UN expert criticizes US torture decision

[Towlie]

Source: Associated Press

VIENNA (AP) — An Austrian newspaper quotes the U.N.'s top torture investigator as saying President Barack Obama's decision not to prosecute CIA operatives who used questionable interrogation practices violates international law.

Read more: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j4Ejd9oAFE1osxxYu3b7f9cI_7eQD97KRMP00

---

How big of a fire has to be built under his butt before he'll get moving on this?

[newfie11]

1. YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:woohoo:
Maybe this will get something moving.

[backwoodsbob]

2. not to be a negative nancy but

how is the presidents decision a violation of law?

[No Elephants]

7. The decision, in and of itself, does not technically violate the treaty. However, if Obama

follows through on the decision that he announced, and does indeed not prosecute, his inaction would violate the treaty. And, he would be violating his oath of office as well.

[TriplD]

3. IMO it violates US law as well

Obama could Constitutionally pardon these war criminals, but obstructing the enforcement of the War Crimes Act of 1996 would seem to contradict his Constitutional obligation to faithfully execute our laws.

[No Elephants]

Deleted because Post #9 rendered this post moot and I stand corrected.

[TriplD]

9. Article II, Section 3 states:

he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.

[No Elephants]

11. Thanks. I should have been more careful.

[Igel]

21. Which doesn't strike me as especially relevant.

It's one thing to make sure laws are executed faithfully.

It's another to insist that every infraction of every law be punished.

And an entirely different problem--both legally and logically--to say he has to take responsibility for making sure that all the laws were executed faithfully before he had the authority to do the 'making sure'.

Being a prosecutor still involves exercising discretion and judgment. The president has to exercise judgment and discretion no less.

[Mari333]

4. good.

Helen Thomas is right. Hes playing it too safe.

[L0oniX]

8. Good luck to him getting re-elected.

[Mari333]

10. I have a feeling

call it a hunch, that if he doesnt get his shit together soon, a lot of people will be voting 3rd party in the next election to send him a message..and that means the GOP will get in, with some swinging dick. But only if he keeps playing it too safe.

[Wednesdays]

17. And people wonder why he's "playing it safe"...?

Here's the answer. Check my comment, then the OP in the link.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5481865#5482748

You really thought we're living in a democracy?

[stillcool]

5. I would think the torture..

would violate international law. I hope the world doesn't wait for the United States, or accept whatever actions come out of this government. Surely they realize justice will be denied.

[No Elephants]

12. That's a different issue. The issue in this thread is whether failure to prosecute violates a

treaty to which the U.S. is a party.

[stillcool]

16. Those memo's don't seem to be concerned...

at all with any international law. Maybe that's why the detainee's are attempting to sue within the U.S. Court system.

[EFerrari]

22. When we signed onto to the Geneva Conventions, they became our law, too.

[No Elephants]

6. Did the U.S. ever become a party to that convention? On edit. Yes, in 1988, under REAGAN!

[Dystopian]

13. KandR. The world is watching. eom

peace~

[ananda]

14. He's an imperial president.

There will have to be a fire so big
that he'll feel the heat through
the tough boots of corporofascist
leather.

[No Elephants]

15. Note AP's headline. It does not exactly scream "Not prosecuting Bushco violates treaty," does it?

[Towlie]

19. I definitely had a different headline in mind, but DU wants the original headline in this forum.

[pat_k]

18. But Torture is just . . .

. . .http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5473776&mesg_id=5473776">"working on the edge" -- Michael Hayden

Somehow, the following brings home the totality of the horror. When being forced into a box is relief. . . there are no words.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/17/torture-methods-interrogation-george-bush-approved">The Guardian
Torture techniques endorsed by the Bush administration
Friday 17 April 2009

. . .
Cramped confinement: Detainees put in uncomfortably small containers. Was judged unsuccessful, as it offered detainees a temporary safe haven. . .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8349135&mesg_id=8349963">Related post (Reply to: ". . . But you wanted everyone within 100 feet of a suspect to have resigned immediately. . .")

[grahamhgreen]

25. And then they stuck the bug in there, I wonder if that became a pet? Horrible.

[pat_k]

26. And the twisted "analysis" that. . .

. . .if it would be a violation if the interrogator told the phobic captive that the bug was deadly. But that it would be OK to tell them nothing (and allow them to assume the bug was deadly.)

Depraved lunacy.

[grahamhgreen]

27. Reminds me of the end of "Psycho", with the fly buzzing around Bates, and the voice over says,

"I wont swat the fly, and then they'll think - look she's so harmless she wont even kill a fly..."

[buckrogers1965]

20. Nobody can pardon a violation of human rights.

Not even the president. Most other countries have laws that make it mandatory for them to prosecute human rights violations no matter where they occurred if the jurisdiction that they occurred in refuses to prosecute.

And in fact failure to prosecute when there is clear evidence of a crime may be seen as being an accomplice to the crime and as obstruction of justice.

[EFerrari]

23. Exactly right per the Geneva torture convention and per the UN convention., too.

[grahamhgreen]

24. UN torture investigator: Obama has broken International law - LINK

http://rawstory.com/08/blog/2009/04/18/un-torture-investigator-obama-has-broken-international-law/#

"The United Nation’s top torture investigator has suggested it is illegal under International law for President Barack Obama to announce that the United States government has no intention of prosecuting low-level CIA officers who carried out torture sanctioned by the Bush Administration."

Also:

http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE53H1Y020090418

"VIENNA (Reuters) - President Barack Obama's decision not to prosecute CIA interrogators who used waterboarding on terrorism suspects amounts to a breach of international law, the U.N. rapporteur on torture said.

"The United States, like all other states that are part of the U.N. convention against torture, is committed to conducting criminal investigations of torture and to bringing all persons against whom there is sound evidence to court," U.N. special rapporteur Manfred Nowak told the Austrian daily Der Standard.

Nowak did not think Obama would go as far as to seek an amnesty law for affected CIA personnel and therefore U.S. courts could still try torture suspects, he said on Saturday."