The New York Times has published a blistering editorial calling upon President Barack Obama to fulfill our obligations under domestic and international law and investigate and prosecute those responsible for the torture program under the administration of President George W. Bush. The American Civil Liberties Union is also calling for the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate the program and possibly prosecute those responsible. The Obama Administration has steadfastly refused to prosecute anyone despite its admission that, to quote Obama, “we tortured some folks.” The political costs of such a prosecute were likely viewed as too high and Attorney General Eric Holder has again taken the politically expedient approach in avoiding any serious effort to hold those responsible for these crimes. In the meantime, many of those who would be prosecuted under domestic and international law have been writing books and giving interviews — casually discussing acts that are considered war crimes under international law.
The editorial, entitled “Prosecute Torturers and Their Bosses,” takes the position long advocated by experts in the field and various academics, including myself. There is no question that we tortured people under this program. While there are plenty of torture deniers about, both U.S. and international law is clear. Waterboarding is torture and we have prosecuted both our own citizens and foreigners for this long recognized form of torture despite early denials from people like Ashcroft. Moreover, Obama has admitted that it was torture. Holder admitted it was torture. The United Nations has denounced it as a torture. Leading Republicans and Democratic leaders have denounced it as torture. The United States Senate denounced it as torture. However, not a single person has been prosecuted by the Obama Administration. Instead, the Administration has been threatening allies who have threatened to start their own torture investigation under international treaties.
I have previously written about the cynical calculation that led to Obama blocking the prosecution for those responsible for the torture program. He knew such prosecutions would be unpopular, and with so many constitutional principles since that time, he just did not see the value in adhering to principle (even those embodied within binding treaty obligations). Since Obama ran on a civil liberties platform, many expected an independent torture investigation as soon as he took office. After all, waterboarding is one of the oldest forms of torture, pre-dating the Spanish Inquisition (when it was called tortura del agua). It has long been defined as torture by both U.S. and international law, and by Obama himself. Torture, in turn, has long been defined as a war crime, and the United States is under treaty obligation to investigate and prosecute such crimes.
However, such a principle did not make for good politics. Accordingly, as soon as he was elected, Obama set out to dampen talk of prosecution. Various intelligence officials and politicians went public with accounts of the Obama administration making promises to protect Bush officials and CIA employees from prosecution. Though the White House denied the stories, Obama later gave his controversial speech at the CIA headquarters and did precisely that. In the speech, he effectively embraced the defense of befehl ist befehl (“an order is an order”). As I have written before (here and here), the Obama Administration has destroyed some of the core Nuremburg principles, particularly in its revisal of the “superior orders defense” to excuse U.S. officials.
The board notes that such an investigation would clearly include “former Vice President Dick Cheney; Mr. Cheney’s chief of staff, David Addington; the former C.I.A. director George Tenet; and John Yoo and Jay Bybee, the Office of Legal Counsel lawyers who drafted what became known as the torture memos,” the editorial reads. “There are many more names that could be considered, including Jose Rodriguez Jr., the C.I.A. official who ordered the destruction of the videotapes; the psychologists who devised the torture regimen; and the C.I.A. employees who carried out that regimen.”
The New York Times asks whether the Obama Administration has “the political courage” to order an investigation. That question unfortunately has been loudly and repeatedly answered in the negative.
Why is is not surprising that, in our country, police murder defenders are also turning out to be torture advocates. Thank heavens there has been no recent spate of news articles regarding genocide as I am sure we might also have been told that it was the victim’s fault.
The night-watchman or authoritarian state some citizens may wish our country to become is closer to establishment than any of the founders of our nation might have thought possible.
Who is the “specialist”? A torturer? Mitchell?
*Restrained*
I guess rafflaw is doing a really thorough LEXIS search right now. In the meantime, my humble google-fu turned up this:
Supreme Court rejects Guantanamo torture case
The U.S. Supreme Court said on Monday that it rejected an appeal by four former Guantanamo Bay prisoners arguing that they should be able to proceed with their lawsuit against top Pentagon officials for torture and religious abuse.
Also this:
Five foreign men lose extraordinary rendition case
Five foreign men who sued a San Jose-based CIA contractor for its alleged role in abducting them abroad and spiriting them to secret interrogation sites have exhausted their legal avenues for getting the practice known as “extraordinary rendition” branded a human rights violation.
The U.S. Supreme Court decided Monday to let stand a federal appeals court ruling that the president has the power to scuttle the men’s lawsuit because state secrets, such as how CIA operatives interrogate terror suspects, could be revealed if the case went to trial.
Of course, that didn’t stop Dianne Feinstein, so I suppose there’s no reason it should stop any show trials now.
Than he would be having an IV inserted, in both procedures he most likely would’ve been retrained. For a feeding, an NG tube would be inserted, food doesn’t get digested from bottom up, it’s gets digested from top down. I would’ve cause severe cramping, pain and diarrhea, or even a perforated intestine which would cause peritonitis. I wonder how many died from such treatment we’ll never know about? For anyone to make this torture technique sound like a legitimate medical procedure that would be used instead of an IV or NG tube is blowing smoke. Pure baloney.
Inga – if I thought you had legitimate medical knowledge I would be more persuaded by your arguments.
Oh baloney, rectal rehydration was NOT used to keep the prisoner alive. If the prisoner needed fluids it would’ve been given sub q or IV. I’m pretty certain the prisoner wound no have been any more cooperative getting liters of water or puréed food in his large intestine.
Randyjet,
The fact that people are not routinely prosecuted for perjury in civil cases does not mean that they are not liable to be prosecuted criminally. What good is the oath to tell the truth if it has no teeth? As I recall, there was no question that Clinton could be prosecuted criminally; the only question was whether such a crime rose to the level of a high crime and misdemeanor. As the chief law enforcement officer in the United States, I thought that lying under oath was such a crime.
Jeff, This perjury was a stretch to say the least. As for Presidents committing crimes you have to remember that we had Bush who had not one but TWO DUIs along with Cheney who had racked up a similar total of crimes. The perjury was when Clinton allowed his lawyer to say that Clinton had NO SEX OF ANY KIND. If Clinton had not been a lawyer, he would never have been convicted of perjury since a lay person is not expected to know that he had a duty to correct the lawyer. Clinton DID have that requirement. It is a pretty nitpicky point, and one that hardly rises to the seriousness of multiple DUIs. Or not prosecuting executives lying to Congress under oath. The Senate could not even get a majority to convict much less the required number.
Hey Randyjet, when is your 19th birthday? 😉
No DBQ, that’s your schtick.
Isaac, most liberals who comment here have mentioned the sheer incompetence and lies that got us into the Iraq war and almost tanked our economy. I’m pretty sure everyone but the rightists here agree with you on that.
I’ve been baking all day, used some rum extract for my Potica however. I did have a coffee after lunch with some Frangelico.
Oh….do please give us all the recipe for your Potica. I’m sure everyone is waiting with bated breath.
Hmmmm Chip, what have YOU been drinking? You sound a bit belligerent today.
“Echo chamber.” Ha ha, what a wit you are. Yes, nothing but uniformity of opinion in this thread.
Link the laws you’re referring to–specifying how they apply in the case at hand–or else I’ll assume you’re being as obfuscatory as you were in your last “bankster” rant.
More apologies for torture from the usual echo chamber. It is against the law and immoral, but we can’t enforce the laws outlawing torture, but we can turn around and claim that the President is breaking the law and we must stop him. Any and all parties who broke the law, from Bush on down, including anyone who refused to follow the law in prosecuting those responsible for torture should be prosecuted. It is a shame it took the New York Times so long to see the light.
Let the taxpayers pay to defend all the alleged war criminals and they can make their case before a jury of their peers. I am sure Cheney would welcome the chance for complete vindication. If any are convicted, then their sentences can reflect the fact that they were motivated for the best of reasons. Maybe the judge will not send any to jail. Perhaps, the President can promise to commute all sentences. The important thing is that American jurisprudence does not condone torture because torture is bad, MKAY?
If you’ve seen Team America: World Police, you’ve heard Cheney’s defense stated as clearly and succinctly and vulgarly as possible.
If you haven’t, well here it is. (Definite “civility” warning.)
None actually Chip, I’ve been baking all day, used some rum extract for my Potica however. I did have a coffee after lunch with some Frangelico. That was pretty good. I posted the Red Menace for Pogo since he’s so concerned about Communists. You don’t want me to have to post the bob Dylan John Birch Blues, now do you?
Oh heck, I will. Every time Pogo talks about Communists I hear this song.
http://youtu.be/eCxi5VOYKOY
issac, you were on a roll until that last sentence.
We have it within our power to punish these bad politicians. They are smug to think they got away with it. These men are wanted in foreign countries for war crimes. They’ve dishonored the United States of America and its People. We need to hold them accountable for their inhumane actions. Help bring honor back to our Country. Bring them to justice. I’ve read post after post from concerned citizens who say there is nothing they can do about bad politicians. Well, there is something you can do. Let your voice be heard. Please help get this petition to go viral. PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION TODAY, TIME IS LIMITED, THEN POST FORWARD SO OTHERS CAN SIGN. Together We Stand…
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/arrest-dick-cheney-and-george-w-bush-crimes-against-humanity/wRVSl1y4
The hypocrisy is amazing here. The US tortures, has tortured, and will torture. The US slaughters hundreds of thousands of innocents, has slaughtered millions of Vietnamese to make a point (or secure natural resources), and probably will push their way through a situation by offing many civilians. It is all war and diverting attention away from vastly more heinous crimes with this small potatoes about torture is nothing but Mr. Feel Good. If one of the terrorists of 9/11 had been apprehended before 9/11, tortured, and revealed the plot, and it had been thwarted????? Now, give us the truth, would torture be OK. You’re GDR it would. This pontificating on the high moral ground is nothing but the same crap that Americans spout on a regular basis to make them feel Number One.
Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld should all go to jail for their arrogant incompetence that unnecessarily cost the lives of hundreds of thousands, for sewering the US economy, for bungling beyond all repair the war in Afghanistan that should have been a cakewalk. Torture is nothing compared to that. How come we don’t hear anybody complaining about that?