rly
go find an instance where the incoming Pres went after the preceding Pres.
smh.
Madison and Jefferson went after each other. Jackson spent his first year in office ting all over his predecessors administration and dismantling it. Coolidge went after Harding. Ted Roosevelt and Taft went after each other following their schism. That's just off the top of my head.
What values are you referring to? What is your referrence point?
The author is on the benghazi investigating panel. Think he needs to get back to that.
8th amendment, Geneva Convention, the Reagan era anti-torture thing. WWII prosecution of war crimes. Points of law all over the place if you really care so much.
We still criticize others for doing it, btw.
Obama has normalized the policies of the Bush admin, across the board. And with regards to accepting/endorsing torture, American has become a nation of cowards. Is there any other country as afraid as we are? So easily manipulated?
Speaking of the deterioration of values.
Sen Feinstein "The Report Exposes Brutality That Stands In Stark Contrast To Our Values As A Nation
Echo in here?
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/04/1...rrogation.htmlA still-secret Senate Intelligence Committee report calls into question the legal foundation of the CIA’s use of waterboarding and other harsh interrogation techniques on suspected terrorists, a finding that challenges the key defense on which the agency and the Bush administration relied in arguing that the methods didn’t cons ute torture.
The report also found that the spy agency failed to keep an accurate account of the number of individuals it held, and that it issued erroneous claims about how many it detained and subjected to the controversial interrogation methods. The CIA has said that about 30 detainees underwent the so-called enhanced interrogation techniques.
The CIA’s claim “is BS,” said a former U.S. official familiar with evidence underpinning the report, who asked not to be identified because the matter is still classified. “They are trying to minimize the damage. They are trying to say it was a very targeted program, but that’s not the case.”
The findings are among the report’s 20 main conclusions. Taken together, they paint a picture of an intelligence agency that seemed intent on evading or misleading nearly all of its oversight mechanisms throughout the program, which was launched under the Bush administration after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and ran until 2006.
Some of the report’s other conclusions, which were obtained by McClatchy, include:
_ The CIA used interrogation methods that weren’t approved by the Justice Department or CIA headquarters.
_ The agency impeded effective White House oversight and decision-making regarding the program.
_ The CIA actively evaded or impeded congressional oversight of the program.
_ The agency hindered oversight of the program by its own Inspector General’s Office.
sameThe CIA also failed to keep track of the number of individuals it captured under the program, the Senate report concluded. Moreover, it said, the agency held people who didn’t meet the legal standard for detention. The report puts that number at 26, McClatchy has learned.
“The CIA did not conduct a comprehensive or accurate accounting of the number of individuals it detained and held individuals who did not meet the legal standard for detention,” it found. “The CIA’s claims about the number of detainees held and subjected to its enhanced interrogation techniques were inaccurate.”
“The CIA’s records were hazy, inconsistent and at times inaccurate,” said the former U.S. official.
The Senate report, however, concluded that the Justice Department’s legal analyses were based on flawed information provided by the CIA, which prevented a proper evaluation of the program’s legality.
“The CIA repeatedly provided inaccurate information to the Department of Justice, impeding a proper legal analysis of the CIA’s Detention and Interrogation Program,” the report found.
Several human rights experts said the conclusion called into question the program’s legal foundations.
“If the CIA fundamentally misrepresented what it was doing and that was what led (Justice Department) lawyers to conclude that the conduct was legal, then the legal conclusions themselves were inaccurate,” said Andrea Prasow, senior national security counsel for Human Rights Watch. “The lawyers making those assessments were relying on the facts that were laid before them.”
“This just reinforces the view that everyone who has said the torture program was legal has been selling a bill of goods and it’s time to revisit the entire conventional wisdom being pushed by those who support enhanced interrogation that this program was safe, humane and lawful,” said Raha Wala, a lawyer with the Law and Security Program of Human Rights First.
Among other findings, the report said that CIA personnel used interrogation methods that weren’t approved by the Justice Department or their headquarters.
CIA, a govt unto itself, does what it wants, and civilian/political/legal control.
we'll see about that
CIA, a govt unto itself, does what it wants, and civilian/political/legal control.
three in fact, ...murder, rape and torture...
Senate torture report to be released tomorrow:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/impen...ry?id=27432670U.S. embassies around the world are bracing for a potentially explosive report about to be released that details what the CIA did to terror suspects in the days after the Sept. 11 terror attacks, and the fear is that its release could threaten American lives.
The report, due to be released Tuesday by the Senate, is described as shocking in its very graphic descriptions of secret interrogations, including some details that have never been heard before.
All U.S. facilities around the world are being urged to review security and brace for the reaction, with concern particularly high in areas where there are hot spots, in the Middle East and North Africa.
overstated, but something like that might be true:
http://harvardnsj.org/wp-content/upl...nnon-Final.pdf
http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2014/...ish-today-259/Tomorrow, we may find out what the CIA was saying to itself as it committed war crimes around the world with total impunity. But we won’t get images. The best images you’ll get from GTMO are from Google Earth. But we can still get images of the force-feeding done to other prisoners at the Cuban gulag. We have videos. They have been used in court. And the Pentagon – surprise! – is dead set against releasing them. Why? For the same reason the CIA doesn’t want the torture report to be published. It will “inflame world opinion”. Murtaza Hussein explains:
In a seven page affidavit made public last week and first reported by the Miami Herald’s Carol Rosenberg, [U.S. Navy Rear Admiral Sinclair] Harris explained the reasoning for keeping the videos out of public view:
“While the videos at issue…do not in my opinion depict any improper treatment of the detainees, but rather the lawful, humane and appropriate interaction between guards and detainees, persons and en ies hostile to the United States and its detention of enemy belligerents at Guantánamo Bay are likely to think otherwise.”
To put Harris’s statement another way, the force-feeding videos are at once humane and appropriate, and yet also so visually appalling that people around the world would be enraged if allowed to view them.
Yes, that’s about right. And Rodriguez both argues that the waterboarding of terror suspects was both humane and utterly in line with civilized norms … but for some inexplicable reason he destroyed the evidence anyway. My view is that it should not matter what the rest of the world thinks, when it comes to the internal workings of American democracy. The American people have a right to know what is being done in their name on highly controversial and contested questions. If the CIA and Pentagon have nothing to hide, they have nothing to fear. I think they’re familiar with that line of argument, don’t you?
Obama Administration and G.O.P. Clash Over Torture Report
the Obama administration and its Republican critics clashed on Monday over the wisdom of making it public, and the risk that it will set off a backlash overseas.
While the United States has put diplomatic facilities and military bases on alert for heightened security risks, administration officials said they do not expect the report — or rather the declassified executive summary of it that will be released Tuesday — to ignite the kind of violence that killed four Americans at a diplomatic outpost in Benghazi, Libya, in 2012. Such violent reprisals, they said, tend to be fueled more by perceived attacks against Islam as a religion than by violence against individual Muslims.
But some leading Republican lawmakers have warned against releasing the report, saying that domestic and foreign intelligence reports indicate that a detailed account of the brutal interrogation methods used by the C.I.A. during the George W. Bush administration could incite unrest and violence, even resulting in the deaths of Americans.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/09/us...s&emc=rss&_r=0
Nasty stuff in there, no doubt, if Abu Ghraib was any indicator, but Repugs and CIA are nasty, stinking assholes.
Repugs: "The USA doesn't torture"
newsflash: torturing foreign captives at Gitmo endangers Americans everywhere
the Big Picture that Repugs count on, reliably, Americans being too stupid and ignorant to know,remember: head/BigOil invading Iraq for oil and destabilizing the Middle East cost $3T still paid, wasted 5000+ US military lives, 100Ks of mentally, physically maimed US military.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 12-10-2014 at 10:52 AM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
