Repubs Hold Your PEE: Why the Torture won't matter in 9-11 Trials!

As thereisnospoon very aptly pointed out yesterday, the Authoritarian and Neo-Con wing of the Republican/Conservative/Tea Party is having a Piss Hemmorage over the likelyhood that the upcoming 9-11 Trials in New York will Fail because some sneaky shyster lawyer will DARE to bring up the deep dark non-secret that KSM was Waterboarded 187 Times.

John Boehner:

The Obama Administration’s irresponsible decision to prosecute the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks in New York City puts the interests of liberal special interest groups before the safety and security of the American people. The possibility that Khalid Sheik Mohammed and his co-conspirators could be found ‘not guilty’ due to some legal technicality just blocks from Ground Zero should give every American pause. emphasis added

I think technically those are War Crimes - but even so, it doesn't matter and I'll tell you why.

---

You can find lots of evidence of Wingbag heads exploding all over - like brain matter spattered at a crime scene...

Sarah Palin (1/2 Term Governor/Blogger/Bookhawker)

Horrible decision, absolutely horrible. It is devastating for so many of us to hear that the Obama Administration decided that the 9/11 terrorist mastermind, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, will be given a criminal trial in New York. This is an atrocious decision. [...]

Criminal defense attorneys will now enter into delaying tactics and other methods in the hope of securing some kind of win for their “clients.” The trial will afford Mohammed the opportunity to grandstand and make use of his time in front of the world media to rally his disgusting terrorist cohorts. It will also be an insult to the victims of 9/11, as Mohammed will no doubt use the opportunity to spew his hateful rhetoric in the same neighborhood in which he ruthlessly cut down the lives of so many Americans. [...]

Not much with the "Equal Justice Under the Law" and "Due Process" is she? Technically the only time KSM will probably speak would be on the witness stand - where he can be thoroughly cross examined and his hateful rhetoric balanced with some fracking facts. Something Sarah The Unemployed Pundit wouldn't know anything about.

Then you have the Ex-Super Mayor, Former U.S. Prosecutor and Associate Attorney General Rudy (Noun, Verb & 9-11) Giuliani who - of course - thinks giving KSM a criminal trial is a grave mistake, even though he used to think it was a great idea to put Zacarious Moussaoui on trial.



Someone tell Cavuto that a building that has collapsed doesn't cast a shadow anymore - nitwit.

Ghuliani Now:

GIULIANI: [O]ur criminal justice system is geared to let guilty people go free if there's any doubt. That's the way it is -- that better to have nine guilty go free than one innocent person convicted. Very different situation when you're at war. So when we see all of these procedural problems that are going to be created over the months and years that this could take with these terrorists sitting here, I think we're going to realize that this was a terrible, terrible mistake. [Fox News' Your World with Neil Cavuto, 11/13/09]

Ghuliani Then:

Giuliani reportedly praised Moussaoui's 2006 trial as evidence "we can give people a fair trial." After Moussaoui's trial resulted in a sentence of life in prison without parole, Giuliani reportedly praised the legal process as demonstrating "that we can give people a fair trial, that we are exactly what we say we are. We are a nation of law." He added that Moussaoui will "be a symbol of American justice." He also reportedly said he was "in awe of our system." [New York Daily News, 5/4/2006]

It's not as though this atavistic fear of the Justice System on their part is completely without merit - Torture has already been the reason for Gitmo Prosecutors to DROP CHARGES against a Terrorism Suspect.

But here's why, in this case, none of this hand wringing and Depends Binge-ing really matters:

Besides having a complete and total lack-of-faith in our criminal justice system these guys are all operating under the Liz Cheney Theory of Terror-Fighting, that the key information gained from people such as KSM were done using "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques".



For a quick Refresher Please Review my previous post on the Top Ten Tortuous Lies of Liz Cheney.

On one hand they say these methods were "Perfectly Legal" and "Effective" - but on the other hand they are clearly afraid that if these techniques are revealed in an open U.S. Court of Law any and all evidence gathered using these methods are likely to be excluded as fruits of a poison tree by the court.

The problem is that all of the critical information gained linking them to 9-11 after the capture of key al Qaeda members such as Zubaydah and KSM - were gathered Before Harsh Methods were Deployed as has been documented by FBI Interrogator Ali Soufan.

One of the most striking parts of the memos is the false premises on which they are based. The first, dated August 2002, grants authorization to use harsh interrogation techniques on a high-ranking terrorist, Abu Zubaydah, on the grounds that previous methods hadn’t been working. The next three memos cite the successes of those methods as a justification for their continued use.

It is inaccurate, however, to say that Abu Zubaydah had been uncooperative. Along with another F.B.I. agent, and with several C.I.A. officers present, I questioned him from March to June 2002, before the harsh techniques were introduced later in August. Under traditional interrogation methods, he provided us with important actionable intelligence.

We discovered, for example, that Khalid Shaikh Mohammed was the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. Abu Zubaydah also told us about Jose Padilla, the so-called dirty bomber. This experience fit what I had found throughout my counterterrorism career: traditional interrogation techniques are successful in identifying operatives, uncovering plots and saving lives.

There was no actionable intelligence gained from using enhanced interrogation techniques on Abu Zubaydah that wasn’t, or couldn’t have been, gained from regular tactics. In addition, I saw that using these alternative methods on other terrorists backfired on more than a few occasions — all of which are still classified. The short sightedness behind the use of these techniques ignored the unreliability of the methods, the nature of the threat, the mentality and modus operandi of the terrorists, and due process.

This Agent Soufan reiterated during his Senate Testimony



There have been several reports that KSM openly bragged about his involvement with 9-11 when he was captured. Even Pete (We found the WMD!) Hoekstra says so.

On Attorney General Eric Holder’s announcement this morning to bring Khalid Sheikh Muhammad and five other high-value 9/11 hijackers to the United States, the American people need to ask: Why is this necessary?

KSM has already confessed to being not only the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, but also to planning multiple additional attacks on Americans. He is already being held in the best possible security at Guantanamo Bay, and he has already been charged for his crimes in a military commission process where he faces the death penalty.

And here's the question that these small Republican Minds can't seem to ask - if KSM confessed, and he did so before being water-boarded - Why the FRACK WAS HE WATERBOARDED in the first place?

One could argue that it was to get the location of Bin Laden, but as we can all see - the result of that effort was a ALL FAIL. Again, KSM has during Military Tribunal proceedings admitted that he Lied under Torture. ("I Make Up Stories")

The other reason that these methods were used, was to get some information - besides their involvement in 9-11 and the location of bin Laden - that the Bush Administration was desperate to have. That information was - HOW WAS SADDAM LINKED TO THE ATTACK!

Sorry for the background whine during this video:



The Vice President specifically asked for detainees in Iraq to be Water-Boarded in order to show links between Saddam and 9-11 - but CIA inspector Charles Duelfer refused since he was already getting plenty of good information from the man, and ultimately Duelfer found that Saddam had no links to al Qeada, no links to 9-11 and NO WMD!

But then Bush already knew this..

Habbush, the former head of Iraqi Intelligence had already Defected before the War began and he had told us, and Bush was personally briefed on this, that Saddam had Secretly destroyed his WMD stockpiles in 1992.

Instead of listening to Habbush's information, or the declaration that Saddam had supplied to the UN, Bush paid him off to write a Forgery that framed Saddam for 9-11.

On page 371 of "The Way of the World," Suskind describes the White House’s concoction of a forged letter purportedly from the hand of Habbush to Saddam Hussein to justify the United States’ decision to go to war.

Suskind writes: "The White House had concocted a fake letter from Habbush to Saddam, backdated to July 1, 2001. It said that 9/11 ringleader Mohammed Atta had actually trained for his mission in Iraq — thus showing, finally, that there was an operation link between Saddam and al-Qaeda, something the Vice President's office had been pressing CIA to prove since 9/11 as a justification to invade."

He continues: "A handwritten letter, with Habbush's name on it, would be fashioned by CIA and then hand-carried by a CIA agent to Baghdad for dissemination."

The reason that the Torture will not matter in the upcoming 9-11 trial is because they aren't prosecuting Saddam Hussein. They already had the information they need to convict KSM (and presumably others) before "enhanced techniques" were used - and all the allegedly "good information" they received went nowhere.

Straight down a rat-hole.

None of that stuff is relevant to the case at hand, and none of it is likely to be introduced in determining whether these five individuals do or do not have culpability for the attacks of September 11th. The Wingnuts are still going to be afraid, and frankly they have good reason to be afraid ultimately that all of this information will eventually come out and become fully understood by the American people and the world.

Eventually the person who deserves to be on trial for these actions, including the false excuses for the Iraq War - is George W. Bush.



But that isn't the trail before us today... maybe eventually, but not today.


Vyan

For the Last Time ALL OF IT was Torture!

It's well past time we put a final punctuation mark on this entire "Enhanced Interrogations are not Torture" nonsense - Once and For All.

It doesn't matter what the Polling Data says (Karl), what matters is what the Law Says. The simple fact is that the is No Such Thing as Torture Lite ™?

It's not a question of whether Waterboarding is or isn't Torture, and therefore illegal, the simple fact is that Every Coercive Method Authorized by Yoo, Bybee, Bradbury and Bush all meet the U.S. and International definitions of torture.

All of Them.

Contrary to many arguments this isn't simply a matter of unenforceable International Law. The US signed and ratified the UN Convention Against Torture over a dozen years ago and implemented empowering legislation under 18 USC 2340 - The Torture Statute. It similarly made it a criminal offense to commit a grave Breach of Geneva under 18 USC 2441 - The War Crimes Act.

In his original August 2002 Memo (pdf) Jay Bybee argued that ten techniques, which had been culled from the Special Forces S.E.R.E. program were not torture because they did not induce "permanent or severe physical or psychological" damage as outlined under 18 USC 2340.

Those techniques were..

attention grasp, wailing, facial hold, facial slap, cramped confinement, wall standing, stress positions, sleep deprivations, insects place in a confinement box and the waterboard

Bybee repeatedly argued that the pain and suffering would be "mild", and unlikely to induce long-term psychological stress because only a few of these kinds of signs had ever been recorded by S.E.R.E. students - but besides the fact that the S.E.R.E. program is voluntary, whereas being held against your will is decidedly NOT voluntary, there is also the issue of duration and repetition. The S.E.R.E. course lasts less than a week, and at any point a student can use a code-word to signify they have overextended their reach. Under the program outlined by Bybee, none of this was possible, and neither was there a definate end to the process...

Amnesty International Describes Torture according to the UN Convention Against Torture this way:

It defines torture as any act by which:

severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental; is intentionally inflicted on a person; for such purposes as:

* obtaining from him/her or a third person information or a confession
* punishing him/her for an act s/he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed
* intimidating or coercing him/her or a third person
* or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind;

when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity.*

ANY ACT - which causes severe physical or mental pain and suffering for the purpose of extracting information. ANY ACT.

Slapping, Grasping, Wall Standing, Cramped Confinement, Waterboarding - it doesn't matter. ANY ACT.

Both the Geneva and the UN Convention Against Torture do not include a Laundry List of prohibited actions simply because one you do that, it increases the likelihood that someone might try to invent a technique which isn't included on the list and try to claim that it Isn't Torture on a technicality.

Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions prohibits ''violence to life and person,'' in particular ''mutilation, cruel treatment and torture'' and also prohibits ''outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment''. These terms include ''other forms of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment." The drafters of common Article 3 avoided a detailed list of prohibited acts in order to ensure that it had the broadest possible reach, leaving no loophole. As the official commentary by the International Committee of the Red Cross explained:

''It is always dangerous to go into too much detail -- especially in this domain. However great the care taken in drawing up a list of all the various forms of infliction, it would never be possible to catch up with the imagination of future torturers who wished to satisfy their bestial instincts; the more specific and complete a list tries to be, the more restrictive it becomes. The form of wording adopted is flexible, and, at the same time, precise.''

The Army Field Manual, which is crafted to abie by Geneva, does include a list of prohibited actions, and that list doesn't leave any wiggle room for coercive interrogations.

5-75. If used in conjunction with intelligence interrogations,
prohibited actions include, but are not limited to—
• Forcing the detainee to be naked, perform sexual acts, or pose in a
sexual manner.
• Placing hoods or sacks over the head of a detainee; using duct tape
over the eyes.
• Applying beatings, electric shock, burns, or other forms of physical
pain.
• “Waterboarding.”
• Using military working dogs.
• Inducing hypothermia or heat injury.
• Conducting mock executions.
• Depriving the detainee of necessary food, water, or medical care.
5-76. While using legitimate interrogation techniques, certain applications of
approaches and techniques may approach the line between permissible
actions and prohibited actions.

Performing any of these actions, could clearly meet the legal definition of torture and a War Crime. As could hiding detainees from the legally authorized monitoring agencies such as the International Red Cross.

Two primary defenses/excuses were proffered by Bybee (and have been parotted by many others) - 1) The Pain and Suffering Wasn't THAT Severe!

Pain is a highly subjective issue. What might cause minor pain for one person could be intensely painful for another. But then again, even minor inconveniences can become monumentally discomforting over the coarse of time. Some can even become deadly.

Repeated Face Slapping, like any form of assault, can led to bruising, hemoraging and even a subdural hematoma which can trigger traumatic brain injury. I'm not talking about 2 quick slaps, but hundreds of slaps - over the course of days, and weeks and months. The longer the duration the higher likelihood of permanent damage, and even death.

Stress Positions, Wall Standing and Cramped Confinement are all classic forms of torture. They are used to induce muscle fatigue, which one might associate with body building - but the static nature of the muscles producers a very different result than increasing Lat or Deltoid size. When combined with sleep deprivation, extended periods of acute muscle fatigue can cause the subjects kidneys to shutdown. Generally speaking a lack of functioning kidneys tends to lead to a lack of Life!

Even the psychologist whom some OLC memos cited to argue that the suggested methods were harmless, in fact says exactly the opposite.

"As soon as you add in any other stress, any other psychological stress, then the sleep deprivation feeds on that, and the two compound each other to make things far worse. I made that very, very clear," he said. "And there's been a lot of research by others since then to show that this is the case."

As for whether such stress could be considered "harmful," Horne was unequivocal. "I thought it was totally inappropriate to cite my book as being evidence that you can do this and there's not much harm. With additional stress, these people are suffering. It's obviously traumatic," he said. "I just find it absurd."

It's is even more difficult to quantify psychological pain and suffering than it can be for physical pain, but it can't seriously be argued that deliberate attempts at inducing fear and shamefully humiliation (such as the use of nudity, dogs and insects) had No Effect At All! Further we have amples examples of the impact of physical and emotional abuse, particularly in domestic situations when women are the most common targets.

Women who live in violent households experience intense feelings of fear, panic, and anxiety (Jones 87). Many experience feelings of depression and shame, because they feel guilty about staying in their current situation (Jones 87). Women who are victims of abuse over a prolonged period of time will develop feelings of learned helplessness, or in other words, they will feel powerless to do anything to ameliorate their situation. This feeling of learned helplessness will further contribute to a depressed state. Women who are physically abused are also often verbally abused. This verbal abuse includes name-calling, making one feel worthless, playing mind games, and isolation from one’s family and friends. Verbal abuse can be more damaging to a woman’s psychological well-being than physical abuse. Which physical abuse the wounds heal, but psychological abuse is more difficult to overcome.

Clearly we are usually discussing men rather than women when talk about detainee abuse, but the simple fact is that most women in domestic violence situations CAN LEAVE and end the abuse - a detainee doesn't have that option, and hence has the potential to feel even more helpless and become even more psychologically damaged. Putting aside the obviously problematic argument of "which is worse", it it clear that both the law and society consider this kind of abusive treatment to be unacceptable - so how then can we consider similar treatment to be permissible under the color of authority regardless of the circumstances?

The simple truth is we can't.

The second argument offered is 2) We we're doing it to Save American Lives

Besides the fact that the CIA Inspector Generals Report, and the FBI Director both dispute claims that "Enhance Interrogation" has succeeding in producing "Good Actionable Intelligence" that saved lives, there is one very simple response to this, the UN Convention Against Torture, which the U.S. has signed and ratified, states...

Article 2(2) of the Convention states that: "No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture."

In short, there are NO ABUSIVE ACTIONS, either physical or psychological, which are permitted under Geneva for extracting information and under the UN Conventions there are NO EXCUSES.

Many people tend to look at the purely as a "waterboarding" issue, but the fact is long before you reach that particular technique, you've already long passed the threshold into torture and war crimes. But even with that in mind, few people even realize what waterboarding truly is. Even Wikipedia knows better than Jay Bybee.

Waterboarding is a form of torture that consists of immobilizing the victim on his or her back with the head inclined downwards, and then pouring water over the face and into the breathing passages. By forced suffocation and inhalation of water, the subject experiences drowning and is caused to believe they are about to die. It is considered a form of torture by legal experts, politicians, war veterans, intelligence officials, military judges,and human rights organizations. As early as the Spanish Inquisition it was used for interrogation purposes, to punish and intimidate, and to force confessions.

In contrast to submerging the head face-forward in water, waterboarding precipitates a gag reflex almost immediately. The technique does not inevitably cause lasting physical damage. It can cause extreme pain, dry drowning, damage to lungs, brain damage from oxygen deprivation, other physical injuries including broken bones due to struggling against restraints, lasting psychological damage or, ultimately, death. Adverse physical consequences can start manifesting months after the event; psychological effects can last for years.

Certain forms of waterboarding do not allow water to enter the mouth and lungs by using a non-permiable or cellophane sheet to cover the nose and mouth (although the Method used under S.E.R.E. isn't one of these), but far from being "safe" this version of waterboarding it can enduce the phenomenon of Dry Drowning.

In normal breathing, the diaphragm contracts, causing the lungs to expand (lungs are above the diaphragm). This expansion draws air into the lungs by generating a negative pressure or vacuum. Air first travels through the rigid larynx and upper airways before filling the inflatable alveoli in the lungs.

When water or other foreign bodies are inhaled, laryngospasm occurs and the person's larynx spasms shut. As a result, the vacuum created by the diaphragm cannot be filled by the inrush of air into the lungs, and the vacuum persists. In an attempt to force air in through the spasmed larynx, the person may breathe deeper and with more effort, but this only increases the vacuum's force inside the chest. The obstruction to the inflow of oxygen causes hypoxia, and the obstruction to the outflow of carbon dioxide causes acidosis, both resulting in death.

In addition, a multifactorial form of pulmonary edema is produced. The heart continues to beat normally during this time, and blood continues to circulate, though pulmonary oxygen and carbon dioxide gas exchange is markedly reduced. The volume of blood in the pulmonary circulation increases, by pulling in more blood from the abdomen, head, arms and legs - abnormally large volumes of this blood enter the pulmonary circulation via the superior and inferior vena cavae (great veins) in response to the persistent partial vacuum. From the vena cavae, the increased blood volume flows through the right atrium and into the right ventricle. The blood volume is great enough to stretch out the ventricle, similar to water entering a balloon.

POP! You're dead.

This is what Jay Bybee Wrote about severe suffering and Waterboarding.

Any pain associated with muscle fatigue is not of the intensity sufficient to amount to "sever physical pain or suffering" under the statute, nor, despite it's discomfort, can it be said to be difficult to endure. As we understand it, when the waterboard is used, the subject's body responds as if the subject were drowning--even though the subject is well aware that he is in fact not drowning.

As a simple point of fact, if you're "body is responding as if you're drowning" -- You. Are. Drowning! All of the negative impacts, from lung damage, acidosis and edema are likely and possible depending on the duration and frequency of the treatment.

Abu Zubaydah who was waterboarded 83 times (in additional to sleep deprivation, endless loud music and stress positions) is a long way from free from "Sufferring":

First, they beat him. As authorized by the Justice Department and confirmed by the Red Cross, they wrapped a collar around his neck and smashed him over and over against a wall. They forced his body into a tiny, pitch-dark box and left him for hours. They stripped him naked and suspended him from hooks in the ceiling. They kept him awake for days.

Today, he suffers blinding headaches and has permanent brain damage. He has an excruciating sensitivity to sounds, hearing what others do not. The slightest noise drives him nearly insane. In the last two years alone, he has experienced about 200 seizures.

But physical pain is a passing thing. The enduring torment is the taunting reminder that darkness encroaches. Already, he cannot picture his mother's face or recall his father's name. Gradually, his past, like his future, eludes him.

The last point is that even if these techniques all managed to successfully slalom through the minefield of U.S. and International Law, there is considerable evidence that CIA and Military Personnel in the field - went far beyond the guidelines provided by the OLC and not just at Abu Ghrab or Gitmo.

A 27-year-old Iraqi male died while being interrogated by Navy Seals on April 5, 2004, in Mosul, Iraq. During his confinement he was hooded, flex-cuffed, sleep deprived and subjected to hot and cold environmental conditions, including the use of cold water on his body and hood. The exact cause of death was ""undetermined"" although the autopsy stated that hypothermia may have contributed to his death. Notes say he ""struggled/ interrogated/ died sleeping.""

An Iraqi detainee (also described as a white male) died on January 9, 2004, in Al Asad, Iraq, while being interrogated by ""OGA."" He was standing, shackled to the top of a door frame with a gag in his mouth at the time he died. The cause of death was asphyxia and blunt force injuries.

A detainee was smothered to death during an interrogation by Military Intelligence on November 26, 2003, in Al Qaim, Iraq. A previously released autopsy report, that appears to be of General Mowhoush, lists ""asphyxia due to smothering and chest compression"" as the cause of death and cites bruises from the impact with a blunt object.

A detainee at Abu Ghraib Prison, captured by Navy Seal Team number seven, died on November 4, 2003, during an interrogation by Navy Seals and ""OGA."" A previously released autopsy report, that appears to be of Manadel Al Jamadi, shows that the cause of his death was ""blunt force injury complicated by compromised respiration.""

A 52-year-old male Iraqi was strangled to death at the Whitehorse detainment facility on June 6, 2003, in Nasiriyah, Iraq. His autopsy also revealed bone and rib fractures, and multiple bruises on his body.

If Death By Interrogation isn't enough to prove torture - then nothing is torture. Nothing at all.

And this is precisely the point, those that support this policy would attempt to redefine reality right out of existence. If our only protection against Torture is whether someone makes you stand on one leg for 4 hours instead of 8 Hours or 12 hours, then we have No protection at ALL.

That is why a Hard Bright Line needs to be maintained, that is why Disbarment is Too Good For "Em, the entire lot of the War Criminal Gang needs to be fully investigated and prosecuted. Anything less is a disgrace.

Vyan