Some Things Must Neither Be Forgiven Nor Forgotten

It will take years, perhaps decades, before the full scope of the catastrophe Bush visited on this country is understood. But I already know what I will never forgive him for:

Of all the horrible things done by America over the last 8 years, nothing was more shameful than the formalization, the normalization, of torture.

It was the 2004 election which sealed the shame, for America knew, Americans knew, indeed all the world knew that torture had happened. Was happening. Would continue to happen if George Bush was reelected. I still don’t know what Americans thought that election was about, but to many of us from outside it was about whether Americans were the sort of people who would elect George Bush once he had shown them his soul.

America then showed its soul to the world, and it was hard not turn aside in contempt and disgust. Hard to look at what the shining city on the hill, the nation which stood against both Nazism and the totalitarianism of the Soviet Union, had become.

America before Bush had been far from perfect, but no matter what dumbass thing we did, no matter what stupid mistakes or unethical bullshit we engaged in, I could at least say we didn’t take pride in torturing people. We’d drawn a bright line and refused to step over it. Until Bush.

Everything else he did – destroying the economy, weakening the government to the point where it couldn’t respond to disasters like Katrina, raping the environment, ignoring global warming, warrantless wiretapping, even invading Iraq based on lies – all of that pales in comparison to the fact that he took us over that line. He made us into a nation of torturers.

Christopher Hitchens, who had to be waterboarded before he discovered what torture was, still thinks it wasn’t Bush’s fault. He blames the masses:

Continuing his discourse on torture policy, Hitchens then claimed that the Bush administration’s commitment to harsh interrogation techniques, which he considers torture, derived from a desire among Americans for a more “ruthless” government. “It has to be admitted by every American that in the majority after the 9/11 Commission, people wanted an administration that was much more ruthless than the one they’d had on September the 10th,” he said.

“I know something for a sure thing,” Hitchens continued. “The demand for torture and other methods I would describe as illegal, the demand to go outside the Geneva conventions — all this came from below. What everyone wants to say is this came from a small clique around the vice-president. It’s not educational. It doesn’t enlighten anyone to behave as if that were true. This is our society wanting and demanding harsh measures.”

Poor, pathetic President Bush. He was only doing what the unwashed masses told him to. The people were screaming for blood, and so he gave it to them.

Bull. Shit.

I know that Americans were hurt, scared, angry and looking to lash out after 9/11. But I didn’t hear a deafening demand for our government to start torturing people. Even if the people had demanded that, it’s why we have representative government. We choose leaders to lead. And a leader’s responsibility is to ensure cooler heads prevail.

Instead, Bush took the opportunity to turn us into a nation of torturers.

He and his apologists are doing their level-best to convince us that the past is best left in the past, that Bush’s torture regime kept us safe, that without torture we’re all going to be murdered by terrorists. It’s Jack Bauer thinking. They can’t separate fantasy from reality:

We are supposed to feel bad for Jack Bauer, the lead character on FOX’s hit show “24.” Only he and a handful of his colleagues, it seems, have the moral strength necessary to do what has to be done. While Senators whine and his superiors wring their hands about what is “right,” Bauer acts and saves the nation.

What this means – and has meant for more than six seasons of “24” – is that Bauer is a not-so reluctant torturer. He beats up the bad guys because, as he has said so many times, “there is no other way.”

The reality is that there are more reliable and effective ways. Resorting to torture isn’t heroic, it’s stupid. Reliance on it has resulted in strategic mistakes and has made the nation less safe. The torture chorus has yet to document a single instance of a “but for” success, and that refusal looks more and more like a criminal cover-up.

I taught interrogation and the law of war for 18 years to U.S. Army, Air Force, and Marine interrogators. The truth is that torture is just as likely to lead to false information or no information, not solid intelligence. History is replete with victims who have refused to talk or lied or died under torture. American torture has killed or addled suspects who might have provided vital intelligence if interrogated humanely. One problem with TV fiction is that viewers assume that if Jack Bauer can break some fingers and crack the case in an hour, anyone could.

Unfortunately that is exactly the message that some have gleaned from this program. After watching torture work over and over again, some junior soldiers (and, sadly, some very senior policy makers who ought to know better) have copied the tactics they have seen on “24” and other action programs, according to evidence gathered by journalists and Human Rights First. Military educators have also reported that “24” is “one of the biggest problems” they have in their classrooms.

How fucking pathetic is it that any teenager in the country (well, aside from the budding Republicons) will, when asked, explain very calmly and rationally that there’s a clear difference between what works in Hollywood and what works in the real world, yet the fucktards who were in charge of our government and the delusional fools in our armed forces think 24 is an instructional video?

This is what Bush and his cronies wrought. The fact they decided torture was necessary and efficient led a lot of people to believe the same, because they’re our leaders and people trust their leaders to do what is right.

Of course, it seems Cons have a hard time distinguishing between right and wrong:

From the new WaPo/ABC poll:

A majority of Americans in a new Washington Post-ABC News poll oppose the use of torture in terrorism investigations, backing Barack Obama’s pledge that “under my administration, the United States does not torture.”

Overall, 58 percent support the prohibition Obama declared before taking office, but there’s a wide gap across party lines: 71 percent of Democrats and 56 percent of independents in the poll said torture should never be used, but most Republicans, 55 percent, said there
are cases in which the U.S. should consider using torture against terrorism suspects.

Funny how that “right and wrong/black and white” world conservatives love so much turns gray when it comes to torture.

And on Gitmo:

In a new Washington Post-ABC News poll, 53 percent of Americans said the United States should shutter the controversial facility, finding another way to deal with the prisoners under custody there. But a sizable proportion of all adults polled, 42 percent, and a broad majority of Republicans, 69 percent, said terrorism suspects should remain at Gitmo. Most Democrats, 68 percent, and independents, 55 percent, said they’d prefer another way.

Apparently, when Hitchens and the rest of the Villagers talk about “what Americans want,” they’re only talking to Cons. It presents a rather warped view of what the majority of the country knows to be right.

And the majority of us know that there will be no going forward, that our moral authority cannot be restored, until there is an accounting for the war crimes Bush and his regime committed:

Even more surprisingly for spouters of conventional wisdom, a majority of Americans (50-47%) believe that the Obama administration should investigate whether the Bush administration’s treatment of detainees was illegal. When asked: “Do you think the Obama administration should or should not investigate whether any laws were broken in the way terrorism suspects were treated under the Bush administration?,” Democrats overwhelmingly favor such investigations (69%), while Republicans oppose them by the same margin, and independents are slightly against.

This number was obtained despite the 24/7 yawping of pundits, gassbags, opinion-makers, and other self-important fools telling us all how vital it is that Obama move on, forget the past, and incidentally hang on to the torture option because you never know when you’re going to need to break a few fingers to stop a ticking time bomb. A hair-thin majority, but still a majority, hasn’t fallen for the lies. They know it’s important to prosecute those who broke countless laws and destroyed our country’s moral standing.

We have to set things right, but not just for us. The world is watching. So are our adversaries:

One hesitates to say this will amount to anything, but Marc Lynch notes that Mohammed Essam Derbala, a leader of Ayman Zawahiri’s Egyptian terrorist group that merged with Al Qaeda in 1998, today urged his former confederates to declare a unilateral ceasefire to “test Barack Obama’s pledges to establish a new relationship with the Islamic world and to close Guantanamo.”

[snip]

Let’s be clear about a few things. Derbala has no power to call for or enforce any Al Qaeda ceasefire. But consider how overwhelmingly significant it is that a former terrorist of such obvious credibility would say something like this. And why’d he say it? Because Barack Obama just renounced torture. He put the United States on a clear path to repudiating the detentions, interrogations and, as important, humiliations that Muslims consider the U.S. to have inflicted not just on terrorists, but the entire Muslim world. Part of Al Qaeda’s entire propagandistic message is that the U.S. is an unchanging brutish entity determined to subjugate the Muslim world. What Obama did today severely complicates that narrative. But it’s not enough for us to consider the narrative to be complicated — it takes Muslim figures of credibility to say so. That’s what Derbala just did.

Imagine that. In the real world, not torturing people makes you safer and more secure. We should ask the producers of 24 to break the news to Jack Bauer – otherwise, the Cons will never understand the truth.

And the truth is this:

We must wipe the grime and filth from the walls of that shining city on a hill. We must relight the beacons. If we are to do any good in this world, we must go forward with prosecutions, hold our own war criminals accountable just as we have those in countless other countries.

We can’t forgive, and we can’t forget. Not this. We have to love our country enough to hold those who broke her most fundamental laws to account, or there will be nothing left of that shining city but ruins.

Some Things Must Neither Be Forgiven Nor Forgotten
{advertisement}

Eric Holder Does Not Believe In 24. Neocon Heads Explode

There’s very bad news for our Jack Bauer-worshiping, torture-loving neocon class.

First, let’s have a look at Faux News and their inability, along with the vast majority of the fuckwits who ran this country into the ground the last several years, to tell the difference between fiction and reality:

Beck and the Fox & Friends hosts also invoked 24 as a justification for the use of torture. Referring to the show’s recent season premiere, in which protagonist Jack Bauer, a former member of the fictional “Counter Terrorist Unit,” defends his use of torture during a hearing before Congress, Beck said: “[I]t’s going to take somebody who sits in front of Congress who is not afraid of them anymore and does what Jack Bauer did. And that is, ‘Yes, I did torture, and I’m proud of it.’ And it’s time for these things to come out of the closet.” Introducing an excerpt from 24, in which Bauer is seen answering questions from a congressional committee about torture, Kilmeade stated: “Let’s listen to what happened in the fictional series 24 and see if this helps build your argument.”

After the clip, co-host Steve Doocy said: “In particular, in that clip, you know, the guy [fictional Sen. Blaine Mayer] goes, ‘You tortured them.’ And he [Bauer] goes, ‘Well, it probably was torture under your definition. But ask the people whose lives I saved whether or not it was worth me going over the edge’ — they would probably — you ask the average person, ‘Is it OK to do something, rough somebody up, to save lives?’ You ask the person on the street, they’d say, ‘Yeah, why not?’ “

Well, there’s plenty of people on the street who would say “Not no but HELL no!” to a hypothetical like that. I’m one, and I’m average enough. Keifer Sutherland isn’t quite so average, but it’s worth mentioning that those stopping him on the street for a rousing endorsement of torture would be coming away mightily disappointed:

If right wingers see Bauer as an example of how to prosecute the war on terror, they might be disheartened to learn that even the man that plays Bauer, actor Keifer Sutherland, doesn’t see his character’s torture techniques as effective in real life. “You torture someone and they’ll basically tell you exactly what you want to hear, whether it’s true or not, if you put someone in enough pain,” Sutherland said last year.

Let me put this in somewhat simple terms for the hard-of-thinking: Jack Bauer thinks torture is effective because he’s a character in a television series. Keifer Sutherland knows it’s ineffective because he’s a real man with an actual brain. The Faux News babblers, our soon-to-be-former rulers, and very nearly the entire neocon chickenhawk crowd cite Jack Bauer instead of Keifer Sutherland on these matters because they’re a raving bunch of lackwits. No wonder they yawp about violent video games and immoral movies being harmful to the younguns – since they can’t tell the difference between fantasy and reality, they think no one else can, either.

But I digress. I said I had bad news for them. And that’s because Obama’s Attorney General nominee, Eric Holder, is fucking awesome.

Check out these moves:

When Alberto Gonzales was the nominee for Attorney General, he went to great lengths to avoid describing waterboarding as torture, or even addressing whether the practice is legal. Michael Mukasey’s A.G. nomination was nearly derailed by his unwillingness to address similar questions.

It wasn’t a trick question. Today, Eric Holder answered it.

Holder’s response was both unequivocal and encouraging: “If you look at the history of the use of that technique, used by the Khmer Rouge, used in the Inquisition, used by the Japanese and prosecuted by us as war crimes. We prosecuted our own soldiers for using it in Vietnam. I agree with you, Mr. Chairman, waterboarding is torture.”

Judiciary Committee Chairman Pat Leahy (D-Vt.) followed up, asking if foreign countries would have the authority to waterboard U.S. citizens, if they deemed it necessary for their national security. “No, they would not,” Holder replied, “It would violate the international obligations that I think all civilized nations have agreed to — the Geneva Conventions.”

And finally, Leahy asked whether the president has the authority to override the law regarding torture. Holder responded, “Mr. Chairman, no one is above the law. The president has a constitutional obligation to faithfully execute the laws of the United States.”

My darlings. I love this man. Love him, love him, love him.

But wait! There’s more. Clever John Cornyn attempted to trip him up with a clever hypothetical. Oh, noes! It’s the ticking time bomb scenario! We know how Jack Bauer would respond – what about Holder?

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) could not fathom that an Attorney General would reject a practice that both is unlawful and endangers Americans. He tried to get Holder to back off his anti-torture stance by presenting an absurd “ticking time bomb” hypothetical in which thousands of American lives are at stake. “You would still refuse to condone aggressive interrogation techniques?” Cornyn asked. When Holder replied that waterboarding is not the only interrogation method, Cornyn insisted, “Assume that it was”:

HOLDER: I think your hypothetical assumes a premise that I’m not willing to concede.

CORNYN: I know you don’t like my hypothetical.

HOLDER: No, the hypothetical’s fine; the premise that underlies it I’m not willing to accept, and that is that waterboarding is the only way that I could get that information from those people.

CORNYN: Assume that it was.

HOLDER: [Laughs] Given the knowledge that I have about other techniques and what I’ve heard from retired admirals and generals and FBI agents, there are other ways in a timely fashion that you can get information out of people that is accurate and will produce useable intelligence. And so it

Eric Holder Does Not Believe In 24. Neocon Heads Explode

Great American Hypocrisy: Torture Prosecutions for Thee but Not for Me

It seems the United States can prosecute torture – as long as it was someone else who did the torturing:

While fiercely loyal establishment spokespeople such as The Washington Post‘s Ruth Marcus continue to insist that prosecutions are only appropriate for common criminals (“someone breaking into your house”) but not our glorious political leaders when they break the law (by, say, systematically torturing people), the Bush administration has righteously decided that torture is such a grotesque and intolerable crime that political leaders who order it simply must be punished in American courts to the fullest extent of the law . . . . if they’re from Liberia:

MIAMI (AP) — U.S. prosecutors want a Miami judge to sentence the son of former Liberian President Charles Taylor to 147 years in prison for torturing people when he was chief of a brutal paramilitary unit during his father’s reign.

Charles McArthur Emmanuel, also known as Charles “Chuckie” Taylor Jr. is scheduled to be sentenced Jan. 9 by U.S. District Judge Cecilia M. Altonaga. His conviction was the first use of a 1994 law allowing prosecution in the U.S. for acts of torture committed overseas.

Even in the U.S., it’s hard to believe that federal prosecutors who work for the Bush DOJ were able to convey the following words with a straight face:

A recent Justice Department court filing describes torture – which the U.S. has been accused of in the war on terror – as a “flagrant and pernicious abuse of power and authority” that warrants severe punishment of Taylor.

It undermines respect for and trust in authority, government and a rule of law,” wrote Assistant U.S. Attorney Caroline Heck Miller in last week’s filing. “The gravity of the offense of torture is beyond dispute.”

Why, yes. Yes, it is. Which is bloody well why we should have Bush, Cheney et all locked up in cells awaiting the displeasure of the court.

There is an excellent fucking case to be made for delivering Bush and his cronies to the Hague:

A political scientist named Michael Haas has just published a book titled George W. Bush, War Criminal? The Bush Administration’s Liability for 269 War Crimes:

Based on information supplied in autobiographical and press sources, the book matches events in Afghanistan, Guantánamo, Iraq , and various secret places of detention with provisions in the Geneva Conventions and other international agreements on war crimes. His compilation is the first to cite a comprehensive list of specific war crimes in four categories-illegality of the decision to go to war, misconduct during war, mistreatment of prisoners of war, and misgovernment in the American occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Haas accuses President Bush of conduct bordering on treason because he reenacted several complaints stated in the Declaration of Independence against England, ignored the Constitution and federal laws, trampled on the American tradition of developing international law to bring order to world politics, and in effect made a Faustian pact with Osama Bin Laden that the intelligence community blames for an increase in world terrorism. Osama Bin Laden remains alive, he reports, because Bush preferred to go after oil-rich Iraq rather than tracking down Al Qaeda leaders, whose uncaptured presence was useful to him in justifying a “war on terror” pursued on a military rather than a criminal basis without restraint from constitutional checks and balances.

The worst war crime cited is the murder of at least 45 prisoners, some but not all by torture. Other heinous crimes include the brutal treatment of thousands of children, some 64 of whom have been detained at Guantánamo. Sources document the use of illegal weapons in the war from cluster bombs to daisy cutters, napalm, white phosphorus, and depleted uranium weapons, some of which have injured and killed American soldiers as well as thousands of innocent civilians. Children playing in areas of Iraq where depleted uranium weapons have been used, but not reported on request from the World Health Organization, have developed leukemia and other serious diseases.

If actions like this do not make our leaders war criminals worthy of trial and conviction, nothing does. We have no right, none, to prosecute and imprison people for doing what we ourselves have done.

Digby excoriates the prevailing political winds blowing in the direction of forgive, forget, and pretend we can keep it from happening again without going through all the ickyness of a trial. She takes that down with alacrity, finishing with a stark reminder:

And this is one issue where there is absolutely no room for compromise — the world is watching and our national security depends upon Obama completely and without reservations ending these programs, closing Guantanamo, following the Geneva conventions and standing firm against any kind of lawless and unproductive anti-terrorism measures. Investigating and exposing the full extent of what went on is also, in my view, a necessity if we are to restore any kind of credibility around the world. If he doesn’t do these things, this moment will be as squandered as the world’s sympathy was squandered by Bush after 9/11. The world will be unlikely to give us a third chance at getting this right.

Second chances are hard enough to come by. We were extraordinarily lucky that Obama came along and restored the world’s faith in us. We need to show them their faith is justified.

And yes, there is something we can do about it. We can apply some pressure.

Ari Melber at The Nation has a good suggestion:

The Obama transition team is taking questions again at Change.gov, throwing open the site this week for citizen input. The first run of this experiment was a mixed bag. The platform was open and transparent, but the official answers felt more like old boilerplate than new responses. When the submitted questions parrot toics in the traditional media, of course, the exchange can feel like a dated press conference. But here’s a vital question that few reporters have ever presented to Obama:

Wil
l you appoint a Special Prosecutor (ideally Patrick Fitzgerald) to independently investigate the gravest crimes of the Bush Administration, including torture and warrantless wiretapping?

That question ranked sixth in voting last time — out of over 10,000 submissions — but the transition team only answered the top five questions. Now that Vice President Cheney confessed his support for waterboarding on national television, flouting the rule of law, the issue is even more urgent. Activist Bob Fertik, who has submitted the question twice, explains how you can vote to press this issue on the transition team:

  1. Sign in at http://change.gov/openforquestions
  2. Search for “Fitzgerald
  3. This will display several similar questions, so look carefully for “Bob Fertik”
  4. Look right for the checkbox, mouseover it so it goes from white to dark, then click to cast your vote

Now that we’ve shown we have the stomach to prosecute other countries’ citizens for torture, we need to stop being big fat fucking hypocrites and prosecute a few of our own.

Great American Hypocrisy: Torture Prosecutions for Thee but Not for Me

Torture Apologists and the Need for a Special Prosecutor

The neocons are working the refs overtime in an attempt to convince us that when it comes to al Qaeda, all torture is good torture. Check out Michael Smerconish on Hardball, claiming that if the US is doing it, it’s gotta be right:

MATTHEWS: KSM is Khalid Shaikh Mohammed. [Cheney] approved the waterboarding. He said it’s fine. Michael Smerconish, you agree?

MICHAEL SMERCONISH, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: I agree. And I think the fact that the vice president now acknowledges that he was involved in the decision-making process tells us how sparingly this technique has been used. Most published accounts say less than six members of al Qaeda have been subjected to waterboarding, and yet it’s so dominant a headline.

I’ll tell you something else, Chris. You’ve got to believe in the efficacy of water boarding because one has to suspect that the best of our interrogators would be assigned to KSM. And if that man or that women believed that these means were necessary, then obviously, they believe in the efficacy of waterboarding.

And frankly, there are no measures that I would be unwilling to say-or I would be willing to say are inappropriate for the likes of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed. Mine is a blanket endorsement…

MATTHEWS: So shoot his toes off one at a time.

SMERCONISH: … of whatever is necessary.

MATTHEWS: No, no, no. Michael, shoot his toes off one at a time is fine with you. You just said that, right? Anything is OK with you?

SMERCONISH: Chris, listen, you can play whatever sound bite you’d like, I’ll go along with it tonight.

MATTHEWS: No, I’m asking. I don’t know…

(CROSSTALK)

MATTHEWS: Do you think it’s OK to just do…

SMERCONISH: If you’re talking…

MATTHEWS: … any kind of torture?

SMERCONISH: Yes, Chris, I believe that if you’re dealing with the operations planner of September 11 and if this individual has actionable intelligence, that there are no means that should not be employed. We’re talking about individuals who fly airplanes into buildings to kill Americans, who will decapitate-remember, KSM talks with bravado about decapitating Mr. Pearl from “The Wall Street Journal.” So keep in mind who you’re dealing with. There’s no tit for tat here. In other words, they’re not going to tone it down if we tone it down. So do whatever is necessary…

MATTHEWS: OK. You’re clear.

SMERCONISH: … to protect American lives.

MATTHEWS: I just wanted to make sure-I wanted to be graphic about shooting the toes off because we’ve all seen that in movies and in film, where you see all kinds of torture used by the bad guys. I just wanted to know if you thought we could do the same. That’s all.

SMERCONISH: Indeed. I do.

These fuckers are all living in a fantasy world. Read the transcript or watch the clip – it’s incredible, especially toward the end:

MATTHEWS: In other words, your moral system is based on, if you’re an American, anything goes. If you’re in the other country, we try you for war crimes. You lose the war, we cut your head off, or whatever it takes, we execute you. In other words, your morality is entirely nationally based. I’m just asking.

SMERCONISH: And I’m going to answer, if you’ll give me the chance. Yes, my moral code is dictated by the fact that I want our leaders to be guided to protect American lives first.

He outright says we can torture people wearing the uniform of another country. Later, he tries to walk it back and say that for now, he’s only talking about al Qaeda, but he demonstrates he would have no problem wiping out the Geneva Conventions. He thinks we’re justified in perpetrating any horror as long as the other side is doing it, too.

Christopher Hitchens takes him apart. He is, of course, too stupid to realize it. And you can expect a lot more of this sort of bullshit to spew forth from the mouths of Cons like a cow with dysentary. I somehow doubt the Hague will be impressed with the resulting pile of noxious excuses. But the right certainly seems to be. And Duncan Hunter speaks for them all when he says that all the talk about detainee abuse is “left-wing rubbish.”

Amazing how they like to portray themselves as the “moral” ones.

That makes the proposal to fire U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald very attractive indeed:

Mr. President, one of the first things you’ll get upon your swearing in is a stack of resignation letters from all the U.S. Attorneys, standard procedure when changing Administrations. The very first one you should act on is that of Patrick Fitzgerald, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois.

[snip]

There is abundant reason to believe that gross violations of our Law have taken place at the highest levels of our Government including authorizing or ordering torture, unlawful detention of U.S. citizens, unlawful surveillance and wiretapping of U.S. citizens and other serious offenses, committed and/or authorized by Cabinet Secretaries and Executive Branch officials.

From the moment you take the Oath of Office it becomes your sworn Duty to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed”, which must include investigating and, if appropriate, prosecuting, possible criminal actions at high levels in the Administration preceeding yours. That’s where Patrick Fitzgerald comes in.

Accept Fitzgerald’s resignation as U.S. Attorney, and immediately appoint him Special Counsel with authority to investigate ANY credible allegation of lawbreaking by ANY official with the rank of Undersecretary or above, give him full Presidential backing and turn him loose. His brief should extend to any such official, or Member of Congress, who had knowledge of such lawbreaking but did nothing to stop it, as is their responsibility.

Sounds like an excellent idea to me.

Our nation’s highest officials redefined torture and threw the Geneva Conventions out the window. They engaged in war crimes, and now they’re sending an army of apologists to try to convince the American public that they were doing the right thing all along. The world knows bet
ter: what we did was wrong. There is no justification for torture. “They’re doing it, too!” is not an excuse. “But we got our lawyers to say it was okay!” is not an excuse. “Ticking time bombs” are a myth. Torture doesn’t keep America safe. All it does is lowers us to the same level as dictators, terrorists, and criminals.

We need to show the world that our laws matter, and that we will take responsibility and decisive action when our leaders lead us astray. Commissions aren’t going to be enough. Handwringing is useless. What we need is prosecutions. If we don’t hold our own war criminals to account, we run a very real risk that future administrations will descend into further lawlessness. We lose our moral authority. And we fail as a democracy.

We need to rise above the depravity of the last eight years and get ourselves back on track. It may be politically easier to let bygones be bygones, but we need to inform Obama that turning our back on the past does nothing to heal this country and prevent us from ever falling so far again.

Time to make our voices heard (h/t):

Petition Badge

Get Badge

That’s a message the torture apologists will find hard to spin. It’s the clearest way to show them we’re not swallowing their bullshit.

Torture Apologists and the Need for a Special Prosecutor

Paying a Heavy Price for Throwing Footwear

Al-Zaidi became an instant hero among those of us who have long wanted to hurl something at Bush’s thick head. Now he could use our help:

While Tweety fussed about the propriety of Al Zaida’s shoe throw just now, very credible reports started to come in from Arabic sources that Muntader Al Zaida is in very bad shape:

Raed in the Middle reports:

Albaghdadia, the TV channel where the Iraqi Journalist Montather Al-Zeidi works, reports that an Iraqi MP (Ms. Zainab Al-Kanani) informed them that Montather’s hand was broken in jail.

This confirms a lot of reports and rumors about Montather being subject to torture while the Iraqi authorities are interrogating and detaining him in some unspecified location.

From Roads to Iraq:

Iraqi TV al-Sharqiya just reported on the news that AL-Zaidi is transferred to Camp Cropper prison [the Airport prison, managed by the American forces].

The TV Channel announced that Al-Zaidi is in a difficult condition, with broken ribs and signs of tortures on his thighs. Also he can not move his right arm.

[snip]

Urgent appeals for Al Zaida’s safety should be made by phone to the White House – 202-456-1111 and the Iraqi Embassy – (202) 742-1600.

I wish I could hope that being transferred to a prison managed by Americans meant he’d get proper care and treatment. There was a time, not too long ago, when that would never have been in question.

At least we can let them know we’re watching.

Paying a Heavy Price for Throwing Footwear

Anti-Torture General Praises Eric Holder

Glenn Greenwald, who has spoken out passionately and often against the abuses of the Bush Regime, recently interviewed retired Rear Admiral John Huston, who himself has been battling to bring America back to sanity. I’ll let Glenn take over the intro:

Ten days ago, twelve retired Generals and Admirals met with key members of the Obama transition team — including Attorney General-designate Eric Holder and White-House-Counsel-to-be Greg Craig — in order, as the Associated Press put it, to “press[] their case to overturn seven years of Bush administration policies on detention, interrogation and rendition in the war on terror.” One of those military officers was John Hutson, a retired Rear Admrial [sic] with the U.S. Navy and current Dean and President of the Franklin Pierce Law Center.

You should listen to the interview in its entirety, of course, but I just wanted to highlight this bit:

GG: Now, one of the things that I thought was encouraging about this meeting, and the reports that arose from it, was that they sent the Obama team; that is, they sent extremely important officials that are going to play very influential role. They didn’t send low-level functionaries. They sent Eric Holder, who will probably have as much of a role as anybody else in determining how these rules are ultimately written. What was your impressions of their posture, their resolve to do the right thing here, walking away from this meeting?

JH: I have to tell you, I was really impressed. I’m not easily impressionable, I guess. But I think we all were. They were well-informed, they asked good questions, they played Devil’s advocate in a very effective way, asking the kinds of questions that you just asked, and what about the ticking time bomb — all those questions that you hear.

They knew the issues, and were very, very engaged. We had a long meeting, much longer than we expected, because they wanted to plumb the depths of these issues, so that they’d be able to respond to the nay-sayers, to the critics of these policies. And, I was just tremendously impressed, I have to say. Eric Holder was terrific; he was super.

Two things. One, these sorts of things have never been said about Bush’s lackeys, so the contrast is stark – very, very encouraging. Two, Eric Holder is “terrific” and “super” in the estimation of this very wise and credible former admiral.

So can Firedoglake please just shut the fuck up about Holder now? When you’re cheering on Karl fucking Rove, and you’re the only people in the universe aside from the Cons who seem to have a problem with him, your credibility isn’t just shattered, it’s been chopped, puréed , spread thin, left to dry, incinerated, and then had its ashes scattered in the depths of space.

Anti-Torture General Praises Eric Holder

About that "Torture" McCain Suffered…

He didn’t.

McCain was never tortured as a POW.

Every confession he made was absolutely accurate.

Every technique used against him was perfectly legal, moral, and ethical.

Our government says so:

The torture that was deployed against McCain emerges in all the various accounts. It involved sleep deprivation, the withholding of medical treatment, stress positions, long-time standing, and beating. Sound familiar?

According to the Bush administration’s definition of torture, McCain was therefore not tortured.

Cheney denies that McCain was tortured; as does Bush. So do John Yoo and David Addington and George Tenet. In the one indisputably authentic version of the story of a Vietnamese guard showing compassion, McCain talks of the agony of long-time standing. A quarter century later, Don Rumsfeld was putting his signature to memos lengthening the agony of “long-time standing” that victims of Bush’s torture regime would have to endure. These torture techniques are, according to the president of the United States, merely “enhanced interrogation.”

No war crimes were committed against McCain. And the techniques used are, according to the president, tools to extract accurate information. And so the false confessions that McCain was forced to make were, according to the logic of the Bush administration, as accurate as the “intelligence” we have procured from “interrogating” terror suspects. Feel safer?

Imfuckingmeasurably.

Just in case anyone’s all outraged by this on McCain’s behalf, just remember that he agrees 110%:

Now the kicker: in the Military Commissions Act, McCain acquiesced to the use of these techniques against terror suspects by the CIA. And so the tortured became the enabler of torture. Someone somewhere cried out in pain for the same reasons McCain once did. And McCain let it continue.

That’s real presidential material, that is.

Andrew Sullivan’s earned himself a bottle o’ the best in the house for this piece. Tip o’ the shot glass to Ed Brayton for making sure I didn’t miss it.

About that "Torture" McCain Suffered…

And the Depravity Continues Apace

Our government has lost its collective mind.

It’s decided torture’s okay. It’s decided renditions are peachy. It feels that holding a person without charge or trial forever is perfectly acceptable. And now, it’s decided that if prisoners act up, why, stuffing them in a box is the right thing to do:

WASHINGTON (CNN) — The U.S. military is segregating violent Iraqi prisoners in wooden crates that in some cases are not much bigger than the prisoners.

The military released photos of what it calls “segregation boxes” used in Iraq.

Three grainy black-and-white photos show the rudimentary structures of wood and mesh. Some of the boxes are as small as 3 feet by 3 feet by 6 feet tall, according to military officials.

[snip]

The military said the boxes are humane and are checked every 15 minutes. It said detainees, who stand inside the boxes, are isolated for no more than 12 hours at a time.

“Someone in a segregation box is actually observed more than those anywhere else,” said Maj. Neal Fisher, a spokesman for Task Force 134, the Marine unit in charge of detainees. “Their care and custody does not change simply because they are in segregation.”

Are you fucking insane? Of course “their care and custody” has changed – you’ve shoved them in a tiny little box and left ’em crated like a Chinese chicken for twelve fucking hours, you fuckwit.

I don’t know how much more depraved our government can get. Seriously. They seem bent on pumping out as many pissed-off jihadists as possible. I’ll tell you something: if some complete asshole yanked me out of my country, tortured me, kept me imprisoned indefinitely, and then shoved me in a wee little crate every time I expressed my displeasure, I’d be fucking ready to kill every single American ever born. Doesn’t matter if I’d been the most disinterested so-and-so around beforehand – I’d sure as shit decide that America’s the Great Satan after all that treatment. Talk about validating prejudices. We’re confirming every bad thing the Middle East has ever said about us.

And then, and then, the same sick fucks who abuse these prisoners turn around and call us unpatriotic because we don’t condone this shit. They think we should be proud of America. You know what? I’m really not. I’m dead ashamed. My country makes me sick.

Especially since this shit isn’t news anymore. Go ahead. See for yourselves. The only people carrying this story besides CNN are the bloody blogs.

We should be outraged. Everyone in this country should be screaming. Every news source in the nation should be running these stories non-stop. The Bush regime should have been hauled away in chains ages ago. Instead, we get a collective yawn, a shrug of the shoulders, and a big, fat, “Whaddya gonna do?”

I really, really hope the International Criminal Court does what we don’t have the guts to do, and indicts every last one of these insane fuckers. Someone needs to remind this country how civilized nations are supposed to behave.

(Tip o’ the shot glass to both Think Progress and dday on this one.)

And the Depravity Continues Apace

With the Watchdogs Silent, Vigilantes Must Act

Day 7, and the media is still too obsessed with personality politics to notice that President Bush wholeheartedly approves of torture. At this point, our Assclown in Chief could admit to stir-frying babies, and the media would stick a three-line item on page B-18. They simply don’t care.

I don’t know how they got the idea that Americans only want stories about gaffes, bullshit, woo, and general fluff. It’s time to disabuse them of that notion.

Firedoglake has put together a nifty little tool for writing easy letters to the editor of a bajillion papers. I’ve done my part:

Bush Approves Torture, Media Obsesses Over Orange Juice

Dear Editor,

Where are our watchdogs of democracy?

President Bush knew of meetings held at the highest level of his administration to discuss and approve specific torture
techniques. He approved of those meetings.

The American President approved of torture. ABC broke the story on April 10th. And yet, Dan Fromkin of the Washington Post notes, “There was no mention of Bush’s admission in the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal or the Los Angeles Times. There was nothing on the major wire services. And nothing on CNN, CBS or NBC.”

Barak Obama’s choice of morning beverage was far more important to our media than our president approving torture.

When President Nixon authorized a burglary, the media kept the story going until he was impeached. President Bush’s authorization of torture would seem a far worse offense, but the media has ignored it.

Democracy’s watchdogs barked at Watergate. Why are they silent now?


I know a fair number of you are writers. Go forth and write.

With the Watchdogs Silent, Vigilantes Must Act

No More

The Washington Monthly has a message for the Bush regime: we’re done here.

In most issues of the Washington Monthly, we favor articles that we hope will launch a debate. In this issue we seek to end one. The unifying message of the articles that follow is, simply, Stop. In the wake of September 11, the United States became a nation that practiced torture. Astonishingly—despite the repudiation of torture by experts and the revelations of Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib—we remain one. As we go to press, President George W. Bush stands poised to veto a measure that would end all use of torture by the United States. His move, we suspect, will provoke only limited outcry. What once was shocking is now ordinary.

Well, guess what? It is. Bush admits that he approved torture, and the media can’t be bothered. Congress passes a bill that would ban torture, he vetoes it, the country has a heart attack from not surprised.

(CBS/AP) President George W. Bush said Saturday he vetoed legislation that would ban the CIA from using harsh interrogation methods such as waterboarding to break suspected terrorists because it would end practices that have prevented attacks. “The bill Congress sent me would take away one of the most valuable tools in the war on terror,” the president said in his weekly radio address taped for broadcast Saturday. “So today I vetoed it.”


Is anyone else taken aback by this? “One of the most valuable tools?” Since the fuck when has torture been a “valuable tool”? Ten fucking seconds on Wikipedia kills that notion:

One well documented effect of torture is that with rare exceptions people will say or do anything to escape the situation, including untrue “confessions” and implication of others without genuine knowledge, who
may well then be tortured in turn.


Insult to injury, listen to the way he announces his veto. Like it’s the most ordinary thing in the world to do. Like any idiot would have done the same. You can hear the “Well, duh” lurking behind the words.

We’re all pretty focused on Expelled: the Dumbfuckery right now. But it’s worth saving some outrage over this. Our country tortures people. Our president supports torture 110%. And this has become so expected that we just shrug and wait for November.

We can’t wait. We can’t just shrug this off. We have work to do:

One thing we can do is try and get ABC to ask some sort of question on this in this week’s Democratic debate. They BROKE the story, after all, so they have a little connection to it. You can contact them here and demand that they follow up their reporting on torture by pushing it into the Presidential race. Contacting World News Tonight with moderator
Charlie Gibson and
ABC News Programming Specials would probably be the most helpful.


It stops.

No More