Author
|
Topic: US Justice; These Interesting Times (Read 2403 times) |
|
MoEnzyme
Acolyte
Gender: 
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 4.80
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
 
|
 |
US Justice; These Interesting Times
« on: 2009-04-05 20:58:04 » |
 |
I have already made some of my general reservations about Obama known. Although he has inherited a politically purged justice department, barely competant if at all after being stripped of all non-neo-con anti-torture voices, his efforts at reform have been somewhat less than instantaneous. Holdover voices of corruption remain alive even as the front office has been madeover. Eric Holder seems to finally hold the helm on some issues - CA medical MJ for example, even as others remain intransigent - Gov't secrets for example. Though one may imagine some better miracle worker, none have stepped up to fill the void; issue a challenge; or otherwise make him/herself known.
From my few hours of Fox News exposure, it seems Obama can do nothing right, from my few hours of non-US sources he is a great improvement even as some urge caution, and from my domestic liberal sources he has already sold out to the other side even if there is no better ally available. And yet even in the clusterfuck of agitated media personalities somehow Obama manages ever higher domestic and otherwise approval ratings whenever the public offer their unmediated opinion. This guy is almost beyond teflon. The more he gets attacked the better he looks. And while it might not be the Disney marketing strategy, for politics it currently seems to work wonderfully.
Perhaps it may be simply because compared to the recent political leadership, he really does look great. Perhaps not something we should feel proud of, or perhaps it is, depending on which way you spin. In any case, despite right wing wacko rehabilitation programs to the contrary, GWB is likely gonna smell like shit one way or another. His and Cheney's Recent public confessions to war crimes (in Re:torture) don't help W one bit. Indeed I think there are already several indictment/arrest warrants floating around the international community for them.
In the long run, I think the GWB administration, in particular how Obama chooses to remedy its unconstitutional excesses and prosecute its war crimes, will ultimately determine much of Obama's own legacy. If he can find a way to effectively deal with this legacy, even if it ultimately must come through mercy when justice fails, the possibilities for redemption and transcendence remain manifold. If instead they try to sweep it all under the rug, it shall finally prove a legacy of mediocrity and failure. I don't expect this problem to solve itself in less than the magic 100 days.
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
MoEnzyme
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 4.80
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
|
|
Re:US Justice; These Interesting Times
« Reply #1 on: 2009-04-06 05:38:03 » |
|
http://www.alternet.org/rights/135032/eric_holder_to_federal_prosecutors%3A_don%27t_play_politics_with_the_law/?page=entire
Eric Holder to Federal Prosecutors: Don't Play Politics with the Law
By John W. Dean, Find Law. Posted April 6, 2009.
Holder has placed all federal prosecutors on notice that his Justice Department will play by the rules.
In a striking and decisive move, Attorney General Eric Holder has dismissed the indictment that had resulted in the conviction of former Republican U.S. Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska. As Holder explained, he made the surprising announcement of the dismissal after he discovered further evidence of prosecutorial misconduct, and determined that in the interests of justice, he must seek to have the indictment voided and the case dismissed.
If the situation was indeed as bad as Holder has suggested, it seems that he did the right thing. Yet it is the judge in the case, Judge Emmett Sullivan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, who deserves credit for first bringing what appears to have been serious prosecutorial misconduct to light.
Judge Sullivan's Rulings in the Stevens Case Must Have Been the Flare that Caught Holder's Attention
Senator Stevens was tried and convicted by a jury in Judge Sullivan's courtroom. Sullivan had earlier reprimanded the federal prosecutors for their handling of the case, and at a later point, had even held them in contempt of court for ignoring his order. Thus, when Holder arrived as Attorney General at the Obama Department of Justice, he found that several of his senior prosecutors in the Public Integrity Section of the Criminal Division had outstanding contempt citations pending against them.
Clearly, Eric Holder, who had started his own career as a prosecutor in the Public Integrity Section, did not take this situation lightly. Holder had once served on the District of Columbia trial court bench with Emmett Sullivan, and he knew that Judge Sullivan was a solid, if not model, judge. Holder understood that it was extraordinary that Judge Sullivan had taken the virtually-unheard-of action of holding top Justice Department attorneys in contempt for their behavior. Uncharacteristically, too, Judge Sullivan had found it necessary to repeatedly lambaste the government for misconduct.
For example, Judge Sullivan had called the prosecutors' failure to disclose essential information about evidence that they had already presented to the jury "disturbing." Indeed, he found the nondisclosure serious enough that he struck the evidence and told the members of the jury that they should not consider it. Moreover, outside the jury's presence, Judge Sullivan struck other evidence, and accused the government of presenting that evidence despite knowing that it consisted of lies.
An FBI Agent's Complaint Also Drew Attention to Problems with the Stevens Conviction
Following Stevens's October conviction, in late December 2008, one of the Alaska-based FBI agents who had been involved in the case filed a formal complaint with the Justice Department (a procedure he followed to give himself whistleblower status and job protection). In his complaint, he charged that a fellow FBI agent along with the prosecutors contrived to improperly conceal evidence from the court and the defense.
The allegations included claims that a female agent on the case had had an improper relationship with the government's star witness, and that the prosecutors had, in essence, lied to Judge Sullivan in explaining some of their actions during the trial. Judge Sullivan has published a redacted version of the complaint, which sets forth "serious violations of policy, rules, and procedures as well as possible criminal violations." This complaint resulted in Stevens's attorneys' filing another motion for a mistrial. That motion was pending when Attorney General Holder announced his actions.
But it got even worse.
A Further Contempt Holding From Judge Sullivan Ensued
At another post-conviction hearing, on February 13, 2009, Judge Sullivan held four Justice Department attorneys in contempt for defying his order and failing to provide thirty-three documents related to post-trial motions. The contempt holding was directed at the head of the Public Integrity Section, William Welch; his deputy and the lead prosecutor in the case against Stevens, Brenda Morris; the head of the Criminal Division's Appellate Section, Patricia Steler; and a trial attorney who had just joined the team (and because he had no true responsibility was quickly excused from the contempt citation), Kevin Driscoll.
At the time, Judge Sullivan said he would not issue sanctions for their contempt until the conclusion of the case. The matter of those sanctions is still pending, and may be addressed on April 7, 2009, when Judge Sullivan hears the government's motion to dismiss the case.
In any case, these prosecutors' actions would have been inappropriate. In a high- profile case like this one, which brought down the longest-serving Republican member of the U.S. Senate in a year when he was up for reelection, these actions went far beyond mere incompetence. These are not people who can be entrusted with the power to prosecute.
Judge Sullivan, whom many Washington, DC lawyers consider to be one of the best on the federal bench, was sending signal after signal to warn the Bush Department of Justice that something was very amiss. The Bush Administration ignored the warnings but thankfully, the Obama Administration did not.
The Standards Federal Prosecutors Must Follow
Since at least 1935, when the U.S. Supreme Court issued its holding in Berger v. United States, a clear minimum standard has existed for federal prosecutors, that has never changed: "The United States Attorney is the representative not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all; and whose interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done. As such, he is in a peculiar and very definite sense the servant of the law, the twofold aim of which is that guilt shall not escape or innocence suffer." In that case, after finding that a prosecutor had failed to meet his duty not to impede the truth, the Court overturned a prosecution as unfair.
More specifically, it has long been the law that federal prosecutors have both a constitutional and ethical duty to disclose information favorable to a defendant, if that evidence has the potential to illuminate the truth. It is that long-standing duty that seems to have been violated in the Stevens case. These standards are explored and discussed by Professor Bennett Gershman is an article for theGeorgetown Journal of Legal Ethics (Winter 2001). The ethical standards are found in the model rules and code applicable to prosecutors. The constitutional requirement was established in the 1963 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Brady v. Maryland, and its progeny.
In Brady the Court stated: "An inscription on the walls of the Department of Justice states the proposition candidly for the federal domain: 'The United States wins its point whenever justice is done its citizens in the courts.' A prosecution that withholds evidence on demand of an accused which, if made available, would tend to exculpate him or reduce the penalty helps shape a trial that bears heavily on the defendant. That casts the prosecutor in the role of an architect of a proceeding that does not comport with standards of justice."
It appears that Attorney General Holder has discovered that prosecutors in the Stevens case utterly failed to meet these standards and responsibilities. In fact, he said he was "horrified" by what he discovered. So not only has Attorney General Holder requested, on behalf of the United States, that Judge Sullivan dismiss the conviction against Stevens, but he has also called for an investigation of the prosecutors by the Office of Professional Responsibility within the Justice Department.
Attorney General Holder Has Sent a Strong Message to All Federal Prosecutors
Judge Sullivan has been sending warnings to the Justice Department throughout this case. The information that Attorney General Holder is now acting upon could have been uncovered by Bush's attorney general, Michael Mukasey, who is himself an experienced federal trial judge. The fact that Mukasey ignored the warnings of Judge Sullivan speaks to the quality of his stewardship of the Justice Department.
Eric Holder's actions, however, have now sent a message to the entire establishment of federal prosecutors. Holder is depoliticizing the Justice Department, to ensure fairness for Republicans and Democrats alike. And he has placed all federal prosecutors on notice that his Justice Department will play by the rules.
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
MoEnzyme
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 4.80
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
|
|
Re:US Justice; These Interesting Times
« Reply #2 on: 2009-04-07 18:14:42 » |
|
Now if they would open a prosecution against those lawyers involved in drafting the torture memos, we would be on the path to competance in US Justice.
Stevens case closed, case against prosecutors open
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gZXmpL3-GlWbhbGKemFmCm_bPPmQD97DNK180
Intro:
Quote:WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge dismissed the corruption conviction of former Sen. Ted Stevens on Tuesday and took the rare and serious step of opening a criminal investigation into prosecutors who mishandled the case.
"In nearly 25 years on the bench, I've never seen anything approaching the mishandling and misconduct that I've seen in this case," U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan said.
Sullivan appointed a special prosecutor to investigate Justice Department lawyers who repeatedly mishandled witnesses and withheld evidence from defense attorneys during the monthlong trial that ended with Stevens' conviction in October. |
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
MoEnzyme
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 4.80
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
|
|
Re:US Justice; These Interesting Times
« Reply #3 on: 2009-04-09 09:42:33 » |
|
It gets more interesting. I think Obama should call their bluff and let them go "Nookyoolar". Just when it seems that the GOP is hitting a bottom, they figure out a way to become even more unpopular - blowing up the capital in order to protect torture-mongering lawyers. The Dems could definitely pull a three-peat gaining even more power in 2010 if the GOP goes down that road, just in time for the census and redistricting, too! 
-Mo
Republicans in Desperation Over Obama Releasing More Bush Torture Memos
By Scott Horton, The Daily Beast. Posted April 9, 2009.
If the president releases more Bush torture memos, Republicans are promising to "go nuclear" and filibuster his legal appointments.
Senate Republicans are now privately threatening to derail the confirmation of key Obama administration nominees for top legal positions by linking the votes to suppressing critical torture memos from the Bush era. A reliable Justice Department source advises me that Senate Republicans are planning to “go nuclear” over the nominations of Dawn Johnsen as chief of the Office of Legal Counsel in the Department of Justice and Yale Law School Dean Harold Koh as State Department legal counsel if the torture documents are made public. The source says these threats are the principal reason for the Obama administration’s abrupt pullback last week from a commitment to release some of the documents. A Republican Senate source confirms the strategy. It now appears that Republicans are seeking an Obama commitment to safeguard the Bush administration’s darkest secrets in exchange for letting these nominations go forward.
Full article: http://www.alternet.org/rights/135582/republicans_in_desperation_over_obama_releasing_more_bush_torture_memos_/
Another interesting excerpt (just to know whose asses are already on the line):
The memos, authored by then-administration officials and now University of California law professor John Yoo, federal appellate judge Jay Bybee and former Justice Department lawyer Stephen Bradbury, apparently grant authority for the brutal treatment of prisoners, including waterboarding, isolated confinement in coffin-like containers, and “head smacking.” The stakes over release of the papers are increasingly high. Yoo and Bybee are both targets of a criminal investigation in a Spanish court probing the torture of five Spanish citizens formerly held in Guantánamo; also named in the Spanish case are former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and three other Bush lawyers. Legal observers in Spain consider the Bush administration lawyers at serious risk of indictment, and the memos, once released, could be entered as evidence in connection with their prosecution. Unlike the torture memos that are already public, these memos directly approve specific torture techniques and therefore present a far graver problem for their authors.
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
Blunderov
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.90
Rate Blunderov
"We think in generalities, we live in details"
|
|
Re:US Justice; These Interesting Times
« Reply #4 on: 2009-04-09 11:08:38 » |
|
[Blunderov] Yes, very interesting indeed. Can this be contained like the Plame affair perhaps? Or will it go viral? Clearly a nerve has been hit. I would be most interested in any further updates from Mo if he has the time or inclination....
|
|
|
|
|
MoEnzyme
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 4.80
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
|
|
Re:US Justice; These Interesting Times
« Reply #5 on: 2009-04-09 14:52:35 » |
|
Quote from: MoEnzyme on 2009-04-09 09:42:33 It gets more interesting. I think Obama should call their bluff and let them go "Nookyoolar". Just when it seems that the GOP is hitting a bottom, they figure out a way to become even more unpopular - blowing up the capital in order to protect torture-mongering lawyers. The Dems could definitely pull a three-peat gaining even more power in 2010 if the GOP goes down that road, just in time for the census and redistricting, too!
-Mo |
Quote from: Blunderov on 2009-04-09 11:08:38 [Blunderov] Yes, very interesting indeed. Can this be contained like the Plame affair perhaps? Or will it go viral? Clearly a nerve has been hit. I would be most interested in any further updates from Mo if he has the time or inclination....
|
I think I've already proven my surplus time and inclination on this particular topic.
I think I do know how this would turn out differently for Democrats compared to Republicans. The Democrats have less personal and party loyalty than the Rerpublicans, and would probably waste little time turning on their own, especially if it was for a no-brainer issue like torture. Republicans are different, however, in that the real players have a much larger helpings of party loyalty . . . not limitless, but enough to induce at least a certain amount of institutionally self-destructive behavior (which pleases me just fine). While I don't really understand it, I can imagine what is left of the GOP following a number of their former leaders off such a cliff if they can be convinced in ANY concievable way that the prosecution is unfair.
This especially includes torture . . . since the political media universe has already been arguing this for a few years now -- while it may seem like a no brainer to you and I, the GOP faithful have already been overconditioned on the necessity of torture to the point that (with only the rare exceptions like McCain) they are unlikely to see any other position as remotely worthy. In their minds these are the MOST PATRIOTIC Republicans, because they were willing to go to exceptional measures for the greater good. I know trying to understand torture this way is like trying to see the world from a psychotic point of view, but that's how they see it. The only reason they may not ultimately pull the nookyoolar option would be because they knew ahead of time it won't work. The obvious GOP standout on this may be McCain whom they would need to maintain a fillibuster.
-Mo
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
MoEnzyme
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 4.80
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
|
|
Re:US Justice; These Interesting Times
« Reply #6 on: 2009-04-11 09:49:18 » |
|
I pasted in the excerpts most relevant to this thread, but there is MUCH more at the link, so if this interests you I highly recommend the whole interview, plus you can learn more about Jane Mayer's background. She's both complimentary and critical of Obama so far and really lays out the case of why we have to prosecute these people. Considering that some of those responsible or with knowledge may still work in the CIA and the Justice Department, this is a perfect case for an independent prosecutor . . . in fact I think nothing else would work.
It would also give the Obama administration an issue, and indeed the most relevant issue with which to start cleaning house in both Justice and the CIA. Let the independent prosecutor get to work, and soon it will be evident which remaining bureaucrats have blood on their hands. Certainly a good litmus test for incompetance. I think perhaps instead of just calling the GOP bluff about blocking further appointments over the potential release of torture memos, going the extra step of having a special prosecutor appointed in addition to releasing the memos would best frame the GOP for maximum party self-destruction if they decide to try the "nuclear option."
-Mo
http://www.alternet.org/rights/136123/%27these_people_fear_prosecution%27%3A_why_bush%27s_cia_team_should_worry_about_its_dark_embrace_of_torture/?page=entire
'These People Fear Prosecution': Why Bush's CIA Team Should Worry About Its Dark Embrace of Torture
By Liliana Segura, AlterNet. Posted April 11, 2009.
The New Yorker's Jane Mayer discusses the fallout from the Red Cross' shocking report on CIA torture and its serious legal implications.
Quote:LS: I wanted to ask you about accountability. It seems like every other day we're hearing about how Obama's Department of Justice is standing up in court and defending some Bush administration practice, or else the administration is making a statement that suggests that there's not going to be any move for accountability. Yet House Judiciary Chairman Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., just released a 540-page report reiterating the allegations against the Bush administration and calling for a special prosecutor appointed by Attorney General Eric Holder. What would it take for that to happen?
JM: What would it take for that to happen? It would take Obama. It would take Obama weighing in on this. And, you know, it seems that his general style is to try to find consensus rather than to isolate people and confront them. I think that an early tip-off to his thinking was when he described possible accountability as "witch hunts" and said we're not going to have witch hunts.
And yet I think that they're going to find it impossible to be where they are. Right now, they're trying to assert some kind of neutral position about the Bush years. They've come out critical, they've said "we're fixing this, it was wrong," and they have started to fix it -- I give them credit for doing a lot of the right things.
But what they're trying to do is not have to open up the past, as they keep saying, and I don't think that's going to work because they're going to have a choice here. They're at a fork in the road, where either they're going to open things up, or they're going to have to cover things up. There's not a real neutral position to be there. And that's what I think they're beginning to realize. |
Quote:LS: I'm glad you brought up Dick Cheney. I wanted to ask you about him since he plays such an important role in your book, and also because there's this bizarre way in which he seems to be more in the public eye now than he ever was as vice president. What do you think that's about?
Also, you've noted that interesting quote by Cheney referring to Guantanamo prisoners, "People will want to know where they've been and what we've been doing with them." Do you think he fears prosecution at all? Do you think that's part of why he's out there talking and defending … ?
JN: Listen, all of these people fear prosecution. And it seems unthinkable to prosecute them to most people. But face it: The ICRC report; from some standpoints, it can be seen as a crime scene. And its a crime scene that was authorized by the top of our government. They all have some legal liability here. Cheney coming out -- you know, I can't really -- it's hard to get inside Cheney's mind, but I can say politically what it has the effect of doing is putting a marker down, so that if there's another attack, the Republicans can say, "You see, the Democrats weakened America. We warned them, and we told you so." So, I think in some ways it's a political gambit. And it's also a play for his legacy. He's trying to say "I'm not a war criminal."
Can I say one thing about the Ridenhour Prize? One thing I wanted to say was that Ron Ridenhour -- who was the whistle-blower about My Lai [in the Vietnam War] -- one of his contentions was always that there was authorized slaughter there. It was not just Lt. William Calley who was going on a berserk spree on his own. And so I think that it's kind of fitting that the ICRC report comes out which shows, again, the point that I was trying to make in The Dark Side, which is: This was not just an isolated episode of bad behavior, it was not just the people at the bottom of the barrel, as Donald Rumsfeld called them.
This was an authorized program of abuse from the top of the U.S. government. So there are a lot of parallels there. In both cases, what makes the headlines is the abuse, but the larger point that people have to grapple with is going up the chain of command, how it was authorized. |
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
MoEnzyme
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 4.80
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
|
|
Re:US Justice; These Interesting Times
« Reply #7 on: 2009-04-16 22:02:29 » |
|
Just laying down my marker today. I know there is some interesting news on this. Unfortunately I'm working somewhat furiously on some IRL legal/business issues for the next few days, so as always drop in your prescient thoughts and news releases on this. I'll think of something profound to say by this weekend sometime after I have some private google time, so I look forward toward any inspiration you all can give me 'til then. Yes it seems that Obama is releasing torture memos, great! And yet he seems to want to protect some of his closest enemies in the previous administration. Well, fuck. I suppose we shouldn't be surprised that he's just another politician rather than the next American messiah. Please, don't pass the buck, however, enlightenment is all of our responsibilities. No prosecutor needs Obama's sign-off; local politics is beautiful that way.
I'll be back soon.
-Mo
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
Walter Watts
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1571
Reputation: 8.89
Rate Walter Watts
Just when I thought I was out-they pull me back in
|
|
Re:US Justice; These Interesting Times
« Reply #8 on: 2009-04-17 22:28:00 » |
|
Quote from: MoEnzyme on 2009-04-16 22:02:29
Just laying down my marker today. I know there is some interesting news on this. Unfortunately I'm working somewhat furiously on some IRL legal/business issues for the next few days, so as always drop in your prescient thoughts and news releases on this. I'll think of something profound to say by this weekend sometime after I have some private google time, so I look forward toward any inspiration you all can give me 'til then. Yes it seems that Obama is releasing torture memos, great! And yet he seems to want to protect some of his closest enemies in the previous administration. Well, fuck. I suppose we shouldn't be surprised that he's just another politician rather than the next American messiah. Please, don't pass the buck, however, enlightenment is all of our responsibilities. No prosecutor needs Obama's sign-off; local politics is beautiful that way.
I'll be back soon.
-Mo
|
Mo, that is just so ecumenical of you. 
Walter
PS.
That's what political capital is for.
You can't take it with you
|
Walter Watts
Tulsa Network Solutions, Inc.
No one gets to see the Wizard! Not nobody! Not no how!
|
|
|
Blunderov
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.90
Rate Blunderov
"We think in generalities, we live in details"
|
|
Re:US Justice; These Interesting Times
« Reply #9 on: 2009-04-18 02:28:56 » |
|
[Blunderov] Obama is getting some things right - raising the dead for instance. Not bad for a man who has been in office for only a few months...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3836904
How Barack Obama resurrected The Dead
Source: Associated Press
LOS ANGELES – He's still got a little work to do on the economy, but already President Barack Obama has accomplished at least one task that had appeared all but impossible just a year ago: He's put The Dead back on the road.
As the core surviving members of the Grateful Dead, once the world's biggest concert draw, barrel across the country for the first time in five years, bass player Phil Lesh says they have Obama, and also Lesh's youngest son, Brian, to thank.
After Lesh, who had never publicly supported a presidential candidate, threw his lot in with Obama, he was anxious to do a benefit concert for him. But he was all but done with The Dead, so it was going to feature his other band, Phil and Friends.
"My son Brian said, 'No Daddy, you've got to get The Dead together because it will be so much more meaningful and important,'" the musician chuckled during a recent phone interview.
Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090417/ap_en_mu/the_dead_r...
[Bl.] Now for healing the sick. A one-payer health care system might do it...
|
|
|
|
|
letheomaniac
Archon
Gender: 
Posts: 267
Reputation: 8.40
Rate letheomaniac
|
|
Re:US Justice; These Interesting Times
« Reply #10 on: 2009-04-18 03:18:49 » |
|
[letheomaniac]Here's the dirty laundry (well, some of it anyway):
Source: http://www.alternet.org
Author: Liliana Segura
Dated: 17/4/2009
New Bush Torture Bombshell Memos: 10 Horrifying Discoveries
Slamming prisoners into walls, locking them in boxes with insects; these memos are the smoking gun for the sadistic crimes of the Bush administration.
The Obama administration has finally released four long-awaited legal memos used by the Bush administration to design its torture program -- and although their existence, like U.S. torture itself, has been an open secret for years, the memos are nonetheless shocking.
Written in a dispassionate legal tone, the documents contain the professional opinion of Office of Legal Council attorneys Jay Bybee and Steven Bradbury as they assessed the CIA's "harsh interrogation techniques" between 2002 and 2005. Each method is described in sadistic detail, and each would surely be heinous if experienced on its own. But, as pointed out in the famous "Bybee" memo, dated August 1, 2002 -- the "interrogation team planned to use these techniques "in some sort of escalating fashion, culminating with the waterboard, though not necessarily ending with this technique."
The torture memos are available on the ACLU website. But if you can't bring yourself to read them, below are ten disturbing excerpts that provide a hideous glimpse of what was done in the name of Americans in the so-called "war on terror." As you read them, keep in mind that the Obama administration has already announced that it will not seek charges against the people who carried out the actions they describe. "In releasing these memos, it is our intention to assure those who carried out their duties relying in good faith upon legal advice from the Department of Justice that they will not be subject to prosecution," Obama said in a statement.
"This is a time for reflection, not retribution. ... We have been through a dark and painful chapter in our history. But at a time of great challenges and disturbing disunity, nothing will be gained by spending our time and energy laying blame for the past."
Attorney General Eric Holder released a statement, too. "It would be unfair to prosecute dedicated men and women working to protect America for conduct that was sanctioned in advance by the Justice Department," he said.
Which was exactly what the Bush administration intended.
1. Walling (Bybee memo, August 1, 2002)
"A flexible false wall will be constructed. The individual is placed with his heels touching the wall: The interrogator pulls the individual forward and then quickly and firmly pushes the individual into the wall. It is the individual's shoulder blades that hit the wall. During this motion, the head and neck are supported with a rolled hood or towel that provides a c-collar effect to help prevent whiplash …
"You have orally informed us that the false wall is in part constructed to create a loud sound when the individual hits it, which will further shock or surprise the individual. In part, the idea is to create a sound that will make the impact seem far worse than it is and that will be far worse than any injury that might result from the action."
2. The Facial (or Insult) Slap (Bybee memo, August 1, 2002)
"With the facial slap or insult slap, the interrogator slaps the individual's face with fingers slightly spread. The hand makes contact with the area directly between the tip of the individual's chin and the bottom of the corresponding earlobe. The interrogator invades the individual's personal space. The goal of the facial slap is not to inflict physical pain that is severe or lasting. Instead, the purpose of the facial slap is to induce shock, surprise, and/or humiliation …"
3. Cramped Confinement & insects Placed In a Confinement Box (Bybee memo, August 1, 2002)
"You would like to place (Abu) Zubaydah in a cramped confinement box with an insect. You have informed us that he appears to have a fear of insects. In particular, you would like to tell Zubaydah that you intend to place a stinging insect into the box with him. You would however, place a harmless insect in the box. You have orally informed us that you would in fact place a harmless insect such as a caterpillar in the box with him...
"Focusing in part on the fact that the boxes will be without light, placement in these boxes would constitute a procedure designed to disrupt profoundly the senses...
"With respect to the small confinement box, you have informed us that he would spend at most two hours in this box ... For the larger box, in which he can both stand and sit, he may be placed in this box for up to eighteen hours at a time ..."
4. Dietary Manipulation (Bradbury memo, May 10, 2005)
"This technique involves the substitution of commercial liquid meal replacements for normal food, presenting detainees with a bland, unappetizing, but nutritionally complete diet. You have informed us that the CIA believes dietary manipulation makes other techniques, such as sleep deprivation, more effective.
"Medical officers are required to ensure adequate fluid and nutritional intake, and frequent medial monitoring takes place while any detainee is undergoing dietary manipulation."
5. Nudity (Bradury memo, May 10, 2005)
"This technique is used to cause psychological discomfort, particularly if a detainee, for cultural or other reasons, is especially modest. When the technique is employed, clothing can be provided as an instant reward for cooperation. During and between interrogation sessions, a detainee may be kept nude, provided that ambient temperatures and the health of the detainee permit.
"... Interrogators can exploit the detainee's fear of being seen naked. In addition, female officers involved in the interrogation process may see the detainees naked, and … we will assume that detainees subjected to nudity as an interrogation technique are aware that they may be seen naked by females."
6. Abdominal Slap (Bradbury memo, May 10, 2005)
"In this technique, the interrogator strikes the abdomen of the detainee with the back of his open hand. The interrogator must have no rings or other jewelry on his hand. The interrogator is positioned directly in front of the detainee, generally no more than than 18 inches from the detainees. With his fingers held tightly together and fully extended, and with his palm toward the interrogator's own body, using his elbow as a fixed pivot point, the interrogator slaps the detainee in the detainee's abdomen. The interrogator may not use a fist, and the slap must be delivered above the navel and below the sternum. This technique is used to condition a detainee to pay attention tot the interrogator's questions and to dislodge expectations that the detainee will not be touched."
7. Water Dousing and "Flicking" (Bradbury memo, May 10, 2005)
"Cold water is poured on the detainee either from a container or from a hose without a nozzle. This technique is intended to weaken the detainee's resistance and persuade him to cooperate with interrogators. … A medical officer must observe and monitor the detainee throughout application of this technique, including for signs of hypothermia.
"… You have also described a variation of water dousing involving much smaller quantities of water; this variation is known as 'flicking.' Flicking of water is achieved by the interrogator wetting his fingers and then flicking them at the detainee, propelling droplets at the detainee. Flicking of water is done 'in an effort to create a distracting effect, to awaken, to startle, to irritate, to instill humiliation, or to cause temporary insult … Although water may be flicked into the detainee's face with this variation, the flicking of water at all times is done in such a manner as to avoid the inhalation or ingestion of water by the detainee."
8. Sleep Deprivation (more than 48 hours) (Bradbury memo, May 10, 2005)
"The primary method of sleep deprivation involves the use of shackling to keep the detainee awake. In this method, the detainee is standing and is handcuffed, and the handcuffs are attached by a length of chain to the ceiling. The detainee's hands are shackled in front of his body, so that the detainee has approximately a two- to three-foot diameter of movement. The detainee's feet are shackled to a bolt in the floor.
"… In lieu of standing sleep deprivation, a detainee may instead be seated on and shackled to a small stool. The stool supports the detainee's weight, but is too small to permit the subject to balance himself sufficiently to go to sleep…
"… We understand that a detainee undergoing sleep deprivation is generally fed by hand by CIA personnel so that he need not be unshackled…
"If the detainee is clothed, he wears an adult diaper under his pants … If the detainee is wearing a diaper, it is checked regularly and changed as necessary. The use of the diaper is for sanitary and health purposes of the detainee; it is not used for the purpose of humiliating the detainee and it is not considered to be an interrogation technique.
"The maximum allowable duration for sleep deprivation authorized by the CIA is 180 hours ... You have informed us that to date, more than a dozen detainees have been subjected to sleep deprivation of more than 48 hours, and three detainees have been subjected to sleep deprivation of more than 96 hours."
9. Combination of Techniques (Bradbury memo, May 10, 2005)
"Your office has outlined the manner in which many of the individual techniques we previously considered could be combined …
"In a prototypical interrogation, the detainee begins his first interrogation session stripped of his clothes, shackled, and hooded, with the walling collar over his head and around his neck. … The interrogators remove the hood and explain that the detainee can improve his situation by cooperating and may say that the interrogators 'will do what it takes to get important information.' As soon as the detainee does anything inconsistent with the interrogators' instructions, the interrogators use an insult slap or abdominal slap. They employ walling if it becomes clear that the detainee is not cooperating in the interrogation. This sequence 'may continue for several more iterations as the interrogators continue to measure the [detainee's] resistance posture and apply a negative consequence to [his] resistance efforts.' The interrogators and security officers then put the detainee into position for standing sleep deprivation, begin dietary manipulation through a liquid diet, and keep the detainee nude (except for a diaper). The first interrogation session, which could have lasted from 30 minutes to several ours, would then be at an end.
"If the interrogation team determines there is a need to continue, and if the medical and psychological personnel advise that there are no contraindications, a second session may begin."
10. Waterboarding (Bybee memo, August 1, 2002)
"Finally, you would like to use a technique called the 'waterboard.' In this procedure, the individual is bound securely to an inclined bench, which is approximately four feet by seven feet. The individual's feet are generally elevated. A cloth is placed over the forehead and eyes. Water is then applied to the cloth in a controlled manner. As this is done, the cloth is lowered until it covers both the nose and mouth. Once the cloth is saturated and completely covers the mouth and nose, air flow is slightly restricted for 20 to 40 seconds due to the presence of the cloth. This causes an increase in carbon dioxide level in the individual's blood. This increase in the carbon dioxide level stimulates increased effort to breathe. This effort plus the cloth produces the perception of "suffocation and incipient panic," i.e., the perception of drowning...
"We find that the use of the waterboard constitutes a threat of imminent death. As you have explained the waterboard procedure to us, it creates in the subject the uncontrollable physiological sensation that the subject is drowning ...
"Although the waterboard constitutes a threat of imminent death, prolonged mental harm must nonetheless result to violate the statuatory prohibition on infliction of severe mental pain or suffering ... you have advised us that the relied is almost immediate when the cloth is removed from the nose and mouth. In the absence of prolonged mental harm, no severe mental pain or suffering would have been inflicted, and the use of these procedures would not constitute torture."
|
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker
|
|
|
MoEnzyme
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 2256
Reputation: 4.80
Rate MoEnzyme
infidel lab animal
|
|
Re:US Justice; These Interesting Times
« Reply #11 on: 2009-04-18 14:58:27 » |
|
First thing, let's kill all the lawyers.  Alright, maybe we won't kill them, just permanently end their careers as lawyers, and let them try on a prison jump suit for a while. And maybe not all lawyers, but just the ones who provide, and or facilitate legal justifications for torture. No we won't actually torture them, unless you consider professional and public humiliation a form of torture, or simply another opportunity to write and sell books.
Thanks for the dirty laundry, Letheomaniac. Exactly the kind of stuff I was looking for. Keep it coming!
When I set down my first marker I wasn't yet fully briefed on the situation, and now I am. The best things I can say are 1) Very little was redacted, and as best as I've heard the disclosures of the memos were very thorough, despite some earlier concerns I heard that he might be caving to non-dislosure political pressure. I give Obama (while not perfect) satisfactory grades so far on disclosure/transparancy issues. He had me worried, and I'm still not done worrying, but so far hope remains alive. 2) As best I can tell there is no blanket comment on the creators/dissiminators of these memos and what criminal liability they may face. Yes, both Obama and Holder stated that they would not be prosecuting people for just simply following orders, however that does not preclude them from losing their employment in the US government, and/or government contracts related to their incompetance, which is MUCH more important at this juncture.
I hope this REALLY means that Obama and Holder are still open to prosecuting the policy creators and disseminators. Those people engaged in torture who also significantly disseminated and promoted these policies should still be considered for prosecution. And here I'm saying lets check out emails, text messages, memos, any communication with other CIA employees or cooperators to determine who was REALLY just following orders and who was enthusiastically promoting these activities as a general policy. Especially anybody who seemed to be getting institutional promotions for such memetic propagations.
But once again, let's start with the lawyers. I can't think of a better place to start cleaning house.
On a final note, I heard about the Spanish stating that they would not prosecute all those attorneys they named (And I thought it was a pretty darned good list). I'm hoping that's because they are currently convinced that the Obama/Clinton/Holder team intends to seriously consider prosecuting these individuals. Although I initially thought the twin announcements a very depressing development, I have on closer inspection realized that both were actually consistent with such an eventual outcome.
|
I will fight your gods for food,
Mo Enzyme
(consolidation of handles: Jake Sapiens; memelab; logicnazi; Loki; Every1Hz; and Shadow)
|
|
|
Blunderov
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.90
Rate Blunderov
"We think in generalities, we live in details"
|
|
Re:US Justice; These Interesting Times
« Reply #12 on: 2009-04-18 17:39:55 » |
|
Quote from: MoEnzyme on 2009-04-18 14:58:27
<snip>
On a final note, I heard about the Spanish stating that they would not prosecute all those attorneys they named (And I thought it was a pretty darned good list). I'm hoping that's because they are currently convinced that the Obama/Clinton/Holder team intends to seriously consider prosecuting these individuals. Although I initially thought the twin announcements a very depressing development, I have on closer inspection realized that both were actually consistent with such an eventual outcome.</snip>
|
[Blunderov] Here's hoping. But I wouldn't hold my breath; it seems all too possible that it is currently impolitic to quash the issue all at once and that the remaining issue of the leaderships' manifest crimes will be swept under the carpet at some more distant (and more convenient) time. Apply zitsfleisch, rinse and repeat is much more likely to be Obama's housekeeping strategy I suspect. Eventually everybody will move on and yesterdays monsters will dandle their spawn untroubled.
Best Regards.
|
|
|
|
|
Hermit
Archon
Posts: 4287
Reputation: 8.94
Rate Hermit
Prime example of a practically perfect person
|
|
Re:US Justice; These Interesting Times
« Reply #13 on: 2009-04-19 01:58:54 » |
|
Mo, time to peek at the "Obama - Put to the test fails dismally" thread again. As I predicted, the U.N. special rapporteur on torture, Manfred Nowak, considers the US as being in breach of its treaty obligations and Obama's attempts to shield CIA operatives who engaged in torture as being illegal under International law.
Kindest Regards
Hermit
|
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
|
|
|
letheomaniac
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 267
Reputation: 8.40
Rate letheomaniac
|
|
Re:US Justice; These Interesting Times
« Reply #14 on: 2009-04-19 02:18:28 » |
|
Mo:
Quote:| Thanks for the dirty laundry, Letheomaniac. Exactly the kind of stuff I was looking for. Keep it coming! |
[letheomaniac] My pleasure Mo. I have to give Obama points for releasing these memos, but...
Hermit:
Quote:| ...Manfred Nowak, considers the US as being in breach of its treaty obligations and Obama's attempts to shield CIA operatives who engaged in torture as being illegal under International law. |
[letheomaniac] I have to take some points back for allowing the use of the Nuremburg defence. Hugz 2 all. 
|
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker
|
|
|
|
Logged
