
The new Bybee memo was obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union.
Good job! Please stop by www.aclu.org and give them a few Bushbucks.
One thing that's lost in the litany of war crimes perpetrated by Bush and Co. is the fact that as many, if not more, Iraqi civilians died as a direct result of the economic sanctions against Iraq as have died so far in Gulf War II. ... With most of those sanction-related deaths occurring during the Clinton-Gore admininstration.
Also, remember when Bill Clinton was looking to "take out" Osama Bin Laden and Clinton "accidentally" bombed a pharmaceutical plant in the Sudan, the only one serving hundreds of thousands of people -- and in doing so caused the death of ... well ... we don't know how many deaths, in that the UN wanted to investigate the bombing, but guess who vetoed the investigation.
The bombing of that plant more than likely resulted in the death of tens of thousands of innocent civilians.
Should Barack Obama be elected, what we'll see is the same wantonly murderous imperialism perpetrated not by a single presidential administration but by past administrations both Republican and Democrat. But with Obama, as with Clinton, the murdering will take place behind a "happy face."
As for torture, I'm sure all commondreams.org readers know that torture has been around for a long time as far as US foreign policy is concerned.
And bloodthirsty political functionaries, they're not all Republicans, not by a long shot. How's this for bloodthirsty, how's this for "writing off" the lives of half a children -- http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1084
What Obama supports is what the US has presented to the world for many, many decades. And that something is nothing more than wanton, murderous imperialism.
Sorry whatfools but you are wrong.
Republicans make laws for OTHER people to follow, not for them to follow!
And generally, no matter what the law says, if you have enough money you can buy your way out of it. That's another time honoured conservative principle I believe.
I think you'll find that "faith" is what got the USA this far into the shit in the first place.
No, you can not shoot your neighbor
...unless it's a Republican...
Conversations between bank robbers on the way to the bank matter little up against the pre-meditated decision to rob the bank.
These right wingers controlling the US government over the past eight years, Repuks/Demoks alike, made the pre-meditated decision to challenge the rule of international and domestic law, the US Constitution, their personal oaths of office, and the public will.
The decision was made and the action was taken. No further analysis is needed. It's not very hard to see the damage done, although the harder you look the more damage you see. We also have ourselves to hold to account - the people share responsibility.
Can we stop analyzing the crime? Let's talk about the right move that we all need to make - joining in mass resistance to finally turn the tide, and push the capitalist beast back into its cage.
Just what the Hell is "Good Faith"? Torture is cruel and inhumane no matter what the heck they call it. It calls for a war crimes trial.
There can be no "good faith" torture. It was proved long before the sick neocons gained power that torture is useful for only two things: eliciting false confessions and intimidation. Torture has long been known to be useless in actually determining truthful information as the torturee will say anything to stop the torture. Thus it can not be applied "in good faith", period.
Hey, alright, now I can shoot my neighbor who has a barking dog. Or, perhaps his dog.
Not a problem, I'll just plead I did it in 'GOOD FAITH'.
A bunch of Satanic Republicans.
Although I saw one shred of Decency, and it was Durbin, the Illinois Democrat. I've seen this pattern over time.
The Republicans are horrific, notably WORSE than the crooked and complicit Democrats.
Has Nader divested himself of Ratheon=Cluster Bombs YET?
Directions to Utopia welcome. Sophomoric rants not.
No Amnesty for Torture.
And the false definitions put in place by the Bush thugs remain in force, as demonstrated by this AP piece. "Waterboarding" is not the correct term. It is a term created by the Bush administration to deflect the public from the actual term that has been used to describe this technique for hundreds of years: "water torture." Water Torture is the name of this technique as described in war crimes tribunals in WW2 (when the Japanese used it against POW's, and many of the leaders were subsequently hung for doing so), in the Phillipines in the mid 20th century, which also resulted in numerous trials and tribunals against leaders that authorized its use against POW's, and going as far back as the middle ages, when torture "inquisitors" used the "water torture" against prisoners to extract information or false confessions.
HEY MASS MEDIA: STOP using terms invented by the President to define a technique that has always been known for what it is: TORTURE.
2nd point: "simulated drowning." There is nothing "simulated" about the water torture. it IS drowning. Drowning being defined as water entering the lungs, depriving the victim of air, until death occurs. A more accurate description would be "controlled drowning," as the victim is drowned - quite literally - right up until the point of death, at which point the torture is stopped so the victim doesn't die (usually).
I'm sick and tired of every damned "news" story that comes out on this subject using these two misleading and false terms. God forbid any news agency should actually deviate from the administration's fucking talking points.
Good god!
No, good faith doesn't protect one against torture charges. You cannot act in good faith and seriously torture people. That's fucking for virginity all over agian, but given that it's from the same sort of people who brought you the Vietnam war; Wh