Torture, Honor and Obama

Torture is back in the news (good) -- along with renditions (bad) and assorted assassination units (worse). Let's concentrate on what looks positive. The Inspector General of the Justice Department has issued a report recommending that cases involving gross abuses, perhaps including murder, committed by American personnel in Iraq will be reopened. The White House itself demurs, preferring to look ahead (Afghanistan?), not backwards. Still, the probe now will go forward with a green light from Secretary Eric Holder. Reason to celebrate? Hold your applause until the finale.

The Holder investigation will be self-limited -- when it materializes. Obama has made it abundantly clear that he will have no part of a deep probe into torture, rendition, surveillance or anything else associated with the 'war on terror.' What Holder has in mind seemingly is an investigation of those persons (mainly contract workers) who did things outside the 'square' of permissible actions established by the Bush Justice Department guidelines (as drawn in the air by Obama a couple of weeks ago). In other words, a replay of the unconscionable Abu Ghraib travesty when 23 year old Lynndie England was cynically sacrificed to save the skin of the Army brass and their civilian superiors. Except this time the indicted will have competent lawyers in an open civilian court. Let's visualize what they will do with Obama's figurative square in cross-examining Bush era officials: "so, slamming prisoners' heads against walls was allowed, but not unless they wore whiplash collars. Please tell the court why my client's firm grip on Mohammed X's neck was not a reasonable functional equivalent." These courts inescapably will become theatres of the absurd. That is why I doubt that any civil legal proceedings -- in the end -- will actually occur.

As to the future, I find it impossible to comprehend how we can ensure against a repetition of these offenses without knowing precisely what has been done with what effect. And, above all, without holding to account those who initiated and condoned criminal acts. That is something we likely will never know or do given a strong aversion to airing 'dirty linen' by the White House and the Congress. It is worth remembering that some of the worst abuses occurred in the first months of the American occupation of Iraq. The center of operations where torture was institutionalized was Camp Cropper on the outskirts of Baghdad, which opened its doors in May 2003. Its commander was General Stanley McChrystal. This is the same McChrystal who Obama has charged with executing the 'new' American strategy in Afghanistan that aims at winning the hearts and minds of the natives.

Comments

[TexasKG]

So when the next 9/11 comes to your neighborhood and I fear that it will soon, I don't want to hear anyone of you complain, cry, moan about losing your loved ones. Smile and just say "change you can beleive in".

[kindGSL]

What lives were ever saved by what the CIA did?

[taxman92571]

If you believe the CIA did not save lives then you did not read that blackout-ed memo, That memo shows that some of the methods used got the CIA valuable information that brought down some terrorist groups.

What we do not know is how effect, how many terrorist groups were brought down, and how many American lives were saved because most of the memo is blacked out. So my real question is if you can allow the CIA to defend their actions because on national security then how fair would any trail be? This is simply a witchunt and it should not be done. If any laws were broken, and frankly I don't feel they were only because the terrorist will do anything they can to kill. If the terrorist could get their hands on WMD they would use them. The terrorist will stop and there is no choice. We have to go after them, it means takig their lives, locking them in prison until they die, and as Americans we have the most generious hearts. We just have no choice, 9-11 proved that.

[Marlyn]

"What Holder has in mind seemingly is an investigation of those persons (mainly contract workers) who did things outside the 'square' of permissible actions"

Contract workers, yes Blackwater.

And now Obama tells us that he will continue the Bush policy of EXTRAORDINARY RENDITION, but it will be different from what Bush did because the State Department will have a larger role in insuring that prisoners will not be abused. And yet, Blackwater (aka Xe) is still employed by the State Department.

Hillary?

[MikeRdg]

I cringe when I hear or read words like: " Look to the future, not backward to past", or "It is in the past, forget about it", or " The past is in the past, look forward - to the future"

The above is not possible, when there has been no accountability. This words have been spoken to countless American victims, who placed their faith and trust into a handful of men, who were placed into religious positions, to oversee people within the LDS faith. When I heard Obama utter these words, it cause one to wonder if he had a conversion with Harry Reid, Orrin Hatch, etc.

The words -- forget the past, look to the future, condones the wrongdoer, and places the burden of the past and future on the victims.

[FearlessFreep]

"Those who control the past control the future. Those who control the present control the past"--Orwell

[kosolm]

Is it that Obama is afraid of the backlash of the repub right wing,that makes him so against these
investigations? If that is the case I believe that I voted for the wrong guy.We are talking about the
torturing of thousands of innocent people.The fact that some were guilty (of what ?since so many
have still not been charged,but remain incarcerated,and Obama now is advocating indefinite
detention)We are talking about 100 (confirmed) deaths of detainees that were in our custody,and
many more suspected.How can a country that is supposed to be the beacon of hope,that goes by
the rules of law allow these crimes to go unpunished and allow the leader of same to dictate that
we will not look back,and no one will be held accountable for these attrocities

[taxman92571]

Obama is the one that said he wants to look forward, not backwards. Maybe as president he knows more about the subject than you and I? Maybe, just maybe, Obama beleives that what the the CIA was the right thing to do? Maybe Obama knows how many American lives were saved, Maybe that's why he said what he did? We will never know the entire story because of nation security.

The Attorney General should follow the Obama's lead on this issue.

[WorldofTomorrow420]

The whitewash is coming.

[kindGSL]

Speak truth to power.

[kindGSL]

It is already happening.

[sophierose]

"I haveseen the enemy and it is us."

old Pogo comic strip

[Mark Mack]

"The International Society for the Suppression of Savage Customs had intrusted him with the making of a report for its future guidance..he had written it..it was vibrating with eloquence. The peroration was magnificent. It made me tingle with enthusiasm..this was..power of words..no practical hints to interrupt the magic current..unless a note at the foot of the last page...scrawled evidently..much later. It was very simple, and at the end of that moving appeal to altruistic sentiment....it blazed at you: - "Exterminate all the brutes!!"

- Josesph Conrad, Heart of Darkness.


Present day - torture, rendition, surveillance - strikes at the suggestion of the Societies for the Suppression of Savage Customs. And no matter how civilized this current process is made to be, and altruistic senses held, there is that sense the scrawl is still "Exterminate all the brutes!!"

[TJCole]

No Michael, "The Theater of the Absurd" is and was in The Oval Office..!

A Theater in the Round so to speak except Oval..and we know you were up to your eye balls as a key player under Bush/Cheney and now this new president...matinee idol fraud...

[anachoret]

Let me guess what the right wing will do with anyone they discover to have done these criminal acts, no matter how disgusting.

Gordon Liddy.
Ollie North.

The right wingers will give anyone who did this stuff a talk radio show, Cable television show, comic book and cartoon show on Saturday morning.

[taxman92571]

Well maybe it is because most Americans agree with Ollie and Gordon. They certainly do not agree with the hate monger like Olbermann. If they agreed with him did then he would have a book as a top seller like Bill Oriely, or his own cartoon show, ect, ect, ect.

[NER]

Ollie North and Gordon Liddy are just an earlier incarnation of the current right-wing rationalizers of law-breaking, perpetrated with the cynical invocation of patriotism.

[Aaror]

G Gordon Libby encouraged armed opposition to the US govenment under Clinton. Among his listeners was Timothy McVeigh.
It is possible that if the right wing had not made a hero out of a felon who conspired to commit election fraud, that the second worst terrorist attack on US soil would not have occured.
Think about that before you laud your heroes.

[onebadapple]

They certainly aren't doing that for Lynndie England. She was supposed to appear at the Library of Congress two weeks ago to discuss the authorized biography by Gary S. Winkler about her role in the Abu Grab scandal, but right-wingers threatened violence.....so it was cancelled.

The name of the book is "Tortured: Lynndie England, Abu Ghraig, and the Photographs that Shocked the World". No, the book is not a white wash of the scandal, in fact, it reveals more truths based upon military and court documents.

[anachoret]

Thank you for the reference. The book sounds like a useful read, and I'll see if I can pick it up.

But she doesn't fit the mold, like a completely unrepentant CIA agent or contractor who gets strung up, protects those who were above him/her and says something like, "I'd do it all again, if this country had the courage to do it." Or, "I would have gone a lot further, if the government hadn't stopped me."
If they find that attitude, he'll be the right's new Jack Bauer.

[kindGSL]

That is what they did last time, Bush was the result. This time we actually clean it up, not sweep it under the carpet.

[WVKay]

The United States of America is torturing people. And there are actually U.S. citizens who support this? So when your sons and daughters are captured by soldiers of other countries and are tortured, what do you say? There will be no defense.

[taxman92571]

The American soldier has been totured by the enemy. It is documented and still we forgive. So my question is that in today's world, and not to forget that those nasty little 1 megaton suit case nukes that the former Soviet Union developed and have no idea where they are at, these things are floating around somewhere in the world. They are nasty little bombs, easy to hide, and easy to use.

These nasty little bombs are somewhere out there and you better believe that if the terrorist would get hands on one they would use it to kill innocent people. So again I ask, who should we protect? The rights of terrorist, give them our same Constitutional rights, or find them, maybe use a mock execution, threaten their families, water boarding and learn how they plan on attacking. The difference is that we may scare them by threating thier families but we would never send a plane into a builging to kill their families.

[NER]

The law is the law. It's illegal in the United States to torture prisoners. If you think the law should be changed, work on it. But don't say we can bend the law because the ends justify the means.

[Aaror]

Um, do you know anything about physics?
The smallest amount of fissile material that could make a bomb would be about 10 pounds of plutonium, this would make an explosion smaller than the bombs dropped on Japan (though still horrific, basically a 10 mile radius would be destroyed). However, this does not mean that a 10 pound suitcase could destroy a city. You would need two perfect half-spheres of plutonium, plus an arming device including a non-nuclear munition for detonation. This might be doable with about 10 pounds of equipment.
It would not fit in briefcase, and it would be difficult to make one small enough for a carry on bag. One of those hard shell suitcases from the 1960's would probably work. The problem is the radiation. I just had iodine put in my heart to check out whether my arteries were working, I can't fly for three months without a note from my doctor to explain why I am radioactive, or the TSA will detain me. What, you didn't know we have radioactivity monitors in our airports and ports? DUH!!!

[Aaror]

Also, do you know anything about torture, counterterrorism, or homeland defense?
Torture is not useful for gaining information, only for getting false confessions (do you really believe that the folks captured by North Korea and Vietnam in our wars there were war criminals?). This means that unless we have a strategic reason to need false confessions, we would not use torture. A torture victem gives whatever answer the perpetrator wants to hear, true or false. How is this useful information?
CIA interrogators get information using "good cop, bad cop," methods to gain the trust of the suspect, just like police do. If you want to keep America safe from a smuggled nuke, use police tactics that work, not Jack Bauer tactics that all the experts agree don't work.

[FearlessFreep]

They'll say "No talk of root causes!"

[taxman92571]

Then what are the root causes? We are Christains, we are Jews, we don't believe that you can kill your wife because she commited adultry? We don't mulitlate baby girls? What then?

The root causes are that we support counties they do not like, we believe in freedom of religion, the freedom to vote for our leaders, the freedom to decide our lives without government interference, and that concept is the exact oppisite of what they believe.

So what are the root causes then?

[taxman92571]

Let's see, the choice is a mock excusion of a terror suspect or the death of 3000 innocent Americans. The choice is a no brainer, Americans should never die at the hands of terrorist. We need to take the agressive stand and what ever method will get you the information needed should be used. Innocent American lives come first.

[sarnold15]

That's a false choice, and is simply not rational thinking.

Even the CIA has found that torture leads to less reliable information than other interrogation techniques.

Committing torture is more likely to inspire those sympathetic to the victims of torture to react in fear and hate and become terrorists. Our own forms of terrorism, such as torture and bombing ("shock and awe") civilians are creating more terrorists. It's wrong and it is counterproductive.

Gather up your courage and try to understand your "enemy". The best and most mature approach is to make your enemy your friend.

[Stirner]

"Whatever method"? A nation that resorts to that principle is not worth defending. The truth is not sought, only the pleasures of patriotic sadism.

[guard]

I concur with many others that the upcoming mock "show trials" will actually be worse than nothing.
It would be better to frankly admit that political leaders are above the law, than to do fantasy justice.

[taxman92571]

No way, political leaders are not above the law. Many have gone to jail, Nixon was forced to resign, both Republican and Democrat leaders who break the law have gone to jail.

There are two diffrences here

1. That maybe what the CIA did was not against the law
2. Because of national security they would never get a fair trail, if so charged with a crime.

[kindGSL]

You are suggesting torture is legal. It is not. What they did was clearly against the law.

[jmpurser]

Thank you. The news of the belated investigations into torture actually got my hope to rise. Until I read the details and once again felt the all too familiar "Obama drop".

The upshot of this "investigation" is that we will sacrifice a few goats while Obama toasts the principle that some people are above the law and Holder resets American Justice to accept "I was only following orders" as the perfect excuse for war crimes.

Yet another American tragedy on Obama's watch.

[kindGSL]

You are wrong. It is the beginning of a larger investigation.

[Rule Of Law]

Don't hold your breath.

[Bluedanube]

Maybe the Obama that campaigned in November will return from vacation rather than the timorous "player" seen on the Washington "stage" this summer. He has to do better or it's one term Barak.

[JohnHKennedy]

If President Obama fails to enforce Our Federal Torture Laws he will have no honor.

Obama took an Oath Of Office
and promised to defend our Constitution and enforce our Federal Laws.

If he fails to do that he is no different than Bush and Cheney.

KEEP ASKING ALL POLITICIANS AT ALL PUBLIC EVENTS

"WHY DO YOU SUPPORT TORTURE?"
If they aren't actively calling for enforcement of our Federal Torture Laws,
They DO Support Torture.

SIGN THE PETITIONS
Demanding
both a Commission of Inquiry
and a Special Prosecutor
For All Their Crimes
at ANGRYVOTERS.ORG

http://ANGRYVOTERS.ORG

Only Prosecution Stops Torture!
Only Prosecution Stops Violations of Our Constitution and Rule Of Law..

[taxman92571]

So the terrorist in Iraq who bomb innocent women and children so they can terrorize that country and keep it unstablized or the terrorist who cut off the fingers of those who voted in Afganistan are entitled to invoke our Constitution and demand their rights? No....

[kindGSL]

You are talking abut Blackwater or CIA black ops?

[timothyi]

You are willing to give up our most cherished traditions and beliefs because of a threat of terror. You are a coward.