Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

How Many Others Were Tortured?

The International Committee of the Red Cross's blistering, confidential 2007 report on the CIA's secret prisons is now available online, Web-published by journalist Mark Danner, who last month recounted its gruesome descriptions of the brutal tactics used on detainees -- and its authoritative conclusion that their treatment amounted to torture.

News stories this morning dwell on the report's finding that medical personnel at the prisons took part in the torture of detainees, in gross violation of both their own professional ethics and international law.

But the report, which was based on interviews with the 14 "high value" detainees transferred from the secret prisons to Guantanamo in September 2006, also raises and expresses "grave concerns" about a very significant unanswered question: What happened to all the other detainees who passed through the secret CIA prisons who we still don't know about?

In 2006, President Bush himself acknowledged that "many" other detainees who were held at the CIA prisons were later returned to their home countries. The ICRC report says those detainees may well have been tortured as well -- but the ICRC doesn't know, because those detainees have have never been found.

Indeed, one of the many very serious charges the ICRC report levels against the U.S. government is that the 14 detainees they eventually interviewed had previously been "disappeared" -- deprived of any communication with their families, lawyers or the ICRC for as long as four and a half years and in direct contravention of international law. But the 14 in question at least showed up on the books once they were sent to Guantanamo in 2006. The other CIA detainees, however, were basically disappeared again.

And given how little intelligence at least some of the 14 "high value" detainees provided -- even the Bush administration's much-heralded "star witness" turned out to be of only limited value -- the image the report conjures up is of innocent people tortured by the CIA and now vanished by mutual agreement with other countries.

From the section of the report titled "Fate of other persons who passed through the CIA detention program":

"During his speech of 6 September 2006, President Bush also stated that the CIA detention program held a limited number of persons at a given time, and that a number of other persons had also been detained by the CIA in the context of the fight against terrorism. President Bush added that: 'many of them have been returned to their home countries for prosecution or detention by their governments' once the US authorities had determined that they had "little or no intelligence value".

"In subsequent discussions with various US Government departments, it was again stated to the ICRC that the majority, if not all, other detainees who went through this program have been transferred to their countries of origin....

"The ICRC has a number of legal and operational concerns about this practice. In particular, the ICRC regrets that the USG [U.S. government] has not informed the ICRC of the countries of destination so that the ICRC can seek access from the relevant authorities in order to monitor human treatment and to ensure communication with their families.

"In light of the conditions of detention and treatment of the fourteen during the period they were held in the CIA detention program, as reported above, the ICRC remains gravely concerned by the fact that a significant number of other persons have passed through this detention program and may have been subjected to similar, if not the same conditions and treatment."

Salon blogger Glenn Greenwald calls attention to the report's demand "that the US authorities investigate all allegations of ill-treatment and take steps to punish the perpetrators, where appropriate." Writes Greenwald: "Yet Obama's handpicked CIA Director, Leon Panetta, continues to demand that there be no investigations of any kind, let alone prosecutions."

Scott Horton blogs for Harper's: "The Red Cross does not reach quickly to an 'investigate and punish' recommendation. That happens only where the evidence of criminal conduct is manifest. And it was in this case. They use the word 'torture' repeatedly, without equivocation or qualification....

"The question...is for the Obama Administration: why has Eric Holder blocked the criminal investigation that a proper understanding of his duties would lead him to initiate?"

Joby Warrick and Julie Tate write in The Washington Post: "Medical officers who oversaw interrogations of terrorism suspects in CIA secret prisons committed gross violations of medical ethics and in some cases essentially participated in torture, the International Committee of the Red Cross concluded in a confidential report that labeled the CIA program 'inhuman.'

"Health personnel offered supervision and even assistance as suspected al-Qaeda operatives were beaten, deprived of food, exposed to temperature extremes and subjected to waterboarding, the relief agency said in the 2007 report, a copy of which was posted on a magazine Web site yesterday. The report quoted one medical official as telling a detainee: 'I look after your body only because we need you for information.'...

"In addition to widely reported methods such as waterboarding, the report alleges that several of the detainees were forced to stand for days in painful positions with their arms shackled overhead. One prisoner reported being shackled in this manner for 'two to three months, seven days of prolonged stress standing followed by two days of being able to sit or lie down.'

"In addition to the coercive methods -- which the ICRC said 'amounted to torture' and a violation of U.S. and international treaty obligations -- the report said detainees were routinely threatened with further violence against themselves and their families. Nine of the 14 prisoners said they were threatened with 'electric shocks, infection with HIV, sodomy of the detainee and...being brought close to death,' it said."

Scott Shane writes in the New York Times: "The report does not indicate whether the medical workers at the C.I.A. sites were physicians, other professionals or both. Other sources have said that psychologists helped design and run the C.I.A. interrogation program, that physicians' assistants and former military paramedics worked regularly in it, and that physicians were involved at times....

"In its 40-page report, the Red Cross roundly condemned the C.I.A. detention program not only for using torture and other cruel treatment, but also for holding prisoners without notice to governments or families.

"'The totality of the circumstances in which the 14 were held effectively amounted to an arbitrary deprivation of liberty and enforced disappearance, in contravention of international law,' said the report, which was provided to the C.I.A. acting general counsel, John Rizzo, in February 2007....

"The report also provided new details of the Bush administration's failure to cooperate for several years with the Red Cross's inquiries and investigations of American detention programs. Repeated inquiries and reports from the organization beginning in 2002 received no response from American officials, the report said, though the United States sent a diplomatic message addressing some inquiries in 2005."

Meanwhile, in other detainee news, Mark Seibel blogs for McClatchy Newspapers: "It's only taken seven years, but finally a federal district judge has made it clear he's had enough delay in a Guantanamo case, and he leaves no doubt that he has no faith in the Obama Justice Department to carry through on promises to release a detainee. Here's Marisa Taylor's story on the hearing, during which the judge castigates the Justice Department for hiding evidence that he said undermines its cases against several detainees.

"For a full picture of U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan's rising ire, read the transcript of the hearing. The case is that of Dr. Aymen Batarfi, a Yemeni doctor seized in Afghanistan in 2002 who's been in Guantanamo since.

"The government agreed last week that Dr. Batarfi should go home.

"That's not enough for Judge Sullivan. He's openly skeptical of the government's motive for making that announcement just a week before Batarfi's habeas case was to be heard in his court. He wants to know why the government won't let him enter an order mandating Batarfi's release, since everyone agrees he shouldn't be detained any longer. He wants to know when Batarfi will go free. He calls Guantanamo a 'travesty' of American justice, 'a horror story,' he equates it to the injustice of the U.S. internment of Japanese-Americans in World War II."

By Dan Froomkin  |  April 7, 2009; 10:25 AM ET
Categories:  Looking Backward , Torture  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Cartoon Watch
Next: Quick Takes

Comments

The Amer. Psychological Assn. refused to repudiate the use of psychologists in torture. Last year, Stephen Reisner ran as an APA presidential candidate on an anti-torture platform, and he failed to win election.

The American Nurses Association has failed to take any stance or action against the use of registered nurses as agents of abuse and torture. Not coincidentally, nurses have been identified in participating in abuse and torture at Abu Ghraib via Dr. Stephen Miles and in the deaths of immigrant detainees as commissioned officers of the USPHS and of ICE/DHS via Amy Goldstein and Dana Priest at WaPo and Nina Bernstein at the NYT.

I used to write about these issues, and without fail, they garnered the least number of hits and absolutely no comments or follow-up action. The hypocrisy of progressives is no less than that of the right wing.

Then there are the political persecutions and prosecutions of US citizens in the US, which are not receiving any support. Whistle blowers are persecuted and terrorized unto literal death (that's my own personal story and hell).

This is much too little and too late.

The ugly little reported fact is that committing torture breaks the lives of both torturer and the tortured.

You get what you dish out.

Posted by: Nequals1 | April 7, 2009 11:03 AM | Report abuse

The US Flag is used to drape the coffins of returning American fallen heroes. It is carfully folded by the honour guard and given to the fallen hero's loved ones.

The US flag is not rag to wipe the gore, puke and excrement stained boots of Rumsfeld and Cheney's state sponsored torturers.

Time to clean the flag.

Posted by: walker1 | April 7, 2009 11:25 AM | Report abuse

so are we going to punish our American criminals or are we going to let them skate?

What do we lose if we let them skate?

Posted by: vigor | April 7, 2009 11:34 AM | Report abuse

Obama's willingness to cover up the crimes of the Bush/Cheney team is my biggest disappointment with the new administration (bigger even than their handling of the finance crisis). Even a truth commission with subpoena power (to incarcerate those who don't cooperate), and whose results will not be used as the basis of prosecution, would be a better alternative. Right now, repressive governments can point to the United States as a model for their own horrific acts. Reclaiming the moral high ground is, to my mind, a worthwhile goal.

This includes even those professionals who didn't create the system of abuse, but participated--like the doctors, nurses and other medical personnel who defied their Hippocratic oaths (actually, I'm not sure if nurses take that oath or not : )--at least, their professional morals--by aiding and abetting a system of abuse. To my mind, they should be allowed to keep their current jobs, but there should be some penalty for their being accessories: and that penalty is, their participation should be made a matter of public record.

Posted by: whizbang9a | April 7, 2009 11:40 AM | Report abuse

Growing up in America in the 1960s we believed that we were the epitome of goodness, that to be America was to be on the side of decency and goodness, that America stood for freedom and human rights.

Now it feels the opposite; under the leadership of a pair of sadists we have fallen lower in stature than countries like Libya, down to the level of Uganda under Idi Amin. We are badly tarnished.

For the sake of the rule of law it is imperative that those who ordered, sanctioned, and administered the violations of the pat eight years be exposed and prosecuted. I firmly believe that America must make up for this arrogance by eliminating any possible accusation of justice deferred or denied; Bush and Cheney and their collaborators should be handed over to international tribunals for trial.

We can't undo the atrocities they committed, but we can at least show the world this was an abberation.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | April 7, 2009 11:49 AM | Report abuse

What's Obama waiting for?

Posted by: herzliebster | April 7, 2009 12:02 PM | Report abuse

A little water up your nose.
Forced to listen to horrible music that American kids pay big money to hear.
Blindfolded naked with a Megaohm meter strapped to you.

The hazing on collage campuses’ is worse than this.
I went through worse things in the Navy.

The enemy on the other hand is free to use high voltage electricity, dismemberment, decapitation, rape, sodomy, dragging and a whole list of truly nasty things that actually hurt and kill you without any outcry from the left.

What’s their take on it?
Oh yah,….we deserved it.
Just ask Michael Moore.

Look I pay good money in taxes for this stuff.
And the best you can do is waterboarding?

That wouldn't even make a Muslim communist insurgent admit that he was born in Kenya!

Posted by: rexreddy | April 7, 2009 12:21 PM | Report abuse

Wow. Why to I not care?

I must be sick. I only care about the victims of terrorist violence. I care nothing about the fate of those terorist who are captured before they can slaughter innocent people.

Yup, my priorities are almost certainly up-side down.

Posted by: ZZim | April 7, 2009 12:46 PM | Report abuse

Those who compare the torture visited upon detainees by US military and intelligence personnel to "the hazing on collage(sic) campuses" or "a little water up your nose" should read the official autopsies, written by US military MDs, of the detainees who died while being interrogated. Here are a few tidbits:

"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. "

"Died as a result of asphyxia (lack of oxygen to the brain) due to strangulation as evidenced by the recently fractured hyoid bone in the neck and soft tissue hemorrhage extending downward to the level of the right thyroid cartilage. Autopsy reveleaved bone fracture, rib fractures, contusions in mid abdomen, back and buttocks extending to the left flank, abrasions, lateral buttocks. Contusions, back of legs and knees; abrasions on knees, left fingers and encircling to left wrist. Lacerations and superficial cuts, right 4th and 5th fingers. Also, blunt force injuries, predominatnly recent contusions (bruises) on the torso and lower extremities. Abrasions on left wrist are consistent with use of restraints. No evidence of defense injuries or natural disease. Manner of death is homicide."

"Chart of 6 unnatural deaths. Case A03-51 - strangulation, found outside isolation unit, autopsy done. Case 03-273 - closed head injury; died 12 hours after escape attempt, autopsy done. Case 03-504 - blunt force trauma and choking, died during interrogation, autopsy done. Case 03-571 - blunt force trauma and choking, dured during interrogation, autopsy done. Case 04-014, blunt force trauma and choking, gagged in standing restraint, autopsy done. Unnumbered case - gunshot wound to abdomen: "shot without provocation", no autopsy done, not reported. "

The quotes above come from official US autopsies reported by US military doctors.

Pretty rough "fraternity hazing" if you ask me.

Posted by: jheath53 | April 7, 2009 12:53 PM | Report abuse

How many others were tortured?! All of them. The other question is how many were dumped overboard from the Navy's prison ships. America will never be clean again until the perpetrators of torture are brought to trial, their deeds made public and they are punished. Anyone arguing otherwise are part of the reason the torures occurred in the first place.

Posted by: Byrd3 | April 7, 2009 12:56 PM | Report abuse

". I care nothing about the fate of those terorist who are captured before they can slaughter innocent people.

Yup, my priorities are almost certainly up-side down.

Posted by: ZZim "

You also seem not to care about the vast majority of detainees who didn't do anything wrong. Or if they did, why did the Bush administration let them go?

Posted by: thrh | April 7, 2009 1:10 PM | Report abuse

Dan, thanks for this round-up of the ongoing discussion of this issue. There's a lot of useful info here, and a lot for Americans to ponder about their government's activities in their name.

For those who think it's funny, all I can say is that you are a pretty sad example of the American citizenry. I feel for the victims of terrorists as much as I do for the victims of state-sponsored torture. I can somehow condemn suicide bombers AND CIA torturers, as can most reasonable people. And I can definitely demand that the government that purports to represent my best interests not disappear political prisoners or inflict physical and psychological harm on others. Governments that use those techniques on "others" often find a way to use them on their own citizens.

Posted by: eruditeogre | April 7, 2009 1:10 PM | Report abuse

Those who say they only care for the victims of terrorist attacks are inhuman. Some of the people held in our prisons and tortured are innocent of any wrongdoing. That you would condone their torture as retribution for something they played no part in is sick. I feel that this country has completely lost its way. At one point in our history we were a beacon of freedom and we fought to protect human rights. Today, we defend our own inquisition.

Posted by: fletc3her | April 7, 2009 1:14 PM | Report abuse

". I care nothing about the fate of those terorist who are captured before they can slaughter innocent people.

Yup, my priorities are almost certainly up-side down.

Posted by: ZZim "

You also seem not to care about the vast majority of detainees who didn't do anything wrong. Or if they did, why did the Bush administration let them go?
=====================================
They let most of them go because they questioned them and determined that they were not in fact terrorists. This occurs in the initial screening process. Nobody in the terrorist-catching business wants to waste their time on guys who are not actually terrorists.

The Red Cross isn't talking about these guys at all.

The group of people that the Red Cross is talking about consists of guys that the terrorist-catchers are absolutely certain are actual terrorists possessing important information that, if known, would save innocent lives. These guys get lots of attention in order to break their resistance.

This is the treatment that the IRC is complaining about. The IRC is NOT complaining about the treatment of guys picked up in raids, interrogated and released. Please reread the article, re-form your erroneous opinion, and apologize to me here.

Thanks

ZZim

Posted by: ZZim | April 7, 2009 1:21 PM | Report abuse

If I were one of the torturers and the government ever dared to prosecute me for violation of the many laws and treaties prohibiting this kind of conduct, I would simply say that I thought there might be a "ticking timebomb."

Citing the precedent of cases on the TV show "24," Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has already stated that torture is permissible under the Constitution if the torturer thinks there might be a "ticking timebomb."

So far, it appears that there is no danger that a case will ever reach Scalia, because the Obama Administration never intended to enforce laws against rich or powerful people. That was all just posturing. Just ask Ted Stephens!

Posted by: motorfriend | April 7, 2009 1:28 PM | Report abuse

So far, it appears that there is no danger that a case will ever reach Scalia, because the Obama Administration never intended to enforce laws against rich or powerful people. That was all just posturing. Just ask Ted Stephens!
=========================================
CIA interrogators are neither rich nor powerful.

Obama will not prosecute them for a couple of very good reasons.

Reason A: Nearly all of the accusations of "torture" are distorted and politically motivated. Because these lies and distortions serve Obama's political interests, he must prevent them from being exposed in court. So there will be no trials.

Reason B: The "torturers" are keeping you safe. If Obama shuts down their operations, you will no longet be safe. People WILL die. Obama WILL be blamed. Obama will NOT get re-elected. He's NOT going to allow that to happen.

Remember: Guantanamo has not been shut down. The Obama Administration has not altered the Bush Administration legal strategies. There has been no precipitous withdrawal from Iraq. The Obama Administration is the third Bush Administration. Either keep your head in the sand or get used to it.

Posted by: ZZim | April 7, 2009 1:36 PM | Report abuse

Apparently many other prisoners were beaten, some to death--OUTSIDE of CIA detention. Without accountability--read investigations and potential jail time--there is no accountability. I don't want to hear any more BS about how "Americans don't torture." If Obama refuses to investigate he is complicit in the coverup. And I voted for the guy.

Posted by: scientist1 | April 7, 2009 1:37 PM | Report abuse

A little water up your nose.
Forced to listen to horrible music that American kids pay big money to hear.
Blindfolded naked with a Megaohm meter strapped to you.

The hazing on collage campuses’ is worse than this.
I went through worse things in the Navy.

The enemy on the other hand is free to use high voltage electricity, dismemberment, decapitation, rape, sodomy, dragging and a whole list of truly nasty things that actually hurt and kill you without any outcry from the left.

What’s their take on it?
Oh yah,….we deserved it.
Just ask Michael Moore.

Look I pay good money in taxes for this stuff.
And the best you can do is waterboarding?

That wouldn't even make a Muslim communist insurgent admit that he was born in Kenya!

Posted by: rexreddy
*********

This is kind of chilling.
Apparently, there is no possibility (for RexReddy) that America can, has or ever will torture.
He doesn't address the guilt or innocence of those who were tortured-- that might be too sticky a problem for his limited, black-and-white view of the world. He does manage to get in a cheap shot at Obama, though. (Well done, RR! Way to use Fox News talking points from last summer.)
The idea that we might have laws-- not only that, but treaties that the United States insisted other nations sign banning torture-- must be too much for RR to contemplate. We *voluntarily* gave up the right to torture anyone we thought *might* have information?
Jack Bauer is fictional?
Torture doesn't work?
Keep on making your stupid, grade school attacks on the left, RR, and gripe about how much you miss the "good ol' days" under W and his cabal of war criminals. God help us, that's your First Amendment right.

Posted by: drewbitt | April 7, 2009 1:43 PM | Report abuse

CIA interrogators are neither rich nor powerful.

Obama will not prosecute them for a couple of very good reasons.

Reason A: Nearly all of the accusations of "torture" are distorted and politically motivated. Because these lies and distortions serve Obama's political interests, he must prevent them from being exposed in court. So there will be no trials.

Reason B: The "torturers" are keeping you safe. If Obama shuts down their operations, you will no longet be safe. People WILL die. Obama WILL be blamed. Obama will NOT get re-elected. He's NOT going to allow that to happen.

Remember: Guantanamo has not been shut down. The Obama Administration has not altered the Bush Administration legal strategies. There has been no precipitous withdrawal from Iraq. The Obama Administration is the third Bush Administration. Either keep your head in the sand or get used to it.

Posted by: ZZim
**************
I would be the first to admit that Obama has not moved fast enough to end the Bush Administration's reprehensible policies, but a few things:

1) Nothing has shown that torture has kept us safe. ZZim, you do not have any proof for this allegation, while those who oppose torture have lots of support saying that torture doesn't work. Produce some evidence of your statement or admit that it's nothing more than an idea you take on faith-- but cannot prove.

2) The CIA personnel involved in this knew it was in violation of international treaty, no matter what the Justice Dept. said regarding US law. Committing war crimes on the orders of superiors is no defense. That's what got lots and lots of camp guards executed at Nuremberg. (Look it up.)

3) Obama will shut down Guantanamo and there will be a thorough investigation into what happened there and at Abu Ghraib. Nobody is off the hook. If he wants to adhere to our obligations under several treaties, Obama has no choice.

4) If Obama doesn't, there are lots of countries who will happily launch investigations. Many Bush Administration higher ups should be wary of traveling outside the US for, oh, the rest of their lives.

5) If the Obama Administration is truly the third Bush term, he'll lose office in 2012. The people spoke in November; the criminals at the top were kicked out and their policies were rejected. This is not a point upon which there could be disagreement-- McCain lost because the American public was sick of Bush and everything he had done to us.

Now... marshal your arguments and offer something more than a rehash of Sean Hannity and his mindless spew.

Posted by: drewbitt | April 7, 2009 1:50 PM | Report abuse

We have a lot to answer for.

It will be a long time before we're ready to re-join the civilized world.

Posted by: jpk1 | April 7, 2009 1:50 PM | Report abuse

But the report, which was based on interviews with the 14 "high value" detainees transferred from the secret prisons to Guantanamo in September 2006,
____
So this is "BASED" on the testimony of TERRORISTS??? Thats interesting, the Left say's torture doesn't work because they'll just tell you lies... Well why wouldn't these same people LIE when talking to the Red Cross if it's in their BEST interest???

Posted by: sovine08 | April 7, 2009 1:52 PM | Report abuse

When I read ZZim's posts, I thought I recognized the "reasoning". It finally came to me: 'Ol ZZim is parroting Cheney's lies! As if all of that stuff about "...you will no longer be safe..." hadn't been debunked long ago. And the "Accusations of torture are distorted and politically motivated...". Enough trustworthy folks in high places have exposed what has been going on in Gitmo to make it ring disturbingly true. No, the parroting of Cheney's lies just prove that ZZim is a true believer, who is running scared, now that the truth is finally coming out. Good luck with that, ZZim.

Posted by: shyde1 | April 7, 2009 1:57 PM | Report abuse

Writes Greenwald: "Yet Obama's handpicked CIA Director, Leon Panetta, continues to demand that there be no investigations of any kind, let alone prosecutions."
____
I have a new level of respect for President Obama... Froomkin is an IDIOT!! It would be stupid to tear this country apart having a witch hunt!!! Obama keeps this up and I might even vote for him next time...

Posted by: sovine08 | April 7, 2009 2:01 PM | Report abuse

For all those spineless libs that think freedom is free, well, I have news for you, it isn't and never will be. Thank god for our brave hero's that do what's necessary, and yes, that means a little "TORTURE" now and again. Try asking one of the 911 victims family if they approve. If this method saves just one American life, then I say well done and keep up the good work. If we don't hunt them down and yes "KILL THEM", how are you peace at any cost folks going to deal with fighting them on the streets of your neighborhood. If you really think that isn't a possibility, I feel sorry for you. You may just want to stay friendly with a 2nd. ammend loving and practicing neighbor.

Posted by: tenrubburnet | April 7, 2009 2:05 PM | Report abuse

For all those spineless libs that think freedom is free, well, I have news for you, it isn't and never will be. Thank god for our brave hero's that do what's necessary, and yes, that means a little "TORTURE" now and again. Try asking one of the 911 victims family if they approve. If this method saves just one American life, then I say well done and keep up the good work. If we don't hunt them down and yes "KILL THEM", how are you peace at any cost folks going to deal with fighting them on the streets of your neighborhood. If you really think that isn't a possibility, I feel sorry for you. You may just want to stay friendly with a 2nd. ammend loving and practicing neighbor.

Posted by: tenrubburnet | April 7, 2009 2:13 PM | Report abuse

1) Nothing has shown that torture has kept us safe. ZZim, you do not have any proof for this allegation, while those who oppose torture have lots of support saying that torture doesn't work. Produce some evidence of your statement or admit that it's nothing more than an idea you take on faith-- but cannot prove.

2) The CIA personnel involved in this knew it was in violation of international treaty, no matter what the Justice Dept. said regarding US law. Committing war crimes on the orders of superiors is no defense. That's what got lots and lots of camp guards executed at Nuremberg. (Look it up.)

3) Obama will shut down Guantanamo and there will be a thorough investigation into what happened there and at Abu Ghraib. Nobody is off the hook. If he wants to adhere to our obligations under several treaties, Obama has no choice.

4) If Obama doesn't, there are lots of countries who will happily launch investigations. Many Bush Administration higher ups should be wary of traveling outside the US for, oh, the rest of their lives.

5) If the Obama Administration is truly the third Bush term, he'll lose office in 2012. The people spoke in November; the criminals at the top were kicked out and their policies were rejected. This is not a point upon which there could be disagreement-- McCain lost because the American public was sick of Bush and everything he had done to us.

Now... marshal your arguments and offer something more than a rehash of Sean Hannity and his mindless spew.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
1) Nothing has shown that the alleged torture has not kept us safe.
2) You would have a point here if any “war crimes” had been committed. Since no “war crimes” were committed, your point is irrelevant.
3) Yeah, yeah, he will save the Earth from destruction and angels will sing tra la la la. Actions speak louder than words. So far all we have from Obama are words. And those words seem to have people like you fooled. Which is Obama’s intent. During the past eight years I gnashed my teeth at the foolishness and gullibility of Liberals. Now, like Mr. Obama, I’m reveling in it.
4) Heheheh. Yes, let the former Bushies fear the scary powerful Spaniards. Foreign kangaroo courts mean nothing.
5) We’ll see how that goes, I’m looking forward to Bush’s fourth term and the sour gnashing of teeth from people like Froomkin.
6) Who is Sean Hannity?

Posted by: ZZim | April 7, 2009 2:25 PM | Report abuse

When I read ZZim's posts, I thought I recognized the "reasoning". It finally came to me: 'Ol ZZim is parroting Cheney's lies! As if all of that stuff about "...you will no longer be safe..." hadn't been debunked long ago. And the "Accusations of torture are distorted and politically motivated...". Enough trustworthy folks in high places have exposed what has been going on in Gitmo to make it ring disturbingly true. No, the parroting of Cheney's lies just prove that ZZim is a true believer, who is running scared, now that the truth is finally coming out. Good luck with that, ZZim.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
I haven’t read anything that the former Veep has said recently, so I’ll rely on your informed opinion that he agrees with me.

My response is - Good for him! It proves that he really understands the world.

I never really developed an opinion of the guy while he was in office, but if he agrees with me on these subjects he must be pretty wise.

Posted by: ZZim | April 7, 2009 2:29 PM | Report abuse

Writes Greenwald: "Yet Obama's handpicked CIA Director, Leon Panetta, continues to demand that there be no investigations of any kind, let alone prosecutions."
____
I have a new level of respect for President Obama... Froomkin is an IDIOT!! It would be stupid to tear this country apart having a witch hunt!!! Obama keeps this up and I might even vote for him next time...
=====================================
Yup. I might, too. Before the election, I was willing to vote for Hillary because she sent out a lot of signals that she would be the 3rd Bush Administration. However, once it became clear to me that Obama was lying about NOT being the next Bush Administration (on foreign policy anyway), I became indifferent.

Posted by: ZZim | April 7, 2009 2:33 PM | Report abuse

Maybe Obama worked out a special deal with the Republicans:

(1) Obama's DOJ won't prosecute the Bush regime criminals from top to bottom for torture and other criminal acts sanctioned by them as chickenhawks-in-charge, and

(2) In return, Republicans will unanimously oppose Obama every step of the way on legislation and judicial appointments.

Obama's legacy will be that he is the one who let the torturers get away with it.

Posted by: Patriot3 | April 7, 2009 2:47 PM | Report abuse

". I care nothing about the fate of those terorist who are captured before they can slaughter innocent people.

Yup, my priorities are almost certainly up-side down.

Posted by: ZZim "

You also seem not to care about the vast majority of detainees who didn't do anything wrong. Or if they did, why did the Bush administration let them go?
=====================================
They let most of them go because they questioned them and determined that they were not in fact terrorists. This occurs in the initial screening process. Nobody in the terrorist-catching business wants to waste their time on guys who are not actually terrorists.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
ZZim, I think that's the point... if these people were let go because they were not terrorists, then these people are therefore innocent so why did we continue to hold and torture innocent people?

Posted by: PeterPamZ | April 7, 2009 2:47 PM | Report abuse

"I feel that this country has completely lost its way. At one point in our history we were a beacon of freedom and we fought to protect human rights. Today, we defend our own inquisition."

When exactly were we a "beacon for freedom"? You should read a book called "Killing Hope: U. S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II " ... the U.S. has been torturing and murdering people en masse since it's conception (what do you call whipping and raping millions of kidnapped slaves from Africa? ever heard about what we did in the Phillipines? How about Agent Orange? Plain of Jars? United Fruit and Guatemala? ...), as well as training other people to ("torture by proxy"). I don't see how bombing, torturing, and gassing millions of innocent people makes us a "beacon for freedom" ... I think that the torture in CIA prisons today doesn't mean we've "lost our way" -- just business as usual.

Posted by: jrtayloriv | April 7, 2009 2:47 PM | Report abuse

Umm Commander Zim you seem to know a whole lot about the torture program. Except for what is and has been publicly available knowledge. For instance Obama did not need to change or alter the program, because if I am not mistaken the Bush team rescinded the torture memos shortly before leaving office. I do however need some help in understanding why they would withdraw sound legal opinion on sound legal programs. Also if President Bush was to be believed, they stopped the programs altogether a couple of years ago when the public found out. Why would they stop such valuable programs? Also why would they destroy tapes if everything they were doing was legal and supported by sound legal opinions? After all the court system is very heavily conservative, especially the supreme court, and I don’t think the legal system would have a political ax to grind with the Bush administration. So why would the Bush administration say they stopped the program? So if the torturers were keeping us safe, then why did the Bush administration say that they a) didn’t torture and b) stopped doing what they said they were not doing and c) destroyed the evidence of it and dropped the legal reasoning for it. If I were you I’de be mad at Bush and co, especially for dropping that sound legal reasoning contained in those opinions they withdrew. If the opinions were truly valid then the Bush administration pulled the rug out from under Obama. Sounds like treason to me…I tossed the treason thing in there for you since republicans like to accuse people of treason so much I thought maybe if Bush took away Obama’s legal backing for the programs, like he did, then surely that makes us less safe and Bush was acting treasonous. Don’t you think?

BTW if the Obama administration is essentially the third Bush administration, then why are you so dead set against Obama? Seems like you should be kissing up to him in the same manner that you did Bush.

Also the whole argument, well they did it so why can’t we do it? Is fallacious especially when dealing with a country of laws. Simple answer is that if those things occur the enemy is breaking the law and if caught will be punished for it much like in WWII when the order givers were executed for crimes like genocide and water-boarding. Of course if you prefer to live and act in a lawless society with minimal government interference then there is always Somalia.

Posted by: m_mcmahon | April 7, 2009 2:49 PM | Report abuse

You also seem not to care about the vast majority of detainees who didn't do anything wrong. Or if they did, why did the Bush administration let them go?
=====================================
They let most of them go because they questioned them and determined that they were not in fact terrorists. This occurs in the initial screening process. Nobody in the terrorist-catching business wants to waste their time on guys who are not actually terrorists.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
ZZim, I think that's the point... if these people were let go because they were not terrorists, then these people are therefore innocent so why did we continue to hold and torture innocent people?
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Well Peter, we didn’t. We let the ones who were obviously innocent go during the initial screening process.

Those remaining were probably terrorists. Further screening resuled in a pool of individuals who are almost certainly terrorists. And a VERY small minority of this third group was aggressively interrogated in a manner that certain foreign leftist organizations like the Red Cross call “torture”. Enhanced interrogation is a very expensive and time-consuming process and we only have so many resources available. Our resources are not limitless, so most terrorists were able to avoid enhanced interrogation.

We didn’t continue to hold anyone we didn’t consider terrorists. What possible reason would we have to do that? There are more terrorists out there than we have jail cells. So why would we waste resources on guys we thought were innocent? We didn’t. We let them go. Heck, we even erred on the side of weakness and released guys we thought were terrorists but didn’t have any evidence on. I’m sorry for the hundreds of people who have been murdered by those released terrorists, but we can’t afford to keep all the terrorists locked up.

Posted by: ZZim | April 7, 2009 3:06 PM | Report abuse

I'd be interested to know what the knee-jerk right wingers would think of trying out some of this stuff on homegrown domestic terrorists, the militia types, the people who murder doctors and blow up clinics, the people who stockpile weapons, etc. Maybe the people who just read the same books as those people, or share a sublet, or have stuff on their hard drives that could be interpreted as evidence of planning for domestic terrorism should be looked at to. I suspect that much of this indifference to human suffering is rooted in a smug confidence that such tools would never be visited upon themselves because they are "innocent." But can you be sure? Sometimes dragnets get cast pretty wide, and, let's face it, what happened in Waco and at Ruby Ridge was pretty ugly. A few more outrages by "lone" right wing gunmen, or, worse, another Oklahoma City, and some folks might feel its time to "take off the gloves" with the kooks... and anyone who looks like them...

Posted by: benjaminanderson | April 7, 2009 3:08 PM | Report abuse

1) Nothing has shown that the alleged torture has not kept us safe.
2) You would have a point here if any “war crimes” had been committed. Since no “war crimes” were committed, your point is irrelevant.
3) Yeah, yeah, he will save the Earth from destruction and angels will sing tra la la la. Actions speak louder than words. So far all we have from Obama are words. And those words seem to have people like you fooled. Which is Obama’s intent. During the past eight years I gnashed my teeth at the foolishness and gullibility of Liberals. Now, like Mr. Obama, I’m reveling in it.
4) Heheheh. Yes, let the former Bushies fear the scary powerful Spaniards. Foreign kangaroo courts mean nothing.
5) We’ll see how that goes, I’m looking forward to Bush’s fourth term and the sour gnashing of teeth from people like Froomkin.
6) Who is Sean Hannity?
-----------------------------
Your non-chalance is breathtaking and your ignorant cowboy attitude resembles that of a 11 year old schoolyard bully. It is not alleged torture - it was torture.

Waterboarding IS torture - and we waterboarded. And that is just one of many war crimes. Yes, War crimes - and John Yoo and Jay Bybee and Jim Haynes III etc ridiculous legal opinions that your idol Cheney/spineless Bush sucked on like a lollipop for cold comfort when shredding the Constitution and our laws, just doesn't make it so. And yes, there is clear evidence - which according to the war hero Powell (who in your eyes, is now a traitor I bet) will come out - that atleast two of these HVTs clammed up once the torture crap started. And we got nothing after that - for torturing in my name, you bunch of prissy a-holes! So yes, torturing DID NOT keep us safe - infact it prevented us from getting the good stuff to protect this country.

If you gnashed your teeth for the past 8 years, you might want to go get a few pairs of good dentures - because we are going to roll on traitors like you. You will not like what's going to happen to this country - because we are going to make sure the laws and the Constitution are followed. So gnash away.

And if you think Spain is the only country who is going to get busy filing suits against the morons who ruled over us for the last eight years, you got another thing coming. It is not a Kangaroo court by any means - and I guess it probably makes them feel good to be 'Wanted' in atleast some countries. Personally, I'd like to see them with a black sack over their head, and huddled over each other, naked, Abu Ghraib style. Throw in some waterboarding, so they get an idea.

Posted by: Pillai | April 7, 2009 3:12 PM | Report abuse

And BTW, slagging the ICRC is pretty low, ZZim. For many of our wars now, the Red Cross was a welcome presence for our servicemen and women held as POWs. They are certainly not leftist in any way, unless by that you mean they don't consider Americans some sort of master race above international law. Americans like you are the mirror reflection of the fanatics we must fight, and I sincerely wish a pox on both your houses.

Posted by: benjaminanderson | April 7, 2009 3:20 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: m_mcmahon.
--------------------
Excellent post there, m_mcmahon!.

I hear crickets - ZZim?? You still around to answer? Or are you busy pulling crap out of your a$$?

Posted by: Pillai | April 7, 2009 3:27 PM | Report abuse

And BTW, slagging the ICRC is pretty low, ZZim. For many of our wars now, the Red Cross was a welcome presence for our servicemen and women held as POWs. They are certainly not leftist in any way, unless by that you mean they don't consider Americans some sort of master race above international law. Americans like you are the mirror reflection of the fanatics we must fight, and I sincerely wish a pox on both your houses.
==================================
I agree, it's a sad thing to see a once-nuetral organization like the Red Cross turned into a leftist propaganda tool. Honestly, it hurts me to see it. I mean, it USED to really be a nuetral organization. Now it's just another propaganda-spewing America-hating left-wing NGO. It's no wonder so many countries have a habit of booting NGO's these days.

It's a real shame.

Oh, I don't believe in "races", so there cannot be a "master race". Where do people with these sorts of ideas come from?

Posted by: ZZim | April 7, 2009 3:29 PM | Report abuse

I'd be interested to know what the knee-jerk right wingers would think of trying out some of this stuff on homegrown domestic terrorists, the militia types, the people who murder doctors and blow up clinics, the people who stockpile weapons, etc. Maybe the people who just read the same books as those people, or share a sublet, or have stuff on their hard drives that could be interpreted as evidence of planning for domestic terrorism should be looked at to. I suspect that much of this indifference to human suffering is rooted in a smug confidence that such tools would never be visited upon themselves because they are "innocent." But can you be sure? Sometimes dragnets get cast pretty wide, and, let's face it, what happened in Waco and at Ruby Ridge was pretty ugly. A few more outrages by "lone" right wing gunmen, or, worse, another Oklahoma City, and some folks might feel its time to "take off the gloves" with the kooks... and anyone who looks like them...
==========================================
I suppose if these guys were a comparable problem we probably would treat them in a comparable manner. I predict with 100% confidence that Obama will concientiously follow Bush's lead in this area and treat this imaginary problem as though it doesn't exist.

Posted by: ZZim | April 7, 2009 3:35 PM | Report abuse

By the way, I'm also interested in what a knee-jerk right-winger would say about that.

Posted by: ZZim | April 7, 2009 3:36 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: ZZim
Now it's just another propaganda-spewing America-hating left-wing NGO. It's no wonder so many countries have a habit of booting NGO's these days.

It's a real shame.

Oh, I don't believe in "races", so there cannot be a "master race". Where do people with these sorts of ideas come from?
---------------------------------

The same place where IRC is called a 'propaganda-spewing America-hating NGO', just because it decided to expose some criminalities of an administration.

Posted by: Pillai | April 7, 2009 3:38 PM | Report abuse

There's this interesting belief that anyone arrested on "suspicion" is guilty, and that guilt can be determined via tribunals where defendants have limited access to witnesses and prosecutors are free to withhold evidence from the defense.

I've got two words for you: Ted Stevens.

Posted by: Common_Sense_Not_Common | April 7, 2009 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Where do people with these sorts of ideas come from?
---------------------------------
The same place where IRC is called a 'propaganda-spewing America-hating NGO', just because it decided to expose some criminalities of an administration.
====================================
The Washington Post opinion pages? I think you're right.

I suppose everyone is entitled to their own perspective. Even yours, because the rest of us deserve a good chuckle.

I suppose if I were Dick Cheney I would feel very conflicted right now. On the one hand, I could go to Spain and deliver a devastating blow to America's enemies (foreign and domestic) by defeating them in court. And on the other hand I could just take a nap. At his age, a nap probably sounds pretty good.

Posted by: ZZim | April 7, 2009 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Step back and notice which topics bring out the Bush apologists in the greatest numbers and I would venture to guess that torture is at the top of the list. Why? Because it is the one area with the greatest potential legal exposure to the former administration. Regardless of how it is parsed out, torture as a sanctioned policy is a very big deal, It does bring international criminal court proceedings to life. It has not been legal since the church stopped doing it. This is the one area that could have brought down the Bush administration while they were in office and could still bring them to ruin after leaving office.

The other reason that torture discussions bring out the republican apologists in droves is pretty easy to spot in their defenses. They like it, or rather they like the notion of torture. See how often they either down play it or they justify it with strawman arguments. But, but, but they do it too, or this is a different kind of war, or how do we know what they know if we don’t try to get the information out of them, or these are sophisticated guys who need that extra little omphf to get the info. That last one cracks me up. Face it all the blathering is just excuse making, they support torture for one reason…they like it.

Posted by: m_mcmahon | April 7, 2009 3:48 PM | Report abuse

Writes Greenwald: "Yet Obama's handpicked CIA Director, Leon Panetta, continues to demand that there be no investigations of any kind, let alone prosecutions."
---------
I dunno, it's the CIA, Panetta is hardly the last authority.

(snicker)

Maybe they're screwing with the torture boy heads...

(HAHA)

BTW, every single person who has advocated against the torture has made a difference.

Posted by: thegreatpotatospamof2003 | April 7, 2009 3:48 PM | Report abuse

Torture is treason, particularly as committed by an officer of the United States government. Anyone with half a brain understands why...

And then the question becomes one of protecting the US against its internal enemies, as well as those on the outside.

Posted by: thegreatpotatospamof2003 | April 7, 2009 3:53 PM | Report abuse

We didn’t continue to hold anyone we didn’t consider terrorists. What possible reason would we have to do that? There are more terrorists out there than we have jail cells. So why would we waste resources on guys we thought were innocent? We didn’t. We let them go. Heck, we even erred on the side of weakness and released guys we thought were terrorists but didn’t have any evidence on.
Posted by: ZZim
_____
I don't know who you are ZZim but you make a lot of sense... Something you normally don't find on these blogs for Froomkin.

Posted by: sovine08 | April 7, 2009 3:55 PM | Report abuse

Face it all the blathering is just excuse making, they support torture for one reason…they like it.
===================================
Nah, it's mainly to point out that the "torture" mostly occurred in the imagination of Bush's enemies. And the gullible folks who believed all the anti-Bush propaganda.

The GWOT continues unabated and 99.9% unchanged. Obama calls it the "struggle against man-caused disasters" now, but that's okay with me. It's just sugar-coating, the bitter pill remains beneath.

Posted by: ZZim | April 7, 2009 4:04 PM | Report abuse

I don't know who you are ZZim but you make a lot of sense... Something you normally don't find on these blogs for Froomkin.
======================================
Thank you Sovine08. I'm not normally here, but it's been a slow news day. Even Froomkin entertains me today.

I've noticed that this seems to be a pretty un-diverse crowd. Maybe I should spend more time here. Might be fun.

I feel like Andre the Giant in one of those 20-wrestler free-for-alls, smacking 'em down one after the other.

Posted by: ZZim | April 7, 2009 4:08 PM | Report abuse

Personally, I'd like to see them with a black sack over their head, and huddled over each other, naked, Abu Ghraib style. Throw in some waterboarding, so they get an idea. Posted by: Pillai
_____
It's always interesting to see the people who say they are against torture are the ones to WANT to torture...

Posted by: sovine08 | April 7, 2009 4:09 PM | Report abuse

ZZim makes assertions without evidence. Classic Rightwingnuttery.

Posted by: raqualung | April 7, 2009 4:13 PM | Report abuse

Dan: Here are some suggested general guidelines regarding comment postings that I respectfully ask you to consider:

1. Set a limit on the number of times a poster can post and respond in the Comments section of each daily column.

2. Ideas, not individuals, should be critiqued and refuted - with reasoned counter arguments, and without personal invective.

3. Assumptions concerning an individual's political leanings, lifestyle, favorite political commentators, moral sensibilities, and ideological beliefs should not be automatically inferred by the content of a post with which one does not agree (the corollary to item 2 above).

4. The purpose of comment posting should be a healthy and thought provoking dialogue between respectful dissenters, who choose to think carefully and clearly before they post, and who choose to remain open minded (willing to consider reforming or expanding their opinion based on reasoned and factual comments by other posters).

Just call me Rodney King.

Posted by: MillPond2 | April 7, 2009 4:15 PM | Report abuse

Nah, it's mainly to point out that the "torture" mostly occurred in the imagination of Bush's enemies. And the gullible folks who believed all the anti-Bush propaganda
--------

Jus sayin, though, your view doesn't reflect reality.

And when one doesn't function in reality, whether you, me or the CIA, one has already lost, is irreparably harmed.

Reality is an absolute, the torture kooks are, in essence, trying to argue physics, legal reasoning and a social theory they can't begin to comprehend.

And assuming parity is always a mistake.

And they've lost 2 wars, the economy already having circled the drain, still going down, affecting US defense.

I wouldn't ask a treason kook to save this, now, would I?

He can't see a thing, reflecting a lack of higher reasoning skills.

The absence of intellectualism in the torture boys is startling.

Posted by: thegreatpotatospamof2003 | April 7, 2009 4:17 PM | Report abuse

Drewbit and others::::: who say torture has never proved to work. Well, one thing we know for sure and that is before 9/11, with no torture going on, that did not work either, as we got hit. If any of you think that the USA takes the high road and tries to set examples by not torturing these folks, who by the way, hit our country like never before, will make the Terrorist sit up and go, oh, we can't be bad because the USA has stopped torturing, you must be kidding yourself. I do not know the answer and I would wager a bet that if you were in the Presidents shoes, past and present, and was informed of information that required thinking outside of Monday morning quarterback’s, you might just change your minds. You can spew your own opinions on this site because some brave American died for you to have the ability to do so. And the cute passing comment about Hannity, you must be an Olbermann fan, talk about arrogance and a blow hard, none better than this guy, and his side kick Madow, who mimics his every move, and wants the world to live peacefully, and who doesn't, now wants the world to get rid of their NUKES. Think that is going to happen? Cats out of the bag and we as a world will have to live with the consequences of all past deeds. Look forward and let’s see what we can do to improve the World instead of giving such great answers to information, which once known would probably make you want to torture someone, from the Red Cross. Maybe Obama's apologies for America being such a bad country will make the folks who hate us stand up and say, no more, America is now good, yea you betcha!!!!!!!

Posted by: TomucKw | April 7, 2009 4:18 PM | Report abuse

The GWOT continues unabated and 99.9% unchanged.

We didn’t continue to hold anyone we didn’t consider terrorists. What possible reason would we have to do that? There are more terrorists out there than we have jail cells. So why would we waste resources on guys we thought were innocent? We didn’t. We let them go. Heck, we even erred on the side of weakness and released guys we thought were terrorists but didn’t have any evidence on.
---------------------------

We let them go? Because there were innocent? And you need a gold medal for that? For keeping innocent people in prison and torturing them, and finally letting them go?

You let them go, huh? What about innocent Afghan taxi cab driver Dilawar? Know him? Or was he let go a bit too late? We beat his legs to a pulp, and then he died because of a blood clot. And many more.

So we tortured and killed somebody. Not a warcrime? Only your rose colored shades allow you to see it that way.

And one more thing - in here all you have is this bravado, this talk of the tough guy, this 'I am Jack Bauer' attitude. Out there, in the real world, you will cry like a little girl when enduring even a fraction of what many of the innocents in G'Bay and Bagram went through.


Posted by: Pillai | April 7, 2009 4:24 PM | Report abuse

Torture is torture. It is not defined by who it is perpetrated upon. In fact, Bush and Cheney engaged in torture. This is not in dispute. What is disputed is whether or not they had the legal authority to do so, or whether they acted extra-legally. Most legal opinions (forget Yoo and Hanley)indicate that they did not.

Posted by: raqualung | April 7, 2009 4:24 PM | Report abuse

But Zim if it never occurred and is only in the heads of Bush’s enemies then why would they destroy the tapes of something perfectly legal? Why rescind the memo’s supporting something that is perfectly legal? Why did the former president (and I include Dirty Dick in this too) say over and over “we don’t torture” then spend time obliquely justifying what he said never occurred and then tell us they stopped doing what they never did but was perfectly legal for them to do anyway?

Why have they spent so much time and effort on building a case that we don’t torture and work to redefine it legally with those now rescinded (by Bush) legal opinions? Why then do they through the press (or rather Fox News and the radio punditry) work so hard to legitimize it and trivialize it? Oh it’s just a dunk in the water, it’s not even as bad as fraternity hijinx? Then if it’s not torture why do the apologists, like yourself, spend so much time legitimizing it? It is painfully evident in your posts and in writings on right wing site and from the words of the Fox and the radio punditry that face it you like torture. You like the idea that you can have someone in your hands and that you can attribute heinous actions to that individual and then use those attributes to justify doing to that person whatever you want to do because these people are so evil, they deserve it. People like Omar Khadr who was fighting us and was captured. What could be gleaned from the mind of a teenager that might imperil the US? Nothing, no one entrusts kids with serious intelligence on operations. We tortured him because we as a country felt that we can do whatever we want to our prisoners. What about Maher Arar? Why have him tortured? Sure we may not have done it but we certainly facilitated his torture? What could be learned from torturing him for several months that could not have been cleared up with a couple of ten minute phone calls to Canada? We did it because we wanted to and to show we could.

Why did we stop the FBI from their interrogations to torture people to gather the very same information that the FBI had gathered from normal interrogation techniques? Why did Washington and the Bush administration interfere with professionals who get results? Why were sessions directed from the White House at times? Why stoop so low? Why do it at all?

Posted by: m_mcmahon | April 7, 2009 4:25 PM | Report abuse

It's always interesting to see the people who say they are against torture are the ones to WANT to torture...
Posted by: sovine08
---------
I like torturing torturers. Just to show them how it feels, so that they will never do it again. Get it? Something akin to what Christopher Hitchens did when he got himself waterboarded to get an idea. And he was seriously shook up by it. Go read the Vanity Fair article by this hardcore conservative.

Posted by: Pillai | April 7, 2009 4:29 PM | Report abuse

The purpose of comment posting should be a healthy and thought provoking dialogue between respectful dissenters, who choose to think carefully and clearly before they post, and who choose to remain open minded (willing to consider reforming or expanding their opinion based on reasoned and factual comments by other posters).
========================================
Rodney, great paragraph and a noble sentiment.

However, Internet discussion boards are what they are - open to all comers. The gatekeepers can only delete the most egregious violators, giving us a very wide range in which to express ourselves. I'm afraid it's the nature of this beast.

Anyway, respect.

ZZim

Posted by: ZZim | April 7, 2009 4:30 PM | Report abuse

I always think of that episode of Taxi where Elaine, excited about a big date, splurges on a high end hairdresser, played by a fey-acting, supercilious Ted Danson.

Anyway, long story short, he gives her a Mrs Frankenstein look, right down to a stripe in her hair. She's hysterical, goes back to the salon with Alex and Louie, wanting to SMACK Danson. Alex talks her out of it, telling her she's too good to sink to his (Danson's) level, advising her to walk away.

She does.

Louie, OTOH, says "I'm not," and throws a bucket a hair dye on him.

Moral of the story: People will behave and think independently.

At the time, and even now, it was mentioned those willing to commit torture, and therefore treason, were risking retaliation.

This is public as well as private reaction, one we've never really faced as a nation.

Posted by: thegreatpotatospamof2003 | April 7, 2009 4:30 PM | Report abuse

We let them go? Because there were innocent? And you need a gold medal for that? For keeping innocent people in prison and torturing them, and finally letting them go?
==-=-=--=--=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
No, we don’t need a medal. Letting innocent people go after determining their innocence is a routine procedure in America. It’s pretty ho-hum actually. I know that people raised on anti-American propaganda might think otherwise, but oh well, there are no “reality pills” that such people can take to clear their minds.

Posted by: ZZim | April 7, 2009 4:37 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Pillai
And yes, there is clear evidence - which according to the war hero Powell (who in your eyes, is now a traitor I bet) will come out
_______
I don't think you followed what was said in that Rachel Maddow interview.. cause your hero Powell all but said he knew what was going on but he will NOT render judgment on it. Maddow didn't look happy.

Posted by: Pillai
So yes, torturing DID NOT keep us safe - infact it prevented us from getting the good stuff to protect this country.
______
Well since we haven't been attacked since we started this program of harsh interogation.. how can you say with certainty it didn't help to keep us safe? In fact you have NO IDEA what information we did get.. So I believe what you said falls under your opinion..

Posted by: Pillai
If you gnashed your teeth for the past 8 years, you might want to go get a few pairs of good dentures - because we are going to roll on traitors like you.
____
I didn't gnash my teeth these last 8 years but it sounds like you might have... and since Obama has shown no interest in looking into this it looks like you are the one who will keep on gnashing away.


Posted by: Pillai
And if you think Spain is the only country who is going to get busy filing suits against the morons who ruled over us for the last eight years, you got another thing coming.
_______
Ah yes Spain the country that brought us Franco is going to tell us about treating prisoners.. And yeah you might find a couple of other Leftist judges in different countries over there but if you think Bush or Cheney is going to be arrested going aboard.. you will be sady disappointed

Posted by: sovine08 | April 7, 2009 4:38 PM | Report abuse

Why did we stop the FBI from their interrogations to torture people to gather the very same information that the FBI had gathered from normal interrogation techniques? Why did Washington and the Bush administration interfere with professionals who get results? Why were sessions directed from the White House at times? Why stoop so low? Why do it at all?


Posted by: m_mcmahon | April 7, 2009 4:25 PM | Report abuse
========================================
Exactly my point. Not only is the anti-Bush Administration propaganda a lie, it doesn't even make any SENSE!!?! I agree totally, how could people be so gullible as to swallow this stuff? They make it sound like Bush and Cheney were running about doing random nefarious stuff without rhyme or reason. I mean, who is stupid enough to believe all that baloney?

Posted by: ZZim | April 7, 2009 4:42 PM | Report abuse

"The question...is for the Obama Administration: why has Eric Holder blocked the criminal investigation that a proper understanding of his duties would lead him to initiate?"

Check your history, when did a US attorney general stand up for civil rights? It was a rarity.

Posted by: khmaio | April 7, 2009 4:46 PM | Report abuse

Zim I absolutely do not get your 4:42 post and your conclusion is definately not in line with mine yet somehow you think we agree? M premise in that para was why did the white house, the Bush - Cheney White House that is, interfere with professionals who were getting results? They interfered because they wanted to show power over those in their posiession. They interfered because their desire was to torture. They tortured because they liked to.

Posted by: m_mcmahon | April 7, 2009 4:49 PM | Report abuse

The government has had to throw out cases against suspected terrorists because evidence was collected through torture. So torture is non-productive in additon to being immoral and illegal. So there are many very good reasons not to engage in torture.

Posted by: raqualung | April 7, 2009 4:50 PM | Report abuse

Only Kucinich has the ba11s to do it. Obama is not in a particularly good position to do it, because then he's seen as being "partisan" - and not "moving forward."

I think letting these wingtipped warriors, these draft-dodging hypocrites, these fat white punks go free, is only inviting more of the same in the future.

Next time, it'll be US Citizens that disappear and we won't even have a newspaper left to read about it in.

We helped them do it in Chile and Argentina. This is nothing new. Same old rich, white, scardy cat, chicken hawks. Survival of the fittest would straighten this all out - which is why they changed the rules so many generations ago - from slavery to now is not much different when you really stop and think about it. Whatever rights we have, were not given to us, they were taken by force from the fat, sweaty, white hands of our forefathers' Bush Cheney Rumsfeld AIG Execs, Madoffs.

There's people in jail right now for failure to pay parking tickets, and these disgusting treasonous scum are getting their belly folds cleaned and dried out while they plot their next lie.

Sweet.

Posted by: LeftwithNochoice | April 7, 2009 4:50 PM | Report abuse

So yes, torturing DID NOT keep us safe - infact it prevented us from getting the good stuff to protect this country.
______
Well since we haven't been attacked since we started this program of harsh interogation.. how can you say with certainty it didn't help to keep us safe? In fact you have NO IDEA what information we did get.. So I believe what you said falls under your opinion..

Posted by: sovine08
------------
No- you got it wrong. Not my op. I read, incidentally. And I can quote you the exact words of the FBI agents involved in the interrogation of many of these suspects, if I had the book by Jane Mayers 'The Dark Side' at hand right now. Or the article by Danner. Whom are you going to quote?

Of course, you will laugh it off as some leftie writers, as you laugh off the Int Red Cross Report. As you laughed off/belittled everyone for the last eight years who thought of opposing immoral, if not outright illegal acts in the name of protecting the country..

But..it does not matter, does it? You can have your opinions. I can have mine. Truth is out there. Just like crooks like Nixon could not hold on too longer under the 'It is law when i do it' logic, this too will come out.

Till then, adios.

Posted by: Pillai | April 7, 2009 4:57 PM | Report abuse

Zim I absolutely do not get your 4:42 post and your conclusion is definately not in line with mine yet somehow you think we agree? M premise in that para was why did the white house, the Bush - Cheney White House that is, interfere with professionals who were getting results? They interfered because they wanted to show power over those in their posiession. They interfered because their desire was to torture. They tortured because they liked to.

---------------------

You didn't get it? He was laughing in your face, being sarcastic etc, to your legitimate query. That's what people does when they are just stumped, but still feel like retorting like a little boy throwing a tantrum.

Posted by: Pillai | April 7, 2009 5:01 PM | Report abuse

Interesting that everyone keeps blibbering about this relatively minor instance of U.S. torture/killing, and ignored my comment above. Interesting how people keep themselves comfortably confined to the mass-media-defined boundaries of discourse.

Posted by: jrtayloriv | April 7, 2009 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Zim I absolutely do not get your 4:42 post and your conclusion is definately not in line with mine yet somehow you think we agree? M premise in that para was why did the white house, the Bush - Cheney White House that is, interfere with professionals who were getting results? They interfered because they wanted to show power over those in their posiession. They interfered because their desire was to torture. They tortured because they liked to.
=========================================
Perhaps I was being too subtle:

A person would have to be extremely gullible to think that the scenario you laid out is even remotely realistic.

It defies common sense. If you believe it then you lack common sense.

It is unreasonable and irrational. If you believe it, then you lack reason.

One of the first moves in a propaganda campaign is to dehumanize the target, make them seem somehow inhuman. Once you've done that, your intended audience will believe just about any crazy thing you tell them about your enemies. You can convince people that your enemies are doing things that are unreasonable, irrational, and lack common sense.

Propaganda works. You are a victim.

You actually believe that Bush and Cheney would interfere with FBI agents who were geting results because they liked torture better. Honestly, I'm astounded.

Posted by: ZZim | April 7, 2009 5:09 PM | Report abuse

Interesting that everyone keeps blibbering about this relatively minor instance of U.S. torture/killing, and ignored my comment above. Interesting how people keep themselves comfortably confined to the mass-media-defined boundaries of discourse.

Posted by: jrtayloriv | April 7, 2009 5:02 PM | Report abuse
==================================
Yeah, about that. We read it and dismissed it as irrelevant blibbering but were were too polite to say anything.

Posted by: ZZim | April 7, 2009 5:10 PM | Report abuse

Interesting that everyone keeps blibbering about this relatively minor instance of U.S. torture/killing, and ignored my comment above. Interesting how people keep themselves comfortably confined to the mass-media-defined boundaries of discourse.

Posted by: jrtayloriv
------------------------
Point 1 - In the grand scheme of things, you might feel it is a minor thing, but it is not. If we tortured and killed, and then publicly admit we tortured, that is a huge issue, which leads to the other countries that are part of the same legal binding agreement that we signed as well prohibiting torture to consider taking legal action against us, like Spain.

Pont 2. Yes, your point is well taken about short sighted US involvements around the world leading to much death and destruction. Terrible things were done by US Politicians. But the fact remains that Americans are fundamentally committed to peace and is a very empathetic group. But the one thing that remains infallible is our Constitution and the rights it accords all people. That IMHO is what makes it a Beacon of Freedom, to use another cliched expression, like the stupid War on Terror.

So yes, USA is a fantastic idea that sometimes gets 'refined' the wrong way, but it always corrects itself to go the right way. How many other countries can you say the same things about?

Posted by: Pillai | April 7, 2009 5:19 PM | Report abuse

We learned without resorting to torture that Bin Laden was planning to attack inside the US using planes. Still, Bush did nothing with the information, preferring instead to spend the month before 9/11 clearing brush on his ranch and playing golf. That alone is grounds for indictment.

Posted by: raqualung | April 7, 2009 5:20 PM | Report abuse

Propaganda works and I am the victim? Interesting. I know it works and I fully recognized the full frontal propaganda assault that has been going on now for a good eight years, but I don't think you fully understand who is under the propagandists spell. So the scenario I laid out is not realistic? Yet the ticking time bomb scenario that is relied upon by the republican party is highly realistic? Here's a difference...my scenario is straight from FBI agents involved, it is not from dirty dick, his sock puppet George or from 24. The FBI guys were seriously pissed that they were being interfered with by an administration that was publicly saying that they would not interfere.

Face it once again the torture occurs because you and your kind like the notion of someone powerless in your grasp. Dirty dick and Bush are both bullies who wanted to live above the law and how, despite their claims of legality spent an awful lot of time hiding this and then justifying it, especially dick. Torture will get you exactly what you want. If you want confessions it will get you those. But more likely it will simply give you a quick thrill to be the bully and to employ your own frontier justice outside the legal system which is why they stressed keeping all those being tortured outside the legal system. It had nothing to do with terrorists getting rights, it had nothing to do with anything other than keeping the torture out of the public eye and out of the court system not to protect the suspects, but to protect the torturers and more importantly the administration.

Still no answer on the two Canadians (a 15 year old boy and a tourist) tortured in our name?

Posted by: m_mcmahon | April 7, 2009 5:32 PM | Report abuse

Maybe it's time for the United States to establish a Josef Mengele Memorial Endowment for the propagation of torture!

Posted by: ruinedbruin | April 7, 2009 5:42 PM | Report abuse

Does Obama have clay feet?

Posted by: ruinedbruin | April 7, 2009 5:44 PM | Report abuse

Based on nothing but what I read in newspapers and blogs, I believe that Obama wants to try to keep the lid on prosecutions of members of the Bush administration until after the 2012 election.

Posted by: dickdata | April 7, 2009 5:49 PM | Report abuse

If that's the best anyone can do on behalf of torture--"show me it doesn't work"--then we might be in trouble. Torture is considered counterproductive by plenty of experts in interrogation. There's a good reason why those CIA operatives insisted on legal protection for what they were being ordered to do: they knew their actions constituted torture. Several former interrogators have said as much.

The testimony of the terrorists--for it's true, several of them are confirmed terrorists--agrees in so many particulars, that it's not possible to consider their testimony made up. It's not like they had a chance to get together and coordinate testimonies. In fact, their statements on their treatment in prison are much more reliable than anything they said otherwise.

Dan's cited so many references and articles debunking the "kept-us-safe" claims of Bush and Cheney, that it's not worth listing them here. But their biggest claimed victories are either circular or turn out to have been nothing at all--often grandiose fantasies planted by FBI agents leading suspects on.

And an important larger point: it's not incompatible at all, to be outraged by the crimes (and yes, torture and rendition are crimes), and to want the country kept safe. For one thing, there's the matter of terrorist recruitment, which our invasion of Iraq and our abusive prisons have helped increase. But then there's the matter of how to combat terrorists most effectively. Paranoia and adventurism work to their advantage. Selective military action (like the initial campaign against the Taliban) can be appropriate. Surveillance of suspects, and freezing of suspect assets--in other words, law-enforcement-type activities--are also appropriate. Abduction and imprisonment--more along the lines of espionage--of important targets is also appropriate.

It's possible to be a humanitarian, and also support vigorous defense of our country. However, I will never support the complete abandonment of the principles on which this country was founded--the dignity and fundamental right to life and freedom of the individual--in the name of national defense. To take military, or legal, or clandestine, action against a group or an individual, it's because we have good information that they're engaged in something extremely harmful to us. In that case, we can justly claim they've forfeited their right to freedom.

Even in that instance, we as a nation owe it to the world and to ourselves to at least respect the fundamental humanity of an individual. That's good policy, in order to gain intelligence from the prisoners, and also in order to mitigate the hatred of our nation worldwide.

Posted by: whizbang9a | April 7, 2009 5:53 PM | Report abuse

The Federal Military Commissions Act of 2006 folks... allows all of this to happen. Allows our dear leader to name anyone he wishes without warrant, an "enemy combatant." "But the people at Guantanamo are terrorists!", some may argue. No, they are not. They can be anyone, like you and I, that were unfortunate enough to be called "enemy combatants" by the Bush administration. We don't KNOW these guys are terrorists for sure. Usually, a person is innocent until proven guilty. The FMCA allows anyone our government names to be quite the opposite. America is DEAD, folks. The more we sit around twiddling our thumbs, the less we can do to revive it. Let it be known: GTMO is an American concentration camp. We were once so proud of our war-heroes that saved Europe from Hitler's 3rd Reich. Now, our government has sunken as low as Hitler. Remember. ANY country has the potential to become Nazi Germany. It's a matter of whether or not we the people let it. May one day our constitution mean something again.

Posted by: kogejoe | April 7, 2009 6:31 PM | Report abuse

Who can believe the red cross???? The ahabs always accuse them of dirt.Right? I voted for Obama but he needs to get up and act like he has a pair. Bush and band are guilty of sooooo much but big O is going to let that slide? Anyone should find these people guilty first,then kill them and their fifth cousin's removed.Do it so it does not cost much. Get them and all these border runners we have killing off kids and drop them off out in the ocean from 5000 feet,no chute problem over with.If they talk they get to live. "trial first tho" By the way the red cross was selling hotel soap to G I's on the beach in Lebonan when they could not get any.If Bush and band are pros we will forget the airplane rides!


Posted by: m-walters | April 7, 2009 6:38 PM | Report abuse

So the scenario I laid out is not realistic? Yet the ticking time bomb scenario that is relied upon by the republican party is highly realistic?
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Yes, it is not realistic. I makes people get a glazed look in their eyes, nod politely without making eye contact, and suddenly remember important business elsewhere.

As for the “ticking time bomb scenario”, I believe that’s a TV show, not reality.

Posted by: ZZim | April 7, 2009 7:23 PM | Report abuse

I like torturing torturers. Just to show them how it feels, so that they will never do it again. Get it?
Posted by: Pillai

_____
And Bush had Khalid Shekih Mohammed, the guy who sawed off the head of Daniel Pearl and planned 9/11, waterboarded and hopefully soon executed so he will never do it again.. You see I do get it. You two think alike...

Posted by: sovine08 | April 7, 2009 7:29 PM | Report abuse

I kinda figure it like this, if the CIA had beat a terrorist for 16 hours straight with a limp noodle the Red Cross would call it torture because we denied him of needed sleep. Wow big deal, I'm realy upset with my government because they may have prevented another terrorist attack on American soil. Poor Hussein, he didn't get his sleep or his goats milk.
Well the Red Cross wasn't there, and a lot they claim is heresay, and frankly my dear, being as I'm a veteren of one unpopular war where we were all accused of being baby killers by people like Hanoi Jane and scary Kerry, I don't give a damn.
Let it lie, your still alive.
Get over it and get a life.

Posted by: jhnjdy | April 7, 2009 10:38 PM | Report abuse

I could argue Monica Goodling jeopardized the economy too.

By destroying all potential for respect of The United States in the world ? by- hey - you tell me - this chick outta Pat Robertson's all goody goody Jesus saves for MY personal afterlife, MY selfish PRIVATE AFTERWORLD - (GTF outta the way too by the way, I'll KILL for MY personal saviour - unless you believe too ? )Regent Uni- no, university.

Monica hired Lane McCotter- NOTORIOUS on the record for abuse as warden - NOTE Cheney was just indicted months ago for private prison investments- NOTE - Lane McCotter - after being BANNED from one state iirc, now runs ? his own private prison unit in - oh where is it ? Utah ( New slogan for Utah, don't get busted with a J here - or it's waterboardin' time + dogs while you wear the black trash bag raincoats naked crapping yourself listening to 140 db white noise ?? ? ?- can they make that FIT on a billboard ? probably would increase highway deaths - people trying to read the sign about Stay outta Utah...) ANYWAY - maybe it's Utah he's BANNED from to be fair, it's out west.

Monica - good ole jesus loving Monica - picked THIS monster - the WORST candidate - to shape the prisons in Iraq.

THIS can NOT be repaired.

NO SOLDIERS can fix that.

forget flowers- soldiers could dangle CitiBank credit cards - oh wait, they already get special cards like this for themselves- nice perk for the card issuer- I can see some soldier in a fox hole - bullets flying goin 'LATE FEE ! ? WHAT ? LATE FEE - I'm gonna F'KILL CITIBANK )- OR they could dangle 100k bundles of Benjiman - yes, 1000 bills could dangle from a gun I think - STILL won't fix it.

NOTHING can fix what Monica did when she CHERRY PICKED Lane McCotter.

I can't believe no press or media outlet will touch this - or go into it.

It's NEAR the core.

Monica can get us Rove.

Rove knows it too.

Posted by: CountrywideLockheed | April 7, 2009 11:58 PM | Report abuse

Remember- as you were sold Terror- which justified this useless torment of our own species - THANK YOU for showing us the BETTER PATH Bush - and oh yeah, super christian Monica ! - I don't think Jesus would approve of BODY OVENS at a prison Monica... Do you ?

Oh, but you wanted this - I don't doubt that - you WILL kill for your personal - note - it's ALWAYS PERSONAL with the whackjob sociopaths isn't it - or wait - maybe that's it - the sociopaths keep it impersonal perhaps -either way - Picking Lane McCotter is like - you do the math !

I do say- people who INVEST into END DAYS models ?

I'd say that's EXACTLY what you'd HAVE to think to TAKE a Countrywide mortgage- you'd HAVE to think the world was ending, or at least feel hopeless enough to go buy a countrywide mortgage.

I wouldn't put it past bush to be in on 9.11 - literally HELP promote a sense using Fox and NewsCorp - of hopelessness- THEN ? Neil Bush style ? Serve em up all giant credit cards, home mortgages.

RECALL - Fox ran CountryWide ads -back to back with DiTech DAY IN - DAY OUT - in between the terror TV pilots. I do wonder - they seem to have cancelled the pilot Shock and Awe- maybe they replaced that with Dave Ramsey's CHRISTIAN ECONOMICS show on how you can live debt free- AND support END DAYS MENTALITY TOO and not go insane ! or become dependent on TV sold Eli Lilly products !

McLellan is a way in on the death star, just dig around his comments on Cheney, the turkey shoot and Fox.

Posted by: CountrywideLockheed | April 8, 2009 12:04 AM | Report abuse

You'd think Israel would object to the body ovens at Abu Ghraib.

Why not ?

Posted by: CountrywideLockheed | April 8, 2009 12:05 AM | Report abuse

TESTIMONY I've seen says those ovens were used.

Google US soldier testimony on Abu Ghraib.

The pictures were NOT all of it.

The pictures WE have are from just ONE person - their master CD - THEY took.

YOU can interpolate what other potential abuse happened if the photo's we have are from just ONE person.

I doubt they got around Betty Crocker Oven Bake treat time.

Where is THAT story.

I'd go after the ovens.

This could put Israel on a REAL hot seat too.

Because ? they would HAVE to be NOT in support of body ovens.

partisan OR religious differing.

ovens at Abu Ghraib could unite Israel with Arab world if you think about it -

Maybe Washington Post will do something there and bring focus to it.

FULL discovery process has to happen before catharsis for all who passed THROUGH Abu Ghraib - all who knew someone who died there - (thanks Monica - TWICE on all of this - my god - what is it - the most religious people are the monsters- Monica PROBABLY just wants to be left alone, I say - no, she really DID blow an entire nation state)...

Israel morally has NO choice but to unite with the Arabs who lost lives at Abu Ghraib. Those ovens were used.

google testimony from US soldiers.

I guess it's just too provocative for corporate media to touch - fear of alienation of advertisers. Washington Post JC Penney give her a Diamond ads will go if WP provokes Israel into a corner FORCING them to agree here on the use of OVENS for PEOPLE !

Hope someone here grows from this.

Posted by: CountrywideLockheed | April 8, 2009 12:10 AM | Report abuse

I guess I have no tolerance for a divided humanity.

Posted by: CountrywideLockheed | April 8, 2009 12:11 AM | Report abuse

I think it's fair to distill the conflict presented in this article to say- it's not about who abused who -

it's simply that ANYONE would torture ANYONE.

Human to human.

That's where I have issue.

I'd say if you are being tortured, or ARE torturing ? something isn't right.

People who promote it from the keyboard ?

may their codependency torment them to proclaim otherwise.

It's tormenting enough to wake up to further and further observances - let's just say - of our species. Europe seems to love the dungeons ! ?

ok ok - let's not geocode or assign to a territory sociopathy in humanity.

Yet ? Fox sure did a good job promoting that.

Here - on THIS moving tectonic plate - go figure- THESE people - identifiable - ONLY by their religious affiliation to Islam ? THEY are the ones - let's create some derogatory names- repeat them - even using sister network Fox Business News - which is a prop just to inject political statements using economy as obfuscative cover... ?

I'm not biting.

FACTS ARE:

Monica Goodling promoted an environment for Abu Ghraib -

and Countrywide sold off the LAND of the US - piece by piece -not nearly in entirety ? but that they did it at ALL ?

it's actually not so much of the US sold off by Countrywide, but the economic impact has been like a comet.

Too bad stimulus didn't include 200 BILLION for NEW EXPANDED FUNCTIONAL DOJ !

to go AFTER ALL those who got us here.

religious ideology - love thy neighbor - shock and awe- I don't think so.

sociopaths.

to date Monica Goodling is NOT in Federal PRISON.

Posted by: CountrywideLockheed | April 8, 2009 12:19 AM | Report abuse

Think about this- as these thoughts became on my mind yesterday.

US Native Americans (wow, strange line there) - but the originals (Spinal Tap's first name, until they found there already was a band called the Originals, so they named themselves the New Originals !)

The natives that WERE here- pushed onto reservations.

THAT is where the CURRENT natives of the US - are finding themselves.

a Reservation where cheap dollars are printed - and passed around - where abuse at top levels of economic power and political power are rampant- masked by the wonder of TV, online, newspaper and radio when merged together under blankets of attempt - AND contempt - to Tony Snow us all to death.

US Citizen's haven't realized it.

The NEW - not Europeans - have shown up - it's those that know the world ropes on financial products, and global economy- have shown up.

And all CURRENT holders into nation state models ? are SUCKERS - while they are PLAYED LIKE A HARP to CDO's, SIV's and CDS's.

Silly Americans' wake up - if you think nationalism is so hot - try the nationstate wide web. the NWW ?

I don't think so -

it's the WORLD WIDE WEB-

it's GLOBAL media share
GLOBAL economy
GLOBAL trade

why are we still promoting what ?

division of the planet so we can justify using nuclear weapons over territories that we NOW KNOW are on the backs of MOVING TURTLES - or - ok ok - tectonic plates... same difference to some I suppose.

I sure hope it's not turtles all the way up !

Posted by: CountrywideLockheed | April 8, 2009 12:29 AM | Report abuse

I'm just surprised people are snowed by the medically prescribed nostalgia inducing programs like Wartime Stories with Ollie North.

Curl up the camp fire - relive those old days - get that lump in the throat - THEN - we'll just slip in the word Afghanistan a few times here or there, and you'll be on OUR page - fightin' for what's right ?

you know, like your parents retirement- and preventing Neil Bush esque criminals from looting your parents retirement -

whoops - too late

sure am glad we spent all that time on nameless faceless terrorists comin' to get us from a CAVE with WOODEN RIFLES who don't SPEAK ENGLISH ?

And now ? just 2 months ago ? Cheney - reiterates ? "A US WILL LIKELY BE HIT with a Nuclear weapon under Obama admin"

Gee- now it's WMD's in the FUTURE !

I think if you yell fire in a crowded theater ? you need to be held accoutnable, Cheney did this on Fox - stating a US city would be hit years ago - yet ? no intel -

I say if you yell 'MIGHT BE FIRE' in a crowded theater ? If the 6 foot 9 black guy who's really a pretty nice guy - puts you into a coma - he's fully entitled to - even IF he's a she and it was a sex change !

Where is the PRESS accountability to say - Hey Cheney - you can't just SAY the US will be hit - a US CITY that is - seems you have some intel on this ? lol

with a nuclear weapon.

Ah I see

believe in Jesus, FEAR TERROR forever (I WENT to homeland website - the GIF filename ? for their terror alerts ? there IS No ZERO ALERT STATUS gif - THAT is what homeland offers the kids psyches - FEAR TERROR FOREVER, NO DAMN GIF for ZERO ALERT)

FACT

in fact, everything I post is a fact as intended.

I just don't think most people want to look at the truth as it explicates.

Fact IS Countrywide took over Lockheed's lease.

Fact IS Countrywide decided it would do a NEW means to back the mortgages, take them DIRECTLY TO WALL STREET !

FAct is - that land WAS PART of the US-

fact is Fox News was #1 promoter of Countrywide

Fact is Bank of America had CW in scope for a LONG time

Fact is General Tommy Franks decided he'd rather discover a career on Board of Directors for Bank of America

than manage that silly 5 month planned War on Terror he and bush spent in first months of bush's alleged presidency.

I have to say alleged to remain SANE and LEGAL.

Posted by: CountrywideLockheed | April 8, 2009 12:37 AM | Report abuse

Why do I reason it's proper to say Alleged presidency with Bush ?

because - he's not been tried.

I think I've uncovered a GREAT wedge into the bushman here.

Seems a judge in Spain wants to try Gonzalez for crimes violating the Geneva convention on Torture- imagine the BEST insight I have - coming LAST - on a story like this.

Back of Barbara Olshanky's book - a civil rights attorney ? she includes a copy of a very interesting letter - ESPECIALLY in context of Spain. heh heh ehhe


way I see it ?


this letter says - Mr. PResident - as advising attorney - I depart here- and you may be held liable up to and including the death penalty for violations of the Geneva convention - it's a real letter.

HERE is what I say can happen.

someone sends the Judge in Spain a copy ?

or let's them know about it ?

That FREE's GOnzy, and it's a DIRECT LINK to bush

it was written TO bush man

prior ? it was just a damned interesting letter.

NOW ? it says - no no and NO - here is where I TOLD'zdzdzdd the presidnt'zdzd I'm no longer a part of this, and he's on his own. BLACK and WHITE - or white on black -however you want to read it -

We could see Bush enter international criminal courts on this - unless I'm not sane.

I thought it was a viable playout - anyone else ?

google - might be able to find that letter.

I should type it in and post it- I type faster than I talk.

Posted by: CountrywideLockheed | April 8, 2009 12:41 AM | Report abuse

to all you nation state lovers ?

hey - I support global tourism too !

Posted by: CountrywideLockheed | April 8, 2009 12:43 AM | Report abuse

wow

Just imagine

Bretton II comes about - NEAR same time nuclear weapons show up ?

TWO clear signs - nation statism can not persist - without arbitrary USE of nuclear weapons.

I find those who go after Iran - or anyone really- who wants a nuke- to miss the mark.

The mark is - no more nationalism ?

no more borders

no more borders ?

I'll leave you with a wonderful story.

Long time ago, black horses and white hores lived apart.

Black horses had the water hole, White horses had the grasses

They would switch - but always- never having both.

One day - god comes down - and says- I will solve this.

Next day ? All the white horses had black stripes - all the black horses had white stripes -

I say- hey - Iran is only a problem or as it is only Iran so long as nationalism is propped up.

I question with skepticism those who promote these issues of nation state conflict.

It's as if the IQ parade stopped at 143 or something.

Where is the realization ? it's the WORLD wide web - GLOBAL culture

global economy
global trade

how LONG can you promote isolationism disguised as patriotism ? oh wait

patriotism IS isolationism

screw that

hey - I think this keyboard was made in China

turn yours over

and everything ELSE in your patriotic house - while Countrywide sold off the land TAKEN from the PRIOR SUCKER NATIVES...

Wake up CURRENT Native Americans

you are about to discover a new relationship with a NEW reservation.

What's LEFT after CW sold off the US to - ALL over the world -

We ARE the NEW Native Americans - and I do say - it's not looking good at the reservation.

that's about it too

so long as you hold onto nationalism -you'll have 'reservations' to place the losers that didn't make the grade.

Look at GITMO - same model played out

Blair Witch I say on bush - no redneck is THIS smart.

but you know /

while pro life- bush never stayed one execution in texas. - at that - he held the record.

THAT's the man to represent America ?

lol

oh boyz'd we gotz'dz'dz problems -

I bet this year ? citi issues more credit cards OUT of the US than IN - ha ha ha


Posted by: CountrywideLockheed | April 8, 2009 12:51 AM | Report abuse

Oh my - let's go use nuclear weapons to get what we need from Bretton II

HA HA AH

sometimes Planet of the Apes is a better view than reality.

Posted by: CountrywideLockheed | April 8, 2009 12:52 AM | Report abuse

Pretty sad when the RED CROSS is the ONLY voice on compassion.

Hey WP - let's see some more DIAMOND ADS or OIL ADS

Posted by: CountrywideLockheed | April 8, 2009 12:53 AM | Report abuse

What we are witnessing here ?

is one religious fundamentalist group - Pat Robertson's Regent's Monica Goodling hiring the WORST possible candidate to head up Iraq's prisons ?

vs. Another religious fundamentalism.

I'd wager we had a COUP in the US.

Rove is no dummy - he can win on getting the compulsives vote - those who HAVE to vote to protect their PERSONAl - PRIVATE - SELFISH - EMPTY afterlife plan -

all the while throwing THIS world out the window -

for the next

sound familiar anyone ?

Posted by: CountrywideLockheed | April 8, 2009 1:04 AM | Report abuse

I think the news on PRIVATE legal counsel to investigate DOJ from Alaska's recent upheavel - on bad prosecutorial data...

Is INTERESTING to say the least.

Here is a judge that is saying -

Department of Justice ? you can NOT be relied upon - and DOJ can't - not until outside counsel.

Posted by: CountrywideLockheed | April 8, 2009 1:05 AM | Report abuse

Article title was:

"How many others were tortured ?"

TRY - every American and WORLD citizen.

Posted by: CountrywideLockheed | April 8, 2009 1:06 AM | Report abuse

I'd say ANY US employee of the CIA - Goss's CIA that is...

who took place in torture ?

tortured the ENTIRE US MILITARY SOLDIER BASE who has FOUGHT and LOST THEIR LIVES to protecting the IDEAL that THIS nation - so long as Fiat or Bretton II CAN last ? does NOT torture.

I'd say what PROBABLY went down ?

Bush said to Saudi's - ok ok - I'll rid you of Saddam - I want oil rights for Iraq.

Hey - JUST this summer- Western oil went BACK online first time since Saddam.

GO FIGURE - Iraqi Oil Minister said -hey hey hey - what's this HUNT oil - Condi ? out of Texas - that's seeking to make deals OUTSIDE us ? heh heh

Hunt oil has some GOOD discovery in process - I wager.

Condi let ME know the deal "I can't believe I'm standing on the actual ground where my personal saviour jesus christ walked"

Hey Condi - it's Jesus THE Christ - the CHRISTOS - INDIVIDED model for species - check it out - it TRUMPS nationalism.

There IS no Iran in your GOD's eyes eh ? oh wait Condi, let me guess, moving tectonic plates, oh no'z'z'zdzdz - moving territories for static models ? oh no'z'z'z

How did Stanford ever let you in - how did they let you OUT !

Posted by: CountrywideLockheed | April 8, 2009 1:11 AM | Report abuse

Last g-20 put Bretton II - GONE DADDY GONE.

Wait and See.

News at all

Washington Post spends too much time on JC Penny Diamond ads with Exxon oil to go after the REAL news.

Obama's gonna come out "Folks, America is broke, we tried to prevent crisis, that's about it - now, you have to see -it's a global economy, a global media share, and frankly ? all we have left is tourism - no one even WANTS the land that's buried in toxic debt through Bush admins allowance for CountryWide and others to just sell it all off - and jeopardize our economic system...."

maybe he won't mention bush.

only because as GOP likes to say - "Now is no time to look back" wow.

so much for AFT view in video games.

Posted by: CountrywideLockheed | April 8, 2009 1:14 AM | Report abuse

Obama then goes

Now - as to jobs...

America as a theme park WILL have lemonade stands folks - don't get me wrong - we're working on jobs.


Posted by: CountrywideLockheed | April 8, 2009 1:15 AM | Report abuse

Asolescent jobs for an adolescent nation state LAST run by - ? well ? an adolescent.

Vote Jesus end times folks ?

yeah - let's give THAT to the kids to give em hope.

are we above a hanging ?

Posted by: CountrywideLockheed | April 8, 2009 1:16 AM | Report abuse

I will say

I like Dan Froomin's face though.

I read faces okay I think.

Happy - intelligent - caring - good happiness in that face - genuine.

Probably great with kids - goofball and serious side.

If I were you Dan - I'd explore how to bind terror sell to protect Merica + countrywide sellOUT Merica through known organization NewsCorp.

wasn't badly crafted - I mean, nationalism IS tourism now.

Think about it - people in the US talk about France and Germany like theme parks

"This year, we're going to theme park France.."

might as well be.

and besides- no child should have to embrace use or potential use of a nuclear weapon for what ?

kids these days are http://

GLOBAL

WORLD wide web

NOT nation state wide web

YET? they inherit the debt from cleanup from bush's savings and loan part DEUX -

AND inherit - oh my

Homeland has a KIDS section

not ONLY do you GET to FEAR terror FOREVER kids- I don't know you Dan, but I hope you're laughing - and at the same time - crying... BUT kids also get to learn about ?

I don't think ANY child should EVER be at homeland security - the entire organization is a VIOLENT OBSTRUCTION to their psyche.

Greenspan said - you HAVE to have potential for hope - if not hope - to live - healthily.

presence of 'homeland' takes that away.

I hope Obama admin takes out homeland next.

What an eye sore -

protect what ?

NO manufacturing jobs

tax loops for the corps to leave the US

HA- DEBt out the wazoo ?

HELOC's to break people ?

record foreclosures ?

it goes on and on.

protect what way of life mr. bush ?

who wants to take away THIS ?

let them.

please - we're THIRD WORLD NOW folks.

education

we rank 3rd world

health

3rd world

BUT - pro life will get the vote !

?? ? ??????????

wow - pro WHAT LIFE -

gotta SEE that LIFE through honey -

it's the ENTIRE LIFE you better be pro about.

lol

Posted by: CountrywideLockheed | April 8, 2009 1:27 AM | Report abuse

The damage done by torture doesn't stop with those tortured. The greater damage is to the country that allows it. Torturing degrades America and American values.

Justice can be achieved without torture.

Israel captured, held, tried,and ultimately executed Adolph Eichmann. Yet, even with the provocation of 6 million murders, Israel did not torture him. This is well documented for those who doubt it.

Posted by: Keesvan | April 8, 2009 4:10 PM | Report abuse

Why aren't Bush & his dear buddy "Big Dick" Cheney tried for WAR CRIMES.? We pester China about human rights violations, lets enforce them in our own country. Why let them go unpunished ?

Posted by: gatorsn09 | April 9, 2009 12:32 AM | Report abuse

If we do not investigate / prosecute these highest of all crimes that were committed in our names, then we are all complicit in them. This is dark, dark moment in our history.

Posted by: eddieo1 | April 9, 2009 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Anyone supporting state sponsored torture is an enemy of the state and constitute a gathering threat to the constitution. Such personnel must be identified and made accountable as internal saboteurs to the ideals of the United States. Should torture have been committed? It is an irrelivent answer. It was not allowed by our constitution, international law, the geneva convention or the US Army Field Manual.
Therefore, all culpable are willing criminals of poor moral fiber and judgement who today seek to hide their actions. If they themselves believed their actions where in the dedicated of saving the Nation they would proudly stand as patriots to be counted. But they hide and seek to remain hidden--afraid to be named and defined.
Let those true to the laws of the United States hunt them--as those whom in the past have searched out war criminals within their own citizenry.

Posted by: pac1 | April 10, 2009 12:27 PM | Report abuse

How many other captives were tortured?

John Yoo wrote that the pain had to be equivalent to the pain of organ failure -- or imminent death. Well then, every captive who died during brutal interrogation was tortured.

It is now known that during 2002 and 2003 every captive held at Bagram had their wrists shackled to the ceiling, with a bag over their head, punctuated by random beatings from the GIs in the 519 Intelligence Battalion and 577 Military Police Company. Even captives who were still healing from very serious wounds, like Omar Khadr, were shackled to the ceiling. Multiple captives actually died from this treatment. I suggest this meets Yoo's definition of "pain equivalent to organ failure or imminent death".

So, the minimum lowest figure is hundreds of captives were tortured -- Even by Yoo's definition.

Posted by: arcticredriver | April 12, 2009 9:38 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company