No Associated Press content was harmed in the writing of this post

Last week Andy McCarthy prompted the latest change in my understanding in how the right thinks about torture. Initially I believed they were unwilling to accept their leaders were engaging in it, and that if it turned out they were they would recoil as sharply as the rest of us. That changed when I read a Los Angeles Times piece by Jonah Goldberg that basically stipulated we tortured but was fine with it anyway. It may have been this one, where he writes:

the meatier part of the argument is in the more nuanced area of "coercive measures," "stress positions" and what one unnamed official once described to the Wall Street Journal as "a little bit of smacky-face." [Since elaborated as "wrapp[ing] a collar around [a detainee's] neck and smash[ing] him over and over against a wall."]...The way [Andrew] Sullivan and those who agree with him see it, torture is torture is torture -- and torture is always wrong, even when defined as intimidation and "smacky-face." "Not in my name" is their rallying cry, often with the sort of self-righteousness that suggests that those who disagree must admire cruelty.

Reading that, it became clear that Bush's supporters were willing to uncritically accept the administration's positions. Techniques were given cute euphemisms (see also) and those who objected to it on principle were dismissed as moral divas. Moreover, their reflexive support meant ignoring torture's history. Engaging in practices with a gruesome past or lifting terminology from the Gestapo was never examined. Read more…

[cross posted at NPR Check] Read more…

Je répète, re: "...Pelosi today said her top security adviser was part of a briefing in February 2003 in which he learned interrogators were waterboarding terrorists."

It's handy that those who were waterboarded are "terrorists," not "accused/suspected/purported" terrorists, etc. Illegal, inhuman, whatever -- a technique that is magically used only on guilty people is pretty impressive.

Arthur finds that Nancy's Senate counterpart is similarly aware of waterboarding's inerrant targeting. C'mon, if they weren't guilty of terrorism, why would they have been waterboarded? Case closed!

Also, it seems that Harry has a rather curious concept of how ordinary rendition works....

[cross posted at NPR Check]

On Monday's ME, Tom Bowman and Renee Montagne assess the Obama War switch of commanders in Afghanistan from General McKiernan to General McChrystal and - boy - is Bowman juiced by McChrystal's Green Beret credentials. Read more…

No Associated Press content was harmed in the writing of this post

This week may have foreshadowed the kind of twists and turns we can look forward to as more information about the US torture program becomes public. Jeff Kaye took note of a Washington Times story about how Jonathan Fredman, the top CIA lawyer for the agency's interrogation program, disputes the record of an October 2002 interrogation meeting. According to the minutes this is where Fredman uttered the immortal words about interrogation, "If the detainee dies you're doing it wrong." It seems he or an ally does not wish for that to be the lasting impression of him because the Times article rather remarkably disputes the notes themselves.

Meeting notes seem to me to be fairly uncontroversial things. It certainly is rare for contemporaneous notes of one to spark debate. The usual procedure is basically: Have someone scribble down the main points people are making during the meeting, then afterwards type them up and send them out. Maybe something needs to be sharpened or modified in some way, but according to the Times "Mr. Fredman says the writer of the 2002 memo misconstrued enough of his points that the memo is unreliable." That gets my antenna up. While I suppose it is possible for someone to get huge swaths of a meeting fundamentally wrong it does not seem very likely. It sounds more like a somewhat desperate and implausible attempt to rewrite history.

Fredman's efforts to reshape an already-settling record is not what really interested me in Kaye's post, though. It was his description of how the Army Field Manual (AFM) was lurking below the surface of the torture debate and will sooner or later emerge as yet another large knot to untangle. I had been under the impression that the military had a much stricter standard for interrogations, and once president Obama put the CIA under the AFM we had at least ensured torture would not be an issue going forward. It will not be quite so simple. Kaye pointed out in another post that in September 2006 Donald Rumsfeld ordered the overhaul of the AFM. The revised edition contained a section, Appendix M, which may have been initially intended to be classified. (Given what it contains this is yet another reason to be extremely skeptical of classification claims, for national security or other reasons.) It authorizes a set of interrogation procedures that go by the euphemism Separation. Kaye analyzes them, then arrives at the following commonsense formulation: "The inclusion of a procedure that so obviously needs medical monitoring should be a red flag that it violates basic humane treatment." Read more…

No Associated Press content was harmed in the writing of this post

Now that we are seeing more and more details about the Bush administration's torture program, it is forcing those in favor of it do defend in greater detail. Right wing blogs have been the lustiest advocates. Even someone like A.J. Strata who in his own words has "left the conservative fevered swamps" can write of the left: "Their base is adamant that there be public witch hunts against the Bush administration for being aggressive in the war on terror, and for inflicting a faked drowning reaction in established mass murderers tied to 9-11." The terminology is fascinating - investigations are witch hunts, the gutting of habeas corpus is being aggressive, waterboarding is fake drowning (sounds more like a girl at the beach trying to get a lifeguard's attention), and Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Rahim Nashiri have been transmuted through some heretofore unknown Terrorism Philosophers Stone from low level al Qaida functionaries - or potentially even less (via) - into key architects of 9/11. From there, the story goes, these people gave up valuable intelligence. The subtext: They had it coming. Read more…

When you get mildew, it's never just one plant. Whatever rotted Broder's sensibility and conscience infests everything. Take a look at this front page teaser today from Pravda on the Potomac:

It's all here, isn't it? All wrapped up in one little compact package. Read more…

There is nothing, *nothing* that is "funny" nor "entertaining" nor easily dismissed, about the act of torture. Ever.

This is not hard for civilized people to understand. And religious people, too. Their sacred texts agree. And decent atheists, and humanists, and people who love children, or care for the weak and helpless. Or have been such.

I am likely too "serious" for this business, but I feel all my Divinity School training coming forth, as well as my personal experience as an abuse survivor. Please, stop the jokes and foolish dismissals of the American, and indeed all, record of "approved" methods of torture. As they say, 'you don't know it's not funny until it happens to you." Just stop it. And stop excusing it.

This extends not only to the current and past administrations, but all those who would make a joke of child-rape, or electrocution, or any of the other humiliations and tortures of those who are the subject of current discussion, regardless of how well they suit the purpose of casual snarking. It's disgusting. Inhumane. And most of all, something that will rebound ten-fold upon those who treat it casually, if that is the only thing that motivates. Yes, it can happen to you. And I promise you, you won't laugh when it does.

Since both the White House and Congress no longer consider prosecuting torture as a crime, it is safe to assume that we can begin to legally use these methods as legitimate tools to lobby our Congress and White House for the real changes we expect from our government. These methods that I document will be equally applicable to those who lobby against the interests of average American citizen on these issues.

Congressionally Approved Method of Lobbying #2, the method for lobbying Congressional members and White House administration officials that push for hate based and bigoted legislation against the LGBT community and Marriage Equality will be placed below the fold because even the edited image is probably NSFW: Read more…

Since both the White House and Congress no longer consider prosecuting torture as a crime, it is safe to assume that we can begin to legally use these methods as legitimate tools to lobby our Congress and White House for the real changes we expect from our government. These methods that I document will be equally applicable to those who lobby against the interests of average American citizen on these issues.

Congressionally Approved Method of Lobbying #1

Method for lobbying Congressional members and White House administration officials that push for funding of energy non-solutions such as the proven mythical "clean coal":

The symbolism of turning their mythical clean energy into a tool for lobbying for real clean energy solutions ought to shock them into doing the right thing. Read more…

Better late than never:

These memos make it clear that Mr. Bybee is unfit for a job that requires legal judgment and a respect for the Constitution. Congress should impeach him. And if the administration will not conduct a thorough investigation of these issues, then Congress has a constitutional duty to hold the executive branch accountable. If that means putting Donald Rumsfeld and Alberto Gonzales on the stand, even Dick Cheney, we are sure Americans can handle it. Read more…

That is a fact. Now, you may ask "why is this important?"

Leading up to a 2004 visit to Vancouver, Canada, lawyers there sought to have him charged for his criminal behavior resulting in a court decision that reflected the Canadian Attorney General's view that Bush could not be brought up on torture charges at that time because he had diplomatic immunity:

“These charges were properly laid and backed up by powerful evidence. The government didn’t deny that evidence because it couldn’t deny it. Diplomatic immunity is purely procedural. It doesn’t affect the validity of the charges, only whether they can be proceeded with, for the time being, in a foreign court, in this case a Canadian court. Even if Bush has immunity, it’s only temporary and it won’t shield him or anyone in his administration from Canadian law, or any other law, when they leave office. That the Canadian government would try to hush this up by hiding Bush behind diplomatic immunity was only to be expected. Paul Martin invited Bush here to ingratiate himself with the President, despite the President’s crimes against our laws and against international law, despite even his inadmissibility as a war criminal under Canada’s immigration laws – above all, despite the unending human disaster the President’s ‘war of choice’ has brought to the people of Iraq.”

Cut back to 2009, as Bush makes plans to deliver a speech in Calgary, Canada, and this time? Read more…

[I'm reposting and stickying this post from 12/05/2006, because nobody should think that Gitmo is the whole of America's problem with torture and executive lawlessness. The entire cancer of torture and executive lawlessness needs to be cut out. That's what "moving forward" means. See Jeralyn today on Ghost Air, which had twenty six planes. That's a lot of prisoners. Where are they? --lambert]

Let's do some arithmetic on how many prisoners Bush is holding in his gulags.

1. We know that there are thousands of prisoners (estimates range from 7,000 to 35,000).
2. Gitmo holds only 500.
3. So, where are the missing thousands? The only alternatives I can think of:
1. They've been released
2. They're still in jail
   
3. They've been disappeared.

Barring divine intervention, the bodies of the missing thousands occupy time and space in this world. Where are they?

Which door would you choose? (a), released? (b), still in jail? Or (c), disappeared? Read more…

Via TFT:
Obsidian Wings:

I'm not sure it tells anything we don't already know (read, e.g., The Dark Side). But the Levin-run Senate Armed Services Committee report on detainee abuse is now out (pdf exec summary). And it deserves some press attention. Read more…

Will Obama Buy Torture-Lite?

You’ve got to hand it to them. Torture aficionados at the White House and CIA have conned key congressional leaders into insisting not only that torture-lite would be a swell idea, but advocating that the overseers of torture be kept on.

From change-you-can-believe-in, we seem to be slipping back to fear-you-can-trade-on.

It is not just Obama, or even the Intelligence Committees, it is the entire palace of moral bankruptcy that makes this possible.

Obama Team Tilts Toward Gates

Another sign that Obama may be close to retaining Gates has been the lack of chatter from transition officials about alternative candidates

Robert Gates; bad as Rumsfeld?,
The Danger of Keeping Robert Gates

Obviously there are no plans to hold torturers accountable and no plans to tell the truth about what happened. Read more…

And how does that policy enhance our "moral standing," if any, in the world? AP:

Barack Obama's incoming administration is unlikely to bring criminal charges against government workers who authorized or used harsh interrogation techniques [torture] during the George W. Bush presidency. Obama, who has criticized the use of torture, is being urged by some constitutional scholars and humans rights groups to investigate possible war crimes by the Bush administration.

But two Obama advisers said there's little — if any — chance that the incoming president's Justice Department will go after anyone involved in authorizing or carrying out interrogations that provoked worldwide outrage.

The advisers spoke on condition of anonymity because the plans are still tentative. A spokesman for Obama's transition team did not respond to requests for comment Monday.

Chnage! Read more…

It truly sickens me the way Republicans can spend a lifetime of running our country into the ground, go on Sunday morning TV, make a few nice sounds and presto, he's cabinet material.

The latest from Steve Clemons: Chuck Hagel Will Help Obama Find his "Inner Nixon".

Clemons says this like it was a good thing. Yeah, the secret bombing of Cambodia, the destruction of Chilean democracy, and so many other things were such a good idea and worked out so well for our country. Read more…

[Welcome, Crooks and Liars readers!]

Reuters:

The Polish prosecutor's office is investigating allegations that there was a CIA prison in Poland where al Qaeda suspects were questioned and guards might have used methods close to torture, the prime minister's top adviser said on Friday.

I suppose this is happening now because the Bush administration has, er, disposed of the prisoners? Because the birds have all flown? One more little problem cleaned up before the perps enter the dreaded private sector? Read more…

I elevated this from a comment in Vastleft's thread here.

Irresponsible to speculate? NO! It would be irresponsible not to! Something calling itself a “Jay McDonough” doing something he calls “will write about politics from a progressive perspective”, at something called “Progressive Politics Examiner” (which also has something called a "British Music Examiner" (wow, check it!) writes this: Read more…

(hat tip to Athenae at First Draft)

Please take a moment to remember Irene Sendler.
What she did the last time nations with the kind of economic and political power as ours chose to behave as filthily as ours saved the lives of countless children; she paid a terrible price for her kindness, as she was tortured upon capture by the German 'conquerors' of Poland.

In this Feb. 21, 2008, file photo, Chief Ashkenazi Rabbi of Israel Yona Metzger, left, speaks with Holocaust hero Irena Sendler, right, during a meeting in Warsaw, Poland. The family of Polish social worker Sendler, credited with rescuing 2,500 Jewish children from the Nazis during the Holocaust, says she has died. Sendler's daughter, Janina Zgrzembska, says her 98-year-old mother died Monday, May 12, 2008, morning in a Warsaw hospital. Sendler organized the rescue of Jewish children from the Warsaw Ghetto during Nazi Germany's brutal World War II occupation. (AP Photo/Alik Keplicz)

May the world be kinder to today's Read more…

From The Guardian: "Senior [Bush] officials bypassed army chief to introduce interrogation methods."

America's most senior general was "hoodwinked" by top Bush administration officials determined to push through aggressive interrogation techniques of terror suspects held at Guantánamo Bay, leading to the US military abandoning its age-old ban on the cruel and inhumane treatment of prisoners... Read more…

Torture Architect John Yoo Hypocritically Blasts Democratic Party For Violating Constitution’s Intent

Via the indispensable Avedon Carol.

Lynndie England, of Abu Ghraib fame, gives a lengthy interview in the German magazine Stern. England was sentenced to three years in prison for her part in the deeds there. She served 521 days and is now out on parole. How's life for her?

"(She sighs) Oh, it's just little things going wrong. I'm just trying to get by. Trying to find a job, trying to find a house. It's been harder than I expected. I went to a couple of interviews, and I thought they went great. I wrote dozens of applications. Nothing came of it. I put in at Wal-Mart, at Staples. I'd do any job. But I never heard from them." Read more…

Frank Luntz-isms live on in the Bush White House.

From today's Presidential Radio Address:

Where do we start? Read more…