Anyone who thinks they have all the Answers before they've even heard the Question - is Dangerously Deluded! Real Truth Requires Vigilance, Perseverance and Courage, regardless of Party and who wields Power. Left, Right, Center, Corporations, Government, Unions, Criminals or the Indifferent.
Wherein New York Times Columnist David Brooks backs up Joe Barton on the "Shakedown" thing.
Brooks: We're a nation of laws, we have laws to protect the unpopular even those who do bad things. We have a set of laws. What President Obama did when he very publicly and very brutally strong-armed BP was that he went around these laws. Well, just imagine if Dick Cheney did it to somebody he didn't like?
I'm not worried about what'll happen with the money, I'm worried about the erosion of the rule of law, the President using the vast powers of the government to strong-arm a company -not matter how unpopular, no matter how badly they may have behaved.
So let me get this perfectly straight, the idea here is that Obama circumvented the rule of law by getting BP to pay for the damage that they caused without first taking them to court? They struck, essentially a "gentlemen's agreement" - the same thing that might happen outside of a courtroom in order to defer or end litigation to accomplish the same goal, which is Restore the people of the Gulf.
Shields nails it (Obama Derangement Syndrome):
Shields: What does Barton do, he takes BP and identifies them with the Republican Party. He puts a Republican face on BP. It's almost an inclination to Blame America First, these people are so consumed with attacking President Obama, they're going to take the side of BP!?
The main objection, and you can see it here in this clip with Bill O'Reilly Grilling Michele Bachman, is that they Obama used the threat of prosecution in order to "extort" money from BP. The thing is this is what just about every prosecutor in the country does when they arrange for a plea bargain for a lesser charge when the accused agrees to admit their guilt and make reasonable restitution.
Even Bill O'Reilly gets it:
O'Reilly: I want Obama to strong-arm these guys, it's one of the best things he's done in this whole thing!
Amen to that.
But when comparing to the Bush Administration, there is not a "Coulda, Shoulda, Woulda" to this - because the Bush Administration actually did the exact same thing with various corporations nearly 100 times.
"Last month, prosecutors and the company reached an unusual deferred prosecution agreement, under which Bristol-Myers has two years to clean up its act and prove it can operate lawfully. If it stays clean, it won't face criminal charges. Also under the terms of the agreement, Bristol-Myers made a $300 million payment to a shareholder-restitution fund and Mr. Dolan (CEO of Bristol-Myers) gave up the chairman's post to Mr. Robinson."
...
...will (not)criminally prosecute Chevron Corporation and its subsidiaries
(collectively, "CHEVRON") for any crimes related to its purchases of Iraqi oil under the United Nations Oil-for-Food Program from in or about mid-2000 up to and including in or about March 2003, that involved the payment by third parties of secret illegal surcharges to the former Government of Iraq, including asset forth in Exhibit A. which is incorporated by reference herein.
..........
It is the intent of the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern
District of New York to seek the transfer of $20,000,000 of these funds to the Development Fund of Iraq (sanctioned on May 21, 2003, by United Nations Security Council Resolution 1483) to be used as restitution to the people of Iraq asthe intended beneficiaries of the proceeds of the sale of all Iraqi oil made pursuant to the United Nations 011-for-Food Program.
Contrast all of this with Dick Cheney, because there is no "IF" when it comes to his involvement in Circumventing the Rule of Law against people who may - MAY - have done bad things....
Dick Cheney, with his surrogates Liz Cheney and Marc Theissen who continue to this day to argue that it's inappropriate to apply the Rules of War including the Geneva Conventions to Foreign Enemy combatants, who continue to this day to argue that Waterboarding isn't Torture - even though America has prosecuted people for it for over 100 years, going all the way back to the Spanish-American War.
Comparing Obama getting BP to pay for the cleanup of the Gulf and people who've been impacted by the spill is NOTHING compared to the Presidential Overreach and gross bumrushing of the Rule of Law that the Bush Administration - especially Dick (Halliburton) Cheney - perpetrated.
Whether it was illegal rendition, illegal wiretaps, kidnapping, torture, creating an assassination squad - practically nothing stopped Dick Cheney from completely "Circumventing the Rule Of Law" on a regular basis.
In this tour-de-force of ridicule Jon Stewart blasts the human rights and detention hypocrisy of the Obama Administration was has grossly failed to turn this country back to the rule of law and away from the brutal and illegal tactics of the Bush Administration. Gitmo is still open, Renditions are still part of our policy, Habeas Corpus is still restricted particularly at Bagram AFB because of the Military Commissions Act (which is yet to be repealed). He's even been backing down on trying KSM in Criminal Court. Not good, not good at all.
It's been three days since former President George W. Bush casually admitted that he had authorized the water-boarding of Khallid Sheihk Mohammad, and although Huffpo claims there's been outrage - from my perspective America's collective response has been - "Ho Hum, what else is new? - Daddy, you plug that hole yet?
Bush: We Water-boarded Khallid Sheik Mohammad, I'd do it again to save lives.
Sad to say Mr. Ex-President, according to all the available evidence - Water-Boarding KSM didn't save anyone.
Not one.
In 2004, just two years after Bush's Controversial "Harsh Interrogation Program" the CIA's Own Inspector General found that it was both ineffective and illegal.
WASHINGTON — The CIA inspector general in 2004 found that there was no conclusive proof that waterboarding or other harsh interrogation techniques helped the Bush administration thwart any "specific imminent attacks," according to recently declassified Justice Department memos.
That undercuts assertions by former vice president Dick Cheney and other former Bush administration officials that the use of harsh interrogation tactics including waterboarding, which is widely considered torture, was justified because it headed off terrorist attacks.
Bush himself actually shut his program down in 2004 after this report was issued, so why's he blathering now about "He'd do it again - to save lives"?
It didn't save any then, it wouldn't save any now - quite the opposite.
Bush's FBI Director, who ought to know if any lives were saved by the use of harsh techniques, says - that didn't happen.
Mueller: I don't believe it has been the case (that Harsh Tactics have saved lives)
So where are the saved lives George?
As Keith correctly points out, Water-boarding has been a War Crime for over half a century going back as far as the Spanish American War. General Washington banned tortured during the Revolutionary War. The U.S. Prosecuted and executed Japanese Soldiers who Water-Boarded our troops in WWII. The U.S. Court Martialed this soldier for participating in the Water-Boarding of a suspected VietCong member during the Vietnam Conflict.
During the 80's, under President Reagan a Texas Sherrif was prosecuted for water-boarding a suspect. Even recently there is a trial - sadly only a civil case - over a Police Lt. who tortured and gained false confessions from over a 100 Suspects over the course of 2 decades.
Water-boarding has always been a crime, going all the way back to beginning of this nation - IT. IS. UNAMERICAN! When the HELL did that change?
Keith with Air Force Interrogator "Matthew Alexander"
Here's a excerpt from Matthew Alexanders Wapo Op-ed on torture.
as a Special Operations pilot flying helicopters, saw combat in Bosnia and Kosovo, became an Air Force counterintelligence agent, then volunteered to go to Iraq to work as a senior interrogator. What I saw in Iraq still rattles me -- both because it betrays our traditions and because it just doesn't work.
Torture and abuse are against my moral fabric. The cliche still bears repeating: Such outrages are inconsistent with American principles. And then there's the pragmatic side: Torture and. Our policy of torture was directly and swiftly recruiting fighters for al-Qaeda in Iraq. The large majority of suicide bombings in Iraq are still carried out by these foreigners. They are also involved in most of the attacks on U.S. and coalition forces in Iraq. It's no exaggeration to say that at least half of our losses and casualties in that country have come at the hands of foreigners who joined the fray because of our program of detainee abuse.
KSM's sworn testimony during his Military Commission was that he lied to us while undergoing harsh tactics - "I Make Up Stories".
As for K.S.M. himself, who (as Jane Mayer writes) was waterboarded, reportedly hung for hours on end from his wrists, beaten, and subjected to other agonies for weeks, Bush said he provided "many details of other plots to kill innocent Americans." K.S.M. was certainly knowledgeable. It would be surprising if he gave up nothing of value. But according to a former senior C.I.A. official, who read all the interrogation reports on K.S.M., "90 percent of it was total fucking bullshit." A former Pentagon analyst adds: "K.S.M. produced no actionable intelligence. He was trying to tell us how stupid we were."
Yeah, and apparently you guys were pretty fucking stupid.
KSM gave us Bupkis. Not only had the Library Tower plot already been foiled long before KSM was even captured - I think i've notice we still haven't caught Bin Laden! Weren't he and KSM like BFF's?
It's interesting that Bush's justifies the torture of KSM, but not that of Abu Zubaydah particularly since his mistreatment took place months before the OIC memos providing quasi-legal justification for it. And the fact is that according to FBI Agent Ali Soufan, Zubaydah had given us plenty of information, including confirming KSM's identity withou being mistreated, he just wasn't saying what the Bush Administration wanted to hear - "How was Saddam connected to 9-11?"
Officials who analyzed Abu Zubaydah’s interrogation reports say that the reports were afforded the highest value within the Bush administration not because of the many American lives they were going to save but because they could be cited repeatedly against those who doubted the wisdom of ousting Saddam by force.
"We didn’t know he’d been waterboarded and tortured when we did that analysis, and the reports were marked as credible as they could be," the former Pentagon analyst tells me. "The White House knew he’d been tortured. I didn’t, though I was supposed to be evaluating that intelligence." To draw conclusions about the importance of what Abu Zubaydah said without knowing this crucial piece of the background nullified the value of his work. "It seems to me they were using torture to achieve a political objective. I cannot believe that the president and vice president did not know who was being waterboarded, and what was being given up."
This is where the true outrage should stem, the fact that techniques authorized by Bush and Cheney very directly led to the unwarranted death of thousands of U.S. Troops by Emboldening and Enraging the Enemy with images like those from Abu Ghraib.
If fact, you can blame All U.S. Casualties in Iraq on Torture, since at least 1/3rd of the information the Bush Administration used to justify this War - and put on display in front of the United Nations, were produced by either Torture or outright lies.
Specifically I mean the Torture of Ibn Sheik al-Libi, something else that Bush clearly doesn't take pride and credit for in "saving lives" because It Didn't. After he was buried alive by Egyptian forces, al-Libi told us that Saddam's forces had trained members of Al-Qeada on use of Chemical Weapons.
THAT WAS A LIE. (Remember "I make up stories...")
According to the ABC News report, one other detainee who was waterboarded was Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, the director of the Khaldan training camp in Afghanistan, who was captured in November 2001. His current whereabouts are unknown, although there are suspicions that he was finally delivered to the Libyan government. Having slipped off the radar, the government clearly does not want his case revived, not only because it may have to explain what has happened to him, but also because, as a result of the application of "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques," al-Libi claimed that Saddam Hussein had offered to train two al-Qaeda operatives in the use of chemical and biological weapons.
Al-Libi's "confession" led to President Bush declaring, in October 2002, "Iraq has trained al-Qaeda members in bomb making and poisons and gases," and his claims were, notoriously, included in Colin Powell's speech to the UN Security Council on February 5, 2003. The claims were of course, groundless, and were recanted by al-Libi in January 2004, but it took Dan Cloonan, a veteran FBI interrogator, who was resolutely opposed to the use of torture, to explain why they should never have been believed in the first place.
How many lives did that Save, George?
The other two primary sources for the Iraq invasion were a known liar, code-named "Curveball" who gave us information about mobile labs which didn't exist, and a forgery of a receipt from Niger which claimed Iraq had recently purchased (not just attempted but actually possessed) tons of yellowcake uranium ore.
Yet, again - Both were LiES.
When Ambassador Joe Wilson attempted to expose the Yellowcake Lie, we all saw what length's the Bush Administration, with Cheney in the lead, went to to discredit him - including revealing the identity of an active covert CIA operative - Valerie Plame-Wilson.
It's been little reported, but there is currently no doubt the Bush was Directly informed by Saddam's own Head of intelligence that Iraq's WMD's had been destroyed in 1991, yet rather than take heed of this information the Bush Administration had this Iraqi Officer produce a forged letter claiming that Saddam's forces had Trained some of the 9-11 Hijackers.
Again - THAT WAS A LIE.
Suskind says he spoke on the record with U.S. intelligence officials who stated that Bush was informed unequivocally in January 2003 that Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction. Nonetheless, his book relates, Bush decided to invade Iraq three months later — with the forged letter from the head of Iraqi intelligence to Saddam bolstering the U.S. rationale to go into 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."
Lastly, to yet again justify their baseless invasion and attack on Iraq, Dick Cheney suggested that an Iraqi captive be Water-boarded - even though he was already co-operating - and was VERY CLEARLY PROTECTED BY GENEVA as an enemy solder, not a "Unlaawful Combatant" - he still hadn't told us How Saddam Pulled off 9-11!.
Pardon the poor audio.
There were no WMD's in Iraq - not anymore. Bush was told this two months before he decided to invade - and invaded anyway.
There were NO ACTIVE LINKS, between Saddam and al Qeada - all suggests that there were were either lies generated by torture or forgeries.
Here we have a clear pattern using the techniques created by the Red Chinese to create false confessions for propaganda purposes being used over and over and over again - with and without legal wrangling - to justify the Bush Administrations blood lust again Saddam and misdirected guilt for not paying attention to Osama Bin Laden when everyone - Bill Clinton, Sandy Berger, Richard Clarke and even George Tenet - said that al Qaeda would be the Bush Administration's Number one Priority.
A priority in which they failed, utterly, completely.
More Blood On Bush's hands.
Maybe it's the constant insane sadistic prattling of Liz Cheney and Marc Thieesen, maybe it's acute Jack Bauer poisoning - but after all these lives have been literally thrown away over lies, it's simply amazing that Bush smugly retorts "He'd do it all again...to save lives"
And America shrugs...
8,000 Dead on YOUR Watch Mr. President, ON YOUR WATCH!
Whose life did you save George, besides your own political life?
"He'd do it again.. " and America yawns....
War Crimes have no Statute of Limitations.
Is America's indifference a greater indictment of Bush and his campaign to sanitize evil, or of us?
Vyan
Update: It should be noted that Eric Holder has indeed selected Special Prosecutor John Durham to look into this issue. Exactly how far up or down the chain of command he will take this issue remains in question, but it is being addressed legally.
Starting in January of 2002 Bush began to preemptively immunize himself from prosecution under 18 USC 2441 (the War Crimes Act) by issuing executive orders which excepted so-called "enemy Combatants" from Geneva protections (and hence War Crimes protection) on the advice of Alberto Gonzales. I personally don't think that action was legal since the President doesn't make law, congress does - but it did begin a clear pattern of conspiracy to Torture even before the first high-value detainee Zubaydah was even captured in March of that year. These were followed by the Yoo Memos in August after complaints by the FBI and DOJ attorneys about Zubaydah's handling using SERE techniques by contractors. One problem with the Bush defense here is that Yoo didn't have the authority to issue those memos, Jay Bybee did - and another is that the separate Torture Statute (18 USC 2340) with it's own conspiracy section wasn't papered over until Jay Bybee determined that it required "near organ failure or death" for any treatment to be torture when he finally did issue a memo of his own.
This leaves a window from March to August - while Zubaydah was being treated using SERE-like tactics where the Torture Statue (2340) could apply even if Bush's memos had blocked Geneva. This is also why Bush talks about KSM's treatment openly, which didn't occur until later after all this legal cover was established, but not Zubaydah. It may also be why the tapes of Zubaydaah's interrogation were illegally destroyed. Bush also doesn't talk about Jose Padilla who was a U.S. Citizen and clearly protected by U.S. Law, not just Geneva. But a third problem arises, these weren't the only people subjected to this treatment and several of them even went beyond the "Bybee Standard" of protection - They died under Torture
So read several of the 44 US military autopsy reports on the ACLU website -evidence of extensive abuse of US detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan 2002 through 2004. Anthony Romero, Executive Director of ACLU stated, "There is no question that US interrogations have resulted in deaths." ACLU attorney Amrit Sing adds, "These documents present irrefutable evidence that US operatives tortured detainees to death during interrogations."
Conspiracy under both 2441 and 2340 when the subject dies, can lead to the Death Penalty. These cases are the ones most likely to be looked at by Durham, where interrogators went far outside even the framework provided by Gonzales, Yoo and Bybee - but the problem stems from the framework itself, not the act of a "few individuals".
The program was essentially shutdown after criticism from the CIA Inspector Generals Report in 2005, the Yoo/Bybee memos were later rescinded by Bradbury. Then the rest of Bush's erector set of memo's were ruled invalid by Hamdan v Rumfeld in 2006 which re-established Geneva even for Enemy Combatants. Bush then attempted to paper this over with the Military Commissions Act, which stripped Habeus protection from detainees, continued to allow coerced confessions as admissible. The torture program was Official over, but Bush still wanted access to the ill-gained "fruits" without having to admit they were illegal methods in the first place.
In 2007, despite Hamdan and the 2005 Detainee Treatment Act - after fierce urging by Cheney, Bush re-instituted parts of the program (w/o water-boarding), in clear violation of the law. Not only would he do it again - He DID it again.
Today on Face the Nation, Colin Powell blows a truck sized hole in the Primary Republican Meme Against President Obama being "weak" on Terrorism.
The Relevant portion of the discussion starts at 10 Minutes into the video.
"The point is made, 'We don't waterboard anymore or use extreme interrogation techniques.' Most of those extreme interrogation techniques and waterboarding were done away with in the Bush administration," Powell said. "They've been made officially done away with in this current administration."
"The Transportation Security Administration created by George Bush is still in action working in our airports; they take care of me every day that I go to an airport," Powell told moderator Bob Schieffer.
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence was also created under President Bush, "and it is still under President Obama working hard," he said. "Our counterterrorism authorities and forces are hard at work. Our law enforcement officials are hard at work. We have gone after the enemy in Afghanistan with 50,000 more troops, more predators are striking al Qaeda and Taliban leaders in Pakistan. We have continued the policies that President Bush put in place with respect to Iraq.
"The bottom line answer is the nation is still at risk. Terrorists are out there. They're trying to get through. But to suggest that somehow we have become much less safer because of the actions of the administration, I don't think that's borne out by the facts," Powell said.
The facts are the Powell is absolutely correct, most of the so-called "Enhanced Interrogation" Techniques that Dick Cheney continues to call for were Ended by the Bush Administration in 2005 after the CIA Inspector Generals Report found that they were both Illegal and Ineffective.
The real trouble began on May 7, 2004, the day the C.I.A. inspector general, John L. Helgerson, completed a devastating report. In thousands of pages, it challenged the legality of some interrogation methods, found that interrogators were exceeding the rules imposed by the Justice Department and questioned the effectiveness of the entire program.
The Torture Authorizing OLC memos by Yoo and Bybee were all recinded by 2005 - under Bush. The program was scrapped. (Although it should e noted that some elements of it were eventually revived by Bush in 2007, use of water-boarding and nudity remained off the table)
Powell goes on to note that in 8 years have only been THREE successful prosecutions under the Military Commissions system setup by Bush, two of those men, including Salin Hamdan whose Supreme Court Case effectively gutted the Commissions System and established that the Geneva Conventions Do Apply to Detainees, have already been released for time served. People in the Military Commissions still get Layers, like Hamdan's Attorney Commander Swift.
The idea that the only way to keep America Safe is to continue the Criminal Conspiracy of Torture that was headed and Championed by Dick Cheney - is patently ridiculous. This isn't a matter of "differences" unless you idea of a difference is a War Criminal vs NOT a War Criminal.
It's clear that Powell is still a Republican as he attempts to blame the Gridlock in Washington on the "failure to Compromise" on both sides of the aisle, as if the Democrats haven't already Compromised on Single Payer, Medicare for All and the Public Option. He suggests we should follow the example of the founding fathers on the Constitution, while ignoring that their failure to address and resolve the issue of Slavery rather than Kick the Can down the Road with clauses that prevented Congress from outlawing the importation of slaves until 1808 and ratified it's practice with the Fugitive Slave Clause led directly to the Heinous Dred Scott decision and the Civil War.
Every other Country that had Slavery ended the practice without bloodshed.
Last Night was the Season Premier of "24" - Before the second commercial break Retired CTU Agent Jack Bauer had already put a gun to someone's throat, shouting "Tell Me Everything You Know!" into his face.
This he did when the person was voluntarily coming to give him information in the first place.
If the mendacity of such a scenario has become somewhat blase after 8 years of struggle with international terrorism, the following real life story as Reported by Harper's of the systematic cover-up of the death of three Gitmo Detainee's who may very well have been tortured to death in 2006 should send a chill down your spine.
Were these the murders that Jack Wrought?
Today is MLK Day. A single day dedicated to a man who helped raise the nations awareness to a system of brutality and injustice that had plagued this nation from it's inception. A system that may indeed continue today in new forms and new shapes.
In the many years since 9-11 we've been told repeatedly that we needed to "Re-Write" the old rules. To take the battle to the enemy and to work - sometimes - "On the Dark Side".
The question is "Re-Write them into what?" - and using who or what as a guidepost?
U.S. Soldiers have openly admitted that once the Army Field Manual and Geneva Conventions were official thrown out (by Bush and Rumsfeld in 2002), those in the field began to make up their own rules. And one of the places they did turn to- were television actions stars like Jack Bauer.
The television show 24 has become a foreign policy guide for the right wing. Numerous conservative pundits have cited 24 as a sanction for harsh interrogation practices. In September, Laura Ingraham stated, "The average American out there loves the show 24. ... In my mind that’s close to a national referendum that it’s OK to use tough tactics against high-level Al Qaeda operatives as we’re going to get."
Brigadier General Patrick Finnegan recently told the 24 producers that he was concerned that the show’s promotion of illegal torture "was having a damaging effect on young troops."
In an interview with Newsweek, former U.S. Army specialist Tony Lagouranis, who left the military with an honorable discharge in 2005, confirms Finnegans fears — that U.S. soldiers did take cues from 24 to torture prisoners:
Interrogators didn’t have guidance from the military on what to do because we were told that the Geneva Conventions didn’t apply any more. So our training was obsolete, and we were encouraged to be creative. We turned to television and movies to look for ways of interrogating. I can say that I saw that with myself, also. I would adopt the posture of the television or movie interrogator, thinking that establishing that simple power arrangement, establishing absolute power over the detainee, would force him to break. ...
[We adopted mock] executions and mock electrocution, stress positions, isolation, hypothermia. Threatening to execute family members or rape detainees’ wives and things like that.
I'm not normally one to look at Art as an explanation for the actions of people in the Real World. Far From it. But this may be one case where Tough Guy Revenge Fantasy of the Right-Wing Baeur-ites may have run smack face-first into Hard Reality resulting in a trio of War Crimes.
The Official Story is that 32-year-old Salah Ahmed Al-Salami from Yemen, 30-year-old Mani Shaman Al-Utaybi from Saudi Arabia and 22-year-old Yasser Talal Al-Zahrani also from Saudi Arabia, all committed suicide. Simultaneously, in three different, non-adjacent cells, using the exact same method - three men tied their own hands (one of whom had their feet tied), stuffed rags down their own throats, tied nooses made of bed sheets and t-shirts around their own necks, perched themselves on the sink in the cells and lept to their deaths.
Faculty and Students from SETON HALL in New Jersey analysed the Official NCIS Report, which was released two years after the incident, and their findings were that the a story told by the Report is frankly not possible to believe. Supposedly the detainees weren't found until at least two hours later, long enough for Rigor-mortis to set in, yet their cells are supposed to be checked by Guards every ten-minutes. They somehow managed to use sheets to block the view into their cells, and also bunch them up to make it appear as if they were in bed sleeping - how exactly they acquired this many extra sheets is not explained - yet, no guards were disciplined for failing to check on them or failing to notice they have managed to completely barricade themselves.
The Commander of the Camp at the time, then Rear Admiral Harry Harris claimed that the suicides were actually an attack on the Camp.
“I believe this was not an act of desperation,” he said, “but an act of asymmetrical warfare waged against us.”
But the Official Story has begun to break down as four former Army Intelligence non-commissioned Officers who were present during the events of June 9th, 2006 - yet NCIS Investigator never talked to them, and their commanding Officers order to remain silent - have now come forward to e interviewed by Harpers.
They describe a completely difference scenario, where the three prisoners in question had been removed from the primary base and taken to a second secret location - which they nicknamed "Camp No" - out the outskirts of the base.
"Camp No" isn't supposed to exist. It's a small bunker without a guard tower, protected by concertina wire - which is serviced by a White Van (Called the "Paddy Wagon") which moves one prisoner at a time in and out. All visitors and movement on the base is supposed to be documented and logged - all movement that is except for movements made by the "Paddy Wagon". On the Night in question Sgt. Joe Hickman of the Army Reserves, who in civilian life has worked as a private investigator, observed the Paddy Wagon moving between Alpha Block and Camp No making at least three trips - then returning once more and backing up to the medical facility, just before all hell broke lose.
Another thirty minutes passed. Then, as Hickman and [Army Specialist Christopher] Penvose both recall, Camp Delta suddenly “lit up”—stadium-style flood lights were turned on, and the camp became the scene of frenzied activity, filling with personnel in and out of uniform. Hickman headed to the clinic, which appeared to be the center of activity, to learn the reason for the commotion. He asked a distraught medical corpsman what had happened. She said three dead prisoners had been delivered to the clinic. Hickman recalled her saying that they had died because they had rags stuffed down their throats, and that one of them was severely bruised. {Specialist Tony] Davila told me he spoke to Navy guards who said the men had died as the result of having rags stuffed down their throats.
The story of having rags stuff down their throats is one that is highly similar to the story told by another detainee who went through similar treatment that same night - a 42-year-old Saudi Arab name Shaker Aamer in Federal Court filings supplied by his attorney.
On June 9th, 2006, [Aamer] was beaten for two and a half hours straight. Seven naval military police participated in his beating. Mr. Aamer stated he had refused to provide a retina scan and fingerprints. He reported to me that he was strapped to a chair, fully restrained at the head, arms and legs. The MPs inflicted so much pain, Mr. Aamer said he thought he was going to die. The MPs pressed on pressure points all over his body: his temples, just under his jawline, in the hollow beneath his ears. They choked him. They bent his nose repeatedly so hard to the side he thought it would break. They pinched his thighs and feet constantly. They gouged his eyes. They held his eyes open and shined a mag-lite in them for minutes on end, generating intense heat. They bent his fingers until he screamed. When he screamed, they cut off his airway, then put a mask on him so he could not cry out.
A Mask to cover their face, and also prevent removal of the rag down their throat wss found on two of the deceased detainees - but went unremarked on by NCIS.
Despite the fact that those on the base were initially told that detainees died as a result of "rags being stuff in their mouths" - they were told the following day by Colonel Bumgardner (a Subordinate of Adm. Harris) that reporters were being told they "died by hanging" and that they should not note the contradiction if asked, and that also - their communications to their wives and family were being monitored.
In addition to keeping the soldiers on the base quiet, the NCIS investigators were kept on a short leash as well.
The investigators conducted interviews with guards, medics, prisoners, and officers. As the Seton Hall researchers note, however, nothing in the NCIS report suggests that the investigators secured or reviewed the duty roster, the prisoner-transfer book, the pass-on book, the records of phone and radio communications, or footage from the camera that continuously monitored activity in the hallways, all of which could have helped them authoritatively re-construct the events of that evening.
Footage of the hallways would have confirmed - or refuted - the suggestion put forth by Sgt Hickman that these men were most likely not even in their cells at the time of their supposed suicides.
On top of all this there is also the strong likeyhood that Yassar, the youngest of the three was completely innocent.
When I asked Talal Al-Zahrani what he thought had happened to his son, he was direct. “They snatched my seventeen-year-old son for a bounty payment,” he said. “They took him to Guantánamo and held him prisoner for five years. They tortured him. Then they killed him and returned him to me in a box, cut up.”
Al-Zahrani was a brigadier general in the Saudi police. He dismissed the Pentagon’s claims, as well as the investigation that supported them. Yasser, he said, was a young man who loved to play soccer and didn’t care for politics. The Pentagon claimed that Yasser’s frontline battle experience came from his having been a cook in a Taliban camp. Al-Zahrani said that this was preposterous: “A cook? Yasser couldn’t even make a sandwich!”
In fact, Yasser had already been determined to be no threat and was scheduled to be released.
If Sgt. Hickman's story is to be believed, these men were tortured to death. Exactly what information was supposed to be gained by this treatment of these men continues to remain shrouded in mystery, other than just to intimidate them or compel false confessions. The Obama Justice Department appears to be closing this investigation on the matter leaving the Official NCIS Report as it stands, even after recently interviewing Sgt. Hickman and Specialists Davila and Penvose.
“the gist of Sergeant Hickman’s information could not be confirmed.”
So Justice for these three men, or at least a better accounting of the record, remains denied behind a wall of secrecy, lies, threats and high security - all in the name of the "War On Terror".
Much has been made of various Torture Techniques deployed at Guantanamo Bay, and the Obama Administration has both promised to close the base as well as imposed the guidelines of the Army Field Manual (Which abides by the Geneva Conventions), but little has been said or done about the other American Torture Chamber - the Detention Center at Bagram Air Force Base in Afghanistan.
Although the Right Wing has been running about like Chicken Little expecting the sky to come raining down around us all because Obama has gradually begun to fulfill both his and President Bush's promise to close down the Guantanam Detention Center - No one talks about the other detention center at Bagram.
And in fact, the Obama Administration is actually planning to expand the Bagram detention center and presenting even more legal challenges to these detainees by contesting the decision by Federal Judge John Bates in the Boumediene Case which re-established Habeus protection for detainees at GTMO.
The Obama administration is challenging this ruling in the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., arguing that Bates’ ruling would for the first time in American history extend habeas corpus rights to non-Americans in a theater of war in a foreign territory.
The Bagram site, they contend, is not like Guantanamo because the United States has become de facto ruler of the Cuban base after maintaining control of it since 1903.
But Bates ruled that some of those held at Bagram who were captured outside Afghanistan “are virtually identical to the detainees in Boumediene,” describing them as “non-citizens who were... apprehended in foreign lands far from the United States and brought to yet another country for detention.”
Autopsy Reports obtained by the ACLU show that at least 21 former Bagram Detainees may have been Killed During Interrogations.
Some of them were just plain beaten to death
Multiple blunt force injuries. Abrasion in upper right forehead. Abrasion on right lower forehead above eyebrow. Multiple contusions on right cheek and lower nose, left upper forehead, back of head. Abrasions on chest, lower costal margin. Contusions on arm, elbow, forearm, wrist, upper inner arm, groin, inner thigh, right back of knee and calf, left calf, left lower leg. Cause of death was pulmonary embolism due to blunt force injuries.
And this case:
Detainee was found unresponsive restrained in his cell. Death was due to blunt force injuries to lower extremities complicating coronary artery disease.Contusions and abrasions on forehead, nose, head, behind ear, neck, abdomen, buttock, elbow, thigh, knee, foot, toe, hemorrhage on rib area and leg. Detainee died of blunt force injuries to lower extremities, complicating underlying coronary artery disease. The blunt force injuries to the legs resulted in extensive muscle damage, muscle necrosis and rhabomyolysis. Electrolyte disturbances primarily hyperkalemia (elevated blood potassium level) and metabolic acidosis can occur within hours of muscle damage. Massive sodium and water shifts occur, resulting in hypovolemic shock and casodilatation and later, acute renal failure. The decedent's underlying coronary artery disease would compromise his ability to tolerate the electrolyte and fluid abnormalities, and his underlying malnutrition and likely dehydration would further exacerbate the effects of the muscle damage. The manner of death is homicide.
This was Not at Abu Ghraib. Not at GITMO. Not with KSM or Abu Zubaydah - at Bagram.
If the abuse which occured at Abu Ghraib and GITMO have been a rallying cry to help recruit enemies which have killed U.S. Troop as Air Force Interrogator "Matthew Alexander" alleges, it might be well past time to start squaking about this continuing hell hole, particularly since the bodies have been piling up for some time, out of sight - out of mind.
Rachel Discusses Most recent Document Dump from the CIA/Gitmo Files.
Dick Cheney:
I think, for example, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who was the number three man in al Qaeda, the man who planned the attacks of 9/11, provided us with a wealth of information.
“I make up stories,” Mohammed said, describing in broken English an interrogation probably administered by the CIA that concerned the location of Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.
“Where is he? I don’t know. Then he torture me,” Mohammed said. “Then I said, ‘Yes, he is in this area.’”
How do we know KSM lied while under torture? Where's Bin Laden Now?
FBI Interrogator Ali Soufan has repeatedly stated, under oath before Congress and in his Op Ed that harsh tactics did NOT produce actionable intelligence from these suspects. Now we see that the suspects themselves back up Soufan, not Cheney.
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.
Yet once the torture started, Zubaydah stopped talking to us.
Document released last week from the CSRT (Combat Status Review Tribunals) from GITMO also show that even on the number of persons tortured, Bush and Cheney have it wrong. It wasn't just KSM, Zubaydah and Al Nashiri, it was others as well.
Abu Zubaydah: "After months of suffering and torture, physically and mentally, they did not care about my injuries that they inflicted to my eye, to my stomach, to my bladder, and my left thigh and my reproductive organs. They didn't care that I almost died from these injuries. Doctors told me that I nearly died four times." "They say ‘this in your diary.' They say ‘see you want to make operation against America.' I say no, the idea is different. They say no, torturing, torturing. I say ‘okay, I do. I was decide to make operation.'"
• Al Nashiri: "[And, they used to] drown me in water."
• Muhammad: "This is what I understand he [CIA interrogator] told me: you are not American and you are not on American soil. So you cannot ask about the Constitution."
• Khan: "In the end, any classified information you have is through…agencies who physically and mentally tortured me."
They even admitted to Zubaydah that they knew he wasn't a high-ranking member of Al Qaeda, they knew he wasn't even a combatant yet they kept torturing him anyway.
"They told me sorry we discover that you are not number three, not a partner even not a fighter," Zubaydah said during is tribunal hearing.
In this clip Bill O'Reilly seriously attempts to make the argument that the only torture that ever took place under George Bush was the Waterboarding of KSM, al Nishiri and Zubaidah. He chooses to ignore that report from the International Red Cross which shows that nearly everything they did to those men held in both the Black Sites, GITMO, Bagram AFB and Abu Ghraib was either cruelty or torture, not just what was done to those three. FBI Agent Soufan? and the CIA Inspector General's report have both debunked the claim that we found "valuable information" using these techniques, and that these actions were ILLEGAL (as Juan Williams eventually points out) to which O'Reilly says...
Billo: You can dance "the law" dance - all day long. Laws are passed by people and they can be changed.
Juan: Torture is Illegal
Billo: You're hiding behind semantics and meaning Juan rather than getting to the crux of the matter, the Attorney General ruled that Waterboarding was legal
Let just remind Bill that the Attorney General, is not A JUDGE and can't "RULE" on anything. Not to mention the fact that the memo which were issued to authorized various enhanced techniques were vigorously opposed by attornys in the State Dept and NSA, and were eventually all rescinded - while the authors of those memos are facing potentially disbarment.
Bill then goes on condemn George Tiller for his medical practice, which as Juan points out repeatedly, was completely within Kansas Law. There had been a trial of Dr. Tiller which ended in March, but unfortunately for O'Reilly rhetoric he was aquitted.
Kansas law prohibits aborting viable fetuses, which is generally midway through the second trimester, unless two doctors certify that continuing the pregnancy would cause the woman "substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function."[28] Tiller went on trial in March 2009, charged with 19 misdemeanors for allegedly consulting a second physician in late-term abortion cases who was not truly "independent" as required by Kansas state law.
O'Reilly claims that Tiller would perform abortions for "any reason", but that simply isn't true.
On the issue of the Recruitment Office Shooting and the Killing of Private Long, I agree that this issue has not been addressed or talked about nearly enough - but I don't think the reason is bias in the media against addressing Muslim Terrorism. I think the issue is simply that NO ONE IS ARGUING IN FAVOR OF THIS SHOOTING and making excuses for it the way that they are for the Killing of Dr. Tiller. Even in his own segment O'Reilly spend much more time arguing with Juan over Dr. Tiller and Gitmo than talking about Private Long, because there's no Controversy over that subject.
Following the recent comments from Gen Taguba, the author of the Abu Ghraib report, that "the Bush Administration perpetrated War Crimes", and an admission from Gen David Petreaus that "Geneva was violated" in Iraq, former Multinational Forces Commander Lt. Gen Ricardo Sanchez has called for a Truth Commission to reveal what did and didn't happen at Abu Ghraib and in Iraq.
The General described the failures at all levels of civilian and military command that led to the abuses in Iraq, "and that is why I support the formation of a truth commission."
The General went on to say that, "during my time in Iraq there was not one instance of actionable intelligence that came out of these interrogation techniques."
I interviewed General Sanchez after the event and asked him to elaborate on why he felt the US needed such a commission. "For the American people to really know what happened, " he replied, "...this was an institutional failure, a personal failure on the part of many...."
"If we do not find out what happened," continued the General, "then we are doomed to repeat it."
In his support of Obama's order to close the Dentention Center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba
PETRAEUS: Gitmo has caused us problems, there’s no question about it. I oversee a region in which the existence of Gitmo has indeed been used by the enemy against us. We have not been without missteps or mistakes in our activities since 9/11. And again, Gitmo is a lingering reminder for the use of some in that regard.
Petraeus knocks down one by one all of the arguments by the Hair-On-Fire crowd that we'll have "Terrorist on our Streets" if not for Good Ole' Gitmo.
He also clearly acknowledges that the U.S. did violate Geneva, and hence did commit War Crimes.
PETRAEUS: What I would ask is, does that not take away from our enemies a tool, which again they have beaten us around the head and shoulders in the court of public opinion? When we have taken steps that have violated the Geneva Convention, we rightly have been criticized. And so as we move forward, I think it is important to again live our values to live the agreements that we have made in the international justice arena and to practice those.
Fox News-Model:What about the concern that because of some of the treatment of (some) detainees, if tried in U.S. courts, they could go free?
PETRAEUS: I don't think we should be afraid to Live our Values - it's what we're fighting for.
The importance of this perspective can't be understated, particularly with the corroborating arguments from General Taguba, who personally investigated Abu Ghraib.
Maj. Gen Taguba saw the horrors first hand during his Abu Ghraib investigation and he believes the Bush administration is guilty of war crimes.
In a preface to a report by Physicians for Human Rights on prisoner abuse and torture in U.S. military prisons Taguba wrote: "There is no longer any doubt that the current administration committed war crimes. The only question is whether those who ordered torture will be held to account."
With both of these Military commanders, the top commander in both Iraq and Afghanistan, and the Chief investigator into the biggest military Scandal in a generation both clearly stat Geneva was violated and War Crimes Committed the ability to avoid a full-on War Crimes inquiry becomes more difficult and the likelihood of a conviction considering witnesses of this calibre - grows exponentially.
In the last day quite a bit of hubbub and hullaballo has surfaced over a Telegraph UK report that alleges the reason that Obama did not release the latest set of Abu Ghraib pictures is because they depicted the Rape of Children.
I myself have helped share links to this story, but last night I read something which contradicted and to some extent corrected that story from, oddly enough, Jason Leopold.
Jumping more than a bit ahead of the gun a dog's age ago, Leopold has once claimed that Karl Rove was about to be arrested on Fitzmas. He wasn't, but Jason may have learned a lesson or two about verifying sources.
All that is now just another liter of blood under the bridge...
In this case he is addressing detailed descriptions of the pictures requested by the ACLU via FOIA which Obama recently denied. (BTW, Obama's isn't the last word on that subject - it could still go to SCOTUS)
U.S. Army soldiers in Afghanistan took dozens of pictures of their colleagues pointing assault rifles and pistols at the heads and backs of hooded and bound detainees and another photograph showed two male soldiers and one female soldier pointing a broom to one detainee “as if I was sticking the end of a broom stick into [his] rectum,” according to the female soldier’s account as told to an Army criminal investigator.
I found the documents that describes many of the photographs that were set for release at the end of the month on the website of the American Civil Liberties Union. The ACLU has been trying to gain access to the photographs for nearly six years. The ACLU obtained the files describing the pictures in 2005 as part of the organization’s wide-ranging Freedom of information Act lawsuit against the Bush administration seeking documents related to the treatment of “war on terror” prisoners in U.S. custody. ...
About 31 digital photographs contained on a compact disc discovered in June 2004 during an office clean-up at Bagram Airfield also depicted the corpse of “local national” who died from “apparent gunshot wounds” and uniformed U.S. soldiers from the Second Platoon of the 22nd Infantry Battalion stationed at Fire Base Tycze and Dae Rah Wod (DRW) kicking and punching prisoners whose heads were covered with “sand bags” and blindfolds and hands were “zipped-tied,” according to a U.S. Army criminal investigation. The documents related to that investigation can be found in these five separate files: [Part 1] [Part 2] [Part 3] [Part 4] [Part 5].
The female soldier with the broom handle is further addressed in the report as merely posing with the handle in a suggestive position, not actually attacking a detainee with it.
After reading this I tweeted with Jason to ask him about it.
Vyan1 @JasonLeopold These Docs don't seem to describe the same pics referenced in the UK Taguba interview #DNJ
JasonLeopold @Vyan1 that's because the telegraph report is wrong. The photos being withheld are specifically related to a lawsuit involving 43 photos.
JasonLeopold @Vyan1 there is no question that these photos exist but these were not the photos at the center of the lawsuit between Bushies and the ACLU.
You don't even have to trust me or Jason, the documents - linked above - speak for themselves.
Obama didn't suppress pictures of children being raped (Not that I personally would actually blame him if he did since if you truly want to see a Unrelenting Firestorm of resentment in the Arab would - THAT would do it!)
This may be why - and here I'm admittedly speculating the way the Telegraph did - both Gibb's and the Pentagon felt so free to simply attack the Telegraph's reporting and completely avoid addressing the issue of the Rape pictures themselves. (Then again, without the pictures and documents in hand speculation is inevitable...)
Simply put: IMO These are NOT the pictures we're looking for...
But this doesn't mean that the Telegraph UK is completely wrong, in all likelihood those horrid rape picture *do* exist as they've been backed up by other sources such as Sy Hersch, the Physicians for Human Rights Report and General Taguba.
Gen. Taguba: there is no longer any doubt as to whether the current (Bush) administration has committed war crimes. The only question that remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account.
Allegations of children being raped to force their parent to give information have long been alleged by award winning journalist Sy Hersch (Video) but now a report via the Telegraph UK reveals that this allegation is true, and that their were even pictures.
Abu Ghraib abuse photos 'show rape' Photographs of alleged prisoner abuse which Barack Obama is attempting to censor include images of apparent rape and sexual abuse, it has emerged.
At least one picture shows an American soldier apparently raping a female prisoner while another is said to show a male translator raping a male detainee.
Further photographs are said to depict sexual assaults on prisoners with objects including a truncheon, wire and a phosphorescent tube.
Another apparently shows a female prisoner having her clothing forcibly removed to expose her breasts.
Detail of the content emerged from Major General Antonio Taguba, the former army officer who conducted an inquiry into the Abu Ghraib jail in Iraq
Instead of coming from some radical Human Rights organization, this information is coming from a former U.S. Army General, the man who headed the investigation into the Abu Ghraib scandal - and was prohibited from looking at the involvement of higher-ups in these crimes.
Is it rather interesting that John Yoo publicly and specifically argued that *THIS WAS LEGAL*.
John Yoo publicly argued there is no law that could prevent the President from ordering the torture of a child of a suspect in custody – including by crushing that child’s testicles.
This came out in response to a question in a December 1st debate in Chicago with Notre Dame professor and international human rights scholar Doug Cassel.
Cassel: If the President deems that he’s got to torture somebody, including by crushing the testicles of the person’s child, there is no law that can stop him?
Yoo: No treaty.
Cassel: Also no law by Congress. That is what you wrote in the August 2002 memo.
Yoo: I think it depends on why the President thinks he needs to do that.
Geneva doesn't prevent that although it says there will be NO AFFRONTS TO PERSONAL DIGNITY or threats against the family of a detainee? The UN Convention Against Torture doesn't prevent that? 18 USC 2340 (The Torture Statute) and the 18 USC 2441 (The War Crimes Statues) don't outlaw this?
If so, then nothing is outlawed.
The Memo in question is Here (pdf), in it Yoo argues essentially that the Torture Statute only applies if you intent is to "cause severe physical harm" - but if you have some other reason/excuse, the law doesn't apply.
The infliction of pain must be the defendants precise objective.
Although the Torture Convention specifically argued that purposes of "pain inflicted for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person a confession of information... is prohibited" - Yoo tries to argue this away with the argument that words "specifically intended" are included within the ratification documentation of the treaty as approved by Congress.
He argued that since the intent was to gain information or cooperation from the subject, or even a third party as opposed to the simplistic sadistic goal of causing pain for it's own sake, it's legal.
Rob bank and keep the money = Illegal. Rob a bank and give the money to charity = Legal. Rape a child for shits and giggles = Illegal. Rape a child to get their parents to infiltrate the insurgency and report back to you = Legal.
Get it?
And since Yoo put this view into a memo and it was stamped as valid by the Justice Deptartment, it's pretty hard to argue complete ignorance when exactly what he wrote - is what happened in Iraq.
Maj Gen Taguba’s internal inquiry into the abuse at Abu Ghraib, included sworn statements by 13 detainees, which, he said in the report, he found “credible based on the clarity of their statements and supporting evidence provided by other witnesses.”
Among the graphic statements, which were later released under US freedom of information laws, is that of Kasim Mehaddi Hilas in which he says: “I saw [name of a translator] ******* a kid, his age would be about 15 to 18 years. The kid was hurting very bad and they covered all the doors with sheets. Then when I heard screaming I climbed the door because on top it wasn’t covered and I saw [name] who was wearing the military uniform, putting his **** in the little kid’s ***…. and the female soldier was taking pictures.”
Let me point out again, that various prior memos by Yoo claiming that Geneva didn't apply to the Taliban or al Qaeda were never written or amended to include civilians detained in Iraq who very clearly would be covered by Geneva and any actions such as these would clearly be - a War Crime!
General Taguba agrees:
Maj. Gen Taguba saw the horrors first hand during his Abu Ghraib investigation and he believes the Bush administration is guilty of war crimes.
In a preface to a report by Physicians for Human Rights on prisoner abuse and torture in U.S. military prisons Taguba wrote: "There is no longer any doubt that the current administration committed war crimes. The only question is whether those who ordered torture will be held to account."
Jack Bauer, the Patron Saint of the Republican Wingnut Torturers Party, argues *against* his own philosophy of "Do whatever it takes to save lives" in this sequence from the Season 7 Finale of "24".
By pointing out to his protege FBI Agent Walker that...
"You took an oath, you made a promise to uphold the law. You cross that line it always starts out with a small step, before you know it you're running as fast as you can in the wrong direction just to justify why you started in the first place.These laws were written by much smarter men than me, and in the end I know that these laws have to be more important than the 15 people on the bus... I know this. In my mind I know that's right, I just don't think my heart could ever have lived with that."
This is an argument that should be thrown in the face of people like Liz Cheney and her dear ole' dad. Once you cross the line of the law, you spend all your time trying to justify that action - running at full speed in the wrong direction.
In Episode 1 Bauer had a completely different view as he was grilled by Senator Mayer:
BAUER: When I am activated, when I am brought into a situation, there is a reason and that reason is to complete the objectives of my mission at all costs. [...]
For a combat soldier the difference between success and failure is your ability to adapt to your enemy. The people that I deal with, they don’t care about your rules. ... In answer to your question, am I above the law? No, sir. I am more than willing to be judged by the people you claim to represent. I will let them decide what price I should pay. Now please do not sit there with that smug look on your face and expect me to regret the decisions that I have made because, sir, the truth is I don’t.
In this confrontation Bauer came off defiant and strongly challenged whether the law mattered when lives where at stake. His little speech was met with Cheers and Praise on Fox News.
I wonder what they'd think of his latest statements on the subject?
All during this Season the issue of Torture has been not simply shown, but repeatedly challenged particularly by FBI Agent Larry Moss and by Senate Mayer. The reason for this change in tone might be the departure of series creator Joel Surnow who is an admit right-wing "nut" - or it might have to do with a promise made by the Producers to the Commandant of West Point to "Tone Down the Torture". Either way, there has been a difference as Jack's practices have faced some rather stiff push-back.
At one point Mayer and the President Discussed Torture:
Mayer: Well, there's nothing "Grey" about Jack Bauer. The man has committed atrocities. Prisoners have died in is custody.
Taylor: Mr. Bauer has served under Three Presidents, not just me.
Mayer: Is it any less repugnant if it's authorized at the highest level? The State of War is not a Blank Check for the President or for anyone.
Taylor: OH, Don't Lecture me Senator. I am well aware of the limits of my power.
Mayer: Due respect, Madam President. Your power is great, just be careful that you use it to send the right message.
Taylor: All I'm asking you do is excuse Mr. Bauer as a witness. It's not a message, it's an expression of gratitude for what's he's done today.
Mayer: You're asking me to excuse him as a target of the investigation. And the message is clear: under certain cirmcumstances you elieve his methods are acceptable.
Taylor: Some would argue that they are.
Mayer: And they would be WRONG! Under any circumstances, military or moral standard. America has been down this road before Madame President. You yourself called it a "national tragedy".
Taylor: It was a tragedy, I still believe that.
Mayer:Pardon Jack Bauer and you're telling every interogattor in the field that it's "Open Season" again.
This is exactly the point, from all we've seen from the like of Liz Cheney - their arguments show strongly that THEY WILL TORTURE AGAIN. As soon as we have another Right-Wing Leaning President, they will unpack all their torture excuses and be right back in business.
Later Bauer and Mayer argued again face-to-face.
Mayer: You're done Bauer, your finished.
Bauer: He was talking, whatever is going to happen is happening now it's on your conscience.
Mayer: My conscience has a lot less to answer for than yours.
...
Mayer: Madame President I don't care if his source is the blessed virgin Mary nothing justifies what went on in this room.
Taylor: But what if he's right? What if it means we could save lives?
Mayer: Look at that (points to the bloody and battered Burnett) and tell me it's not barbarism? Is that something you can live with?
Bauer: Earlier today two airplanes were brought down - is THAT something you can live with?
Mayer: You're reprehensible Bauer.
Bauer: AND YOU SIR ARE WEAK - Unwiling and Unable to Look Evil in the Eye and DEAL WITH IT!,
This is the true face of the right wing, they are strong and civil libertarians are weak little cowards, who don't have the stomach to do what must be done and will consequently leave our country vulnerable to attack. It's exactly what you hear over and over again said about Obama's closing of GITMO and banning Water-Boarding. Over and over they say "We NEED these tools" because in their mind nothing else works.
Except that it does.
Even in the midst of "24" the truth that "harsh tactics" aren't the only options slips out... in this sequence Bauer and Chloe track down Tony Almeida using his cell phone - something I strongly argued could have and should have been done previously to locate Col Dubaku, instead of threatening to kill the innocent wife and child of a rogue Secret Service Agent. They manage to capture Almieda using smarts not braun, and even after they capture him while Jack is trying to beat the information out of him - Janeane Garofalo's character figures out exactly what they need to know faster than Jack can get answers from Tony, even showing up Chloe O'Brien in the process.
Even in there own show - Torture doesn't always work, and if it doesn't work while good LEGAL police work do - there's simply NO EXCUSES left for it.
As has been documented by Human Rights First, the constant inaccurate information that has come from many shows for decades - not just "24" - the kind of "uber macho" view we often see repeated by clueless politicians has had a direct effect on the actions of our soldiers in the field, and not a good one.
In their final talk, Bauer and Mayer ultimate had a meeting of the minds...
Mayer: At the hearing this morning you said you had "no regrets" about what you've done, but what I saw was a man full of regret.
Bauer: Of course I have regrets Senator. I regret losing my famlly. My wife was murdered because I was responsible for protecting David Palmer during an assasination attempt. (Actually she was murdered as blowback from a busted black-ops attack led by Bauer in Bosnia) My daughter can't even look at me (Which might have a bit to do with Jack cutting off her boyfriends right ARM!) Everyday I look in the eyes of men, women and children knowing that at any moment their lives might be deemed "expendable" in an effort to protect the greater good. I regret every decision and mistake I might have made that resulted in the loss (of innocent life). You know what I regret the most? It's that this world even needs someone like me (IT DOESN'T!)
Mayer: So you think I'm naive to believe we need to hold ourselves to a higher standard of conduct?
Bauer: It doesn't even matter what I think, you just need to understand that things get a lot messier where I work than where you work on the hill.
Mayer: What you've lost Mr. Bauer is tragic, what you've been compelled to do in the name of saving innocent life is tragic. Sometimes we need to incur the most horrible losses in order to uphold the ideals that this country is founded on - how can we presume to lead the world unless we set an example?
Bauer: You make it sound so simple.
Mayer: Maybe it's simpler than you think, maybe all the things you've seen and all the things you've done have clouded your vision.
It's probably this conversation that helps lead to Bauer final conversation with Walker - but in the end Bauer's words to Walker have the opposite effect from deterence and she goes on to commit another act of Torture at the end of the episode while Bauer lays in a Coma - "For the Greater Good".
Even though anything she learns would be inadmissible in any court and her actions would guarantee an acquittal for the victim just like a recent Gitmo detainee had all charges dropped because the Judge determined - he was *Tortured*!
Although this may seem to be a "selfless" act, just as many of Bauer's - it's also pointless and fruitless.
This is the FBI Agent - Agent Hubbard from "The Seige", one for more like Ali Soufan who faced this exact scenario in regards to the treatment of Abu Zubaydah.
This is the argument we see going on constantly in our nation, between the President and the former Vice President, between pundits and talk show hosts.
This is a fight we simply CAN NOT AFFORD not to finally get right.
Radio Host Erich Mancow allows himself to be Waterboarded on air, thinking it's going to be no big deal - he lasts about 6 Seconds and gets up declaring ...
Mancow: If I'd known it was going to be this bad, I wouldn't have done it. I don't want to say this - but it's ABSOLUTELY TORTURE. It's drowning
This makes the third Conservative whose been willing to do this, following Vanity Fair scribe Christopher Hitchens.
"Well, then, if waterboarding does not constitute torture, then there is no such thing as torture,"
And Ashcroft's Deputy Attorney General Daniel Levin.
Next up, Sean Hannity - and after that, i'm thinking Liz Cheney!
(Sorry for the high-pitched whine in the audio - I'm working on that)
Last night on Rachel, the issue of just what Nancy Pelosi knew and when she knew it was examined for once with a less than jaundiced eye toward ignoring the entire "War Crimes Were Committed" thing.
Except to point out that at this point in time Sen Bob Graham's notes also contradict the CIA's, and even Leon Panetta basically says the CIA's information can't be trusted. This "Controvesy" is essentially all over, except for the whining.
Like this....
If we're going to continue down this road of nit-picking everything Democrats knew and did concerning what the Republicans are increasingly starting to admit Was Torture, it's only fair that we look at and examine what Porter Goss - who was head of the House Intelligence Committe at the time of those famed briefings - or what Senator Roberts his counter-part did.
Lay it All out On the Table.
Let's talk about Ibn Shayhk al-Libi who in February of 2002 was water-boarded and "broken" - then when he wouldn't give up link between Saddam and Bin Laden, he was buried alive until he did claiming that Saddam had been training al-Qaeda operatives on the use of Chemicals weapons.
Except that he DIDN'T.
Saddam didn't train al-Qaeda. Saddam didn't even have any Chemical Weapons anymore, and we knew it because the head of Iraqi Intelligence Habbush told us so in January of 2003.
Instead of listening to the truth, they requested that Habbush forge a letter claiming that Mohammad Atta was trained in Iraq.
In March 2003, KSM was water-boarded 183 after he revealed information about the Library tower plot (which had already been foiled) because he wouldn't tell us where Al-Qaeda washiding in Iraq.
In April 2003, Cheney's Office requested the Water-boarding of an Iraqi P.O.W. (in clear violation of Geneva since it was never denied to Iraqis by President Bush), simply to get him to tell us about - you guessed it - Links between Saddam and al-Qeada.
is it starting to look a bit like "The Facts are being made to fit the Policy?" They were.
Before the Iraqi invasion every bit of evidence against Saddam either came from a liar like >Curveball (aka "Rafid Alwan"), a blatant forgery or Torture.
All of these people were tortured to Justify a Lie!
THAT'S THE ISSUE, not which briefing Nancy Pelosi received while she was in the minority in Congress, and whether she was willing to violate National Security Classification Laws to "get the word out" - while every other Republican around like Goss, Hoekstra and Roberts stood by silently.
In what looks like a very serious shot across the bow, numerous Human Rights Groups have banned together to file 500 pages of formal complaints to several state bar associations with detailed allegations of support for Torture and War Crimes by 12 Key Bush Administration Attorneys.
Those attorney's include: John Yoo, Jay Bybee, Stephen Bradbury, Alberto Gonzales, John Ashcroft, Michael Chertoff, Alice Fisher, William Haynes II, Douglas Feith, Michael Mukasey, Timothy Flanigan, and David Addington.
Although the OPR investigation of memo written by three of the attorney's John Yoo, Jay Bybee and Stephen Bradbury may also recommend disbarment when it is finally released, this set of complaints is much broader.
In testimony at a Senate hearing on Wednesday, Former State Department counselor Philip Zelikow told a committee panel that Bush administration officials engaged in a ‘collective failure’ on detention and interrogation of suspected terrorists. He called the torture memos "unsound" because "the lawyers involved ... did not welcome peer review and indeed would shut down challenges even inside the government." Another witness testified that the legal policy constituted "an ethical train wreck" because it violated constitutional, statutory and international law.
...
Torture is illegal under both United States and international law. The Constitution prohibits cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment, and it states that treaties signed by the U.S. are the "supreme Law of the Land" under Article Six. The Geneva Convention and The Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment both prohibit torture and have been signed by the United States. These laws provide no exception for torture under any circumstances. Moreover, the United States Criminal Code prohibits both torture and war crimes, the latter which includes torture. The Army Field Manual prohibits the use of degrading treatment of detainees.
Further argument provided Attorney Kevin Zeese:
Torture is illegal under United States and international law. It is illegal under the U.S. Constitution, domestic law and international treaties to which the United States is a party.
This includes:
1. The United Nations Convention Against Torture (UNCAT), Articles 1, 2, 3 and 16 (ratified in October 1994). 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."
2. The Geneva Conventions, Article 3, (ratified in August 1955). Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U.S. 557 (2006), held that the Geneva Conventions are applicable to accused members of al-Qaeda. Thus, due process protections apply to all detainees in U.S. custody, including those in military prisons.
3. The Eighth Amendment against "cruel and unusual punishment." 4. The United States Criminal Code, Title 18, Prohibitions Against Torture (18 USC 2340A) and War Crimes (18 USC 2441).
Torture is a clearly defined term under international and U.S. law. The Convention Against Torture defines torture as any act by which: "severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental; is intentionally inflicted on a person . . ."
The torture memoranda did not provide objective legal advice to government decision-makers, but instead twisted the state of the law so that it was unrecognizable. They were so inaccurate that these memoranda are more justifications about what the authors and the intended recipients wanted the law to be, rather than assessments of what the law actually is.
Organizations Republicans for Impeachment Progressive Democrats of America Democrats.com Impeach Bybee Prosecute Bush/Cheney After Downing Street Buzz FlashOp Ed News Coalition Repair Project Progressive Magazine Global Network Justice Through Music Media With Conscience Bend-C Friendship Project Citizens for Legitimate Government Center for Study of Democratic Societies The World Can’t Wait American Freedom Campaign Liberty Tree BFUU Social Justice Campaign Peace for Justice Forums WESPAC Foundation PDA Marin County Central Jersey Impeach Group Chesapeake Citizens Topple Bush Stop Recruiters WWU Whatcom Peacebuilders Club Iraq Veterans for Justice Longmont Citizens for Justice and Democracy Bill of Rights Defense Committee The Democratic Activists The Solution Zone Patrick Henry Democratic Club Epluribus Media Consumers for Peace No Nukes North Veterans for Peace Florida Peace Action Network Reclaim the GOP Boston Anti-War League Voters for Peace Campaign for Fresh Air and Clean Politics
Individuals Bob Fertik Ann Wright Tim Carpenter David Swanson Benjamin David William Crain Phoebe Sorgen Sphie de Vries Bob Schecht Susan Serpa Peggy Love Bruce Jones Ben Maski Andy Worlington Mark Adams William J. Cox David Lindorff Ann Wright Steve Fox Peggy Love Pamela Selwyn John H. Kennedy Robley George Bettejo Indelicato Mike Woloshin Bill Warick Story Fitz Nick Mattern Dr. P. Thomas Mark Hull-Richter Laura Bonham Amy Ferrer Christiane Brown Chris Borland Chip Pitts Ann Rick Flux Rostrum Evan Knapperberger RJ Crane Melinda Pillsbury Foster David Wittner David Slesinger Mary Marino Anita Fieldman Nada Khader Leslie Cagan Kristina Borjesson Debra Sweet Lori Price Timeteo Jeffries Shahram Vahdany Bruce Gagnon Matthew Rothschild David Robinson Srena Crew Lisa Boyd Rob Kall Peter Phillips Mark Karlin Doug Fuda
