“They are worried that folks will get angry and violent when they read the purported findings of the report and therefore it is unconscionable to release it. And that dear friends, is the modern principle of American transparency in a nutshell.” – William Banzai
Glenn Greenwald Previews The Senate Torture Report
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 12/09/2014 09:45 -0500
Curious what to expect out of today’s 600-page mega dump by the Senate Intelligence Committee revealing US torture techniques and practices, aka the “torture report”? The the following explainer by the Intercept’s Glenn Greenwald should provide some useful pointers.
Coverage Of The Senate Torture Report
One of the worst myths official Washington and its establishment media have told itself about the torture debate is that the controversy is limited to three cases of waterboarding at Guantánamo and a handful of bad Republican actors. In fact, a wide array of torture techniques were approved at the highest levels of the U.S. Government and then systematically employed in lawless US prisons around the world – at Bagram (including during the Obama presidency), CIA black sites, even to US citizens on US soil. So systematic was the torture regime that a 2008 Senate report concluded that the criminal abuses at Abu Ghraib were the direct result of the torture mentality imposed by official Washington.
American torture was not confined to a handful of aberrational cases or techniques, nor was it the work of rogue CIA agents. It was an officially sanctioned, worldwide regime of torture that had the acquiescence, if not explicit approval, of the top members of both political parties in Congress. It was motivated by far more than interrogation. The evidence for all of this is conclusive and overwhelming. And the American media bears much of the blame, as they refused for years even to use the word “torture” to describe any of this (even as they called these same techniques “torture” when used by American adversaries), a shameful and cowardly abdication that continues literally to this day in many of the most influential outlets.
The Senate Intelligence Committee today will release part of its “torture report.” The report is the by-product of four years of work (2009-2013) and is 6,000 pages long. Only the Executive Summary, roughly 600 pages, will be released today. Even some of that is redacted: the names of CIA agents participating in the torture, countries which agreed to allow CIA black sites, and other details. For months, top Democrats on the Committee warred with the Obama White House due to the latter’s attempts to redact far more vital information than even stalwart CIA ally Dianne Feinstein thought necessary.
None of this has been in any plausible doubt for years. Recall that Gen. Antonio Taguba, who led an official investigation into prisoner abuse, said in 2008: “There is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes. The only question that remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account.” Gen. Barry McCaffrey said : “We tortured people unmercifully. We probably murdered dozens of them during the course of that, both the armed forces and the CIA.” Nobody needs this Senate report to demonstrate that the U.S. government became an official squad of torture (with the American public largely on board).
Still, this will be by far the most comprehensive and official account of the War on Terror’s official torture regime. Given the authors – Committee Democrats along with two Maine Senators: Agnus King (I) and Susan Collins (R) – it’s likely to whitewash critical events, including the key, complicit role members of Congress such as Nancy Pelosi played in approving the program (important details of which are still disputed), as well an attempt to insulate the DC political class by stressing how the CIA “misled” elected officials about the program. But the report is certain to lay bare in very stark terms some of the torture methods, including “graphic details about sexual threats” and what Reuters still euphemistically and subserviently calls “other harsh interrogation techniques the CIA meted out to captured militants.”
Important parts of the Obama administration engaged in all sorts of gamesmanship to prevent the report’s release, including a last-minute call from John Kerry to Feinstein in which the Secretary of State warned that release of the report could endanger American lives (a warning affirmed yesterday by the White House) And a vital part of President Obama’s legacy will be his repeated and ultimately successful efforts to shield the torturers from all forms of legal accountability – which, aside from being a brazen breach of America’s treaty obligations, makes deterrence of future American torture almost impossible (Obama did that even in the face of some polls showing pluralities favored criminal investigations of torture).
To see how little accountability there still is for national security state officials, recall that the CIA got caught spying on the Senate Committee and then lying about it, yet John Brennan kept his job as CIA Director (just as James Clapper is still Director of National Intelligence despite getting caught lying about NSA domestic spying). Any decent person, by definition, would react with revulsion to today’s report, but nobody should react with confidence that its release will help prevent future occurrences by a national security state that resides far beyond democratic accountability, let alone the law.
The Intercept will have comprehensive coverage of the report throughout the day. We’ll have full annotations of the report; graphical guides to the key parts; reporting in Washington from Dan Froomkin, who has been covering the report for months, and other reporters; and I’ll be live-blogging key parts of the report and other fallout in this space all day, appearing, in reverse chronological order, underneath these initial observations.
Media Torture Advocates
Col. Morris Davis, the retired Air Force Colonel who served as the Chief Prosecutor of the Military Commissions at Guantánamo until 2007 when he lost his job for criticizing the tribunal, notes that MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough this morning explicitly defended the torture techniques, arguing: “whatever it takes to keep America safe.” Aside from being the essence of the authoritarian mindset – security über alle – it’s quite striking that major television personalities in the U.S. explicitly justify the use of torture. Is there any other western country where that’s true? After all, The Washington Post hired former Bush speechwriter Marc Theissen as a columnist after he wrote an entire book justifying torture (when used by the U.S.).
The U.S. has led the way in destroying the ostensible western taboo surrounding torture, which is why official torturers go free and torture advocates are featured in almost every major media outlet.
I’d like to hear SSS’ opinion regarding the CIA torturing prisoners.
If Obama, Fienstien and Pelosi are good with it, good enough for me. Better representatives of Social Justice cannot be found. You gotta break some eggs to make an omelet, lets enjoy this fine meal.,
Honestly, I believe the whole regimen to be Fascist practice or preseason, development of tech for the home opener. Not just the torture but the whole Terrorism game plan, Surveillance, Occupation, Rendition, Classification all performed/practiced/perfected away, in prep for the big homecoming.
Can’t wait.
Obama’s Next Speech: “We tortured some folks.” “I’m calling for a DOJ investigation and a panel of experts to be formed.”
Mike Krieger
“I’d like to hear SSS’ opinion regarding the CIA torturing prisoners.” ——— Admin
Predicted response:
— it’s all a fuckin’ lie
— disgruntled employees
— the Comanche’s were far worse
“I’d like to hear SSS’ opinion regarding the CIA torturing prisoners.”
—-Admin
I was aware of the CIA’s use of black sites, including some specifics of location, for high-value al Qaeda detainees long before it became public knowledge. I was not aware of the specific types of interrogation techniques used until that started to leak out publically. Some members of Congress were, though. Nancy Pelosi is one of them.
Let me first read what this report from Congress says before commenting further.
“We Tortured Some Folks”: CIA Lied To Congress, Senate Torture Report Reveals
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 12/09/2014 11:22 -0500
In what we are confident everyone will find to be absolutely shocking news, moments ago the Senate Torture report was released. The key finding, hold on to your hats, is that the CIA “misled” Congress. As for the timing of the release, which takes place at the same time as Jonathan Gruber (Ph.D) is being grilled in the House, it is hardly a coincidence that Obama does everything in his power to deflect attention to what took place under the Bush administration, commenting that “torture techniques did significant damage to America’s standing” in the world. So what did the droning of thousands of innocent civilians do to the same “standing”?
The drilldown from Bloomberg:
CIA provided inaccurate information about effectiveness and scope of interrogations of suspected terrorists, and mismanaged a program that was far more brutal than represented, according to 6-year investigation by Democrats on Senate Intelligence Cmte.
Interrogation techniques weren’t effective, didn’t produce key information that led to killing of Osama bin Laden and were significantly different from procedures authorized by Justice Dept, report says
CIA provided inaccurate information to White House, Congress, DOJ, CIA Inspector General, media and the public
“This document examines the CIA’s secret overseas detention of at least 119 individuals and the use of coercive interrogation techniques – in some cases amounting to torture,” Senate Intelligence Cmte Chairman Dianne Feinstein says in statement
Agency lost track of 119 detainees and at least 26 didn’t meet standards for being held, according to executive summary of 6,000-page report
In fall of 2002, detainee died of hypothermia while shackled to concrete floor; another detainee was held for 17 days in the dark without anybody knowing he was there
Interrogation of terrorism suspect Abu Zubaydah, who was waterboarded at least 83 times, was more brutal than previously known; at one point, he was put in a 1 1/2 meter box and knocked unconscious during waterboarding session, while water and bubbles poured from his mouth
Other detainees with broken legs and feet were inappropriately forced to sit in stress positions
No evidence CIA briefed former President George W. Bush about harsh interrogations, though former Vice President Dick Cheney attended meetings where tactics were discussed
Report details actions taken on terrorism suspects during George W. Bush administration; Bush called report “way off base” in interview with CNN
CIA Torture Report Set for Senate Release Over Bush Objections
Full Senate Intelligence Cmte wasn’t briefed on techniques until September 2006
While some members, including Feinstein and GOP Sen. John McCain, raised objections, CIA informed DOJ Office of Legal Counsel in a classified setting that no senators objected
Obama chimes in:
The report documents a troubling program involving enhanced interrogation techniques on terrorism suspects,” President Obama says in e-mailed statement on release of CIA torture report.
Report “reinforces my long-held view that these harsh methods were not only inconsistent with our values as nation, they did not serve our broader counterterrorism efforts or our national security interests”
Says techniques did “significant damage to America’s standing” in the world
Odd: no comments by the Droner in Chief what droning thousands of innocent women and children around the world does to America’s “standing” in the world.
Some more from Bloomberg:
President George W. Bush was never briefed by the Central Intelligence Agency on the details of harsh interrogation techniques and secret detention of terror suspects for the first four years of the controversial program, and when he did find out the details, he was “uncomfortable” with some of the practices, according to the long-awaited report by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
The 500-page declassified executive summary of the majority staff’s 6,700-page investigation into CIA rendition, detention and interrogation practices after 9/11 states that despite agency efforts to keep the Bush administration informed about the program, top White House officials repeatedly resisted having the CIA brief cabinet-level figures about the details, and CIA officials were not permitted to brief Bush directly until mid-2006, more than four years after the president signed a broad executive order authorizing the program, according to Senate Democratic aides who briefed reporters ahead of Tuesday’s release.
When Bush finally heard the details of the harsh interrogation techniques that were used against CIA detainees, he was “uncomfortable” with some of them and expressed dismay that some detainees were required to remain in stress positions for long amounts of time, to the point that they had no choice but to soil themselves, the aides said.
The committee’s investigation will also state, based on CIA’s internal correspondence, that two intelligence directors, George Tenet and Porter Goss, admitted they never briefed Bush directly on the techniques, even though the CIA inspector general recommended they do so in 2004.
The White House also resisted CIA efforts to brief other cabinet officials in the beginning stages of the program, Senate Democratic aides said. The CIA acting general counsel at the time, John Rizzo, wrote in an internal agency e-mail that the White House had told the CIA not to brief cabinet officials in 2002 because they feared press leaks, but Rizzo said the White House’s clear implication was that if Secretary of State Colin Powell were aware of the details, “he would blow his stack.”
Powell and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld were briefed on the interrogation techniques sometime in 2003, the committee report states. Other top officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, also eventually received briefings about the details of the program, but not the president himself. The committee report states the briefings that did occur were often misleading or incomplete.
In one instance, Cheney was not made aware of a specific country’s hosting of a CIA “black site,” which complicated his direct relations with that country, aides said. The names of countries that participated in the CIA program are not revealed in the declassified executive summary of the report.
“The CIA provided incomplete and inaccurate information to the White House regarding the operation and effectiveness of the detention and interrogation program,” a committee document on the report states. “In addition to inaccurate statements provided to other policymakers, there were instances in which specific questions from White House officials were not answered truthfully or completely.”
In an interview with CNN on Sunday, Bush defended the CIA practices but didn’t mention he was kept out of the loop.
“Here’s what I’m going to say, that we’re fortunate to have men and women who work hard at the CIA serving on our behalf. These are patriots,” he said. “And whatever the report says, if it diminishes their contributions to our country, it is way off base.”
Cheney told The New York Times this week that he was properly informed and the CIA program operated within the authority given by the Bush administration, a claim vigorously disputed by the committee’s report.
“What I keep hearing out there is they portray this as a rogue operation, and the agency was way out of bounds and then they lied about it,” Cheney said. “I think that’s all a bunch of hooey. The program was authorized. The agency did not want to proceed without authorization, and it was also reviewed legally by the Justice Department before they undertook the program.”
In its response to the committee’s report, the CIA states that it is unknowable whether or not Bush was briefed on the details of the program prior to 2006 because CIA records are incomplete on the point. Rizzo, in his memoir “Company Man,” states that Bush probably wasn’t fully briefed on the details. The CIA points out that Bush claimed in his own memoir he was briefed on some details.
“The study asserts that the President was not briefed in a timely way on program details,” the CIA response states. “While the Agency records on the subject are admittedly incomplete, former President Bush has stated in his autobiography that he discussed the program, including its use of enhanced techniques, with then-DCIA Tenet in 2002, prior to the application of the techniques on Abu Zubaydah, and personally approved the techniques.” (Zubaydah is a Saudi citizen still held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.)
Regardless, according to the report, which outgoing committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein will speak about this morning on the Senate floor, the CIA not only went well beyond the techniques and practices authorized by the Bush White House and the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, the agency misrepresented the program to top officials and used false information to gain approval from the White House and Justice Department.
“The CIA provided inaccurate information to the White House, Congress, the Justice Department, the CIA inspector general, the media, and the American public,” a document provided to reporters by the committee states.
Obozo speaking to the press on torture ” Any criticism of my Executive Orders on torture is Racist “.
A few legal observations …………..
The al Qaeda detainees were/are foreign nationals held on foreign soil. They have ZERO legal protections under any U.S. national law, including the Constitution.
The al Qaeda detainees were/are correctly identified under INTERNATIONAL laws, such as the Geneva Conventions on war, as ILLEGAL enemy combatants. This is very important and nearly always ignored by the media. They are not fighting under any recognized national flag, nor are they uniformed soldiers. As such, they are not entitled to any protections under international laws.
Much like many spies who are captured during wartime, members of al Qaeda are subject to the mercy, or not, of the nation which captures them. They can be summarily executed without trial. Or subject to “other measures.” And it’s all perfectly legal.
Do the means justify the ends?
“And it’s all perfectly legal.” ——– SSS
The final battle cry for tyrants, everywhere.
Not saying SSS is a tyrant, but hiding behind the “I was following the law” IS what tyrants hide behind. Let’s not forget … killing Indians was legal also.
Fucking cowards say this shit.
Two psychologists earned $81 million from CIA torture program
By Greg Robb
Published: Dec 9, 2014 1:01 p.m. ET
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — The Central Intelligence Agency’s torture of detainees was developed by two inexperienced contractors who were eventually paid $81 million for their work, according to a Senate Intelligence Committee report on the program released Tuesday.
The two psychologists were working at the U.S. Air Force Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape school prior to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. They had no knowledge of interrogation techniques, al Qaeda, counterterrorism or “any relevant cultural or linguistic expertise,” the report said.
The report suggests that the program was poorly managed with limited oversight. A surprisingly small number of officials were running the program.
The two contractors played a central role — they developed, operated and assessed its interrogation operations.
Also read: Senate Democrats release CIA torture report
“The CIA relied on these two contractors to evaluate the interrogation program they had devised and in which they had obvious financial interests,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat of California, said in a statement on the Senate floor.
From 2005 to 2008, the CIA “outsourced almost all aspects of its detention and interrogation program to this company,” Feinstein said. The contract was worth $181 million but only $81 million was paid, she said.
The two contractors personally conducted interrogations, including water boarding, of the CIA’s most significant detainees. They provided official evaluations of the psychological state of detainees to determine if the enhanced techniques would continue
“Evaluating the psychological state of the very detainees they were interrogating is a clear conflict of interest and a violation of professional guidelines,” Feinstein said.
The two contractors even acted as a liason between the CIA and foreign intelligence services.
The names of the two contractors were not provided, but they were referred to in the report under the pseudonyms Grayson Swigert and Hammond Dunbar in the report.
Stucky:
Amen to that. Condoning repulsive acts as legal makes for degradation of a society.
If we sacrifice the values of the Republic in order to save it, what did we save?
“Human rights can only be assured among a virtuous people. The general government can never be in danger of degenerating into a monarchy, an oligarchy, an aristocracy, or any despotic or oppressive form so long as there is any virtue in the body of the people.”
George Washington
Nice compartmentalization, I am sure it goes even further, within the CIA. The revelations will shock everyone with a face, and at MOST some low level wrist slapping MIGHT occur, or not. Like SSS says, “it’s all perfectly legal.”, so why not? A beautiful first step in conditioning general acceptance.
SSS-“The al Qaeda detainees were/are correctly identified under INTERNATIONAL laws, such as the Geneva Conventions on war, as ILLEGAL enemy combatants.”
Who does the correct identification?
Could you or I be correctly identified?
Good ,in this case …the ends justify the means… GOD this place is turning into a bunch of cry babies pussies that our enemies just love.
Admin ,you still believe we have enemies don’t you ?Don’t play this intellectual shit with me just answer the question.
GOD you people even got my smart phone pissed. Anonymous is bbbbbbbb.
The Central Intelligence Agency’s torture of detainees was developed by two inexperienced contractors who were eventually paid $81 million for their work, according to a Senate Intelligence Committee report on the program released Tuesday.
The two psychologists were working at the U.S. Air Force Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape school prior to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. They had no knowledge of interrogation techniques, al Qaeda, counterterrorism or “any relevant cultural or linguistic expertise,” the report said.
The report suggests that the program was poorly managed with limited oversight. A surprisingly small number of officials were running the program.
The two contractors played a central role — they developed, operated and assessed its interrogation operations.
“The CIA relied on these two contractors to evaluate the interrogation program they had devised and in which they had obvious financial interests,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat of California, said in a statement on the Senate floor.
From 2005 to 2008, the CIA “outsourced almost all aspects of its detention and interrogation program to this company,” Feinstein said. The contract was worth $181 million but only $81 million was paid, she said.
The two contractors personally conducted interrogations, including water boarding, of the CIA’s most significant detainees. They provided official evaluations of the psychological state of detainees to determine if the enhanced techniques would continue
The two contractors even acted as a liason between the CIA and foreign intelligence services.
The names of the two contractors were not provided, but they were referred to in the report under the pseudonyms Grayson Swigert and Hammond Dunbar in the report.
I NEED CAPS LOCK TO RESPOND TO THIS BECAUSE JFCOAPS THIS CANNOT BE TRUE!!!
2 PSYCHOLOGISTS WERE COMPENSATED 81 MILLION DOLLARS FOR THREE YEARS WORTH OF WORK FOR THE US GOVERNMENT? CAN THIS BE TRUE? IS THERE ANY OVERSIGHT, ANY AT ALL? WHAT DID THEY DO FOR THAT KIND OF MONEY? WHAT KIND OF RESULTS DID THEY GET TO JUSTIFY THE KIND OF INCOME USUALLY RESERVERED FOR SULTANS AND INVENTORS OF THINGS LIKE, I DON’T KNOW, THE WHEEL. AND WE DON’T EVEN KNOW WHO THEY ARE? REALLY? AND THEY WERE DUE ANOTHER 100 MILLION BUT THEY GOT CAUGHT WITH BOTH HANDS UP TO THE ELBOWS IN THE COOKIE JAR? SOUNDS LIKE SOMEBODY AT DoD BE STEALING.
caps lock rant over.
Hmmm. Explaining the law seems to have prompted some irrational outbursts.
The U.S. Constitution was designed and written for the governance of U.S. citizens, not foreigners. International law was designed and written for citizens of nations who have accepted, through the individual laws of the nations (in the case of the U.S., signing a treaty per the dictates of the U.S. Constitution) which adopt those laws as binding on its citizens.
If that’s too difficult to comprehend, I can’t help you.
The idea that trained psychologists would engage in torture [sadly] doesn’t surprise me – I was advised years ago to choose a psychologist carefully – that too many of them preferred spending 60K on a psychologist degree than spending 6K doing their own “work”.
I’ve run into a few that were just bat-shit crazy.
@ Ottomatik, who said,
SSS-“The al Qaeda detainees were/are correctly identified under INTERNATIONAL laws, such as the Geneva Conventions on war, as ILLEGAL enemy combatants.”
Who does the correct identification? (In the case of al Qaeda detainees, the USG; do you dispute that detainee Khalid Sheik Muhammad was the operational mastermind of 9/11? Yes or no?)
Could you or I be correctly identified? (We’re U.S. citizens. While we can be correctly identified and investigated as members of al Qaeda, we still retain all of the protections of the Constitution. Get it?)
Shit! I don’t know why we’re all surprised. Just think about the federal budget. Do we really think all that money is going to pay fair wages and costs of services provided? It pork-filled for sure. I mean, we know that the govt has been known to pay fifty or some shit like that dollars for a band aid. Nothing will be done about it. Let’s instead talk about racial equality. Oh, wait! Think how many hungry kids could be fed with 81 million bucks. Or, how about the fact that this covers the cost of sending roughly 3800 students to school for a year even in world class areas like New Jersey (as admin showed)… Nah!
@SSS, I wasn’t even going to comment on your info until this, “…(We’re U.S. citizens. While we can be correctly identified and investigated as members of al Qaeda, we still retain all of the protections of the Constitution. Get it?) …”
You still believe that shit?
Even after the US CONgress and Obama enacted the NDAA which allows for NO CHARGES, NO COUNSEL, NO LIMIT on US citizens on US soil? Even after Obama came out and said he could kill an American on American soil without a court, or even charges?
What in the hell would it take for you to wake up and realize there is NO “Constitutional” protections anymore? Or very, very, few.
Anyway, this can be used to justify the mass killing and torture of American citizens when we are finally handed our asses. Just like most Americans felt completely justified in offering no quarter for Nazi foot soldiers or little ole’ German ladies.
They deserved it because they, if not participating, did nothing to stop it.
Does ANY of this sound familiar to anyone in this country?
Now that the “developing” economies have surpassed the Western economies officially (though I suspect if things were reported more accurately, we would have seen this long ago), how much longer you think they are going to sit back and allow this bloodthirsty, amoral, nation to continue killing other earthly inhabitants under the guise of the US being the wealthiest, most moral and trustworthy?
We, dear friends, are screwed.
Debating on whether torture is legal or not is the stupidest thing I’ve heard. Especially on whether it is legal elsewhere. Were the laws of the lands followed when these “operatives” were taken?
And guess what? Aushwitz and Dachou were flipping “legal” too. At one time it was legal to beat your wife and kid too. What in the Sam Hill is this world coming to?
Might makes right, for now. Our day is coming. Sad and frightening so many want it this way.
Hopefully their/our god will allow “but, but, 9/11, but, but, WMD,” to pardon all those soldiers, psychologists and common supporters when the real “laws” time is up and running.
Sadly though, I get the feeling most of us are going to be completely blindsided when we are made to account for things we refused to control, and basically – or all out – supported.
Unless, of course, God hates the brown people he made too.
SSS- I do get it, I was not purposely goading you into a match, just legitimately seeking informed info that I knew you would be willing to provide, thank you.
Your response to my first question was…the USG. Its a massive group of peeps, can you tell me who in that massive organization lists foreign nationals as: Illegal Enemy Combatants, and if there are any pertinent standards. If not its cool.
To my second question, I am aware that we are US nationals, I get it. Are there any provisions, such as NDAA that could be implemented removing our constitutional protections, currently in place? If so would it be the same group as in question 1?
Thanks for the rant HSF, I’m with you on this, the fact that we paid such an outrageous sum to these two psycho’s is what jumped off the page at me. WTF! And to think their original bill was another $100 mil above what they ultimately got paid, unbelievable. Is that the going rate the government needs to pay to keep their hands clean, to provide a scapegoat to throw under the bus down the road, to provide a means of plausible deniability to their knowledge of what was going on because it was being done by ‘outside contractors.” I guess they were right about one thing, people would be getting pissed off after reading the report. Guilty! I’m pissed!
There are bad motherfuckers that want to do bad shit, no doubt, I dont give a fuck about them, torture the fuckin shit out of em, for days. Lets just be absolutely sure we dont become them or support those that do. For much of our history, America has been the class of the planet, since WWII we have spent most of that accumulated capital. We need to reinvest in class and lead the World as stewards of Liberty, not as spoiled, degenerate, tryannical fascist’s consumed by lust for control and wealth.
“Can you tell me who in that massive (USG) organization lists foreign nationals as: Illegal Enemy Combatants, and if there are any pertinent standards.”
—-ottomatik
Confirmed and properly Identified members of al Qaeda captured on the battlefield are perforce illegal enemy combatants. Information on those detainees usually comes from the CIA and/or military intelligence organizations. Sometimes it comes from the detainees themselves (they admit they’re members of al Qaeda).
Answer to second question forthcoming.
The entire “terrorism requires torture” meme makes perfect sense IF you realize the larger picture. The neo-cons want a war and torture has inflamed the sandbox and gives the mil/ind complex more profits. They got their “Pearl Harbor” with 911 and it’s been downhill ever since for mankind. To these people the plan is unfolding exactly as planned.
I’m looking forward to the day when names like Bush, Wolfowitz, Feith, Cheney, Rice, Powell, etc etc are viewed as horrific traitors that betrayed the public trust.
News headlines today suggest that the US embassy’s and military bases are preparing for violence directed towards US citizens in foreign countries as a result of this congressional report on torture being made public.
How come you never hear about other countries preparing for violence against their citizens in this country every time a US citizen is shot or gets his/her head loped off abroad?
Breaking news. (really)
The FBI just made an announcement that the USA may suffer terrorist attacks on “the homeland” as a result of the CIA report.
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
The gooberment depends on it.
Stuck, that isn’t Breaking News…
…it is their Christmas wish.
Please Lord, please, allow someone to do something stupid so that we can protect the shit out of your sheep.
Please.
I want to kick the FBI and CIA in the fuck.
“Are there any provisions, such as NDAA that could be implemented removing our constitutional protections, currently in place?”
—-ottomatik @ SSS
No, no, and no. That includes the NDAA. There are plenty of misinformed people, such as TE and Stucky, and organizations, such as the ACLU, who THINK that the NDAA gives the president this authority. They are wrong. The NDAA does no such thing.
Much of the NDAA controversy stems from the 2001 congressional “Authorization for Use of Military Force” (AUMF) granted to President Bush after the 9/11 attacks. The House and Senate vote on the AUMF was a resounding 534-1. Ron Paul voted FOR the AUMF, which was basically a declaration of war against al Qaeda and the Taliban. Barbara Lee of California, a former member of the Communist Party, was the sole nay vote.
Some of the wording in the AUMF has been incorporated in the NDAA, and that’s the problem. It requires clarification, yes. But no way, no how does it authorize the president to just willy-nilly ignore the Constitution with regard to arrest and detention of U.S. citizens involved in suspected terrorist activities.
@ TE, who asked, “You still believe that shit?” in response to my statement, “We’re U.S. citizens. While we can be correctly identified and investigated as members of al Qaeda, we still retain all of the protections of the Constitution.”
Yes, I do.
They are the enemy . They would cut your throats from ear to ear if given the chance. I hope the CIA gets information anyway they can.Kill them overseas before they kill here .For me it’s easy .Torture them until their eyeballs pop in their heads if that’s what it takes to stop another attack.
SSS- Thanks for the input, I am on the fence, concerning this matter. There exists a very delicate boundary for Liberty to exist in. I am sure there are all types in the CIA, I am equally sure we live in a dangerous world. Informed discussion and erring towards skepticism seems prudent when discussing an entity(CIA) that has so much power and so little transparency.
If it is primarily the Pentagon that arbitrates the Illegal Enemy Combatant designation, it makes me feel a little better. I believe there is more inclusion, respect and transparency in the US Military, making it inherently more democratic than the CIA. Hence, it is easier to believe many of these actions are genuinely in the interest of protecting America vs. black ops expanding Cartel territory, subjugating peoples for various forms of financial repression, under orders. Delicate boundary indeed, always moving. Im sure there were both. Thanks again for the response.
@ ottomatik
You attribute far too much “power” to the CIA, as do many (most?) people. As for your stated reason that the CIA “has so little transparency,” I’m at a loss for words. The CIA’s sanctioned mission is foreign espionage. Spy stuff. Subversion. Propaganda. And any other dangerous, highly classified and sometimes foolish task dropped in its lap by the president. Transparency is not on the agenda, for obvious reasons.
Who and how are decisions made to kill US citizens engaged in terrorism? They do that, you know. And if they can do that, where is the line? Right now, the line is that the person is overseas and out of reach, but no public evidence is given.
How is that possible?
What say you, SSS? Where is the Constitution when a US citizen can be killed without trial nor public evidence? It is a thing of the past, is where. Presidents are being allowed to do anything they so desire – over-ride laws, kill US citizens, torture people without evidence (I do not give a shit about the legalities of that – it is wrong), enter into war without congressional approval.
For fuck sake, barely anything remains of the Constitution.
It is all over red rover.
Readiness Exercise 1984- REX84
SSS- Their need for secrecy is not lost on me, or our need for them for that matter. That said, I am sure you understand that condition requires us to exercise diligence and skepticism when monitoring their activities,as they(CIA) act in our names.
SSS-“You attribute far too much “power” to the CIA, as do many (most?) people.” I am well aware that information is power, period. The main scope of the CIA’s duty is to acquire information, no? So it could be successfully stated the CIA’s main scope is to acquire power. What they do with that information/power once acquired is what I and others are concerned with. Is the Agency being used as designed; to further the ideals of this Republic or does it serve some unbeknownst agenda/entities hidden by its necessary secrecy. Always a danger given its construct.
@bb, if “they” are the “enemy,” yet “we” are the ones picking people up in the dead of night and transporting them to unknown areas to be tortured, then what the hell are we?
And whom is going to protect us from protectors like that?
@SSS, re Constitutional. I’m sorry that you refuse to face the real facts, but as you state you won’t be around too many more years to truly live with the horror of what we are now. But those you love will.
I still don’t understand what part of the Constitution says the government has the right to take my stuff, incarcerate me, or forcibly inject toxins into my body when I have not only been convicted of NO crime, but not even charged?
I get it now. Being killed for depriving the state of $5 is Constitutional. Having your children placed in foster care because you refuse to follow one doctor/hospital orders is Constitutional. Being locked up indefinitely without charges, lawyers or even being able to call and tell your kids/spouse/parents goodbye is too. And, of course, driving down the road with cash in my pocket it is the Constitutional response to take it from me and force me to prove that the money was mine and not obtained illegally. And finally, keeping every keystroke I’ve ever made, every phone call, web search, text, forever and ever in a data center I pay for too, is completely Constitutional.
I just got my copy out and by god, right there at the bottom was a BIG asterisk*
*can be rescinded or paused anytime the government determines it is in its best interests.
Damn, and here I spent my entire life believing the Constitution was written for times like these, not in spite of them with a mind to chuck it.
How silly of me.
TE …. your comment at 2:56 pm is irrational and paranoid, not to mention riddled with false generalities. Further,
TE asked, “You still believe that shit?” in response to my statement, “We’re U.S. citizens. While we can be correctly identified and investigated as members of al Qaeda, we still retain all of the protections of the Constitution.” To which I replied “Yes, I do.”
I can see my comments in this thread have not been warmly embraced. If you have lost faith in the protections of individual liberty provided to you by the U.S. Constitution, then that’s YOUR problem, not mine. I have not crossed that line because I understand the law, even as a lay citizen untrained in constitutional law.
Why? Because I have taken the time and effort to know what the fuck I’m talking about. I cite facts and case law. My critics? Pffft. Nothing. Opinions aka “I think.” Bottom line: kiss my rosy, red ass.
“TE …. your comment at 2:56 pm is irrational and paranoid, not to mention riddled with false generalities.”
I’ve been in lockstep with TE these past 2 days, I think her comment above is inspired.
Meanwhile, SSS pulls everybody’s chain with a wonderful imitation of Johnny Carson.
SSS – what part of the Constitution allows the president to declare war unilaterally?
What part allows him to change laws unilaterally (delaying Obamacare, immigration amnesty to name two)?
What part allows him to order the death of US citizens without trial or public presentation of evidence?
What part allows money to be printed?
What part allows gun control of any kind?
Where does the Constitution say you can be searched within fifty miles of the border without reasonable cause?
I believe in the ideals of the Constitution. But no way in hell is the Constitution currently fully in force.
If the president can order the death of a US citizen, without trial, and without disclosure of any evidence, there are no protections that US citizens can count upon.
It s amazing you still believe you can count on Constitutional protections given all evidence that many guaranteed protections no longer exist.
“If the president can order the death of a US citizen, without trial, and without disclosure of any evidence, there are no protections that US citizens can count upon.”
—-llpoh
I’ve had enough from the unwashed masses on this site.
I presume you are talking about Anwar al-Alaki, born in New Mexico and killed in a drone strike in Yemen. If so, defend him, Redskin, and I am purposely using that word to inflame you. Get pissed. Make your case. I will destroy your storyline.
If you are referring to someone else, let me know. I’ll still destroy your argument.
Yep, that is him. No storyline. Obama ordered his death. Four years after the order, some details of the order were released.
A US citizen was sentenced to death without trial or presentation of evidence. I am reasonably sure the Constitution provides those protections.
Obliterate away, spydog.
Al-Alaki may well have been an evil sumbitch. But fact is we will never know as there was no trial, as guaranteed under the Constitution and Sixth amendment.
The fact they could not catch him is neither here nor there. They did not order his arrest, but his death. He was never even indicted for a crime.
The govt used international law to justify their actions, as US law would not permit it. Imagine that.
US District court found that Al-Awlaki had plausibly been denied constitutional due process, but that there are no remedies under law for such denial, so the lawsuit brought was dismissed.
So basically, the courts found it is plausible his constitutional rights were violated, but tough shit.
Isn’t that just great. ” Sure, we have violated your rights. Nothing you can do about it. ” What a surprise.
I note SSS ignored all the other Constitutional violations I listed. I am sure I can think of more.
Seizure of property without trial seems like another example to me.
I think they’re using the Otter defense
SSS thinks the CIA is only for foreign spy missions…that’s really rich. SSS has been reading too many Ian Flemming books.
SSS the mangy cur hides with tail between his legs. What a surprise.
Cartoon that should be on SSS’s mirror;
[img
[/img]
In case it doesn’t show —– “We have met the enemy and he is us”