The Obama administration has gone after more whistleblowers and journalists for leaking classified information that all other administrations combined. Quite ironic considering Barack Obama ran as a candidate who would bring more transparency to governance.
Of course the problem isn't that a government employee was leaking information to a journalist or that the journalist wrote a story about it - because the Obama administration leaks classified information to the press all the time.
The distinction is, as usual, whose ox is getting gored.
In the latest fiasco, the FBI subpoenaed home, business and cell phone records from dozens of AP employees in an attempt to find out who the source for an article about how the government thwarted a terrorist attack was. According to the government, the records were subpoenaed so that investigators could map out telephone calls and somehow "triangulate" who was making them.
Maybe. Maybe not.
I suspect the real reason the government issued overly broad subpoenas and did it without consulting with the AP beforehand wasn't so much to find the leaker, but more to create a chilling effect for the next reporter who came across sensitive information. Being subjected to having los federales dig around in your private affairs might just be enough to make some reporters think twice before pushing the send button.
Strangely enough, I don't remember anyone in the White House throwing a fit when the news came out that Anwar al-Awlaki had been added to the President's (illegal and unconstitutional) hit list. I don't recall any heads being made to roll when details of the Osama bin Laden murder became known. The Obama administration made quite liberal use of the government sieve when it served their purpose during the fall.
It's only when neither the president, nor his cronies, are in control of the leaks that problems occur. Bradley Manning leaked materials that proved our government violated international law and conventions regarding torture. He exposed the hypocrisy in Washington and caused much consternation when foreign leaders found out how they'd been played off one another.
In order to show Private Manning who was in charge, the government instituted a smear campaign against him and subjected him to torture. The cables were published on the Wikileaks website so our government turned its focus to Julian Assange who served the role of journalist. But, just as the government tried to silence Daniel Ellsburg when he provided the New York Times with a copy of The Pentagon Papers, the Obama administration went after Mr. Assange and Wilkileaks in any manner they could.
It'a all about control. It's all about the spin. Somewhere George W. Bush is sitting and smiling as he watches President Obama take his ideas for the War Against the Constitution and transform it into something that even W's supporters didn't think possible.
Showing posts with label George W. Bush. Show all posts
Showing posts with label George W. Bush. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 21, 2013
Friday, May 17, 2013
Shutting down dissent anyway possible
By now it is quite obvious to the most oblivious observer that President Obama has failed miserably in his attempt to close down the prison at Guantanamo Bay. You'll remember that he told everyone who would listen back in 2008 that one of the first things he would do as president was close it down.
Like many of his other promises for progressive reform, his promise to close down GITMO has fallen to the wayside. He has been far too interested in killing innocent men, women and children with remote controlled drones to put any effort into closing Guantanamo. He was more concerned about smoothing over the summary execution of three US citizens than in ending the program of torture on Cuba.
If you follow the mainstream media you probably aren't aware that more than 100 of the detainees at Guantanamo are on hunger strike to protest the conditions in the prison. These are men who have been held without charge for, in some cases, over a decade. History will not judge the US kindly over its treatment of the detainees - the constant hysteria for the war on terror has been used to dull the American people's senses when it comes to concepts such as due process and rule of law.
Now the government is fearful that its power to compel the detainees to do what it wants them to is waning. In order to show the detainees who's boss, prison officials have begun force-feeding 30 of the hunger strikers.
This memo obtained by Al-Jazeera spells out the program of forced compliance. You see, it just wouldn't do for a detainee to drop dead from starvation at GITMO. That might just garner a bit of press attention (though just a bit). That might just pique the American public's interest in what is being done in our name. It might re-ignite a debate on the regime of torture started under Bush and accelerated under Obama.
For those detainees who are subject to being force-fed a liquid diet, they are strapped to a chair while a feeding tube is fed through their nose down to their stomach. A mask is placed over the detainee's face and liquid is fed through the tube for up to two hours. Afterward the detainee is placed in a so-called "dry cell" and observed for 45-60 minutes for any signs of induced vomiting. If the detainee vomits he is placed back in the chair and the process is begun anew.
These forced feedings are nothing more than an extension of the torture regime that detainees around the world have been subject to - ever since the Bush administration decided that torture wasn't torture if you called it something else. If there were justice in this world, George W. Bush would sit in a courtroom in The Hague facing charges of human rights violations at the International Criminal Court. Maybe one day Barack Obama could be his cellmate.
The men who are being held illegally at GITMO are adults who are more than capable of making medical decisions for themselves. They have the right to withhold their consent from being force-fed. They have the right to refuse to eat. They have the right to die with dignity, if they so choose. Sadly it is the only form of protest that is garnering any attention to the ways in which the United States is imposing the law of rule.
The Obama administration and other apologists for GITMO claim that the remaining detainees can't be released because there are no assurances they won't immediately take up arms against the United States. Well, to be quite honest, who the fuck could blame them? If they weren't already inclined to take up arms you can bet they sure as hell are now after the way they have been treated and the myriad ways in which the US government has violated their human rights.
It's time to man up, President. Either the men in Guantanamo have committed crimes against the United States or they haven't. If they haven't, it's time to set them free. If they have committed crimes, set their cases for trial.
If President Obama had any humanity he would put an end to the forced feeding of hunger strikers and he would address the problems at Guantanamo. Unfortunately for the detainees, they don't have an effective lobby and they don't have millions of dollars to funnel to Super PACS. All they have are their lives to give in their cause.
Like many of his other promises for progressive reform, his promise to close down GITMO has fallen to the wayside. He has been far too interested in killing innocent men, women and children with remote controlled drones to put any effort into closing Guantanamo. He was more concerned about smoothing over the summary execution of three US citizens than in ending the program of torture on Cuba.
If you follow the mainstream media you probably aren't aware that more than 100 of the detainees at Guantanamo are on hunger strike to protest the conditions in the prison. These are men who have been held without charge for, in some cases, over a decade. History will not judge the US kindly over its treatment of the detainees - the constant hysteria for the war on terror has been used to dull the American people's senses when it comes to concepts such as due process and rule of law.
Now the government is fearful that its power to compel the detainees to do what it wants them to is waning. In order to show the detainees who's boss, prison officials have begun force-feeding 30 of the hunger strikers.
This memo obtained by Al-Jazeera spells out the program of forced compliance. You see, it just wouldn't do for a detainee to drop dead from starvation at GITMO. That might just garner a bit of press attention (though just a bit). That might just pique the American public's interest in what is being done in our name. It might re-ignite a debate on the regime of torture started under Bush and accelerated under Obama.
For those detainees who are subject to being force-fed a liquid diet, they are strapped to a chair while a feeding tube is fed through their nose down to their stomach. A mask is placed over the detainee's face and liquid is fed through the tube for up to two hours. Afterward the detainee is placed in a so-called "dry cell" and observed for 45-60 minutes for any signs of induced vomiting. If the detainee vomits he is placed back in the chair and the process is begun anew.
These forced feedings are nothing more than an extension of the torture regime that detainees around the world have been subject to - ever since the Bush administration decided that torture wasn't torture if you called it something else. If there were justice in this world, George W. Bush would sit in a courtroom in The Hague facing charges of human rights violations at the International Criminal Court. Maybe one day Barack Obama could be his cellmate.
The men who are being held illegally at GITMO are adults who are more than capable of making medical decisions for themselves. They have the right to withhold their consent from being force-fed. They have the right to refuse to eat. They have the right to die with dignity, if they so choose. Sadly it is the only form of protest that is garnering any attention to the ways in which the United States is imposing the law of rule.
The Obama administration and other apologists for GITMO claim that the remaining detainees can't be released because there are no assurances they won't immediately take up arms against the United States. Well, to be quite honest, who the fuck could blame them? If they weren't already inclined to take up arms you can bet they sure as hell are now after the way they have been treated and the myriad ways in which the US government has violated their human rights.
It's time to man up, President. Either the men in Guantanamo have committed crimes against the United States or they haven't. If they haven't, it's time to set them free. If they have committed crimes, set their cases for trial.
If President Obama had any humanity he would put an end to the forced feeding of hunger strikers and he would address the problems at Guantanamo. Unfortunately for the detainees, they don't have an effective lobby and they don't have millions of dollars to funnel to Super PACS. All they have are their lives to give in their cause.
Saturday, May 11, 2013
Justice in Guatemala
Yesterday in Guatemala we saw an example of just what democracy is all about. In a court of law former Guatemalan strongman Efrain Rios Montt was found guilty of genocide for the slaughter of more than 1700 peasants during the country's dirty war. The judge sentenced Rios Montt to 80 years in prison.
The verdict is a vivid demonstration that in a democracy, no one is above the law - even a former military dictator. Could you imagine if a former president stood accused of human rights violations in this country?
It's a sad commentary when a country that has spent most of its history under repressive regimes gives us a lesson in democracy and the rule of law.
President Obama ordered the murder of an American citizen in Yemen. As a result of his orders, two more Americans were killed in Yemen. He has also been complicit in the torture and illegal detention of prisoners of war in Guantanamo.
President Bush (the Younger) committed countless violations of human rights in the torture program his administration cooked up as part of the American arsenal in the war oneverything terror. He also ordered air strikes in Iraq that killed hundreds of innocent civilians as part of his cooked up war against Iraq.
President Clinton sent the war planes into Balkan air space and bombed the hell out of men, women and children who had nothing to do with the civil war in the former Yugoslavia.
President Bush (the Elder) was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of innocent Panamanians when he ordered bombing raids on populated areas during his invasion of Panama.
Under each of these presidents, covert operations were launched in countless nations around the world that resulted in the deaths of innocent men, women and children were nothing more than collateral damage in the eyes of our leaders.
And every time a new president is elected he tells the American people that it's time to look ahead and not argue about the past. No president has ever ordered an investigation into the human rights abuses committed by a former occupant of the White House. It's not because he wants to try to bring the country together in a common mission -- it's because it's tacitly understood that if you ignore what the guy before you did, the guy after you will ignore what you did in kind.
I have no faith that we will hold our leaders accountable for their actions. I have no faith that any former president will have to stand and defend himself against charges that he committed gross human rights violations. And, until it finally happens, there will always be those who are above the law.
What a sorry lesson to teach our children.
The verdict is a vivid demonstration that in a democracy, no one is above the law - even a former military dictator. Could you imagine if a former president stood accused of human rights violations in this country?
It's a sad commentary when a country that has spent most of its history under repressive regimes gives us a lesson in democracy and the rule of law.
President Obama ordered the murder of an American citizen in Yemen. As a result of his orders, two more Americans were killed in Yemen. He has also been complicit in the torture and illegal detention of prisoners of war in Guantanamo.
President Bush (the Younger) committed countless violations of human rights in the torture program his administration cooked up as part of the American arsenal in the war on
President Clinton sent the war planes into Balkan air space and bombed the hell out of men, women and children who had nothing to do with the civil war in the former Yugoslavia.
President Bush (the Elder) was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of innocent Panamanians when he ordered bombing raids on populated areas during his invasion of Panama.
Under each of these presidents, covert operations were launched in countless nations around the world that resulted in the deaths of innocent men, women and children were nothing more than collateral damage in the eyes of our leaders.
And every time a new president is elected he tells the American people that it's time to look ahead and not argue about the past. No president has ever ordered an investigation into the human rights abuses committed by a former occupant of the White House. It's not because he wants to try to bring the country together in a common mission -- it's because it's tacitly understood that if you ignore what the guy before you did, the guy after you will ignore what you did in kind.
I have no faith that we will hold our leaders accountable for their actions. I have no faith that any former president will have to stand and defend himself against charges that he committed gross human rights violations. And, until it finally happens, there will always be those who are above the law.
What a sorry lesson to teach our children.
Thursday, March 21, 2013
Lies, lies, lies
The Big Lie began ten years ago this week.
There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The Bush administration knew it was a lie. They were just looking for a justification.
There were no ties between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda. The Bush administration knew it was a lie. They were just looking for a justification.
Yes, there were chemical weapons. But that, too, was just an excuse. Our government looked the other way when Saddam Hussein gassed the Kurds when Iraq was our ally.
The invasion and occupation of Iraq costs tens of thousands of Iraqis their lives and their homes. Missiles and rockets were fired indiscriminately into residential neighborhoods. No one has ever been charged for those war crimes.
The lies led to the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan where tens of thousands more have died needlessly in a war built upon deception. The US mission has ended in a stalemate. President Obama has announced that the troops will be coming home next year. He's hailing it as a successful conclusion to the war. Just like Richard Nixon ordered the evacuation of US troops from Vietnam and called it a victory, too.
Every one of those deaths was unnecessary. There was never any reason for our government to send our young people to die on foreign soil so that American-based transnational corporations could move into the region and rape and pillage in the name of profit.
I was down in Seabrook the other day to run a marathon. Before the race began someone called Brother Something-or-Other took the microphone and asked for a moment of silence for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. This supposed man of the cloth couldn't have cared less about the slaughter of the innocents that has taken place over the last decade. He only cared about those wearing a uniform with our flag on it.
I was as sickened by his actions as much as I am by all the "Support the Troops" festivities at football and baseball games. I was as sickened as much as I am when college basketball teams accept offers to wear camouflage uniforms and play on aircraft carriers to ramp up support for a war built upon lies.
As much as I would love to put the onus for the needless death and destruction on George W. Bush, I can't. He may have been the one to put things in motion but President Obama has continued the war unabated. Thus the longest war in American history continues with the guarantee that the world won't be any better for it.
And that's no lie.
There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The Bush administration knew it was a lie. They were just looking for a justification.
There were no ties between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda. The Bush administration knew it was a lie. They were just looking for a justification.
Yes, there were chemical weapons. But that, too, was just an excuse. Our government looked the other way when Saddam Hussein gassed the Kurds when Iraq was our ally.
The invasion and occupation of Iraq costs tens of thousands of Iraqis their lives and their homes. Missiles and rockets were fired indiscriminately into residential neighborhoods. No one has ever been charged for those war crimes.
The lies led to the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan where tens of thousands more have died needlessly in a war built upon deception. The US mission has ended in a stalemate. President Obama has announced that the troops will be coming home next year. He's hailing it as a successful conclusion to the war. Just like Richard Nixon ordered the evacuation of US troops from Vietnam and called it a victory, too.
Every one of those deaths was unnecessary. There was never any reason for our government to send our young people to die on foreign soil so that American-based transnational corporations could move into the region and rape and pillage in the name of profit.
I was down in Seabrook the other day to run a marathon. Before the race began someone called Brother Something-or-Other took the microphone and asked for a moment of silence for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. This supposed man of the cloth couldn't have cared less about the slaughter of the innocents that has taken place over the last decade. He only cared about those wearing a uniform with our flag on it.
I was as sickened by his actions as much as I am by all the "Support the Troops" festivities at football and baseball games. I was as sickened as much as I am when college basketball teams accept offers to wear camouflage uniforms and play on aircraft carriers to ramp up support for a war built upon lies.
As much as I would love to put the onus for the needless death and destruction on George W. Bush, I can't. He may have been the one to put things in motion but President Obama has continued the war unabated. Thus the longest war in American history continues with the guarantee that the world won't be any better for it.
And that's no lie.
Monday, October 15, 2012
What right to know?
In our government's ongoing quest to keep us in the dark about all that it does in our name, government prosecutors have requested that a military judge set to preside over the trials of five Guantanamo detainees prevent those detainees from revealing the extent of the torture regime they were subjected to.
This from the same government that felt no compunction to subject these men to utter brutality in contravention of all international conventions on the treatment of prisoners. Oh, they were so proud to let the public know they were waterboarding detainees back in the day. But, when faced with detainees testifying about what they were forced to endure out come the requests for protective orders and other devices to keep the truth from being known.
So much for that crap about the truth setting you free.
Our government is supposed to be accountable to the citizenry. If we are to be proper guardians of the public trust then there should be no government secrets. We have a right to know exactly what our government does in our name. Of course it is much easier just to sit there like a lemming and pretend that everything's okay.
Prosecutors are arguing that the torture regimes constitute confidential information that should not be released to the public. To quote a legal term, that is absolute bullshit. Can you imagine any other criminal forum in which the court would deny a defendant's right to testify that he had been subjected to torture?
If the judge is anything other than a stooge for the prosecution the request should be denied. It is time the world heard exactly what Presidents Bush and Obama authorized. It is time the world heard exactly how the Bush and Obama administrations conspired to violated international law. It is time the world heard the truth about what our government did.
Presidents Bush and Obama are war criminals and should be brought to justice. There is no excuse for a (nominally) democratic government to subject people to torture. Our government is quick to condemn other governments who do the same - yet it's all right for our government to do it and then try to keep it secret.
I just hope I live to see the day that Bush and Obama are forced to stand inside the dock at the International Criminal Court and answer the charges against them.
This from the same government that felt no compunction to subject these men to utter brutality in contravention of all international conventions on the treatment of prisoners. Oh, they were so proud to let the public know they were waterboarding detainees back in the day. But, when faced with detainees testifying about what they were forced to endure out come the requests for protective orders and other devices to keep the truth from being known.
So much for that crap about the truth setting you free.
Our government is supposed to be accountable to the citizenry. If we are to be proper guardians of the public trust then there should be no government secrets. We have a right to know exactly what our government does in our name. Of course it is much easier just to sit there like a lemming and pretend that everything's okay.
Prosecutors are arguing that the torture regimes constitute confidential information that should not be released to the public. To quote a legal term, that is absolute bullshit. Can you imagine any other criminal forum in which the court would deny a defendant's right to testify that he had been subjected to torture?
If the judge is anything other than a stooge for the prosecution the request should be denied. It is time the world heard exactly what Presidents Bush and Obama authorized. It is time the world heard exactly how the Bush and Obama administrations conspired to violated international law. It is time the world heard the truth about what our government did.
Presidents Bush and Obama are war criminals and should be brought to justice. There is no excuse for a (nominally) democratic government to subject people to torture. Our government is quick to condemn other governments who do the same - yet it's all right for our government to do it and then try to keep it secret.
I just hope I live to see the day that Bush and Obama are forced to stand inside the dock at the International Criminal Court and answer the charges against them.
Friday, September 21, 2012
When the chickens come home to roost
Back in 2003, Abu Omar, an Egyptian cleric living in Italy, was kidnapped, flown back to Egypt and tortured. The kidnappers were 23 Americans, all but one were CIA agents. The Americans did their deed with the assistance of five Italian intelligence agents.
Because kidnapping and torture sound like bad things, the US government coined the term extraordinary rendition to refer to the practice of kidnapping foreign nationals and shipping them to secret prisons where they would be held incommunicado and tortured around the clock.
The big, bad arrogant Americans figured they could do whatever the fuck they wanted to, regardless of where they were because they were, well, Americans, and this was President Bush's War onEverything Terrorism.
But apparently someone forgot to send a copy of that memo to the Italians who weren't altogether happy that US agents were running roughshod on Italian soil. Despite pressure from both Washington, and Rome, prosecutors in Milan carried on with the case and the 23 Americans were all convicted in absentia in November 2009.
Now, almost three years later, the highest appellate court in Italy has upheld the convictions - and urged the prosecution of the Italian intelligence agents for their roles in the kidnapping of Mr. Omar.
The convictions are largely symbolic as the Italians have never sought to extradite the Americans - not that the American government would ever allow its agents to be extradited to another country to face criminal charges for their conduct. That's what we do to them.
Just imagine the furor, if you will, that would arise should a foreign government kidnap an American citizen off the streets of some town over here and take them halfway around the world to face criminal charges for some act carried out under cloak of national security. Imagine the reaction if a former US president was ever indicted, arrested and brought before another country's court to face charges of crimes against humanity.
Yet we have no problem kidnapping people in other countries and taking them somewhere where representatives of our government torture, humiliate and shame them for no other reason than they can.
I say good that something decided to grow a backbone and stand up to the inhumane and illegal practices of the US government. If our leaders and representatives thought they could be arrested and charged with crimes against humanity somewhere else in the world, maybe, just maybe, they might think twice before acting like a bunch of thugs for whom the law doesn't apply.
Because kidnapping and torture sound like bad things, the US government coined the term extraordinary rendition to refer to the practice of kidnapping foreign nationals and shipping them to secret prisons where they would be held incommunicado and tortured around the clock.
The big, bad arrogant Americans figured they could do whatever the fuck they wanted to, regardless of where they were because they were, well, Americans, and this was President Bush's War on
But apparently someone forgot to send a copy of that memo to the Italians who weren't altogether happy that US agents were running roughshod on Italian soil. Despite pressure from both Washington, and Rome, prosecutors in Milan carried on with the case and the 23 Americans were all convicted in absentia in November 2009.
Now, almost three years later, the highest appellate court in Italy has upheld the convictions - and urged the prosecution of the Italian intelligence agents for their roles in the kidnapping of Mr. Omar.
The convictions are largely symbolic as the Italians have never sought to extradite the Americans - not that the American government would ever allow its agents to be extradited to another country to face criminal charges for their conduct. That's what we do to them.
Just imagine the furor, if you will, that would arise should a foreign government kidnap an American citizen off the streets of some town over here and take them halfway around the world to face criminal charges for some act carried out under cloak of national security. Imagine the reaction if a former US president was ever indicted, arrested and brought before another country's court to face charges of crimes against humanity.
Yet we have no problem kidnapping people in other countries and taking them somewhere where representatives of our government torture, humiliate and shame them for no other reason than they can.
I say good that something decided to grow a backbone and stand up to the inhumane and illegal practices of the US government. If our leaders and representatives thought they could be arrested and charged with crimes against humanity somewhere else in the world, maybe, just maybe, they might think twice before acting like a bunch of thugs for whom the law doesn't apply.
Monday, September 3, 2012
Nothing to see here
There is no question that the U.S. government has operated secret prisons around the world that have been used to torture detainees suspected of being terrorists or aiding terrorism.
Back in May I reviewed Larry Siems' book The Torture Report which dealt with the ways in which the Bush Administration implemented a systematic plan to torture so-called enemy combatants in the War onEverything Terrorism. The book is a chilling account of the ways in which our leaders conspired to violate every international treaty dealing with the treatment of enemy combatants.
Attorney General Eric Holder "conducted" an investigation of the CIA's torture apparatus after the government caught heat for the death of a detainee in custody. The investigation was nothing but a sham from the beginning as its purpose was to determine whether the program of torture broke the guidelines laid down by President Bush's aides. In other words, Mr. Holder wasn't looking into the question of whether CIA personnel violated international law in torturing detainees who have yet to be charged with any crime, he was looking into whether or not anyone crossed the line scribbled on a sheet of paper by President Bush's lackeys.
And, predictably, Mr. Holder came to the conclusion that there just wasn't enough "admissible evidence" to proceed with any prosecution.
You see the government has decided that much of the evidence proving the U.S. torture program violated international law is too sensitive to be released. In fact, in the show trials in Guantanamo, the courts have ruled that detainees cannot even testify as to the torture they were subjected to because releasing that information would harm national security. Or, to be more blunt (and honest) the information would be embarrassing to the government and might open some up to charges of crimes against humanity.
And we just can't have that, can we? We all know that the only folks who ever get brought up on charges of crimes against humanity are the losers. The winners never have to face justice. Not to mention that the winners get to write the history.
It is evidence of this program of systematic torture that made Bradley Manning the object of the government's hatred. Mr. Manning did what every soldier is required to do under international law - report incidents of torture and war crimes. That is Mr. Manning's sin - he did just what he was supposed to do but, because the information he released embarrassed the government, he is charged with treason and locked up and deprived of his rights.
There is no justification for torture. When you humiliate and degrade another person just because you have the power to do so, you are humiliating and degrading yourself, your institutions, your government and your country.
But no one will ever have to answer for their crimes. No one will ever have to stand before a court to justify the criminal acts they authorized or carried out. No one will ever have to defend himself against charges he committed crimes against humanity.
And it's because no one in our government has the guts or the moral compass to stand up and say it was wrong. President Bush committed crimes against humanity. President Obama has committed crimes against humanity. And whoever wins the election in November will continue to do the same.
All the time the American public will sit there staring at shiny objects not giving a second thought to what their so-called representatives are doing in their name.
Back in May I reviewed Larry Siems' book The Torture Report which dealt with the ways in which the Bush Administration implemented a systematic plan to torture so-called enemy combatants in the War on
Attorney General Eric Holder "conducted" an investigation of the CIA's torture apparatus after the government caught heat for the death of a detainee in custody. The investigation was nothing but a sham from the beginning as its purpose was to determine whether the program of torture broke the guidelines laid down by President Bush's aides. In other words, Mr. Holder wasn't looking into the question of whether CIA personnel violated international law in torturing detainees who have yet to be charged with any crime, he was looking into whether or not anyone crossed the line scribbled on a sheet of paper by President Bush's lackeys.
And, predictably, Mr. Holder came to the conclusion that there just wasn't enough "admissible evidence" to proceed with any prosecution.
You see the government has decided that much of the evidence proving the U.S. torture program violated international law is too sensitive to be released. In fact, in the show trials in Guantanamo, the courts have ruled that detainees cannot even testify as to the torture they were subjected to because releasing that information would harm national security. Or, to be more blunt (and honest) the information would be embarrassing to the government and might open some up to charges of crimes against humanity.
And we just can't have that, can we? We all know that the only folks who ever get brought up on charges of crimes against humanity are the losers. The winners never have to face justice. Not to mention that the winners get to write the history.
It is evidence of this program of systematic torture that made Bradley Manning the object of the government's hatred. Mr. Manning did what every soldier is required to do under international law - report incidents of torture and war crimes. That is Mr. Manning's sin - he did just what he was supposed to do but, because the information he released embarrassed the government, he is charged with treason and locked up and deprived of his rights.
There is no justification for torture. When you humiliate and degrade another person just because you have the power to do so, you are humiliating and degrading yourself, your institutions, your government and your country.
But no one will ever have to answer for their crimes. No one will ever have to stand before a court to justify the criminal acts they authorized or carried out. No one will ever have to defend himself against charges he committed crimes against humanity.
And it's because no one in our government has the guts or the moral compass to stand up and say it was wrong. President Bush committed crimes against humanity. President Obama has committed crimes against humanity. And whoever wins the election in November will continue to do the same.
All the time the American public will sit there staring at shiny objects not giving a second thought to what their so-called representatives are doing in their name.
Tuesday, July 17, 2012
An innocent man
A man is kidnapped in Somalia. The warlord hands over to an official from another country who then sends the man to a secret prison somewhere near the Middle East. For five years that man is held in solitary confinement. He is stripped of his clothes. He is deprived of sleep. He is subjected to bright lights and loud music for days at a time. He is left in complete darkness for days at a time. He is physically and mentally tortured. And this does on day after day, week after week, month after month, for five long years.
Then, one day he is released. He was never formally charged. He never saw the inside of a courtroom or was allowed to see the evidence against him. One day he's in and the next day, with a piece of paper indicating that he was detained and found innocent, he's out.
The label of suspected terrorist is stuck on his back. He lives in constant fear that he will be scooped up again in the future and subjected to the dehumanizing treatment he suffered for those five long years. He has no recourse against the government that ordered his torture. He is, instead, left to pick up the pieces of his own shattered life.
The man's name is Suleiman Abdallah and he was an innocent victim of the United States' brutal torture regime under both the Bush and Obama administrations. The hell through which he lived was a violation of his human rights and constituted a war crime. Of course since the U.S. pulls the strings in both the U.N. and the International Criminal Court, there is no chance that either George W. Bush or Barack Obama will ever have to answer charges they broke international law.
Writes Clara Gutteridge in The Nation:
As I believe my colleague, Jeff Gamso, would say, the torture regime carried out by our government is a case in which the Law of Rule supplanted the Rule of Law. The U.S. government tortured foreign nationals because they could. There was no one to stop it. There was no one to storm the gates at Bagram Air Force Base or at Guantanamo Bay.
Some day, maybe sooner than later, we will look back in shame at what our government did in our name. We will realize that the ends don't justify the means and that once you cross the line the way our government did, there's no coming back.
Every soldier who participated in the torture of a foreign national should face charges. Every officer who ordered the torture to continue should face charges. Every commander who presided over the torture of anyone should face charges. Every federal agent who participated should face charges. The Attorneys General and Defense Secretaries who gave the plan the go-ahead should face charges. Presidents Bush and Obama should face charges.
There is no excuse for what happened in those secret prisons. There is no excuse for the treatment the detainees suffered through. There is no justification for the systematic violation of human rights and international law.
But it won't stop.
From Democracy Now!
Then, one day he is released. He was never formally charged. He never saw the inside of a courtroom or was allowed to see the evidence against him. One day he's in and the next day, with a piece of paper indicating that he was detained and found innocent, he's out.
The label of suspected terrorist is stuck on his back. He lives in constant fear that he will be scooped up again in the future and subjected to the dehumanizing treatment he suffered for those five long years. He has no recourse against the government that ordered his torture. He is, instead, left to pick up the pieces of his own shattered life.
The man's name is Suleiman Abdallah and he was an innocent victim of the United States' brutal torture regime under both the Bush and Obama administrations. The hell through which he lived was a violation of his human rights and constituted a war crime. Of course since the U.S. pulls the strings in both the U.N. and the International Criminal Court, there is no chance that either George W. Bush or Barack Obama will ever have to answer charges they broke international law.
Writes Clara Gutteridge in The Nation:
Suleiman’s legal options were few. “There is currently no political or judicial avenue available to a person like Suleiman who has been wronged by the United States,” explains attorney and professor Joe Margulies, author of Guantánamo and the Abuse of Presidential Power. “In limited circumstances, like prisoners at Guantánamo, people can seek their release in court, but no one can seek anything more than that.” Under both the Bush and Obama administrations, he notes, “any suggestion that the US should compensate an innocent man for the wrong done to him is a complete nonstarter.”
In theory, Suleiman could have sued one of the regional states—Djibouti or Kenya—for their complicity in his rendition and torture. But weak, slow-moving and overburdened legal systems make this option unlikely to yield any tangible benefit.
As I believe my colleague, Jeff Gamso, would say, the torture regime carried out by our government is a case in which the Law of Rule supplanted the Rule of Law. The U.S. government tortured foreign nationals because they could. There was no one to stop it. There was no one to storm the gates at Bagram Air Force Base or at Guantanamo Bay.
Some day, maybe sooner than later, we will look back in shame at what our government did in our name. We will realize that the ends don't justify the means and that once you cross the line the way our government did, there's no coming back.
Every soldier who participated in the torture of a foreign national should face charges. Every officer who ordered the torture to continue should face charges. Every commander who presided over the torture of anyone should face charges. Every federal agent who participated should face charges. The Attorneys General and Defense Secretaries who gave the plan the go-ahead should face charges. Presidents Bush and Obama should face charges.
There is no excuse for what happened in those secret prisons. There is no excuse for the treatment the detainees suffered through. There is no justification for the systematic violation of human rights and international law.
But it won't stop.
From Democracy Now!
Friday, May 4, 2012
Book review: The Torture Report
(a) Offense.— Whoever outside the United States commits or attempts to commit torture shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both, and if death results to any person from conduct prohibited by this subsection, shall be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life.(b) Jurisdiction.— There is jurisdiction over the activity prohibited in subsection (a) if—(1) the alleged offender is a national of the United States; or
(2) the alleged offender is present in the United States, irrespective of the nationality of the victim or alleged offender.
(c) Conspiracy.— A person who conspires to commit an offense under this section shall be subject to the same penalties (other than the penalty of death) as the penalties prescribed for the offense, the commission of which was the object of the conspiracy.
-- 18 USC 2340A
First off I need to make a little disclaimer. Up to now all of the books I've reviewed on this blog were purchased by yours truly. If I thought a book sounded interesting, I'd buy it and, if I found it interesting, I'd write a review.
Larry Siems is the director of PEN American Center's Freedom to Write. He wrote The Torture Room based on over 140,000 declassified government documents that paint a chilling picture of how the Bush Administration decided that international law banning the use of torture didn't apply to the United States. While reading the book I had to resist the temptation to throw the book across the room because what I was reading made me so angry.
The Geneva Convention forbids the use of torture on prisoners of war. US law prohibits the use of torture if the alleged torture takes place in the United States or is committed by a US citizen. But, somehow, John Yoo, President Bush's lackey, came to the conclusion that neither the Geneva Convention nor US law applied if the victims of the torture were "enemy combatants" of the United States' never-ending war on terrorism.
Mr. Yoo decided that slapping someone during an interrogation didn't constitute torture. He decided that making a person stand in a cell naked with his hands cuffed to the ceiling didn't constitute torture. He decided that subjecting a person to days of bright light (or no light) and white noise (or loud music) didn't constitute torture. He decided that putting someone on a liquid diet and making them wear a diaper while depriving them of a toilet didn't constitute torture. He decided that putting a cloth over someone's face and dripping water onto it to simulate drowning didn't constitute torture.
Mr. Yoo, who ignored the oath he took to uphold the Constitution and the laws of the United States, claimed that an enemy combatant wasn't the same as a prisoner of war and that, therefore, the Geneva Convention didn't apply. What? In Mr. Yoo's mind the Geneva Convention was an international treaty that dictated the way nations were to treat prisoners captured from another country's military. So, since the US was fighting an international terrorist organization and not another country, the Geneva Convention didn't apply.
He also relied upon 18 USC 2340's definition of "torture." According to the statute:
“torture” means an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control...To Mr. Yoo's way of thinking, since the purpose of the interrogation methods was to extract information rather than just to inflict several physical or mental pain and suffering, that none of the outlined methods constituted torture.
And W? Well he just ate that shit up. He admitted in his autobiography that he gave the orders to torture suspected al-Qaeda members in secret prisons around the world, to turn them over to regimes that routinely tortured their own citizens and to torture them in US military complexes both here and abroad.
The book contains diaries and log entries that recite the various methods of torture used by US military personnel in violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. There are a few people here and there who took a stand in opposition to the White House's illegal interrogation methods - but there are more people who just stood by and either did nothing and personally carried out the orders.
And the Bush Administration aren't the only villains in this story. Congress played a big role in allowing the illegal interrogations to continue. Scared of being painted as soft on terrorism (or whatever the hell the Bush Administration called its critics), senators and representatives fell over themselves in supporting the president.
The detainees were held (and are still being held) for years in a foreign country without any contact with friends or relatives. They were held without being charged. They were subjected to torture. They were denied habeas relief. They were to be tried before military tribunals without being allowed to see the evidence the US intended to use against them and without due process of law.
President Obama had the opportunity to show the world that the US stands for right. But, instead of having President Bush and his co-conspirators defend themselves against charges of torture and conspiracy to commit torture, he took the easy way out and did nothing. Instead of carrying out his duty to see that the laws of the United States are carried out, he turned a blind eye to the actions of a former president who thought he was above the law. Through his inaction, President Obama is every bit as complicit as George Bush in the horrific acts that were carried out in this nation's name.
Friday, October 14, 2011
Wanted: George W. Bush
Amnesty International has called on the Canadian government either to arrest former US President George W. Bush or to extradite him when he enters the country next week for his role in the torture of prisoners. From 2002-2009, the CIA tortured and humiliated prisoners whom were being held by the CIA.
Amnesty also points out, in a 1,000 page memorandum, that Mr. Bush presided over the torture of detainees held in military custody in Guantanamo, Afghanistan and Iraq. Mr. Bush cancelled a trip earlier this year to Switzerland when other human rights groups called for his arrest.
I wouldn't expect Canadian authorities to do anything. Why would they want to upset the apple cart and piss off their big brother to the south? Besides, the only time a former head of state ever has to answer for his role in crimes against humanity is if he was on the losing side.
It's so easy to make decisions affecting the lives of others when you don't have to worry about putting your own neck on the line. How's that for personal responsibility, Mr. Bush?
See also:
"Human rights groups ask Canada to arrest President George W. Bush," NPR's The Two Way (Oct. 13, 2011)
"Amnesty International seeks George W. Bush's arrest," Politico (Oct. 13, 2011)
"Bush's Swiss visit off after complaints on torture," Reuters (Feb. 5, 2011)
"Canada is required by its international obligations to arrest and prosecute former President Bush given his responsibility for crimes under international law including torture," Susan Lee, Americas Director at Amnesty International said in a statement. "A failure by Canada to take action during his visit would violate the U.N. Convention against Torture and demonstrate contempt for fundamental human rights."Mr. Bush later admitted to authorizing the use of waterboarding to coerce prisoners to cooperate with the CIA. According to the CIA's own investigation, Zayn al Abidin Muhammed Husayn and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed were subjected to waterboarding some 266 times between them in 2002-2003.
Amnesty also points out, in a 1,000 page memorandum, that Mr. Bush presided over the torture of detainees held in military custody in Guantanamo, Afghanistan and Iraq. Mr. Bush cancelled a trip earlier this year to Switzerland when other human rights groups called for his arrest.
I wouldn't expect Canadian authorities to do anything. Why would they want to upset the apple cart and piss off their big brother to the south? Besides, the only time a former head of state ever has to answer for his role in crimes against humanity is if he was on the losing side.
“I cannot comment on individual cases… that said, Amnesty International cherry picks cases to publicize based on ideology. This kind of stunt helps explain why so many respected human rights advocates have abandoned Amnesty International.” -- Canadian Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Jason KenneyOf course it's up for debate whether the US is on the winning side of the mess in the Middle East as the occupation is now ten years old. And what does the government have to show for it? Saddam Hussein is dead - not that Mr. Hussein had anything to do with the 9/11 attacks or al-Qaeda - and now chaos reigns in Iraq where US troops are stuck in a quagmire of political instability. Osama bin-Laden is dead - but TSA is still scoping and groping to its heart's content. Afghanistan is the Asian equivalent of Dodge City and the US shows no sign of figuring out how to get out anytime soon. Syria and Yemen are tinderboxes with governments only holding on because they have shown no problems with turning the army's weapons on their own citizens.
It's so easy to make decisions affecting the lives of others when you don't have to worry about putting your own neck on the line. How's that for personal responsibility, Mr. Bush?
See also:
"Human rights groups ask Canada to arrest President George W. Bush," NPR's The Two Way (Oct. 13, 2011)
"Amnesty International seeks George W. Bush's arrest," Politico (Oct. 13, 2011)
"Bush's Swiss visit off after complaints on torture," Reuters (Feb. 5, 2011)
Thursday, September 8, 2011
On statistics and the death penalty
Doug Berman over at Sentencing Law and Policy presents us a new statistic to measure the efficiency of state death machines - "Executions per Death Sentence" or EPDS as the sabermetricians would say.
The Death Penalty Information Center calculated the number of death sentences handed down by state and the number of inmates each state murdered since the death penalty was reinstituted in 1976. Contrary to what you might think, Texas and Ohio do not head the list.
The old commonwealth, Virginia, heads up the list with an EPDS of .725, meaning that for every 100 death sentences handed down, 72.5 executions are carried out. Texas does pop up at number two on the list with an EPDS of .498, however. The national rate, by the way, is .150.
At the bottom of the list of states that have murdered at least one inmate since 1976 are Pennsylvania (.008), California (.015) and Idaho (.025).
If we look at the murder rates by state in 2009 we find that Virginia had a murder rate of 4.4 homicides per 100,000 people while Texas had a murder rate of 5.4 homicides per 100,000 people. Pennsylvania's murder rate was 5.2 homicides per 100,000, California's was 5.3 and Idaho had a rate of 1.4.
Since 1976, New York, New Jersey, New Hampshire and Kansas are alone in not murdering inmates. New York's murder rate was 4.0. New Jersey's was 3.7. Kansas rate was 4.2 and New Hampshire brought up the rear with a murder rate of .08.
So, based on the data at hand, there would appear to be little or no correlation between the number of executions carried out and the homicide rate in any given state. But, of course, having a reputation as a killer works wonders for the candidates on the right running for the White House.
Just ask George W. Bush or Governor Goodhair.
The Death Penalty Information Center calculated the number of death sentences handed down by state and the number of inmates each state murdered since the death penalty was reinstituted in 1976. Contrary to what you might think, Texas and Ohio do not head the list.
The old commonwealth, Virginia, heads up the list with an EPDS of .725, meaning that for every 100 death sentences handed down, 72.5 executions are carried out. Texas does pop up at number two on the list with an EPDS of .498, however. The national rate, by the way, is .150.
At the bottom of the list of states that have murdered at least one inmate since 1976 are Pennsylvania (.008), California (.015) and Idaho (.025).
If we look at the murder rates by state in 2009 we find that Virginia had a murder rate of 4.4 homicides per 100,000 people while Texas had a murder rate of 5.4 homicides per 100,000 people. Pennsylvania's murder rate was 5.2 homicides per 100,000, California's was 5.3 and Idaho had a rate of 1.4.
Since 1976, New York, New Jersey, New Hampshire and Kansas are alone in not murdering inmates. New York's murder rate was 4.0. New Jersey's was 3.7. Kansas rate was 4.2 and New Hampshire brought up the rear with a murder rate of .08.
So, based on the data at hand, there would appear to be little or no correlation between the number of executions carried out and the homicide rate in any given state. But, of course, having a reputation as a killer works wonders for the candidates on the right running for the White House.
Just ask George W. Bush or Governor Goodhair.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Presidential pardon pool
Since election night I have joked with more than one colleague about starting up a pool on how many presidential pardons George W. Bush grants between now and January 20, 2009. Here's a story from the Houston Chronicle that could lead to the first two. A Willacy County (Texas) grand jury has indicted Vice President Dick Cheney and former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales on state charges related to the alleged abuse of prisoners in the Federal Detention Center in Willacy County.
See these additional accounts:
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
The Bush legacy
Last year George W. Bush vetoed a bill increasing spending on health care for the poor by $7 billion because, according to W, we couldn't afford it.
But this year, within the past month, Bush is looking at spending $85 billion to bail out AIG, at least $200 billion to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, $29 billion to bail out Bear Stearns and upwards of $700 billion for a bailout of securities backed by bad debt.
Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, who two weeks ago stated that the economic crisis was under control, is asking Congress to appropriate the money immediately rather than debate the merits of the plan. Under his watch the crisis boiled over into a complete meltdown, yet he wants to exercise complete control over the kitty.
The mortgage industry sold the public on adjustable rate teaser mortgages, interest-only mortgages, second mortgages to pay the down payment and home-equity lines of credit. Investors bought bonds secured by these debts -- fully aware of the risks involved. And now the Bush administration is coming to their aid -- while it has ignored calls from the working poor to raise the minimum wage, make health insurance affordable, improve our schools and make the dream of home ownership a reality for more Americans.
We are witnessing the largest transfer of wealth from the poor to the wealthy that has ever been seen in the history of the world. That's what compassionate conservatism is all about -- bailing out your campaign contributors and country club friends.
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
So much for the First Amendment
Cheap Trick sang about them two decades ago -- the Dream Police have invaded the Twin Cities. This past weekend, while everyone else was focused on Gustav and his assault on Nawlins, the Minneapolis police cracked down on anyone who had the gall to challenge the Bush/McCain illusion of America. Is this a glimpse into the crystal ball of how McCain intends to prevent 9/11 from happening again?
Media with Conscience reports that the FBI-led Minneapolis Joint Task Force on Terrorism recruited informants to report on the activities of leftist groups in the area. The Minneapolis police and the FBI-led task force conducted pre-emptive assaults on groups exercising their right of free speech.
The Michigan Messenger reports that Ramsey county sheriff's officers conducted an armed raid at a St. Paul convergence space and handcuffed hundreds as they watched movies and ate a pot-luck dinner. Officers defended their actions by claiming they had search warrants -- though no one was al
lowed to see the warrants.
Despite the authoritarian tactics employed by the local police and the FBI, protesters turned out en masse on the opening day of the RNC.
The strength of this nation comes, not from our similarities, but from our wildly divergent origins, paths, views and philosophies. The United State's isn't a melting pot where disparate elements are melded together -- we are a pot of jambalaya, a rich stew made all the better by the mulitude of tastes.
Media with Conscience reports that the FBI-led Minneapolis Joint Task Force on Terrorism recruited informants to report on the activities of leftist groups in the area. The Minneapolis police and the FBI-led task force conducted pre-emptive assaults on groups exercising their right of free speech.
The Michigan Messenger reports that Ramsey county sheriff's officers conducted an armed raid at a St. Paul convergence space and handcuffed hundreds as they watched movies and ate a pot-luck dinner. Officers defended their actions by claiming they had search warrants -- though no one was al
lowed to see the warrants.Despite the authoritarian tactics employed by the local police and the FBI, protesters turned out en masse on the opening day of the RNC.
The strength of this nation comes, not from our similarities, but from our wildly divergent origins, paths, views and philosophies. The United State's isn't a melting pot where disparate elements are melded together -- we are a pot of jambalaya, a rich stew made all the better by the mulitude of tastes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)