Following the admission that the CIA hacked Senate computers and lied to Congress, President Obama today affirmed that it did indeed torture people. This admission (while belated) is an important recognition by the United States of what is obvious from a legal standpoint. However, that also means that CIA officials violated both federal and international law. The question is why Obama began his first term by promising CIA employees that they would not be tried for what he now describes as “tortur[ing] some folks.”
Despite the prior lying to Congress, Obama insisted that he had “full confidence in John Brennan.” As noted before, the Obama Administration is clearly unwilling again to discipline, let alone charged, any CIA personnel for hacking into congressional computers.
The President then turned to the Senate report on our torture program and affirmed his earlier 2009 statement that this was torture — plain and simple:
Even before I came into office, I was very clear that in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, we did some things that were wrong. We did a whole lot of things that were right, but we tortured some folks. We did some things that were contrary to our values. I understand why it happened. I think it’s important when we look back to recall how afraid people were after the twin towers fell and the Pentagon had been hit and the plane in Pennsylvania had fallen and people did not know whether more attacks were imminent and there was enormous pressure on our law enforcement and our national security teams to try to deal with this. And, you know, it’s important for us not to feel too sanctimonious in retrospect about the tough job that those folks had. A lot of those folks were working hard under enormous pressure and are real patriots, but having said all that, we did some things that were wrong. And that’s what that report reflects.
Just a few points are warranted here.
First, torture is a war crime and the United States has insisted that it was at war. We have an obligation to investigate and prosecute any officials responsible for torture. Instead, both the Bush and Obama Administrations threatened countries like Spain and England for even investigating aspects of these crimes. Saying that we “tortured some folks” is not compliance with these law – either domestic or international
Second, it does not matter if we are “afraid” or angry under international law. These treaties clearly reject defenses like “just following orders” or justified torture.
Third, Obama has yet to explain his promise to the CIA employees after taking office. After his election, various high officials said that Obama told them privately that no Bush or CIA officials would be prosecuted. His staff denied the stories but he then soon thereafter told the CIA staff precisely that.
Finally, not only has the United States refused to hold our own officials to the same standards that we impose on other countries, but those responsible for our torture program are giving interviews and writing books in plain sight. In the meantime, the Administration has successfully blocked torture victims from seeking judicial review or relief in our courts.
That record makes the admission that “we tortured some folks” a bit less satisfying. No one familiar with the cases in this area should seriously doubt that we tortured people. What remains unclear is how we can justify not prosecuting those responsible. We may have “tortured some folks” but we never “prosecuted other folks.”
Source: ABC
“I’m surprised that the legal system at present does not have a remedy for a lawless president.”
Does it not seem logical to review what role the legal system has played in the creation of a lawless President before one seeks their remedy?
Jill re going to the streets and protesting. When we were in Vietnam people had a ball in the game (or whatever the cliché is) and they went to the streets and ultimately were heard. Unfortunately I think most people don’t see this as being important because it does not personally effect them. (I would love to know what the heck happened to Occupy.)
Jill ,
I read your post above , regarding what can be done . So I guess there is no legal remedy for a lawless president ? The example that you cited may not work here , as before it takes strength the people involved may get disappeared using NDAA etc . There maybe people monitoring this blog or our online activity and wonder how even this peaceful activity can be perceived by NSA . Another obstacle will be our American press . You said with some help from press the movement in Argentina grew , I doubt that with our msm that kind of work can be expected . Just look at greenwald how he was treated on MTP.
I’m surprised that the legal system at present does not have a remedy for a lawless president . The founders must have never anticipated this kind of situation where the congress will act as a self loathing body.
I know Dredd, but thanks for the “School House Rock” primer. I hope Elizabeth Warren gets some backing to run for the POTUS. “When to going gets weird, the weird turn pro.” Hunter S. Thompson.
seamus
He has just stated the grounds for his own impeachment and the basis for the criminal prosecution of many from the Bush administration. In fact by refusing to prosecute, he himself is violating several international treaties which the United States is a party to (And no, Dumb-Ass, treaties are not international law (USA! USA! USA!) Read your damn Constitution. Is Obama less of a criminal than Bush? Yes. Does he deserve a legal pass for couching criminal acts in cuddly language (Man he likes to use the word folks a lot when he’s got his BS groove going full throttle). No one will do anything. Who cares. I actually hope the ass-wad Republicans impeach him. Maybe we can lance this boil.
===============================
Only the Senate can do the impeachment.
The House crafts the “indictment” which the Senate puts to trial.
Dredd – the House impeaches, the Senate convicts or fails to convict. Clinton was impeached, Johnson was impeached. Neither was convicted.
He has just stated the grounds for his own impeachment and the basis for the criminal prosecution of many from the Bush administration. In fact by refusing to prosecute, he himself is violating several international treaties which the United States is a party to (And no, Dumb-Ass, treaties are not international law (USA! USA! USA!) Read your damn Constitution. Is Obama less of a criminal than Bush? Yes. Does he deserve a legal pass for couching criminal acts in cuddly language (Man he likes to use the word folks a lot when he’s got his BS groove going full throttle). No one will do anything. Who cares. I actually hope the ass-wad Republicans impeach him. Maybe we can lance this boil.
“You Torture Me” by the Fabulous Thunderbirds
Nick anecdotally says “folks” came from blacks.
Does Paul’s “Holy Grail” dictionary say it came from blacks too?
Does the Lone Ranger, Superman, and Bush II use Paul’s “Holy Grail” dictionary or instead use Nick’s Anecdotal Word Origination Private Dick anecdotal experience?
Paul C. Schulte
ME: “We Tortured Some Folks” – Obama
Word Origin & History
folk
O.E. folc “common people, men, tribe, multitude,” from P.Gmc. *folkom (cf. O.Fris. folk, M.Du. volc, Ger. Volk “people”), from P.Gmc. *fulka-, perhaps originally “host of warriors;” cf. O.N. folk “people,” also “army, detachment;” and Lith. pulkas “crowd,” O.C.S. pluku “division of an army,” both believed to have been borrowed from P.Gmc. Some have attempted, without success, to link the word to Gk. plethos “multitude;” L. plebs “people, mob,” populus “people” or vulgus. Superseded in most senses by people.
folks
“people of one’s family,” 1715, colloquial, from plural of folk.
Volkswagen is the folks car.
—————————–
YOU: Dredd – I accept only the OED for word origins.
—————————–
ME: That is how narrow mindedness works, and it shows.
—————————–
YOU: Dredd – that is because the OED is the be all and end all when it comes to the meaning and source of words. Why should I, or you for that matter, accept second or third best?
—————————–
ME: Show me the “OED” (Old Extinct Definitions) definition and word history for folk/folks, and provide a link.
Or shut up and read (OED Unchanged – Old Extinct Definitions) to see how narrow minds devolve.
—————————–
YOU:Dredd – just for your ignorance, the OED is the Oxford English Dictionary, the Holy Grail of the meaning of words and how they change. You are pushing the envelope again.
=========================
Before you trolled here I had this conversation with another “personality” like you who said the same thing.
He would always soil himself when I pointed out that “his elite dictionary” (same as yours BTW) said the same thing as the one regular people used.
Now again, what does “your Holy Grail of the meaning of words” 1% dictionary say about the words “folk / folks” that the one I used does not?
Your brain thingy is hanging out your envelope again if you can’t show a significant difference.
Because you are using a phony “argument” posing as something other than rubbish.
Which leads to the definition of “a phony.”
Dredd – I have sent a fair amount of time in the OED when I was working on my Masters. You are not quoting the OED, because it is laid out differently. Quit making things up. And really, there is no reason to soil oneself over the meaning of a word.
Here’s the problem. How far up are we going to prosecute? It wouldn’t be just to only prosecute those who actually carried out the torture since the torture was sanctioned by Bush and Cheney. This wasn’t the work of a bunch of loose canons. Should we prosecute a former President and Vice President? What affect will a prosecution of a former administration have on our long history of peaceful transitions of power?
I’m not saying we shouldn’t prosecute anybody, just that it’s not as simple as some of you make it out to be.
Simms – most executives of countries have blanket immunity in their own countries for acts like these. However, cabinet officers would be liable.
Paul, Muslims were disappeared. I have linked to one case in prior threads. The govt. kidnapped and tortured this man even though they knew he was innocent. They finally dumped him off in the middle of nowhere in Eastern Europe. He thought he was going to be shot in the back. Miraculously, this did not happen and he was helped by locals back to safety and brought his case to trial in the US. It was dismissed on the grounds of state secrets.
In fact, Muslims were simply taken from their homes, for example, in Detroit. Some were questioned and released. Others were summarily deported with no one knowing what had happened to them. Others were interrogated using the new methods and eventually released after several months.
Finally, under Obama, several US citizens have been disappeared via drones.
Yes, this govt. had plans to kill members of occupy.
Jill – disappeared in the South American terminology seems to mean disappeared for good. You seem to be using as disappearing for a period of time. To my knowledge Obama has had the power (or thinks he has the power) to kill Americans by drone attack. I am not sure if he has acted on that or not. I certainly think it is wrong, but, like Yoo and Bush, he has a legal backing from the DOJ or somebody saying he has the right.
Jill – were the Muslims disappeared or arrested. It makes a big difference.
Paul, Muslims were in fact disappeared and tortured after 9/11. If you look into the occupy movement, extreme violence was used against the protesters, to include this govt.’s plan to execute those whom they considered as leaders in the movement.
There has been some push back, but not nearly enough.
Jill – you are telling me the Obama administration was trying to execute members of Occupy? Hell, they were a danger to themselves.
John Oliver, Glenn Greenwald and others have explored what it has meant to change from a nation which had the rule of law (with major gaps) into a nation where elites rule by law, such as we see now. Laws become a weapon of the powerful to take down their enemies and suppress dissent. Mass surveillance/propaganda is a part of that program.
Without the rule of law, citizens do not have protection from the powerful. We see the disastrous results of this all around us.
Jill – if the government gets to the point where they are ‘disappearing’ citizens, I think you can expect pushback.
wondering, Other than mass, peaceful protest by our citizens I don’t think much will get done. Here is one example of taking on a lawless govt. The mothers of the plaza in Argentina began as a small group of people who wanted to know what the govt. had done with their children and grand children. More and more, members of the society joined in their march. The govt. was finally brought down. (The following is from wikipedia)
“The Mothers’ association was formed by women who had met each other while trying to find their missing sons and daughters. Many of the disappeared were believed to have been abducted by agents of the Argentine government during the years known as the Dirty War (1976–1983); the “disappeared” were often tortured and killed before their bodies were disposed of in rural areas or unmarked graves. The 14 founders of the group were Azucena Villaflor de De Vincenti, Berta Braverman, Haydée García Buelas; María Adela Gard de Antokoletz, Julia, María Mercedes and Cándida Gard (four sisters); Delicia González, Pepa Noia, Mirta Baravalle, Kety Neuhaus, Raquel Arcushin, and Senora De Caimi. They started demonstrations on the Plaza de Mayo, in front of the Casa Rosada presidential palace, on 30 April 1977.
In that period, many people were highly fearful of attracting the government’s attention, as it was exterminating the opposition. Taking strength together by marching in public, with some coverage by the press, by the following year, hundreds of women participated, gathering in the Plaza for weekly demonstrations. They made signs with photos of their children and brandished their children’s names. The government tried to marginalize and trivialize their work by calling them “las locas” (the madwomen).[1]
Together with the number of disappeared, the movement grew and gained international attention during the years of the Dirty War. The mothers cultivated international attention, seeking to build pressure by other governments against the Argentine dictatorship by publicizing the many stories of the “disappeared”. In 1978, when Argentina’s hosted the World Cup, the Mothers’ demonstrations at the Plaza were covered by the international press corps in town for the sporting event.[1] Villaflor had been searching for one of her sons and her daughter-in-law for six months. The government arranged for her to be taken to the ESMA concentration camp on 8 December 1978.[citation needed]
The military has admitted that over 9,000 of those kidnapped are still unaccounted for, but the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo say that the number of missing is closer to 30,000. Most are presumed dead. An estimated 500 of the missing are the children born in concentration camps or prison to pregnant ‘disappeared’ women; the babies were given in illegal adoptions to military families and others associated with the regime. Their mothers were generally believed killed. The numbers are hard to determine due to the secrecy surrounding the abductions.
During this period, Azucena Villaflor, Esther Careaga and María Eugenia Bianco, three of the founders of the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo, were also “disappeared”. After the fall of the military regime, a civilian government commission held in 1984 put the number of disappeared at close to 11,000. Human rights groups and the Mothers believe the figure is much higher, because the military and security forces destroyed records before ceding power to a democratic government.”
This action took great courage, intelligence and perseverance. It did not prevent protesters from being killed. Still, it is an example to us all.
ME: “We Tortured Some Folks” – Obama
Word Origin & History
folk
O.E. folc “common people, men, tribe, multitude,” from P.Gmc. *folkom (cf. O.Fris. folk, M.Du. volc, Ger. Volk “people”), from P.Gmc. *fulka-, perhaps originally “host of warriors;” cf. O.N. folk “people,” also “army, detachment;” and Lith. pulkas “crowd,” O.C.S. pluku “division of an army,” both believed to have been borrowed from P.Gmc. Some have attempted, without success, to link the word to Gk. plethos “multitude;” L. plebs “people, mob,” populus “people” or vulgus. Superseded in most senses by people.
folks
“people of one’s family,” 1715, colloquial, from plural of folk.
Volkswagen is the folks car.
—————————–
YOU: Dredd – I accept only the OED for word origins.
—————————–
ME: That is how narrow mindedness works, and it shows.
—————————–
YOU: Dredd – that is because the OED is the be all and end all when it comes to the meaning and source of words. Why should I, or you for that matter, accept second or third best?
==========================================
ME: Show me the “OED” (Old Extinct Definitions) definition and word history for folk/folks, and provide a link.
Or shut up and read (OED Unchanged – Old Extinct Definitions) to see how narrow minds devolve.
Dredd – just for your ignorance, the OED is the Oxford English Dictionary, the Holy Grail of the meaning of words and how they change. You are pushing the envelope again.
@Jill,
that is a scary thought, if you are referring to the woman that I think you are. And no I don’t say this because I am a “right wind nut”, Im not even a republican. I just hope my vote does not go wasted.
So, if a President is bound to prosecute such crimes and he does not, then nothing legally can be done? Of course nothing is going to be done by the Republicans/Democrats in the congress. Sorry I am new to this blog and do not know if there are some legal remedies to tame such presidents and congress..?