Showing posts with label torture is illegal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label torture is illegal. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 6, 2010

Yoo hypocrite

By GottaLaff



Via L.A. Times Letters to the Editor (bolding mine):

Re “Yoo feels at ease among opposition,” March 29

It's pretty obvious why John Yoo likes living in Berkeley.

He can delude himself into thinking that most of those who disapprove of his actions are "self-indulgent, pot-smoking hippies."

He imagines himself a quasi-martyr living among these "troglodytes."

He may be a bright lawyer, but his introspective properties are clearly deficient.

****

It is good to know that Californians can sleep well at night because John Yoo, professor of law at the University of California's Boalt Hall law school, believes he is the "shining beacon of capitalism" -- while employed by the state of California, accepting state funds for his salary and accruing time for his taxpayer-funded retirement.

How does one spell "hypocrite"?

****

Torture usually leaves psychological scars that never heal and that subject its victims to lifelong illnesses and abuse, and can even lead to suicide.

Yoo excluded this important aspect from his definition of torture in order to make torture more acceptable to the Bush administration and to advance his career, despite the fact that the effects of torture on human psychology have been well documented during the past 100 years.

My original piece on the article referred to in these letters is here.

Monday, March 29, 2010

John Yoo: I'm "a shining beacon of capitalism and democracy surrounded by a sea of Marxism"

By GottaLaff



John Yoo, one of the architects of the "torture memos", is employed at U.C. Berkeley. He says he is very happy teaching at Boalt Hall School of Law.

He seemed perfectly happy when he sparred with Jon Stewart on The Daily Show.

He seemed perfectly happy when he wrote the memos, too. Weeee!

He now seems happy to throw around words like "Marxism" and "troglodytes" when he describes the very people from whom he's happy to take happy checks from and with whom he continues his happy employment.

He seems more than happy to continue to defend the "success" derived from torture.

He's bursting with happy when he sees himself as a "shining beacon of ... democracy."

Yoo lie!

"I think of myself as being West Berlin during the Cold War, a shining beacon of capitalism and democracy surrounded by a sea of Marxism," Yoo observes, sipping iced tea in the faculty club lounge, a wan smile registering the discomfort of colleagues walking by en route to the bar.

He sees his neighbors as the human figures of "a natural history museum of the 1960s," the Telegraph Avenue tableau of a graying, long-haired, pot-smoking counterculture stuck in the ideology's half-century-old heyday.

"It's like looking at the panoramic displays of troglodytes sitting around the campfire with their clubs. Here, it's tie-dye and marijuana. It's just like the 1960s, with the Vietnam War still to protest."

He's just one happy, clappy guy... who just doesn't get it:

Yoo sees the investigation as political score-settling by those who disagreed with the tough war-on-terror policies of the Bush White House. [...]

He sees the persistent protests of his fitness to teach law as the campaign of a radical community intolerant of views that don't accord with their own.

Yes, that's it. Brutalizing people, often innocent ones, had nothing to do with it. Invading a sovereign country who did not invade us, killing thousands upon thousands, in a fraudulent war is just "score-settling". It's all about our "intolerance".

But at least he's happy.

In fact, he's not only happy, he's "amused":

Yoo seems more amused than uncomfortable as the center of controversy.

Isn't that droll?

Yes, Torture Guy is having a good chuckle over objections to his crafting the legal justification for killing, maiming, and psychologically destroying fellow human beings.

That's some sense of humor.

Here's something else Mr. Happy is jolly about:

Yoo doesn't rule out a return to public service should Republican conservatives regain the White House.

Oh goody. If that's not a reason for utter ecstasy, I don't know what is.

Yoo seems at peace living in Berkeley, even though he disparages the community as an enclave of self-satisfied extremists intolerant of those who think outside the liberal mind-set.

This is a man at peace, after what he did, after his own intolerance for, you know, our system of justice, after shredding the Constitution.

At peace.

In that case, may Yoo rest in peace.

Tuesday, March 2, 2010

VIDEO: Fox News allows John Yoo to make excuses for torture

By GottaLaff



F. Yoo.

"Waterboarding is not something that was cooked up in Cheney's office or something like that," he said. "Waterboarding is something that we had a lot of information on. Twenty thousand American soldiers and officers had undergone it and did not suffer any lasting pain, harm or suffering. So, when we looked at the statute that congress wrote and we looked at that evidence, we in the Justice Department and a lot of other lawyers too said that we don't think it amounts to torture because we would not be doing it to our own soldiers otherwise."

Waterboarding, which is indeed part of the military's Survival, Evade, Resist and Escape (SERE) training, is in fact torture.

Oh please, you slimy thug, allow someone, anyone, to waterboard you. Then we'll see if you "think" it amounts to torture.

That BushCo's little gang of abusers has been allowed to skate is literally a crime. Now Yoo feels oh so comfortable popping onto the Tee Vee Machine chatting his fool head off with his special Fox friends, justifying what should be considered criminal behavior.

And ClusterFox is aiding and abetting.

F. Yoo.

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

CIA historian: “The debate’s over, Torture stained the honor of the United States.”

By GottaLaff

http://letustalk.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/waterboarding.jpg

Former BushCo employee Marc Thiessen has been publicly ripping President Obama's national security/terrorism policies, and builds a verbal shrine to those of the Bush crime family.

Watch the video of Thiessen get a royal smackdown by Lawrence O'Donnell here. Then watch it again, because it's that good.

Now read about another evisceration of Thiessen, this time by a Pulitzer Prize-winning CIA historian:

It was not the most successful intelligence program in the history of the CIA by a long shot,” he emails. Weiner added that by the long view of the CIA’s history, there is no more debate.

The debate’s over,” he said. “Torture stained the honor of the United States.”

Weiner also strongly contested the notion that Obama’s approach represents a dialing back to a pre-9/11 mentality. “The Obama administration has some pretty robust programs going on, killing suspects all over Afghanistan and Pakistan with armed drones,” he said.

Weiner also contested another Thiessen chesnut: That the Obama administration is killing too many terrorists, rather than subjecting more of them to enhanced interrogation. Weiner dismissed Thiessen’s case as tantamount to arguing that targeting terrorists abroad “more closely resembles treason than counterterrorism.


Treason indeed.

Of course, Dickless McHeartStent needs to sell his future book, so he'll join Thiessen's irrational, drool-stained love affair with torture, and continue to sputter and stammer about his man crush on waterboarders and how he and his band of thugs saved America. ... after they allowed 9/11 to happen.

Gradually, we will eradicate the toxic Bush stain.

Thursday, February 11, 2010

Yoo asked for it

By GottaLaff

Yoo hooooo!

As reports circulate that the Justice Department has softened its criticism of attorney John Yoo for memos approving the Bush administration's treatment of terrorism suspects, several prominent lawyers are urging a federal appeals court in San Francisco to hold Yoo accountable.

They have submitted arguments opposing dismissal of a prisoner's lawsuit that accuses the former Justice Department attorney of providing a legal cover for torture. The suit covers much of the same ground as the department's ethics investigation of Yoo. [...]

Yoo says he always gave good-faith legal advice and denies authorizing torture. Those claims could be tested in a San Francisco federal court, however, unless Yoo can persuade a court to dismiss Jose Padilla's lawsuit. [...]

Yoo has appealed, saying the suit would interfere with presidential war-making authority. The Obama administration has taken his side, arguing that courts should not meddle in questions of national security.

But in filings over the last 10 days, groups of constitutional law professors, legal ethics scholars and former government attorneys urged the court to keep Padilla's suit alive.

They argue that this is not a dispute over legal advice, as Yoo contends, but the case of a lawyer who allegedly stepped out of his role to take part in planning detention and interrogation policies, and then devised legal opinions to justify those policies.

And who are some of these very principled, very learned, very ethical lawyers who support the novel concept of upholding the-- What's it called again? Oh yeah-- U.S. Constitution? Here's who:

Erwin Chemerinsky, law school dean at UC Irvine; Alan Morrison, an assistant law dean at George Washington and former director of Public Citizen Litigation Group; and Norman Dorsen of New York University, former president of the American Civil Liberties Union.

Also, Stanford's Deborah Rhode and former California Supreme Court Justice Cruz Reynoso, not to mention Bruce Fein, special assistant to the director of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel in President Ronald Reagan's administration.

They stressed the importance of applying ethical standards to lawyers who advise the president on constitutional issues.

There is much more here. (h/t: VNDNBRG)

And here:

*****

All my previous posts on this subject matter can be found here; That link includes one specific to only Fayiz al-Kandari's story here. Here are audio and video interviews with Lt. Col. Wingard, one by David Shuster, one by Ana Marie Cox, and more. My guest commentary at BuzzFlash is here.

Lt. Col. Barry Wingard is a military attorney who represents Fayiz Al-Kandari in the Military Commission process and in no way represents the opinions of his home state. When not on active duty, Colonel Wingard is a public defender in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

If you are inclined to help rectify these injustices: Twitterers, use the hashtag #FreeFayiz. We have organized a team to get these stories out. If you are interested in helping Fayiz out, e-mail me at The Political Carnival, address in sidebar to the right; or tweet me at @GottaLaff.

If you'd like to see other ways you can take action, go here and scroll down to the end of the article.

Then read Jane Mayer's book The Dark Side. You'll have a much greater understanding of why I post endlessly about this, and why I'm all over the CIA deception issues, too.

More of Fayiz's story here, at Answers.com.

Sunday, January 10, 2010

Report: CIA planned to 'rendition' suspects in Germany

By GottaLaff

Report: I'm reporting a report, it's been reported. My sources are confidential because of the sensitive nature of the sensitivity of the as of yet unreported report that I'm reporting.

Reportedly--now I'm not saying this for certain, but it's out there-- this happened, according to unnamed sources, or so it's been reported:

The CIA had 25 agents in Germany after the September 11 attacks and planned to "rendition" illegally al-Qaeda suspects without informing the German government, Spiegel magazine reported Sunday.

"It was about grabbing people without the Germans knowing about it," the German weekly magazine cited an unnamed former CIA agent as saying. "We were planning stuff that was totally illegal."

The plan went so far that other parts of the Central Intelligence Agency were in the loop, but in the end it was scrapped because of objections by the agency's German section, Spiegel cited its source as saying.
As soon as they report more in another report, I'll report it to you, sources say.

Tuesday, July 7, 2009

Guantanamo Open After January 2010?

By GottaLaff

http://aseekingspirit.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/gitmo-prisoners02.jpg

There seems to be news breaking today about various torture-and/or-detainee-related items. Now here's one more. But please remember, it's not only about torture, it's about our so-called legal system (read: military commissions).

Via Spencer Ackerman:

[...] I’m surprised it hasn’t gotten more attention, so here goes again. Pentagon General Counsel Jeh Johnson suggested to the Senate Armed Services Committee today that the difficulties inherent in bringing legal charges against (or deciding on preventive detention for) about 220 detainees at Guantanamo Bay means that some continued detention past President Obama’s January 2010 deadline for closing the detention facility was likely, “whether at Guantanamo or somewhere else.” That sounded like the first concession from a senior administration official that Guantanamo Bay wouldn’t definitely be shuttered by the deadline.

[...] I’m still seeking clarification for whether Johnson is speaking for the administration here [...]

Meanwhile, Lara Jakes of the Associated Press reports — I hope I can blog this — that after today’s hearing, Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), the chairman of the committee, remarked, “What we’re focusing on is the procedures that would be used wherever they’re tried, whether they keep Gitmo open or closed.

Bear with me. I've only just begun to fight, as they say, for those who badly need support. I may even show up with Lt. Col. Wingard on a major progressive radio station in L.A. soon. Stay tuned...

Tuesday, June 9, 2009

Six Scotland Yard officers are accused of 'waterboarding' drug suspects

By GottaLaff

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/12_02/watertortureDM_468x404.jpg
We set such a fine example, why shouldn't everyone want to be just like us? Next thing you know, they'll privatize health care:

Six Scotland Yard officers were accused last night of inflicting torture by 'waterboarding'.
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Are any of you flattered yet? Me neither.

Four suspects are said to have been subjected to simulated drowning during searches of two properties for drugs.

The technique became notorious for its use by U.S. agents on terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay. It has since been banned by President Obama.

It is alleged that the Met officers, who have all been suspended, also repeatedly ducked the suspects' heads in buckets of water.

Ooo, buckets! Getting creative are we?

Most of the alleged victims are believed to have been foreign nationals detained in North London last year. [...]

One insider said: 'It beggars belief that something like this could be going on in the modern Metropolitan Police. It appears certain officers on this squad were completely out of control.' [...]

An internal Yard inquiry has also been launched into the torture claims - which has already raised concerns about the apparent lack of supervision by senior Met commanders.

Follow the link for more.

Sunday, June 7, 2009

VIDEO--Accountability for Torture; Panel: Rachel Maddow, Ron Suskind, Vince Warren, Ricardo Sanchez

By GottaLaff



Via an e-mail:

[T]he Culture Project´s "Blueprint for Accountability" series launch at the Times Center on Sunday, May 31, with Rachel Maddow, General Ricardo Sanchez, Ron Suskind, and Vince Warren has generated rather historical news: General Sanchez, the former top coalition commander in Iraq, called for a truth commission to investigate abusive interrogation techniques. Sanchez is the first major figure from the Iraq theater who has called for accountability in response to the actions of the Bush administration.
It would have been nice if they called it "torture", and not "enhanced blahblahblah". If they're calling for a "truth" commission, the truth is, it's torture. No ifs, ands, or techniques.

Monday, May 18, 2009

Newly-Disclosed Memo Shows Bush Was Presented With Legal Alternative To Torture Program

By GottaLaff

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0b2f1DobGS0TI/610x.jpg
Drip... drip...swoooooosh!... Flood... Gush-sh!
A newly-disclosed 2005 memo, authored by then-State Department counselor Philip Zelikow, then-Acting Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England, and then-Deputy Assistant Secretary for Detainee Affairs Matthew Waxman, gave President Bush “clear and unequivocal advice encouraging a detainee interrogation system that followed humane practices that adhered to US and international law.” The memo was authored as the Bush administration was seeking a “fresh approach” handling terror detainee and just weeks after the OLC issued its second round of torture memos.

In the memo, the three Bush administration officials argue that the President should appoint a “special board” to “review general U.S. government detainee policy and operations” and “evaluate issues of effectiveness and intelligence value.”

While that review was taking place, the authors recommended that U.S. forces treat detainees in the so-called war on terror as if they were “civilian detainees under the law of war.” “This is the system generally being used by our forces in Iraq. Adopting this interim approach allows us to handle the detainees on a well understood basis that gives our forces clear, unambiguous guidelines for conduct,” they wrote, adding:

WE ARE NOT SAYING THAT THESE DETAINEES ARE, NECESSARILY ENTITLED TO THIS STATUS. TO BE CLEAR: WE ARE GIVING THEM A TEMPORARY STATUS THEY DO NOT DESERVE. BUT WE ARE NOT DOING THIS FOR THEM. WE ARE DOING IT FOR US.

Much more here.

Wednesday, May 13, 2009

Per intel, Cheney’s office: Waterboard Iraqi prisoner for Saddam/Al Qaeda connection

By GottaLaff

All roads lead straight to the Nation of Dick:

Robert Windrem, who covered terrorism for NBC, reports exclusively in The Daily Beast that:

*Two U.S. intelligence officers confirm that Vice President Cheney’s office suggested waterboarding an Iraqi prisoner, a former intelligence official for Saddam Hussein, who was suspected to have knowledge of a Saddam-al Qaeda connection.

*The former chief of the Iraq Survey Group, Charles Duelfer, in charge of interrogations, tells The Daily Beast that he considered the request reprehensible.

*Much of the information in the report of the 9/11 Commission was provided through more than 30 sessions of torture of detainees.

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

“To those who wanted or suspected a relationship, he would have been a guy who would know, so [White House officials] had particular interest,” Charles Duelfer, head of the Iraqi Survey Group and the man in charge of interrogations of Iraqi officials, told me. So much so that the officials, according to Duelfer, inquired how the interrogation was proceeding.

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

Duelfer will not disclose who in Washington had proposed the use of waterboarding, saying only: “The language I can use is what has been cleared.” In fact, two senior U.S. intelligence officials at the time tell The Daily Beast that the suggestion to waterboard came from the Office of Vice President Cheney. [...]

Everyone knew there would be more smiles in Washington if WMD stocks were found,” Duelfer said in the interview. “My only obligation was to find the truth. It would be interesting if there was WMD in May 2003, but what was more interesting to me was looking at the entire regime through the slice of WMD.”

But, Duelfer says, Khudayr in fact repeatedly denied knowing the location of WMD or links between Saddam’s regime and al Qaeda and was not subjected to any enhanced interrogation. Duelfer says the idea that he would have known of such links was “ludicrous".

This proposed use of enhanced interrogation techniques, or torture, in Iraq was not the only time these methods were actually used to derive information for a purpose other than the stated one—to derive intelligence about imminent threats to the United States following the 9/11 attacks.

An extensive analysis I conducted as a reporter for NBC News of the 9/11 Commission’s Final Report and its monograph on terrorist travel showed that much of what was reported about the planning and execution of the terror attacks on New York and Washington was based on the CIA's interrogations of high-ranking al Qaeda operatives who had been subjected to "enhanced interrogation techniques." [...]

In fact, information derived from the interrogations was central to the 9/11 Report’s most critical chapters, those on the planning and execution of the attacks.

The NBC analysis also showed—and agency and commission staffers concur—there was a separate, second round of interrogations in early 2004, specifically conducted to answer new questions from the 9/11 Commission after its lawyers had been left unsatisfied by the agency’s internal interrogation reports. [...]

A former senior U.S. intelligence official told me the Commission never expressed any concerns about techniques and even pushed for a second round of interrogations in early 2004, as the Commission was finishing up its work. The second round of interrogations sought by the Commission involved more than 30 separate interrogation sessions.

"Remember," the intelligence official said, "the Commission had access to the intelligence reports that came out of the interrogation. This didn't satisfy them. They demanded direct personal access to the detainees and the administration told them to go pound sand.” [...]

At least four operatives whose interrogation figured in the 9/11 Commission Report have claimed that they told interrogators critical information as a way to stop being "tortured." Those claims came during their hearings in the spring of 2007 at the U.S. military facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

For Duelfer, an experienced interrogator, the details now being laid out in CIA and White House memoranda and in congressional hearings cannot be justified.

Torture is illegal. Torture does not work. BushCo ordered torture. They broke the law. Can it be put any simpler than that?

Recent Posts