Category: Torture

Eric Holder Agonistes

So, Newsweek magazine has an article relating the internal struggle of Attorney General Eric Holder with regard to things like torture and illegal wiretapping. He is horrified at what has been done, but he understands Barack Obama’s desire to cover all this stuff up so that he violate the constitution and the supervision of congress too move forward and not look back (2nd and last graph of the article):

These are not just the philosophical musings of a new attorney general. Holder, 58, may be on the verge of asserting his independence in a profound way. Four knowledgeable sources tell NEWSWEEK that he is now leaning toward appointing a prosecutor to investigate the Bush administration’s brutal interrogation practices, something the president has been reluctant to do. While no final decision has been made, an announcement could come in a matter of weeks, say these sources, who decline to be identified discussing a sensitive law-enforcement matter. Such a decision would roil the country, would likely plunge Washington into a new round of partisan warfare, and could even imperil Obama’s domestic priorities, including health care and energy reform. Holder knows all this, and he has been wrestling with the question for months. “I hope that whatever decision I make would not have a negative impact on the president’s agenda,” he says. “But that can’t be a part of my decision.”

…..

But in late June Holder asked an aide for a copy of the CIA inspector general’s thick classified report on interrogation abuses. He cleared his schedule and, over two days, holed up alone in his Justice Department office, immersed himself in what Dick Cheney once referred to as “the dark side.” He read the report twice, the first time as a lawyer, looking for evidence and instances of transgressions that might call for prosecution. The second time, he started to absorb what he was reading at a more emotional level. He was “shocked and saddened,” he told a friend, by what government servants were alleged to have done in America’s name. When he was done he stood at his window for a long time, staring at Constitution Avenue.

Why are we seeing a report like this? What is driving the reports of how Eric Holder is agonizing over his dual obligations to enforce the law and to do the bidding of Barack Obama?

This is an attempt by Eric Holder to retain some dignity when he makes the wrong choice. He will not be appointing a special prosecutor, nor will he be authorizing any future investigations from within the Department of Justice on these matters, because it is politically inconvenient for Barack Obama and His Stupid* Minions, and he wants to ensure that his reputation takes as small a hit as possible.

He is going to do the craven and political thing, and not the right thing, but he wants all of us to know, particularly those inside the Washington Beltway, that he really agonized over it.

*It’s stupid, because they do not realize that not prosecuting Republican law breakers will not create any bipartisanship, but rather, it will create a sense of impunity that will fuel ‘Phant attacks against the President. We only have to look at Bill Clinton’s experience, where his decision not to pursue Iran-Contra led to a heretofore unknown level of vitriol from the Republicans.

What Digby Said

Seriously:

Today the ACLU and many bloggers who are concerned with the fact that the United States tortured prisoners and apparently has no intention of holding anyone responsible for it are blogging about a little known fact about the issue: the US Government didn’t just torture a bunch a prisoners, as bad as that was, and as horrible as it remains for those who survived it. The United States tortured many prisoners to death. This does not seem to be common knowledge, but the evidence is quite clear that this happened. Torture and death by torture was not isolated.

It should be noted that if the prisoner died, they were violating even the repulsive standards of Bybee and Yoo.

Read Bob Herbert

Seriously, excerpts do not do justice to his essay on Mohammed Jawad, where he describes the US government torturing a 12-16 year old boy, and now is attempting to use his tortured confession to keep him confined, but here are the last 2 ‘graphs:

There is no credible evidence against Jawad, and his torture-induced confession has rightly been ruled inadmissible by a military judge. But the Obama administration does not feel that he has suffered enough. Not only have administration lawyers opposed defense efforts to secure Jawad’s freedom, but they are using, as the primary basis for their opposition, the fruits of the confession that was obtained through torture and has already been deemed inadmissible — without merit, of no value.

[Jawad’s former prosecutor] Colonel Vandeveld is no longer on active duty and has joined the effort by military defense lawyers and the American Civil Liberties Union to secure Jawad’s freedom. Six years of virtual solitary confinement, he said, is enough for someone who was not much older than a child when he was taken into custody.

(emphasis mine)

Barack Obama, tear down that wall.

But he won’t because it’s inconvenient.

Calling Cheney’s Bluff

There is a 2004 report by the CIA on torture, the so called “Holy Grail,” (also here) and, according to Congressional sources who have seen the classified document, it completely demolishes Dick Cheney’s arguments.

It shows what we already know: Torture does not work, and torture did not work.

This should be released, but Obama and His Clueless Minions, will try everything possible to prevent it, because the more evidence that comes out, the greater the push for prosecutions, because it will show what was done, and that Bush and His Evil Minions were told that it did not work.

The Obama administration believes that he needs bipartisan support to implement his agenda, and that prosecutions and investigations of Cheney/Rumsfeld/etc. will prevent this.

The truth is that neither Social Security or Medicare/Medicaid passed with very few Republican votes(none in the case of Social Security), and the benefits of these programs are legion.

The other fact is that the big items on Obama’s agenda would require Republicans to cut their own throats to support him.

Republican support of new financial regulation and stimulus would require them declare that their guiding governmental philosophy since Reagan is a failure, and Republican support for a good public healthcare option would add at least 20 years to their time in the minority, because everyone in the United States would see the personal benefit to “big government”.

Simply put, it is not realistic to expect people to commit suicide for you, particularly when they are your opposition, but Obama continues to work for this, because, he believes that reasonable discourse and his eloquence will work.

This is a delusion. Not only do today’s Republicans not understand the concept of loyal opposition, it is not reasonable for them to support him, because the political fallout is all negative for them.

Congress Votes to Instruct Conferees to Keep Graham-Lieberman Amendment

95 Dems voted with the Republicans to instruct the conference Representatives on the conference committee to keep the amendment to hide torture photos in the Iraq/Afghanistan supplemental, in a stunning display of cowardice.

Thankfully, it’s non-binding, and will probably be ignored by the conferees, but jeebus this is hypocritical, particularly for the Dems in safe districts who voted for it.

It will be ignored by the conferees because the ‘Phants will all vote against the supplemental, because they are opposed to the IMF money, so the Progressive Caucus can actually kill this bill.

Palau????

Seriously, I’ll always take pneumonia (Obama/Biden) over metastasized lung cancer (McCain/Palin) any day, but the cowardice we are seeing over the Guantanamo detainees, particularly the Uighurs, from both the White House and Democrats in Congress is truly revolting.

We abducted them with out evidence or cause, then tortured them at the request of the Chinese Communists, and held them for 7 years, and now, in order to wash their hands of a truly repulsive Republican talking point, Obama is bribing the government of Palau to the tune of $200 million, or about $10,000.00 for every man, woman, and child in that tiny pacific nation, so that he can ship them off to there, as opposed to bringing them to the US, where there is a large community, and they would have some sort of support structure.

This is truly an exercise in cowardice.

Leon Panetta Says that We Intend to Keep Torturing

So, Barack Obama and His Evil Minions, are still arguing in court that there is no crime by Bush Cheney that they will not cover up:

The forced disclosure of such material to the American Civil Liberties Union “could be expected to result in exceptionally grave damage to the national security by informing our enemies of what we knew about them, and when, and in some instances, how we obtained the intelligence we possessed,” Panetta argued.

….

The “disclosure of explicit details of specific interrogations” would provide al-Qaeda “with propaganda it could use to recruit and raise funds,” Panetta said, describing the information at issue as “ready-made ammunition.” He also submitted a classified statement to the court that he said explains why detainees could use the contents to evade questions in the future, even though Obama has promised that the United States will not use the harsh interrogation techniques again.

(emphasis mine)

If you aren’t torturing any more, the information is no longer sensitive.

I cannot see any reason to make this argument unless the Gulags are still in place, and they intend to keep using them, or are still using them.

In Your Face, Barack Obama

It appears that the Graham Lieberman photo suppression amendment, , which would have suppressed all torture photos from the time of the Bush administration, and only from the time of the Bush administration, has been dropped from the Iraq/Afghanistan supplemental in conference committee.

The liberal members of Congress made it clear that they would not vote for any bill containing this provision, and the conference committee has dropped it.

Background here.

Those people who contacted their Congressmen, including me, are to be commended for killing this abomination.

Liberals in Congress Doing the Right Thing

When you have something spearheaded by the repugnant Joseph Lieberman that has to do with national security, you can be sure that it will be a bad thing.

The same goes for self-hating closet case Lindsay Graham.

When you get the two of them together, the stench is such that it, to quote the late Edwin Newman, it positively buggers the mind, which is why we have the, “Detainee Photographic Records Protection Act of 2009,” which would specifically, “photograph taken between September 11, 2001 and January 22, 2009 relating to the treatment of individuals engaged, captured, or detained after September 11, 2001, by the Armed Forces of the United States in operations outside of the United States.”

The only way that this bill could be more repugnant would be if the Obama administration were supporting this, since Obama and His Evil Minions have determined that there is no sort of perversion conducted by either the military or the other state security apparatus during the reign of Bush and His Evil Minions against the law, international treaty obligations, common human decency, the Constitution of the United States of America, or the founding principles of this republic that they will not support and try to suppress.

Oh, wait, Obama and His Evil Minions are supporting this bill, and it’s not a stand alone bill, it’s an amendment to the “must pass” supplemental budget for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Thankfully, there is still a functional liberal wing of the Democrat Party in the house of representatives, and because this bill contains additional funding for the IMF, the Republicans won’t vote for it, and now Barney Frank, along with about 10 other liberal members of Congress, out of 39 needed to kill the bill, have publicly stated that they will vote against any bill that contains such a provision.

Call your Congressman, and tell him to do the right thing.

A Distinction Without a Difference

It appears that Anthony Taguba is now denying that he has any knowledge as to whether or not the photos suppressed by Barack Obama are rape photos.

He’s not denying that he saw photos of rape of women and boys, along with photos rape by instrumentality, he’s just denying any specific knowledge as to whether or not these specific photos are the same.

So there are rape photos, but the 44 photos that the ACLU has filed a freedom of information act about might not be them.

So, Just How Were We Better Than Saddam?

It’s far far worse than I imagined.

When I wrote about Bush rape rooms, I cited Scott Horton, who detailed only rape by instrumentality, but the reality is that we are talking full genital rape here, including the rape of a boy:

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.

What’s more the Telegraph‘s source on this is unimpeachable:

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.

Allegations of rape and abuse were included in his 2004 report but the fact there were photographs was never revealed. He has now confirmed their existence in an interview with the Daily Telegraph.

Maj Gen Taguba, who retired in January 2007, said he supported the President’s decision, adding: “These pictures show torture, abuse, rape and every indecency.

We also know that Barack Obama lied when he talked about this:

Mr Obama seemed to reinforce that view by adding: “I want to emphasise that these photos that were requested in this case are not particularly sensational, especially when compared to the painful images that we remember from Abu Ghraib.”

I don’t think that he could say that you have pictures of a boy and a woman being raped, in additional to the forcible stripping of a woman detainee to humiliate her, any honest description would be almost as inflammatory as the pictures themselves, but saying that they are “no big” will make him less credible the next time something like this comes up.

What Josh Said

I don’t have much to say on Obama’s speech, I’ve only read the transcript, and Obama needs to be watch, but Josh Marshal finds the reality on Richard Bruce Cheney when suggests that Cheney is at best a figure of mockery and derision:

This is someone who not only organized and seemingly directed a policy of state-sponsored torture. He did it in large part to get people to admit to crankish conspiracy theories he got taken in by by a crew of think-tank jockeys in DC whose theories most even half way sensible people treated as punch lines of jokes. So it’s Torquemada or 1984 but only after getting rescripted by Mel Brooks.

This is an extremely gullible man who has just come off being the driving ideological force in an administration that most people can already see produced more fiascos and titanic, self-inflicted goofs than possibly any in our entire history. By any standard the guy is a monumental failure — and not one whose mistakes stem in some Lyndon Johnson fashion from tragic overreach, but just a fool who damaged his country through his own gullibility, paranoia and bad judgment. Whatever else you can say about the Cheney story it ain’t Shakespearean.

Indeed.

Signs of the Apocalypse

It’s by Lanny Davis, a Washington, DC insider, and the guy who accused people supporting Ned Lamont in 2006 against Joe Lieberman of “Liberal McCarthyism“, and he is calling for the criminal prosecution of Dick Cheney for authorizing torture:

I have agreed with President Obama on the need to look forward, not backward.

But … I have changed my mind about the need to indict former Vice President Dick Cheney for complicity in illegal torture.

Even more, they seem to be an in-your-face dare by Mr. Cheney to the U.S. criminal justice system: “I am Dick Cheney, I approved violations of the law in the name of the war on terror, and what are you going to do about it?”

It reminds me of Gary Hart’s reaction in the early days of his 1988 presidential campaign to the rumors of his womanizing. …..

So as to Mr. Cheney: I think it is time to take him up on his implicit dare and indict him for violating the 1994 federal law against torture.

This is as big a Beltway Blowhard as they come, and he called for Dick Cheney to be prosecuted, and got it published in the Moonie Times (Link is to The Hill, which republished it.

I don’t think that he is suggesting this out of any real moral imperative, it’s just that he feels that Dick Cheney is, to paraphrase Bull Durham, “Calling the umpire a called the guy a c$#@sucker,” which offends his genteel Beltway sensibilities.

Obama’s Guantánamo Show Trials

It just gets better and better.

So, the details of the plan are dribbling out and it’s a distinction without a difference as was made clear when the New York Times obtained a filing made to the judges running the military commissions.

Remember the statement that, “The accused will have greater latitude in selecting their counsel?”

Not so much, Bush and His Evil Minions required that the defendants’ lawyers be appointed by the Pentagon, and, “assigned to a special office of military defense lawyers for Guantánamo, which meant, among other things, that they had to be uniformed military, and in the filing to the judges, Obama and His Evil Minions say that a detainee would be allowed to select a lawyer of their “own choosing”, but that the, “requested lawyer must be assigned to the Pentagon’s office of military defense lawyers for Guantánamo.

“Any color you want, so long as it’s black,” quoth Henry Ford.

Furthermore, the right to confront witnesses against them will be ignored by using a very broad hearsay rule, because, according to “senior administration officials” said that although federal courts bar many kinds of hearsay evidence, “the hearsay rule is not one of those things that is rooted in American values.”

The right to confront witnesses in court is one of the most basic of legal rights in our system since the excesses of the Star Chamber in England.

Note that while coerced testimony will not be allowed, that the defendant will not be allowed to question the primary source of the testimony, only their interrogator, or possibly just someone who reads the interrogator’s report, will confirm this.

Pelosi/CIA Update

It turns out that some of the people’s notes on the briefings could not have been made contemporaneously, as the term enhanced interrogation techniques (EITs) was used extensively throughout, and this term was not used before 2004, and the briefing was given in 2002.

This does not mean that anyone at the CIA is lying, though my guess is that some of them are, but it means that the notes used are not those made at the time.

So, you have every Dem who was briefed on that day saying that the CIA did not say then that it was torturing, and you have numerous errors in attendance, staffers being called present, Rep. David Obey challenging the accuracy of the documents, and notes that Porter Goss was briefed along with members of Congress after he became head of the CIA.

As Adam Savage and Jamie Hyneman would say, “This one’s busted.”

Pelosi Says that CIA Is Lying

I’m inclined to agree, since, as I have already noted, both Senators Rockefeller and Graham confirm her account of CIA briefings.

In any case, Nancy Pelosi has upped the ante now, and she has specifically called the CIA out as liars:

At a contentious news conference Thursday, Mrs. Pelosi said that during the 2002 briefing, “we were told that waterboarding was not being used.” Mrs. Pelosi acknowledged that as the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, she was briefed on Sept. 4, 2002, about waterboarding, a form of simulated drowning that critics, including President Barack Obama, call torture. But she said CIA officials told her and other lawmakers only that the Justice Department had concluded the procedure was legal.

This is interesting, because it may force Obama, whether he likes it or not, to put his support behind an investigation of the torture issue, as opposed to his desire to cover it up put it behind us.

It would be amusing if ‘Phant attacks on Pelosi end up precipitating a full investigation of this matter.

The Smoking Gun For Dick Cheney

And no, this is not from the Smoking Gun, it’s from The Daily Beast, and it’s a big one.

Specifically, Robert Windrem, formerly a senior investigative producer with NBC News, has uncovered information that the office of the Vice President specifically requested that the a senior Iraqi official be waterboarded so as to extract a statement that Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden were in league and cooperating on terrorism:

At the end of April 2003, not long after the fall of Baghdad, U.S. forces captured an Iraqi who Bush White House officials suspected might provide information of a relationship between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein’s regime. Muhammed Khudayr al-Dulaymi was the head of the M-14 section of Mukhabarat, one of Saddam’s secret police organizations. His responsibilities included chemical weapons and contacts with terrorist groups.

In his new book, Hide and Seek: The Search for Truth in Iraq, and in an interview with The Daily Beast, Duelfer says he heard from “some in Washington at very senior levels (not in the CIA),” who thought Khudayr’s interrogation had been “too gentle” and suggested another route, one that they believed has proven effective elsewhere. “They asked if enhanced measures, such as waterboarding, should be used,” Duelfer writes. “The executive authorities addressing those measures made clear that such techniques could legally be applied only to terrorism cases, and our debriefings were not as yet terrorism-related. The debriefings were just debriefings, even for this creature.”

Duelfer will not disclose who in Washington had proposed the use of waterboarding, saying only: “The language I can use is what has been cleared.” In fact, two senior U.S. intelligence officials at the time tell The Daily Beast that the suggestion to waterboard came from the Office of Vice President Cheney. Cheney, of course, has vehemently defended waterboarding and other harsh techniques, insisting they elicited valuable intelligence and saved lives. He has also asked that several memoranda be declassified to prove his case. (The Daily Beast placed a call to Cheney’s office and will post a response if we get one.)

(emphasis mine)

This isn’t about a ticking time bomb. This isn’t about ongoing plans. This is a request to torture someone until they say something that benefits you politically.

Can we put him on trial now?

Yes, I know that OVP does not necessarily equal Dick Cheney, but we also know that his office would not make such a request without his tacit or explicit approval.