President-elect Barack Obama appears to be signaling that he is not inclined to investigate crimes committed by the Bush Administration. In an interview with ABC News program “This Week With George Stephanopoulos”, he picked up on the recent Democratic spin that we should all “look to the future and not the past” even if the past happens to contain war crimes committed by his predecessor. I just finished an interview on Talk of the Nation on which I debated the issue with Harvard Professor and former solicitor general Charles Fried. I also discussed the issue on MSNBC Countdown.
Many civil libertarians are concerned that this will be another flip-flop from Obama after he surprised many by voting in favor of telecom immunity. During the campaign, he made it clear that he believed that waterboarding is torture, an inescapable position. Yet, the deductive reasoning is inescapable. If waterboarding is torture and torture is a war crime, then the Bush Administration committed war crimes. Yet, it appears that once again practicalities have proven the enemy of principle. With many insisting that such an investigation would be a distraction. It is the latest spin from democrats. Democrats first insisted that they could do nothing about criminal programs like the torture and surveillance programs because they did not control Congress. Then, when they controlled Congress, they insisted that there was not enough time left in the Administration to investigate and that we would have to wait for the next Administration. Now that they have been given the White House, they are insisting that we need to look forward and not behind.
The latest theme seemed to be what Obama was raising in the interview. When asked about his position, he immediately stated his “belief that we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards.” He then defended those who committed the torture: “And part of my job is to make sure that, for example, at the C.I.A., you’ve got extraordinarily talented people who are working very hard to keep Americans safe. I don’t want them to suddenly feel like they’ve got spend their all their time looking over their shoulders.”
No one seriously expects the torturers to be prosecuted, though I have far less sympathy for people who commit torture. In a nation committed to the rule of law, people should be looking over their shoulder when they are contemplating a war crime.
For the interview, click here.
For the full story, click here.
Three observations by a latecomer to the discussion:
1. Let’s wait to see what Obama really does when he takes office. All this pre-inaugural speculation and parsing of his words just falls into the MSM claptrap which is much ado about nothing until the inauguration. If he doesn’t followup with prosecution I’ll gladly and vociferously join the complaining chorus.
2. Prof. Turley kicked ass. As far as having Ivy League degrees George W. Bush has two, what does that prove? Your test as attorneys is your understanding of the law and your ability to articulate it. I have an Ivy League MS and having friends who went to city schools for their Masters I envied the interesting courses and teachers they had, compared to the well-published stiffs at my better reputed school.
3. To Allan and the Trolls who followed. We won, you lost. Your team is bad, our team is good. There, I’ve put it into the kind of phrasing you are capable of understanding. The shame is that life is more complex than rooting for a team and most of it is going on around you while you remain in your propaganda induced fog, drinking fattening alcoholic beverages and “rooting” devoid of knowledge. Sort of like saying “wasn’t that a great pass the guy made, without noticing the offensive line play, lack of defensive coverage and the perfection of the receiver’s route. Real fans and coaches listen with the announcers turned off so as not to be influenced by the blather, you ingest Limbaugh, Hannity and O’Reilly as if they knew what they were talking about.
Patty C:
I read the article you posted. Very disturbing, if true.
Allan:
“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…”
****************
Under what construction of language do you conclude that my case “rests on the threat of imminent death?”
I wonder why those doing the waterboarding wear masks. I believe they may think that they are breaking the law, so they want to hide their identities.
That salutation should read:
Alan and the trolls who followed:
Sorry. It is too early I guess.
Alan the trolls who followed,
People have already died while in custody of the US and US forces. Over 100 people have died. One person had his legs mutilated from beatings, but there is no imminent fear of dying. If you take the time to actually read a few reports, you will see that the people who have undergone waterboarding or who understand it know it is torture. Here is a link to a BBC interview with Intelligence chief Mike Mcconnell where he states that to him waterboarding is torture. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7185648.stm. Now you know why the CIA was so intent on getting its wtitten authorization from the White House. Because they knew what they were/are doing was/is torture.
Allen,
YOU ARE DELUSIONAL! As referenced by this statement.
I guess you and your buddies feel that staying ignorant of potential future terrorist mass killings by following the letter of the law is preferable to using tough interrogation techniques and thereby saving lives.
Per the Air Force senior interrogator Matthew Alexander who was on the job in Iraq, torture does not work. There are better ways to get information, article here.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/28/AR2008112802242.html
Allen other than fear what motivates you?
And to you “Rightists”? A hearty fuck you for making me have to get out of my chair in the first place, traitors.
Time to take action it would seem. Torch anyone?
and this Turley joker on Bathtub Boy and the Dyke show is an idiot. He gives lawyers a bad name. Move to France, and room with a jihadist.
Blah blah blah. You left wing lunatics will soon find Obama, especially once he is privy to what the last Commander in Chief was privy to, could care less about the opinions of America-hating loons like you. And then what will you have to say. He just said what all you idiots wanted to hear to get your votes. Before election: “I’ll close Guantanamo IMMEDIATELY.” After election: I’ll sign the Order to close it immediately but it may take a year or so to implement it.
Allan –
“Is there really a threat of death if the technique never resulted in death?”
Your argument here is amusing. Because nobody has died yet means that nobody ever will? And how do you know that this technique has not resulted in any deaths? Because torture-advocates say so?
“And when, finally, we suffer another attack by terrorists that could have been avoided by these techniques, will you be able to look yourself in the mirror and feel good about your actions?”
Really? You think these techniques are what are going to keep us safe? So, in your mind the terrorist network is just one big group. They all talk to each other, everybody is in on the next play, and each ‘terrorist’ knows what every other ‘terrorist’ is up to, and therefore to torture one for information will simply thwart all plots and keep us safe? The James Bond villain fantasy world you live in is mind-numbingly juvenile.
mespo727272,
Thanks for the detailed reply.
As I see it, your case rests on the “threat of imminent death” point in the case of waterboarding. Is there really a threat of death if the technique never resulted in death? Is artifice and deception in interrogation outlawed?
Others believe that the “severe” mental pain in the statute requires months of lasting anguish to qualify as “torture”.
Geneva Convention could/should not apply to non-uniformed combatants who follow no rules. It’s meant to be a mutually enforced convention, not one-sided (US only).
The UN is so corrupt that it’s a joke.
I guess you and your buddies feel that staying ignorant of potential future terrorist mass killings by following the letter of the law is preferable to using tough interrogation techniques and thereby saving lives.
And when, finally, we suffer another attack by terrorists that could have been avoided by these techniques, will you be able to look yourself in the mirror and feel good about your actions?
JT:
You were great with Rachel, Keith, and Dr. Fried;
I share your silent prayer. Thank-you!
JT, missed you on NPR. Did manage to catch KO and Rachel-second time. Wooooooooohooooooooo! I may watch you again!
‘The road to success is always under construction’
~Lily Tomlin
mespo, I’ll catch up tomorrow, if I can. Stellar comments these days.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/12/us/politics/12inquire.html?pagewanted=2&_r=3&hp
‘…But it may be difficult for Mr. Obama to resist the pressure for a fuller public accounting, and lawmakers appear ready to proceed even without his support.
The House Judiciary Committee chairman, Representative John Conyers Jr., Democrat of Michigan, has already introduced a measure to create a commission to investigate Mr. Bush’s detention, interrogation and rendition policies. Mr. Conyers’s bill would establish a bipartisan nine-member commission with subpoena power and a mandate “to investigate the broad range of policies” undertaken with claims that Mr. Bush’s wartime powers as commander in chief trumped laws and treaties.
The measure by Mr. Conyers is not the only sign that Congress may force the issue. Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, the second-ranking Democrat on the intelligence committee, said such a commission might not be necessary because the panel itself would press the administration to declassify as much information about C.I.A. prisons as possible…’
Prof. Turley –
I second what A. Karno and others have said in thanking you for continuing to, at the risk of sounding so cliche-ish, speak truth to power, for promising to keep harping on it, and urging other O voters to raise hell, too. (Go to change.gov, for starters, and sign up to vote on others’ commments and to submit your own on this (and other) topics. Writer your Reps and Sens, too.)
Dear Jonathon,
PLEASE do not pass go or collect 200 dollars. Please continue debating this issue at every opportunity. Hammer the press,
get on John Stewart Colbert, Mahr…everywhere you can educate
the audience who seem a little “let it go” The demographic who help elect Barack may be clueless about this issue. ( Toss WWII
along with that, it’s generational) You are building awareness. Don’t stop!
I am a ‘liberal democrat’, of baby boomer generation. All we did
was bitch about Our Constitution being re-written and distorted beyond recognition. Why now, is this issue in danger of swept under the carpet by Obama? We can’t afford it? I’ll bet it’s all economic. TALK ME DOWN !! We have many areas in need of repair, but this is a the crux of our countrys’ ethical infrastructure.
…if the past happens to contain war crimes committed by his predecessor. I just finished an interview on Talk of the Nation on which I debated the issue with Harvard Professor and former solicitor general Charles Fried. I will be discussing the issue again on MSNBC Countdown tonight.
Allan:
Why don’t you ask me to prove to you an apple falls to the ground from a tree and exclude any mention of the Newton or his law of universal gravitation, or to calculate the number of molecules in one mole of ideal gas without mentioning Avogadro’s number? Since I have not been called to educate the willfully ignorant, I’ll just give you a few cites to get you started.
18 U.S.C. Sec 2340A, provides the following definitions:
1. “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;
2. “Severe mental pain or suffering” means the prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from –
1. the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering;
2. the administration or application, or threatened administration or application, of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality;
3. the threat of imminent death; or
4. the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mindaltering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality.
(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.
Similarly, General Comment 20 (October 3, 1992) of the U.N. Human Rights Committee, which is the official body charged with interpreting the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, has stated its view that the Covenant’s article 7 prohibition against torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment includes the principle that “States parties must not expose individuals to the danger of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment upon return to another country by way of their extradition, expulsion or refoulement.”
See article 130 of the Third Geneva Convention; and article 147 of the Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, 12 August 1949.
Article 16, Torture Convention. The European Court of Human Rights has stressed this point. “Even in the most difficult of circumstances, such as the fight against organized terrorism and crime, the [European Convention on Human Rights] prohibits in absolute terms torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”. Aksoy v. Turkey, Case No. 21987/93, Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights (December 18, 1996).
“[T]he United States considers itself bound by the obligation under article 16 to prevent `cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment’, only insofar as the term `cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment’ means the cruel, unusual and inhumane treatment or punishment prohibited by the Fifth, Eighth, and/or Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States.” U.S. Reservations upon Ratification of the Torture Convention, available at: htttp://193.194.138.190/html/menu3/b/treaty12_asp.htm (accessed March 7, 2003).
I suppose I don’t need to give you cites for domestic laws against assault, battery, attempted murder, and the like, but maybe I am assuming too much.
What is OLC?
Ditto “an fauty”?
Allen
The Uniform Code of Military Justice is a federal statute.
UCMJ prohibits U.S. armed forces from, among other things, engaging in cruelty, oppression or maltreatment of prisoners (art. 93), assaulting prisoners (art. 128) (a prohibition that includes a demonstration of violence that results in reasonable apprehension of immediate bodily harm), and communicating a threat to wrongfully injure a detainee (art. 134).
Matching orange jump suits for W & Dick.