Some thoughts on Obama and the torture memos
On the topic of Obama’s decision to release the so-called “torture memos,” others have stated the basics already, and stated them well (see this and this, for example). In the latter article, Representative Peter Hoekstra of Michigan, ranking Republican on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, writes:
…[L]ast week Mr. Obama overruled the advice of his CIA director, Leon Panetta, and four prior CIA directors by releasing the details of the enhanced interrogation program. Former CIA director Michael Hayden has stated clearly that declassifying the memos will make it more difficult for the CIA to defend the nation.
Ponder that for a moment: not only the previous, but also the present CIA director—Obama’s own recent appointee—warned him of the dangers of what he was about to do. And yet Obama disregarded the advice of all of them.
That’s hubris, because it sure isn’t good judgment. And to what purpose did Obama jeopardize our security against this advice? According to Hoekstra:
It was not necessary to release details of the enhanced interrogation techniques, because members of Congress from both parties have been fully aware of them since the program began in 2002. We believed it was something that had to be done in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks to keep our nation safe. After many long and contentious debates, Congress repeatedly approved and funded this program on a bipartisan basis in both Republican and Democratic Congresses.
But worse may still be to come [emphasis mine]:
Last week, Mr. Obama argued that those who implemented this program should not be prosecuted — even though the release of the memos still places many individuals at other forms of unfair legal risk. It appeared that Mr. Obama understood it would be unfair to prosecute U.S. government employees for carrying out a policy that had been fully vetted and approved by the executive branch and Congress… Unfortunately, on April 21, Mr. Obama backtracked and opened the door to possible prosecution of Justice Department attorneys who provided legal advice with respect to the enhanced interrogations program. The president also signaled that he may support some kind of independent inquiry into the program.
It doesn’t take expertise in intelligence-gathering to understand what an incredibly dangerous precedent Obama is setting here. It’s not even really about security, it’s about respect for the continuity of the office of the presidency and the acts of previous Congresses.
Not only is Obama showing how wedded he is to the far Left wing of his party, not only is he showing how little he understands the complexity of decision-making in the immediate post-9/11 period, but he is setting an extraordinary—and I believe unprecedented—precedent.
Ordinarily, decisions made by a previous administration, even ones with which a new administration markedly disagrees, are considered to have been made in good faith unless there is strong and overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Mere disagreement on a point of law is hardly enough; there must be some sort of subversion of the ordinary process of policy-making itself in order to consider prosecuting those who served in previous administrations.
I cannot recall another example in which a new administration not only criticized the previous one at every opportunity, publicly and even (perhaps especially) while abroad, but also prepared to investigate and even prosecute those who made good faith decisions in that administration on the advice of properly appointed lawyers and in a process that was fully disclosed to Congress and approved by that body—or, as in this case, to prosecute the Justice Department lawyers themselves.
This is without any allegation of some sort of egregious misconduct, such as the withholding of evidence by prosecutors in the Stevens case. The sort of prosecution contemplated by the Obama administration is analogous to the show trials of Communist countries, or other dictatorships in which the new leader must stifle and punish the opposition in order to make sure his power is secure, and to sow fear in his rivals.
The closest analogy I can come to in this country is the work of the post-Vietnam War Church Committee, a Congressional body which investigated the CIA and made recommendations that ended such “rogue” practices as attempts to assassinate foreign leaders. The differences between then and now are huge, however; the clandestine CIA tactics investigated then were a far cry from today’s lawyer-generated memos and interrogation techniques, about which Congress was fully informed and of which Congress approved.
It is interesting, however, to note that the Church Committee’s work was mostly classified until the 1990’s; it did not involve the contemporaneous public release of CIA memos. In addition, the checks already in place for the so-called “torture memos” (lawyer approval, Congressional oversight) were exactly the sort of limits on unbridled CIA power and autonomy that were the results of the Church Committee’s work.
In addition, the Church Committee’s recommendations led to policies such as the “firewall” (which I discussed at length here) which hampered our ability to collect and share intelligence between government agencies, and paved the way for 9/11. It all seems rather ironic, doesn’t it?
This is not just wrong, this is not just dangerous, it is stupid. In pure poltical terms, it is a hugh mis-step. If Obama pursues this, it will ignite a firestorm that will consume his administration and ensure his will be a one-term presidency. Unfortunately, it will do much more harm to the country than it will Obama. It empowers the wosrt of both left and right and sets the stage for poltical warfare, the likes of which we haven’t yet seen.
I find this all incredible. Why is this man not brought out of the Whitehouse in handcuffs today?
I get nauseated just thinking about the son of a bitch.
I think she leveled out as well as any I’ve seen thus far. She used the term unprecedented. I believe that wraps it up in of itself.
When the heat starts to descend on Democrats and the memos and emails and statements they issued in support of rough interrogation begint to surface, the whole thing will begin to cool. I for one never regarded any of this as torture and I find it odd that when a citizen is attacked and her/his life threatened, self defense with extraordinary violence is fully justified and deemed fitting, yet collectively, we are being denied this inherent right to live.
All these war events and foreign events aren’t real. Only what happens in Washington is real. If there is political advantage to be gained from this, that is all that matters.
If Obama pursues this…” Precisely, I think it’s still to soon to tell — though we definitely should speculate, not saying we shouldn’t do this, and though it’s bad to not take the advice of your CIA appointee, or worse than bad, I’m not privy to the details. He does seem to act as if 9/11 is in the distant past and could never occur again, and that he would never face such extraordinary difficult decisions, and that some things are off the table when it come to defending our right to life, the most fundamental right of all, against our classic enemy; keep observing, keep talking, but to condemn him … I think it’s to soon to tell.
Pingback:So the U.S. Congress knew and approved of the interrogations? « The Western Experience
I don’t believe that Obama can successfully prosecute anyone in the Bush administration of torture for the simple reason that waterboarding and the other interrogation techniques used by the Bush administration are not defined as ‘torture’ under the applicable law.
Obama CAN, however, go through the process of ATTEMPTING to prosecute former Bush administration officials involved in the issue in order to use the legal system to harass former Bush officials and to placate the Left.
Also, as we have seen with the Libby-Plame stupidity, there’s always a chance to get someone on a technicality, even if no crime was committed pertaining to the original charges, such as in Libby’s case, trumped up charges of perjury supposedly committed during the trial.
And as we know, the MSM will be there to provide every assistance possible to Obama during a ‘show trial.’ All the MSM is drooling at the prospect of fanning the flames of a ‘get Bush’ circus.
Grrrrrrrrrr……….
I think he understands ‘the complexity of his decision’ perfectly. In reality, no prosecutions will ensue precisely because Congress was well aware and thus would be equally liable under the law.
However, the damage to our counter intelligence program and the chilling effect on personnel involved will effectively do the damage. Mission accomplished.
View his actions through the prism of his utterances, during the campaign and since his election, especially abroad and you begin to see that there is no conflict there.
If he is willing to prosecute something that should be covered under attorney-client privliledge, exactly where will he stop? What is to stop him from prosecuting doctors for patient info while pursuing national healthcare? What is to stop him from sucessfully breaking the press from concealing sources?
He needs a proper whoopin’ from him Momma to adjust that big attitude that he has!! Too bad he never got a proper education in core American values. Such a shame!!
all dubya did was blindly follow the advice of his advisors…that didn’t work so well. perhaps ‘do the opposite of what the experts say’ is the way to go.
If the Office of Professional Responsibility investigation which was started during the Bush admin finds that these lawyers behaved unprofessionally and did not give their best legal advice, not only does this post fall apart (because Obama has left open prosecuting the lawyers and not the CIA folks) but the lawyers will be open to the sanction of their own profession and prosecution may not be necessary.
Not to mention the possibility that the CIA was gaming the legal advice.
I would think that the CIA operatives involved have abandoned their search for Osama and have redirected their efforts to find Elvis. With gusto.
I do not blame them.
Nutjobs Marcel and 4jkb: surf on in your appalling ignorance.
all dubya did was blindly follow the advice of his advisors…that didn’t work so well. perhaps ‘do the opposite of what the experts say’ is the way to go.
Yeah, sure, like when Bush insisted on a plan to win in Iraq(the Surge) when his “experts” told him it was not possible.
But the writer is correct in that sometimes it is indeed better to “do the opposite of what the experts say is the way to go.” Thankfully, like Lincoln, Bush stood firm on this and went through a few Generals until he found his Grant and Sherman.
I don’t think Obama is going to prosecute anyone. This has become his modus; i.e. try to satisfy his kook-fringe base by suggesting he will do ridiculous things that he knows he cannot do, and hope that over time they move on to something else.
The problem is that this tactic is in itself enormously damaging. If people thought the country was polarized before, they are in for a shock if this keeps up. And I expect it will.
I should think in this case that the ABA and every lawyer in the country would be in an uproar. You would think that the professionals in the Justice Dept and the Counsels of all the Departments would be leading the parade. As pointed out, violates attorney-client for starters. (Consider that thought a joke. Only Bush/Cheney can stir them to outrage.)
Be careful SteveH. Janet Nappie is watching for folks like you.
This is more of Obama as the boy-philosopher-king modestly working to right the wrongs of the world.
Yes, to mere mortals ‘twould appear as folly, but the Obama knows best, and the future will bear him out.
It all boils down to one thing, it seems to me: Obama and the folks who think like him really do not see us as being at war. They really do think that the entire problem was Bush and U.S. policy toward Israel. I dread the situation that will lend itself to the other side saying, “I told you so.”
If the Office of Professional Responsibility investigation which was started during the Bush admin finds that these lawyers behaved unprofessionally and did not give their best legal advice, not only does this post fall apart (because Obama has left open prosecuting the lawyers and not the CIA folks) but the lawyers will be open to the sanction of their own profession and prosecution may not be necessary.
Lawyers were asked for advice. After a review of applicable law legal advice was given. If such a mundane transaction can be subject to sanction then most of the lawyers in the US would have to be sanctioned.
The investigation the writer refers to has been completed and the findings given to the Obama administration. One can’t help wondering why the report hasn’t been released. A visit to a law professor’s blog may provide a hint, i.e.: Waterboarding, slapping, etc., are not defined as torture under the law. Therefore, I would have to bet that the report exonerates the legal advice given to Bush.
http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2009/04/no-prosecution-because-no-crime.html
If there is a 9-11 on his watch, Obama is going to be asked some very hard questions about what he did to protect America, aside from airing dirty laundry, apologizing for America worldwide, blaming the previous administration constantly, and putting the intelligence services and military into extreme CYA mode.
This is yet another example of liberal fascism on the march. It really has less to do with the actual idea of torture (just listening to Uh-bama’s disjointed and confused responses to reporters’ questions is nearer in definition to torture than any of the Bush administrations’ actions in the fight against Islamic jihadists) than with the Left’s campaign to marginalize and destroy any semblance of opposition – past, present, or future.
Oh-blahblahblah-ma may just be attempting to placate his hardcore leftist loyalist with his cryptic (and ever-changing) stance on potential prosecutions for former Bush officials, but that decision may very well be taken out of his hand by the truly lunatic fringe that is the Democratic leadership in the House and Senate. Pelosi and Reid are hell-bent on investigations, and would love nothing more than several years of show trials designed to embarrass the prior administration and chill the speech of any who would dare stand against their liberal schemes.
Rehashing the previous administrations past sins is usually a smokescreen to cover the reality that everything is not going so well in the present. Obviously, it is a very poor diversionary tactic when Obama has to stretch so far across the line of good practice that his judgement becomes the focus, rather than the supposed offenses of the “bad predecessors”. The initiative will most likely die quickly because of the backlash and exposure issues.
Instead of closing the books on the past Administration and moving on, as past Presidents have traditionally done–one of the main reasons for our almost unique peacefulness and stability during the transition and transfer of power from one Presidential Administration to another here in the United States, but throughout history and in many countries almost always a precarious transfer marked by uncertainty, instability, turmoil and bloodshed–it appears that Obama is going to allow the prosecution of Bush administration figures because of the legitimate and legal work they did in the routine course of governing–policies that they advocated, memos they wrote, advice they gave, and actions they took. No doubt, having captured all three branches of government–the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches, and particularly the Justice Department–and staffed them with left wing leaders loyal to Obama and sharing his views, as does the MSM–Obama’s compliant megaphone–if Obama & Co. want to find a violation of the law, they will find it, and if they want to drum up hate for the accused and the presumption of their guilt, they will get them, too, and will be able to carry such prosecutions forward.
If he takes this road Obama’s actions will forever and irrevocably change American politics for the worse–there will be no going back to things as they were–and somewhere down the road there will be blood, and more and more of it, and the instability and violence that plagues the rest of the world will make a home in America.
I have given my opinion here before that the actions and policies Obama is pursuing are laying the groundwork and the scaffolding for constructing a Tyranny, and this is one more piece of very telling evidence to prove my point.
If we go down this road, I expect we will be thrust, perhaps, into some variant of the French Revolution and the Terror, with new Mesdames Defarge, loyalty oaths, denunciations, arrests in the night, and new electronic equivalents of the tumbrels and the guillotine, and with the usual mobs howling for ever more blood.
Such Terror, once let loose, may very easily become an uncontrollable and unpredictable force of its own.
Perhaps all is not lost, according to Mario Loyola in NRO’s The Corner:
Today’s lead editorial in the WSJ contains this curious sentence:
But at least until now, the U.S. political system has avoided the spectacle of a new Administration prosecuting its predecessor for policy disagreements. This is what happens in Argentina, Malaysia or Peru, countries where the law is treated merely as an extension of political power.
Actually, this has happened in America – in the first two years of the Eisenhower administration. During the 1952 campaign, John Foster Dulles, who was to be Eisenhower’s secretary of state, fostered the impression that “secret agreements” had been reached at Yalta selling out large chunks of the civilized word into Communist slavery, and that the State Department was full of people who had intentionally facilitated the Communist takeover in China. He does not seem to have believed either of those things, but he gained a lot of traction by encouraging others to believe them. Just take a look at the awful foreign policy section of the GOP convention platform in 1952, which he drafted.
The Republicans rode the conspiracy theories all the way to the White House and a congressional majority. The chickens came home to roost immediately, in the form of the McCarthy hearings, essentially an attempt to smear and prosecute officials of the previous administration, as well as sitting members of the armed forces and the State Department. Dean Acheson called it “the attack of the primitives,” and despite Eisenhower’s personal opposition to the witch hunt, he had partly brought it upon himself. The shameful spectacle went on for two years, until the GOP lost its Senate majority – which it would not regain until three decades later.
Obama and the Prosecution of Predecessors
It’s worth reading the whole piece. Essentially, Loyola believes such an effort is a political minefield for the Democrats, so he is challenging Obama to bring it.
I’m not so sure myself with the media, Hollywood and the academy so much stronger when it comes to setting the narrative.
Sorry about the formatting. “But at least now” paragraph is a quote within the quote. The last two paragraphs are mine and should not be italicized.
Oldflyer’s got it. O can’t afford to lose the far left and this – raising the possibility of an action he’d never dare take – holds them. For now.
I think O knows that he could be below 50% popularity by the end of summer (in the polls that consistently give Obama a 5% or more boost – which means he’s really at 45% or so). That would be stunning and historical in nature. The media won’t be able to not cover it and there isn’t an obvious talking point that can explain it. If the far left goes, he’s already below 50%.
Bullseye, Huxley.
This decision proves to me that Obama is in fact a naif, and none-too-bright. By making himself look soft on terrorism, he’s now given hostages to Fortune, as pointed out by Huxley, and in return he’s received….what? Accolades from the cognitively disenfranchised on the left? Conning them in the campaign was one thing — it’s how he got the nomination — but he doesn’t need them now. He gains nothing by pandering to them now, but in so doing he has given his future opponents (in both parties) a devastating weapon against him if his anti-terrorism record is not absolutely perfect.
Stupid.
Can’t remember where I read this, but apparently the CIA was trying to improve on the Clinton method of rendition to foreign countries. They weren’t getting good info; the methods used by foreign interrogators could be brutal; and by giving interrogators questions to ask, they were revealing info they wanted to keep secret. I also read something from a CIA interrogation person that they worked hard to improve techniques and evaluate their effectiveness. This man did not approve of waterboarding-type techniques because they had developed better psych methods.
If this is true, we have to consider what happened not only in terms of an immediate 9/11 response, but also as part of an effort to improve our intelligence gathering when we were, in effect, blind about the nature and extent of the threat.
It seems to me that by retaining rendition as a possible response in an extreme situation, the Obama team is returning to the ineffective, dangerous, and morally questionable Clinton/Gore days.
NRO compared it to the McCarthy hearings as a precedent…. even if that is valid; it’s still a very bad precedent. They argued that Ike set the stage (ah la Obama)… The blowback from those (re: while some were guilty, not all were) put the republican out in the wilderness for decades….
I agree the most egregious aspect is the Banana Republic aspect of prosecuting political enemies (even if merely to achieve political effect from show trials). Astounding. Except, I can’t say this, b/c Banana Republic is surely racist towards someone – either Latin American dictators or an American President. So, I should shut up. Shut my mouth. Or keyboard, as it were.
So: cotton candy. Barack is as light, as inconsequential, as lacking in heft, as sugary disappearing, as cotton candy. Been my fave descrip since 2007.
Barack’s latest error results from deficiencies mentioned many times on this blog: lack of understanding of what makes America great; lack of understanding of history in general – and of the human nature which history reveals.
In his ignorance of history and of human nature, Barack actually falls for and believes in the leftist trope. Astounding. Frightening, actually.
Huxley,
Very good comment above on the McCarthy hearings etc. I hadn’t thought about that angle, but it is very accurate.
McCarthy and so-called McCarthyism was a crude and ham-fisted attempt to deal with what the eventual collapse of the Soviet Union showed to be a real problem. The Verona Tapes and more lately the revelation that IF Stone was a Soviet spy seem to indicate that there indeed was a problem at the time.
However, Huxley is right in that it backfired on the republicans and left them in the minority for decades. That was largly because of the crude and ham-fisted approach, the parasitic careerists who jumped on the anti-communist bandwagon (i.e. Nixon) and last but not least, the main stream media adopting the anti-mcCarthy view hook, line and sinker. Today, with the infirmation gatekeepers bypassed, I wonder if the anti-communists of the early 50’s could have been so thoroughly discredited.
Obama’s own recent appointee–warned him of the dangers of what he was about to do. And yet Obama disregarded the advice of all of them.
As I said, this train has no breaks. I said it LONG ago.
How could it, he is the top guy in Marxism, like Lenin, Mao, Stalin, Hitler, Castro, Chavez, they didn’t have someone tell THEM how socialism should be, why would Obama?
Its not hubris. Would it be hubris for god to be sure of himself? Just as its impossible for a black man to be a racist under this doctrine (or any other minority), its impossible for Obama to have hubris. Hubris is what one has when one takes on a role that one does not deserve. Jesus spoke as the son of god, no one other than the pharasees, and the politicos though the had hubris.
Khutspa!!!!
Last week, Mr. Obama argued that those who implemented this program should not be prosecuted
That was his own idea…
. Obama backtracked and opened the door to possible prosecution of Justice Department attorneys who provided legal advice
That’s is what his keepers told him he should have said. Its pretty easy to see. he tries to answer on the fly, but he has no way to know what the right move forward to be, all he has is ideological lies.
So since the ideology claims to be fair, he thought he would be fair. Then when he gets back to the office, they say. HEY! One of the goals is to remove the FBI and CIA, not be fair to them. We cant make a soviet state if your fair.
And so he comes back and changes his mind. that’s why it keeps chaning. In fact haven’t you notive that there is a pattern to it? the first thing out is not too bad, maybe even fair. The correction, is horrible, bad, and will help result in the fall of the united states, and I will bet that the other states will not be so nice to us as we and they were to russia.
It doesn’t take expertise in intelligence-gathering to understand what an incredibly dangerous precedent Obama is setting here.
No, but it does take some expertise to always be picking the best destructive move towards communism each time. how many times does the roulette wheel have to skip from a valid number to 00 as your watching till we get it?
I cannot recall another example in which a new administration not only criticized the previous one at every opportunity, publicly and even (perhaps especially) while abroad, but also prepared to investigate and even prosecute
I can.. it happens when there is a coupe… and the new guy wants to prevent and previous person who in comparison may be able to still say something that will result in changes to his situation.
So when Myanmar was recently taken over, where is the old leader? New job in a communist country… he didn’t stay, cause they will do what you described.
When the marcos’ were ousted, what happened to them?
Its in how you look at it. they see this as a coupe, we don’t. they see the end result after they are done, we don’t.
What part of purges don’t you understand?
This action will end up purging the state of those with the mentality he is attacking. A purge isn’t always about killing. Many purges in Russia resulted in committals to mental institutions, jails, and camps (which we have but don’t use yet).
Stop looking at things hanging there like separate Christmas ornaments. Napolitano already is starting the gear up to make this one party by making all other parties criminal. They will cement that by going legally after the others. then those that support the others are those that are supporting a enemy regime, which they just cleaned up.
Did you donate to that criminal? Then you’re an enemy. Did Pelosi vote with him? Yes, but she was a victim of his control over the state and she couldn’t vote any other way.
When Lenin took power what happened to the Csars?
A new administration … prepared to investigate and even prosecute those…
When Castro took power, what happened to the people before him
A new administration … prepared to investigate and even prosecute those…
When pol pot came to office, what happened to the people before him?
A new administration … prepared to investigate and even prosecute those…
Here is what makes it different. each of them had a different level of action that was allowed by the type of state they were in. Lenin, castro, and pol pot, were in full totalitarian take over by force. So the options to them ranged from summary executions, to kangaroo courts, to committals. We are not converting due to a full out explosive violent revolution. So for purges, are summary shooting allowed or would work? no. would mental institution work? no. would a staked court show work? yes.
So, he is showing his communist base that he is purging as he can. That’s RED TERROR. the situation where you have no idea what will happen to you. you are not only in trouble for things you break now. but you are in trouble for things you did with permission in the past! you are in trouble for the things you could potentially do.
You see… fear of imprisonment during a purge in the future over something you did that was legal before, sets it up that if your not a big player in state and favored, your best bet is to sit down and not do anything. Maybe get drunk. Maybe have sex, but don’t carry to term. Hey! I just described how Russia is today!
Using law as an extension of will with no regard for law as an entity itself is what totalitarians do. and kings, and feudal lords. They make the rules, they get to change the rules… so changing a ruile now, to change a condition in the past, so that you can do something now. is just Stalinism. Changing history to change the future.
The sort of prosecution contemplated by the Obama administration is analogous to the show trials of Communist countries, or other dictatorships in which the new leader must stifle and punish the opposition in order to make sure his power is secure, and to sow fear in his rivals.
I was sure you got it… but when I wrote above I had not gotten to this part yet. it is EXACTLY that, because they have no other idea of law that is valid! That is. western capitalism and jurisprudence is to be destroyed. In its place is this kind of thing, and unequal application of the law for equal outcomes, with your being guilty until proven innocent.
In fact, that’s what you and others didn’t notice. Bush is guilty, even if they have to make up the new law to make him so. and when the new law or act happens, he has to prove his innocence, since it was tailored to him.
Imagine that, tailoring criminal law to the person being charged to insure and end that is controlled.
Wait till they are done sewing this crap up… then they will turn to everyone else. and they will do this along the lines of ideology. what better way than to make all the capitalists criminals, then replace them with appointed minorities?
Far fetched? Really?
Well the other times that this system was in play this way. it resulted in 6 million jews, 1.5 million who were children, another 6 million indigents, infirm, and what not that they would kill. In russia, 10 million starved to death in one winter. In Cambodia, those with glasses died and never made passes again.
NOTHING is far fetched when its one man rule, because the state takes on his metnal condition. And the kind of mental condition to do that, results in a state that is megalomaniacal to other states, paranoid, controlling down to a degree that might be considered nano management…
And this time… all that new modern technology will be used to insure this. how long before the id chips they are already installing will be added?
The church committee gutted out intelligence and cleared the way for the subversion that allowed obama to take office and now start his purges with the means he has he can use.
“torture memos” (lawyer approval, Congressional oversight) were exactly the sort of limits on unbridled CIA power and autonomy that were the results of the Church Committee’s work.
And just as the oversight they attached to the mortgages accomplished its actual task over what it was sold as, the same situation made sure that the results were controlled by that oversite.
All this amounts to is that we have to fight nuclear fire with marshmallows.
. It all seems rather ironic, doesn’t it?
No.. irony would be if it happened by accident.
You don’t plan the situation to meet the ulterior motives you have and be so clever to orchestrate outcomes then call the orchestrated outcome irony.
At least I don’t.
I see a continuation of church committee through other means over the years. the appointment of bad people, and their bad actions. Restrictions other agencies don’t have. hamstringing. Court cases. Removal of those who can get things done, replacement with bean counters… removal of operatives in every country, replaced with sigint…
I wish some people would just take out a pencil and paper, and just look at one of these, list out the major decisions that changed things, then code them as to which wahy things move.
Not to hard to see if you plot things.
Huxley, if there was a 9/11 on his watch, should he, those that work for him, and other supporters be subject to prosecution for treason and possibly murder?
Obama’s reversal on the possibility of prosecution just shows he is still in his “terminal campaign mode”. He is bowing to the pressure of the Moveon.org crowd (thinking about the money in 2012).
I doubt it will go anywhere but the mere show is payback to the far left supporters – and it will cost the taxpayers several millions.
Since these interrogation techniques were not against the law at the time I think any attempt to retroactively prosecute under new law would be declared unconstitutional.
Just saw Pelosi on the TV saying she had only attended one short briefing by the CIA and interrogation techniques never came up. Of course she was then made aware of a 2005 story in a DC paper stating she and other reps had an hour long briefing in which interrogation techniques were described and no one objected. Upon hearing that she put out a statement which said, “Oh yeah, we were told about the waterboarding and other techniques but they had not yet been implemented.”
Anyway – who the hell’s fault is it she never attended the other briefings?
Huxley, if there was a 9/11 on his watch, should he, those that work for him, and other supporters be subject to prosecution for treason and possibly murder?
Cappy — Not unless they are directly complicit.
Obama has many naive, dangerous, trans-national ideas that I believe will end in tears for America and the world, but I don’t see that as grounds for prosecution for treason or murder.
Obama was, after all, elected on the basis of these ideas. Like it or not, we are going to live out the experiment of these ideas in action.
But we should repudiate these ideas at the ballot box, not the courtroom.
The problem with Obama’s idea is that in essence it provides an administrative detour around the Constitutional prohibition of ex post facto laws. Someone could in good faith seek legal counsel, act in comportment with it, and after the fact be rung up as a criminal. Must be a real morale builder in the CIA. Stick your neck out to protect the country, and risk getting second-guessed by suits behind desks in years to come. Nice.
If only we could find a Constitutional scholar …someone who’d published in this area …
I just read, ‘The Interrogation Memorandums’
article by Gary Berntsen at Real Clear Politics … pessimistic but noteworthy nonetheless, hmmm.
On the advice of former CIA directors, don’t forget that it was George Tenet who asked when the planes flew into he World Trade Center, I hope it wasn’t those guys that were doing those peculiar flight lessons who wanted to know how to fly — but not how to land.” Some of the advice from the CIA is advice we can do without. Nevertheless ..nevertheless… Is Obama really so sure he knows better? Or is he pandering to parochial politics on a matter that could not be any more seriously imagined.
So the “crude and ham-fisted” tactics of Republicans led them into the political wilderness? McCarthy would never have been censured without Republican support and Eisenhower’s support for it. Ike was an honorable man, unlike his predecessor, that liberal icon Truman, a resentful little fool from Missouri, the end product of a corrupt DEMOCRATIC machine in Kansas City whose entire administration was a cesspool of corruption and insider dealings. And, pray tell, while the Republicans were being punished in the “wilderness,” what were the angelic DEMOCRATS such as Lyndon Johnson, a crude thug who stole millions, doing? Safe guarding our freedoms along with their east coast snob liberal conspirators in academia and the media? Obama is not following Ike or Republicans in general – he is following DEMOCRATS and crooks like Truman, thugs like Johnson, and self-inlflated liberals who still think they know what is best for all and sent millions of Vietnamese and Cambodians to their deaths while they swooned over the Woodstock Generation of dopers and misfits. Barry Goldwater was right in proposing sawing off the eastern seaboard and letting it float out to sea.
Torture?
So Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was put in a box with a bug after the brutal raping and flogging, right?
No?
So the box with the bug was after he was branded with the Mogen David and pissed on?
No?
Ok, ok–so the box with a bug was after he was beaten senseless and buried alive (temporarily)with a bone-in ham?
No?!
So what’s the deal here? What’s the problem?
Marcel says,
“all dubya did was blindly follow the advice of his advisors…that didn’t work so well. perhaps ‘do the opposite of what the experts say’ is the way to go.”
Blindly follow? I doubt that. He ignored much of his military advisors in backing the Surge in Iraq. But lets just do the opposite for the hell of it. Lets do the opposite of what our Doctors or what our Police tell us to do and see what joy that brings!
I have no idea how this will end. It is beyond frightening. I told everyone I could before the election that Obama was shockingly ignorant and naive about the world and it’s proving correct. This suicidal sabotage of our defense and national security is going to kill millions of us in the future. I truly believe it. And it’s not just the beer talking.
Don and Hong: Amen. Thanks. It is truly beyond frightening.
Now you guys understand why I hated him even before the primary campaign season. What more can be said? I would repeat my label for him, but there are a few members here who think me intemperate for using the label, so I’ll refrain. He most certainly is hitting his stride, really getting into the program he always had should he gain the seat of power.
He is dangerous and tyrannical. Furthermore, he labels people like me “right wing extremists.” I’d better be careful about my thoughts, lest Homeland Security make an exception and interrogate me aggressively…
I see the hand of Soros in this too. And I’m going to say it: Soros is one of the wealthiest oligarchs in the world who really deserves the cheap $.05 solution, plus labor.
Gray, the punch line is they didn’t even do the bug thing… the muckity mucks just talked (with each other) about doing it but never got around to it…
Gray, the punch line is they didn’t even do the bug thing… the muckity mucks just talked (with each other) about doing it but never got around to it…
Ohhhhh….
So they talked about putting him in a box with a bug after they shot him full of curare and put him on a respirator while they discussed pulling the plug in front of him?
No?
Wait, wait, wait…. they discussed this after they partially castrated him and fed him his own testicle?
After the HCL-drip?
Where’s the torture thing again?
Wolla Dalbo at 1:13 P.M.
I keep my ears to the ground on these things. I can tell you that most of the military will not go along with a State that terrorizes free Americans and imposes tyranny. Yes, there will be some in the military and law enforcement, especially at the federal level, who will go along with it. But they are not the majority.
If these reprobates make a grab for power and seek to rub the rest of us out or set up detention/re-education programs, there most certainly will be blood flowing in America. But most of it will be Leftist blood. In fact, they may so infuriate the rest of us that we may be ruthless in the application of violence to those people. And they are arrogant and clueless enough to have no idea of what is going to happen to them. And they’ll deserve it too.
I’m by nature a peaceful, God-fearing man. I am most certainly not violence prone. I don’t want to see civil war and I am going to do what I can to see if a political solution can be found to this simmering war that is brewing between the cultural Marxists and us conservatives. And we do have a template from history to guide us in these matters. The colonials time and time again went to the well to appeal to the Crown for a just treatment and for representation of their interests. Only when all forebearance was spent and abused did we pick up the musket, bayonet, and long rifle.
It will be clear if that point is ever reached who the aggrieved party is. Let me assure you that the Left will reap what it has sown. Judging by the fear that is behind how they react to the Tea Parties, conservatives, and the military, some of these people have to know that what they are doing is hugely unpopular. They stole an election by engaging in long deception – and they know it as only Communists can know it.
And if the day of reckoning should fall over us, God help them because we certainly won’t give them any mercy.
They talked about a bug inna box after using this:
http://www.corkscrew-balloon.com/misc/torture/23.html
on him?
That’s really bad. I can see why everyone is so upset about this torture thing….
FredHjr Says:
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:28 pm
5¢? If you’re talking about what I think you’re talking about, the price has gone waaaay up in the last few months. 😉
rickl,
Just an expression, ya know? But, yes, I have been casting about to try to buy more of that merchandise and it has been getting rare and pricey.
At the ranges we are not firing as many rounds, because it is getting harder and harder to find and replace what we expend.
Don, I can’t say I disagree with you. You’re mostly dead on. However, allow me to point out that Ike and other republicans supported the democrats precisely because McCarthy’s actions were ham-handed. Had McCarthy not disgusted a large segment of the public he would not have suffered his fate. Basically, he was correct but crude and overzealous. He wound up trying to prosecute some who had no real part in communist subversion and wound up alienating many, including Ike and many fellow republicans.
Just had to say “thank you” Neo, for being such a voice of reason in these bleak times. And I love your frequent followers, they are a witty lot!
Yeah, I’m sure if we had a kidnapping tomorrow somewhere in America and the hostage takers enact the EXACT same routine to their hostage (waterboard over a hundred times, etc.) over several weeks or months, and then the kidnappers are caught, a jury of the peers would just consider the victim had a little vacation time.
Hah ha.
If it weren’t for those pesky conventions, we could probably come up with justifications for saving (fill in blank) amount of American lives in every future war by advocating torture. The only difference here is not the morality of it, just the law.
Tim P,
I fear that some on the right are doing what McCarthy did: using ham-handed, crude, and overzealous arguments against Obama that threaten to discredit substantial criticism. I just cringe when I see “birth certificate” mentioned in a blog comment. My personal assessment of Obama is that he is superficial and narcissistic to a frightening degree and that he speaks and promises before he knows what he is talking about. I also don’t think he has the character to stand up for anything if it costs him personally. But I don’t expect my own views to win any arguments. These must be based on the fallacies in his plans and actions. There is more than enough meat there. Somehow we need to learn to concentrate our arguments and go for it.
Yeah, I’m sure if we had a kidnapping tomorrow somewhere in America and the hostage takers enact the EXACT same routine to their hostage (waterboard over a hundred times, etc.) over several weeks or months, and then the kidnappers are caught, a jury of the peers would just consider the victim had a little vacation time.
Hah ha.
If it weren’t for those pesky conventions, we could probably come up with justifications for saving (fill in blank) amount of American lives in every future war by advocating torture. The only difference here is not the morality of it, just the law.
I’ll attempt to respond to the writer’s hypothetical situation. If I were a member of a kidnapping victim’s family and they were released with only waterboarding having been performed on them I would be relieved that they were returned alive and unharmed.
I’m not sure what the writer is referring to by “pesky conventions,” but will point out to the readers that the thugs in question do not qualify for protection under the Geneva Conventions.
Furthermore, waterboarding, slapping and caterpillar exposures are not defined as “torture” under the law. The readers may read the law and a law professor’s presentation of the law (18 U.S.C. sec. 2340A) themselves at the link below.
http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2009/04/no-prosecution-because-no-crime.html
A key quote to look for:
“The decision of the Obama administration in not prosecuting either the authors of the memoranda or those who acted in reliance on the memoranda should not be viewed as being either an act of benevolence or deal making politics. Rather, it is highly likely that the Justice Department or others determined that based on the wording of this statute, there was no crime committed, or that there likely would be valid legal defenses.
The problem is not the lawyers or those who relied on the lawyers, but the law. There will be no prosecution because under the statute as passed by Congress, there was no prosecutable crime committed.”
But let’s leave aside the fact that no law was broken by waterboarding. The writer likes to put forth hypotheticals so here’s a hypothetical for him:
What about the “morality” of not waterboarding when thousands of civilian lives depend on extracting information from a terrorist captive? I ask the writer: If a member of his family was about to be murdered by these thugs would he still be against waterboarding – which is a harmless but effective method of extracting intelligence?
Another question: If one of the writer’s family were captured by the terrorists and the terrorists waterboarded them instead of cutting off their head with a butcher knife(as they usually do) would the writer be relieved? Or would he be angry that the usual decapitation did not take place?
Logern,
It is what OUR guys go through when training so that they know what it is.
It is infinite times better than beheading.
You are a weirdo.
I haven’t called you a name until now. But that last post of yours was weird. There was no basis in fact.
There was words of obsession from you with no basis in fact.
You like to LIE. That makes you a weirdo.
I think like most of us, I’m disappointed
3 people were waterboarded.
Information came out that saved lives.
Those people are living better today than they were with 3 square meals, a library, a book, sanitary conditions, a gym.
You spit on national security Logern. I wouldn’t have you guard a botanical garden from invasion…
You seek to destroy the good and strengthen evil.
I will now go get my coffee..
FredHjr – there will have to be plausible deniability on each new step toward tyranny. So there won’t be camps, or a lot of military presence, or things that can be construed as secret police. No cataclysms. Just a piece-by-piece capture of freedoms, two steps forward, one step back.
We have a long, long, way to go before we get to gulag or nazi conditions, and we can still hope to outrun them with cultural change and improved technology. The internet, for example, has burst the walls of PC speech more quickly than we would have predicted 15 years ago. The desire of many leftsist to make people behave, to bring in the brave new world, is very real, and they have the advantage of unscrupulosity. They are, however, nowhere near as smart as they think they are, and our long twilight struggle may eventually prevail against the dark. The darkness descends, but new lights seem to offset it as we go.
Be of good cheer.
In all this I am reminded of a Colonel West in Iraq who was interrogating a terrorist deemed to have vital information about an imminent attack. He fired off his sidearm next to the head of the prisoner who gave up the info that saved soldiers lives.
He said he knew the minute he did it his career was over. Said he would do it again, though. I’m sure he had no shortage of job offers when he mustered out but sad to lose a soldier who understood the safety of his men was more important than his career.
By the way I have just started a little blog
http://www.americaisameancountry.blgspot.com
if you know of anything that should be posted there email me at jpd2u@hotmail.com
Fred at 1:13 am:
That ammo is getting more and more expensive is not bad news. It means millions more rounds are being fired by millions more guns. The bad news will be an outrageous Federal ammo tax to stifle gun owners, which both of us know is soon to come.
sorry on the “correct” address for the site is
http://americaisameancountry.blogspot.com/
Logern,
http://wizbangblog.com/content/2009/04/22/you-want-to-know-what-real-torture-is.php
I wouldn’t have you protect my shirt from getting wrinkled..
I wouldn’t have you protect my face from the sun..
You are morally bankrupt. You couldn’t protect anybody from anything. You would seek to CAUSE more destruction and more misery and suffering.
Why? Why would you do that?
Lawyers made a determination.
Nancy Pelosi was briefed more than 30 times (so were other Congress people)
And now Obama and you seek to criminalize what was determined NOT to be torture as torture and maybe even prosecute people for doing their job.
Information was gathered that saved lives.
Logern would like to destroy this country and have more misery and suffering.
Logern probably has a “Coexist with the terrorist” bumpersticker on his car.
He probably would like us all to submit or die. You are a crazy son of a –
And weird
“The sort of prosecution contemplated by the Obama administration is analogous to the show trials of Communist countries, or other dictatorships…”
Please. It can’t be like the show trials in dictatorships because it isn’t taking place in a dictatorship.
Torture is a serious issue. Some people therefore think it deserves a serious smack.
Whether it’s unwise to do it in this way is another story.
Recruiting,
Essentially, waterboarding was determined not to be torture.
The Bush administration has said so many times that the U.S. does NOT torture.
People in Congress were breifed over 30 times.
This is a non-issue that has become issue because Obama seems to be hell bent on calling tactics torture (just like leftists do) that aren’t torture and then prosecuting them for rending a LEGAL opinion.
…. in the court of public opinion even.
When did you stop beating your wife?
Both Gray and Logern are off base a lot. They are basically talking in a way that the left does an awful lot. Which is to an unreal extreme that is not relevant or practical to the conversation except to those too ignorant or unthinking who don’t get it and know that’s the sign for them to get together and chant the same wrong tune.
In the past we recognized that as long as people in the world acted a certain way, then we had no choice but to do similarly but MINIMALLY. If you pay attention you will see that is the doctrine on ALL the things in which we have little real choice if we are to be effective, but we really think they are morally wrong.
We also recognized that we did not use such on innocents, something the socialists in history never did and still don’t. that is, the people that we make a judgment to are not random innocents off the streets, any more than if they caught a special forces guy he would be just a random drive by pickup no more likely than another.
Neither gray or logern gave any kind of reasoned or informed argument. Just high school level collectivist in crowd behavior. They know they are cool when others say yeah.
I’m sure if we had a kidnapping tomorrow somewhere in America and the hostage takers enact the EXACT same routine to their hostage (waterboard over a hundred times, etc.) over several weeks or months, and then the kidnappers are caught, a jury of the peers would just consider the victim had a little vacation time.
I am sure if the Taliban got a hold of the guys that waterboarded their guys they would do more to them than we would if we caught theirs!!!! And I am sure if we got some Taliban who tortured or killed our people, we might hold them, then set them free where they could try again. (shall I give names?)
Kidnappers tend to be harder on their victims than water boarding. Most are never held for ransom, and a whole lot die of being tortured to the extreme for several days. Then they are buried in a way that no one finds them so they are erased.
Want to see some pictures of what they did to our guys?
(warning graphic photo )
http://www.warinformation.com/Conference_Rooms/Dead_US_soldiers_in_Iraq_cell.jpg
I don’t read that site, I searched for a photo.
Want to see a recent picture of the water board victim?
Actually, why don’t we use a real scenario where US soldiers were captured by them
Jimenez, 25, and Fouty, 19, were kidnapped along with a third member of the 2nd Brigade of the 10th Mountain Division during an ambush in May 2007 in the volatile area south of Baghdad known as the “triangle of death.” The body of the third seized soldier, Pfc. Joseph Anzack Jr. of Torrance, Calif., was found in the Euphrates River a year later.
Here they were before their capture
Spc. Alex Jimenez, Pfc. Joseph Anzack and Pvt. Byron W. Fouty.
http://www.army.mil/-images/2008/07/15/19253/size1-army.mil-2008-07-16-111554.jpg
http://www.army.mil/-images/2008/07/15/19252/size2-army.mil-2008-07-16-111550.jpg
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/xml/news/2007/05/army_missing_soldiers_070515w/at_Anzack_500_070517.JPG
I cant show you photos of them now
In October 2008, Fouty’s parents revealed the autopsy results of their son and Jimenez. It was determined that they were tortured. Finger bones were found wrapped in a blanket, indicating their fingers may have been severed sometime before their deaths. Also, according to the autopsy report, Pvt. Fouty’s nose had been broken but had “well healed prior to death.” It is believed that their kidnappers cut their throats, which is believed to be the cause of their deaths. .
They don’t know what trauma they had, because they were so rotted that they could only analyze what damage made it to the bones.
And what did they get out of these soldiers? What moves did they find out? How much did pvt byron w fouty know about battle plans of the generals? How much of the upper plans was he privy to?
How much was Khalid Sheik Mohammad privy to? Where is his dead body rotted with fingers missing? Oh, he aint dead, and he is eating better than they are.
So now that I met your point, what was it? that they wouldn’t do this?
They do worse? That they would attack the people that did this to them? of course, but they would attack even if they didn’t do that to them. That our people killed, maimed and dumped? Cause they didn’t. that we did this to three out of how many captured, and they do that to pretty much everyone they get?
I don’t know… there were actually real incidents that fit your BS thing.
And as far as gray, his doesn’t even warrant such discussion.
get rid of danes post link!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Please. It can’t be like the show trials in dictatorships because it isn’t taking place in a dictatorship.
come again? how does that work..
so ballet in russia is not the same as ballet in america because one is a totalitarian state and the other is a democratic republic?
it too can be the same because the crucial point is the rule of law, and the rule of law is not arbitrary and based on whatever you want, thats rule by king, dictator, etc.
so if the dictator says make up a law to put them in jail for what they did yesterday that was legal, its not the same if obama does it?
what critical part is missing that makes it different and not the same?
Logern Says:
“Hah ha.
If it weren’t for those pesky conventions”
Very true. One more reason for our enemies to fight by the rules themselves… which would include not targeting civilians… because otherwise, they might end up being interrogated and it’s not always pretty….
expat @ 5:59 has expressed my position perfectly. Thank you, expat.
Both Gray and Logern are off base a lot. They are basically talking in a way that the left does an awful lot. Which is to an unreal extreme that is not relevant or practical to the conversation except to those too ignorant or unthinking who don’t get it and know that’s the sign for them to get together and chant the same wrong tune.
You misunderstand. I was juxtaposing what we actually did, which was nothing, with actual instances of actual torture.
Your sarcasm chip is malfunctioning, droid.
I am sardonic on the web as in life…..
I’ve served this nation whether it wanted it or not for 18 years….. Mostly, not.
Artfldgr, if you’re trying to point out that others do worse things, it is valid, just as grand larceny vs. the lesser. All are criminal though. And if penalties are assessed they should fit the offense.
Furthermore, as far as method, not really sure if you need anything fancy. We could go walking. We’ll call it the Bataan Death March. It’s not as fun as it sounds. So, I hear.
apologies then to gray… 🙂
such chips are never perfect…
Get serious, Logern. Go read Richard Fernandez, and then come back without the snark.
http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/2009/04/22/terrorism-and-moral-torture/
exw diavasei to vlviio ,pou den exei anafora stin ellada, alla alles xwres pou panw katw exeis dei to apotelesma apo ta m.m.e.(polemous ktl)kai autos sou leei to paraskinio kai tous tropous pou xrisimopoiisan…diavase kai 8a katalaveisan den 8es na plirwseis to vlviio psa3e sto internet na vreis tin sunenteu3i tou apo ton kouloglou pou einai mia kali perilipsei tou vlviiou.(ntokumanter)