Hang Your Head in Shame

[erik_kosberg]

"The top legal adviser within the US state department, who counsels the secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, on international law, has declined to rule out the use of the interrogation technique known as waterboarding even if it were applied by foreign intelligence services on US citizens."

What goes around, comes around.

BTW, if waterboarding isn't torture, isn't it about time that we started expecting police officers to routinely use it to get information from suspects? After all, if it's not torture, how could anyone complain about that?

[drmomentum[$]]

'Cause it is torture.

What I don't understand is why people think a technique that can make you admit to anything could be considered a good technique for getting useful information.

[erik_kosberg]

"Senior Active-Duty General Says Positive Things About Waterboarding; Will Media Demand Clarification?"

Nothing to see here. Move along.

[pippadaisy[$]]

Maybe they should stop watching 24 and find out what might actually WORK?

[erik_kosberg]

A must read:
How Low Can They Go?

[AuntieEmma[$]]

erik_kosberg said

BTW, if waterboarding isn't torture, isn't it about time that we started expecting police officers to routinely use it to get information from suspects? After all, if it's not torture, how could anyone complain about that?

Oddly enough, this situation actually happened:

In 1983, federal prosecutors charged a Texas sheriff and three of his deputies with violating prisoners' civil rights by forcing confessions. The complaint alleged that the officers conspired to "subject prisoners to a suffocating water torture ordeal in order to coerce confessions. This generally included the placement of a towel over the nose and mouth of the prisoner and the pouring of water in the towel until the prisoner began to move, jerk, or otherwise indicate that he was suffocating and/or drowning."

The four defendants were convicted, and the sheriff was sentenced to 10 years in prison.

From "Waterboarding Used to Be a Crime," written by a former JAG/current judge and professor teaching the law of war:

Waterboarding Used to Be a Crime

[erik_kosberg]

Since people will break when tortured, let's hope that none of our enemies read this and get any ideas.

[erik_kosberg]

Meet Lt. Col. V. Stuart Couch — or in this case, don’t

The Bush administration blocked a Marine Corps lawyer from testifying before Congress today that severe techniques employed by U.S. interrogators derailed his prosecution of a suspected al Qaeda terrorist.

…Lt. Col. V. Stuart Couch, a former Guantanamo Bay prosecutor, was set to testify regarding another concern that has long troubled uniformed lawyers: Regardless of their accuracy, statements obtained under torture or certain other forms of duress are inadmissible in legal proceedings. Because most evidence against Guantanamo prisoners comes from detainee statements, convictions hinge on whether they can be used in court.

Asked last week to appear before the panel, Col. Couch says he informed his superiors and that none had any objection.

That was before the Bush gang caught wind of Couch’s intention to inform lawmakers (who have oversight authority) about the problem. William J. Haynes, the Bush-appointed Pentagon general counsel, yesterday told Couch via email that “it is improper for you to testify about matters still pending in the military court system, and you are not to appear before the Committee to testify tomorrow.”

How predictable.

I’m curious: if the United States “does not torture,” then what could Couch say that would be damaging?

On a related note, what, exactly, was Couch going to say? He actually has quite an important story to tell.

How convenient.

[erik_kosberg]

A Primer on the Law of Torture

Conviction of acting officials in the chain of command for such violations that are part and parcel of war crimes or crimes against humanity, pursuant to the US inspired, post World War II Nuremberg Doctrine, makes those officials, irrespective of rank, title or position, subject to punishment by life imprisonment or the death penalty.

If the rule of law still has any meaning in this country, Bush and his minions will one day be held accountable.

[pippadaisy[$]]

I wouldn't hold my breath unless you look REALLY good in blue.

[erik_kosberg]

Yeah, I know. It's nice to think that this is still a nation ruled by law, but available evidence points to the contrary.

"What Real DOJ Trial Attorneys Say About Torture"

[erik_kosberg]

"So waterboarding is legal."

A priceless gotcha moment.

[erik_kosberg]

"There are different ways of doing it. It’s like swimming, freestyle, backstroke."

I suppose it will soon become an Olympic event.

We're number one! We're number one!

[erik_kosberg]

Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell on waterboarding.

[Helen_B[$]]

Getting water up your nose gets your attention, alright. I sleep with a CPAP machine , and occaisionally water condenses inside the hose and runs down into the mask that covers my nose. I am wide awake, the instant the first drop hits. Humans are hardwired to resist anything that could suffocate them, and being held down, partially suffocated, and basically threatened with drowning is terrifying. Didn't the Inquisition specialize in stuff like this?

[rmthunter]

Actually, I believe the Inquisition originated it. It was torture then, and it's torture now.

[drmomentum[$]]

It was torture then, it's policy now. It was hidden then, it's embraced now.

[rmthunter]

Canada Adds U.S. to List Of Nations That Torture

In Canada, the United States has joined a notorious group of countries -- Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Afghanistan and China, among others -- as a place where foreigners risk torture and abuse, according to a training manual for Canadian diplomats that was accidentally given this week to Amnesty International lawyers.

Somehow I doubt the "accidentally" part, but we're in such good company.

In the spirit of fairness, I should point out that the direct Canadian concern rests on two cases of Canadian citizens detained and treated inhumanely. On the other hand, as a fire-breathing, patriotic American, two cases are two too many. (And of course, there are many more than two, if we're not limiting the discussion to Canadians.)

[erik_kosberg]

Mark This Day

President Bush has now laid down his most aggressive challenge to the very constitutional authority of Congress. It is a naked assertion of executive power. The founders would have called it tyrannical. His cards are now all on the table. This is no bluff.

So it's now official, we are no longer a nation of laws, The Leader can rule as he deems fit.

[drmomentum[$]]

Basically, as long as you get the DOJ to agree, anything goes?

[erik_kosberg]

On the bright side, you'll have a tale to tell your grandchildren.

"Back in the olden days, when I was not much older than you are now, we lived in a nation of laws."

"Oh, come on grandpa, stop fooling us!"

"Really, laws were passed by the representatives of the people and everyone had to obey them."

"Gramps, stop talking nonsense. It was never like that. You're teasing us."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"...the defense Mukasey suggests for telecom companies that illegally turned over consumer records to government officials who had no warrant to request them, is that they were "following orders." I think there were some trials where that excuse was disallowed."
--Juan Cole

[Helen_B[$]]

Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms is beginning to look much better to me than it did just a few years ago.

[rmthunter]

drmomentum said

Basically, as long as you get the DOJ to agree, anything goes?

Signing statements have superseded Congress, and now DoJ has superseded the courts. Something tells me there's a constitutional issue there, somewhere.