To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
The New York Times is finally calling it torture--when someone else has admitted to it.
"At least someone is owning up to the awful legacy of Mr. Bush's illegal detention policies," their editorial concludes, after discussing the decision from the British government to compensate former detainees at Guantanamo Bay. The settlement payments could run over a million pounds in one case.
The New York Times is finally calling it torture--when someone else has admitted to it.
"At least someone is owning up to the awful legacy of Mr. Bush's illegal detention policies," their editorial concludes, after discussing the decision from the British government to compensate former detainees at Guantanamo Bay. The settlement payments could run over a million pounds in one case.
But the Times shouldn't be so quick with the finger-pointing or the congratulations. The British settlement, for one thing, comes with "no concession of liability" for torture. Instead, Cameron's government is paying taxpayer dollars out in order to avoid going to trial and facing liability. There's video available of the treatment of UK prisoners, which the Guardian published and you can see on our Facebook page, but the US news? Not so much.
Our own torture tapes erased in 2005, earned nary a peep from the big media outlets last week, when the statute of limitations on filing charges against the erasers expired. That means that the investigation into who destroyed videotapes of CIA interrogations is effectively over and no one will be held accountable.
Where were the strongly worded condemnations from the Times then? About where the coverage of those tapes, as opposed to the preemptive settlement is now.
Our friends at FireDogLake kept the pressure on while the clock ran out on our torture tapes, but it is ironic to see the Times wagging its finger at the government when it missed an excellent opportunity to hold them accountable itself.
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. Join with us today! |
The New York Times is finally calling it torture--when someone else has admitted to it.
"At least someone is owning up to the awful legacy of Mr. Bush's illegal detention policies," their editorial concludes, after discussing the decision from the British government to compensate former detainees at Guantanamo Bay. The settlement payments could run over a million pounds in one case.
But the Times shouldn't be so quick with the finger-pointing or the congratulations. The British settlement, for one thing, comes with "no concession of liability" for torture. Instead, Cameron's government is paying taxpayer dollars out in order to avoid going to trial and facing liability. There's video available of the treatment of UK prisoners, which the Guardian published and you can see on our Facebook page, but the US news? Not so much.
Our own torture tapes erased in 2005, earned nary a peep from the big media outlets last week, when the statute of limitations on filing charges against the erasers expired. That means that the investigation into who destroyed videotapes of CIA interrogations is effectively over and no one will be held accountable.
Where were the strongly worded condemnations from the Times then? About where the coverage of those tapes, as opposed to the preemptive settlement is now.
Our friends at FireDogLake kept the pressure on while the clock ran out on our torture tapes, but it is ironic to see the Times wagging its finger at the government when it missed an excellent opportunity to hold them accountable itself.
The New York Times is finally calling it torture--when someone else has admitted to it.
"At least someone is owning up to the awful legacy of Mr. Bush's illegal detention policies," their editorial concludes, after discussing the decision from the British government to compensate former detainees at Guantanamo Bay. The settlement payments could run over a million pounds in one case.
But the Times shouldn't be so quick with the finger-pointing or the congratulations. The British settlement, for one thing, comes with "no concession of liability" for torture. Instead, Cameron's government is paying taxpayer dollars out in order to avoid going to trial and facing liability. There's video available of the treatment of UK prisoners, which the Guardian published and you can see on our Facebook page, but the US news? Not so much.
Our own torture tapes erased in 2005, earned nary a peep from the big media outlets last week, when the statute of limitations on filing charges against the erasers expired. That means that the investigation into who destroyed videotapes of CIA interrogations is effectively over and no one will be held accountable.
Where were the strongly worded condemnations from the Times then? About where the coverage of those tapes, as opposed to the preemptive settlement is now.
Our friends at FireDogLake kept the pressure on while the clock ran out on our torture tapes, but it is ironic to see the Times wagging its finger at the government when it missed an excellent opportunity to hold them accountable itself.