Thursday, April 10, 2008

The Torture Planners: "Why are we talking about this in the White House?"

In a very interesting follow-up to the unfolding story on the 2003 John Yoo memorandum that justified the use of torture, ABC news is reporting how the CIA came to the White House after the spring 2002 capture of al Qaeda operative Abu Zubaydah in Pakistan and asked for permission to use more "aggressive" interrogation techniques. Citing anonymous sources, ABC says that beginning with the Zubaydah case, "the most senior Bush administration officials discussed and approved specific details of how high-value al Qaeda suspects would be interrogated by the Central Intelligence Agency." These discussions evidently included the use of waterboarding, as the CIA has admitted using this torture technique on Zubaydah.

The "Principals" -- high-level Bush administration officials -- present included National Security Adviser Condolezza Rice, who chaired the meetings, "Vice President Cheney... Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Colin Powell, as well as CIA Director George Tenet and Attorney General John Ashcroft."

While Ashcroft is said to have signed off on the legality of the interrogations, he got squeamish about how it was being approved. Perhaps he was afraid of future legal and political consequences. Perhaps he remembered how the secrets of the Wannsee Conference were ultimately leaked. Per the ABC story (also reported over at Reuters):

Lawyers in the Justice Department had written a classified memo, which was extensively reviewed, that gave formal legal authority to government interrogators to use the "enhanced" questioning tactics on suspected terrorist prisoners. The August 2002 memo, signed by then head of the Office of Legal Counsel Jay Bybee, was referred to as the so-called "Golden Shield" for CIA agents, who worried they would be held liable if the harsh interrogations became public.....

But even after the "Golden Shield" was in place, briefings and meetings in the White House to discuss individual interrogations continued, sources said. Tenet, seeking to protect his agents, regularly sought confirmation from the NSC principals that specific interrogation plans were legal....

Highly placed sources said CIA directors Tenet and later Porter Goss along with agency lawyers briefed senior advisers, including Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld and Powell, about detainees in CIA custody overseas....

Then-Attorney General Ashcroft was troubled by the discussions. He agreed with the general policy decision to allow aggressive tactics and had repeatedly advised that they were legal. But he argued that senior White House advisers should not be involved in the grim details of interrogations, sources said.

According to a top official, Ashcroft asked aloud after one meeting: "Why are we talking about this in the White House? History will not judge this kindly."
Despite Ashcroft's qualms -- mainly concerned with his political neck, not the safety of prisoners -- the Principals "approved interrogations... pushing the limits of international law and even the Justice Department's own legal approval." Condi Rice was said to be particularly forceful in giving the CIA power to torture (with Powell echoing Ashcroft's wimpy protests).

As the blogger buhdydharma wrote in an article today, the new revelations "clearly point to a high level, willful conspiracy to commit torture." Beyond the question of conspiracy, serious violations of a number of laws that prohibit torture and inhumane treatment have also been broken. Courtesy of Physicians for Human Rights and Human Rights First own examination of criminal laws governing laws on torture, let's review what Ashcroft, Rice, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Tenet, and possibly others, may find themselves vulnerable with aggressive prosecution (for footnotes, please refer to original via link):

The recent amendments to the War Crimes Act establish as war crimes “grave breaches” of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions,10 including “torture” and “cruel or inhuman treatment.”11 “Torture” is characterized, in pertinent part, as “an act specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering.”12 The separate war crime of “cruel or inhuman treatment,” is defined as “an act intended to inflict severe or serious physical or mental pain or suffering.”13

For the crime of torture under the WCA 14 and the Torture Act,15 severe mental pain or suffering is defined as “the prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from” several specified actions, including “the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering” and “the administration or application, or threatened administration or application, of mindaltering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality.”16

For the WCA crime of “cruel or inhuman treatment,” serious mental pain or suffering is defined as “the serious and non-transitory mental harm (which need not be prolonged) caused by or resulting from” the same specified actions.17

The Detainee Treatment Act requires that “no person in the custody or under the physical control of the United States Government, regardless of nationality or physical location, shall be subject to torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment (CIDT).”18 The DTA defines CIDT as conduct prohibited by the Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
Since the "CIA’s reported “enhanced” interrogation techniques cause the types of physical and mental anguish that are criminalized under the WCA and other laws," it's clear that top administration officials have committed war crimes.

But what are the governmental officials, including elected members of the legislature, going to do about it? Certainly we can expect nothing from Mukasey's Justice Department, which even has all but signed off on waterboarding, and refuses to rule out evidence obtained by same. Rep. Conyers has asked John Woo to appear at a hearing of the House Judiciary Committee next month. Meanwhile, the story barely reaches the significance of front page coverage in the U.S. press.

This is not surprising, as the Executive Branch of the U.S. government has gotten away with the criminal execution of an illegal, pre-emptive war in Iraq, even when the evidence for this was placed in the public domain for all to see (going back at least to the publication of the Downing Street memos). Reportedly, the congressional offices of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats receive emails and faxes demanding action, up to and including the initiation of impeachment hearings in the House. All to no avail.

The poet William Blake wrote over two hundred years ago:
You never know what is enough unless you know what is more than enough.
We know that this is more than enough to put the criminal leadership of the Bush administration away in prison for many years. Therefore, enough!!

Give us our bill of indictment. Give us our impartial jury to examine the evidence. Give us justice. Failing this, I shudder to think what monstrous conclusion is being prepared for us in the bowels of history.

2 comments:

Annie said...

Jack Balkin, Marty Lederman and Scott Horton have been writing about this from their Constitutional Law Scholar perspectives.

Given that over one half of all inpatient psychiatric care is delivered in prisons in the US, that it was a mentally ill man who was brutally tortured (see Dan Froomkin's White House Watch column today for pertinent quotes), and that there is a good case to be made for the DOJ as systematically prosecuting and persecuting officials, so that we have real live political prisoners, I think the US as a republic based on democratic principles is hisotry.

I don't foresee a restoration of it, either. Not a single presidential candidate is promising to abandon the executive power and control that Bush and Cheney usurped, Congress has abdicated its duty to bring articles of impeachment forward, and the Supreme Court and DOJ are simply constitutional dictatorship machines.

every agency throughout the federal government has had loyalists embedded, and regulatory oversight stripped - gutted. One could make a case that there is no longer a functioning government except those pieces which collect and disburse revenue to war profiteers, lobbyists and their corporations and the military/industrial/government machinery.
Even in the healthcare blogosphere, I see more and more nurses and physicians writing from a purely profit-driven, inhumane perspective, voicing their view of vulnerable people as being at fault for their vulnerabilities, being worthless, and simply existing as objects to be acted upon, without any regard to their humanity or inherent worth. Torture? I think that it's happening well beyond the scope of the miltiary and the CIA and intelligence communities.

It's a toxic crop of values that have sprouted from the Bush/Cheney PNAC seeds.

Valtin said...

You are correct that the general degradation of the society is continuing apace. There is no reason not to see the "health care" components as debased as the rest of the society, particularly those portions tied to corporate managed care, or the state apparatus (the VA, the prison system).

None of this began with GWB, however. It has accelerated with the fall of the Soviet Union, and the attempt of the U.S. capitalist class to then claim sovreignity over the world. In the end, we will be bankrupted, and great misery will ensue.

The so-called death of communism (extended to mean both socialism and Marxism, as goals, as tools of analysis, etc.) was always just a kind of whistling past the grave.

The facts that surround the construction of society via exploiting and exploited classes embarrassingly remains. The history that was set in motion with the American and French revolutions, and later the 1848 revolutions in Europe, the Paris Commune, the Russian 1905 revolution, the interimperialist slaughter-war of 1914-1918, the Bolshevik revolution, the multination intervention against the Russian communists, the counterrevolution of Stalin and the rise of Fascism (aimed against workers organizations), World War II, the national liberation movements of the postwar period, the Cold War, etc. etc. -- all of this is still real, still active, awaiting its next lurch through the staggering road of progress in history.

Do not despair. Study Marx, read the history of past struggles. Get ready. The omnipotence of the rulers of this country is a fraud, and about to be exposed as such. And not because you or I will do anything, but via the internal contradictions that they either ignore or think they can master.

Search for Info/News on Torture

Google Custom Search
Add to Google ">View blog reactions

This site can contain copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available in my effort to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.