Breaking on GEM$NBC - CIA Operatives who tortured

[malaise]

prisoners will not be prosecuted because they followed the legal guidance given to them from above.

It is not blanket immunity.

Time to get those who gave them the legal guidance.

[WeDidIt]

1. I'd say the Obama Adminstration has been backed into a corner

Their only choice is to prosecute those who justified illegal torture with the memoes.

[glinda]

4. Definitely. I think he and VP were threatened in so many ways. I also noted that

Flotus was near tears when thanking the CIA and related Security people and I will tell you that the overwhelming impression I had was seeing a combination of "fear and also gratefulness" combined. She was shaken up in my opinion.

[Schema Thing]

10. Where could I see this?

[glinda]

35. I heard about it on MSNBC either on Tweety or one of the other ones. I think Tweety.

There was a conversation about the Intelligence Community saying in so many words, that if they wanted "continued co-operation" and help from them, the papers should not be released. I think one can google "CIA not wanting Torture info released" and come up with something in print. I think by not prosecuting them, it must take some of the pressure off. I sincerely believe that pushing Obama to prosecute Intelligence people and revealing too much about them would be like throwing Obama in front of a train. IMHO.

[roguevalley]

41. they all need to be fired. even if they 'can't' be prosecuted, they

need to be gotten rid of. if we aren't going to do this, then get rid of them and get replacements that don't torture. the experts say it doesn't work so replace them all. fuckers.

[EFerrari]

2. Oh, brother. Anyone insterested in this used bridge?

I only used it to bake cookies on Sundays.

[Supersedeas]

19. mixed metaphors?

[EFerrari]

25. Yep. Salad.

:)

[Supersedeas]

45. every salad deserves dressing (for a full accounting so to speak)

=)

[seemslikeadream]

3. I was only following orders

[FrenchieCat]

7. So now I can say what happened, since my reward for singing

won't be sing-sing.

[seemslikeadream]

17. How about the reward for torture and death a public trial for them all

[seemslikeadream]

26. If you want to let torturers go free so be it on your head not mine, I know the difference between

right and wrong and so did those fucking CIA and doctors


"I was taken out of my cell and one of the interrogators wrapped a towel around my neck, they then used it to swing me around and smash me repeatedly against the hard walls of the room."

---shows that they were using physics, as well. By using a towel wrapped around the victim’s neck, they were essentially using arm extensions to increase the speed of the victim’s head as it hit the wall. The higher the speed at impact, the greater the force of impact. For the geeks around, the speed and force of impact go up with the square of the extension (linear speed of the head is rotation of the center point per unit time times pi times the radius squared). Net result: even the short arm extension provided by the towel results in a tremendous increase in the force of impact. “Techonology” at work. Can’t get much more disgusting than this.

.........................

It’s Not the Water-Boarding, It’s the Blows to the Head
By: emptywheel Tuesday April 14, 2009 8:06 pm

Just to lay out a few details based on this article explaining that Obama continues to waver on what parts of the 2005 Bradbury torture memos to reveal. (h/t Steve)
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB123975168816518691-lMyQjAxMDI5MzE5NDcxNTQxWj.html

---1. According to the WSJ, it's not the description of water-boarding that the CIA wants to hide. It's the description of how the CIA threw people against the wall.

--- Among the details in the still-classified memos is approval for a technique in which a prisoner's head could be struck against a wall as long as the head was being held and the force of the blow was controlled by the interrogator, according to people familiar with the memos.

2. We know from the ICRC report this technique had been used, three years before Bradbury wrote his OLC memos, with Abu Zubaydah.
http://www.nybooks.com/icrc-report.pdf
.................

...these details have already been made public, in the ICRC report and elsewhere. What the intelligence officials want to hide is that--even after they did this damage to Abu Zubadaydah (though before the ICRC called it torture in 2007)--Steven Bradbury wrote an OLC memo declaring this treatment legal.

more at:
http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/04/14/its-not-the-water-boarding-its-the-blows-to-the-head /

[FrenchieCat]

5. I think that is the correct pronouncement.....

Or else they've have to procecute everyone in the CIA.....
and that ain't even realistic.
Hell, no CIA agent would even want to talk, and it is certain that cooperation
would be needed.

Better to go after those who actually determined what the torture policies would be,
instead of those who followed orders.

Better to go after the Generals who gave the orders,
than the soldiers who followed them.
They were both wrong, but those in positions of power were wronger.

[AirBaud]

6. +1

[seemslikeadream]

8. I suppose you are against Demjanjuk being deported huh?

or different rules for different war criminals

[FrenchieCat]

12. I believe that "No Blanket Immunity" was stressed for a reason in this announcement.

I'm sure that if someone died at the hand of a CIA agent,
that's a different story for that CIA agent.

And yes, different rules for different war criminals.

If you think that the government should prosecute each and everyone of these folks,
and you think that these folks will cooperate if they know they are going to be put away,
you are fooling yourself.

In criminal prosecution, oftentimess, lesser offenders in the larger scheme of things
are able to work out a deal if they give up a bigger fish.

I'm interested in the bigger fish myself.

[seemslikeadream]

14. They don't need the testimony of torturers to convict the scum

[FrenchieCat]

20. I think you are living in fantasy land.....

where the only thing needed is simply to bring someone in and have someone else point to them, and off to the gallows they go.

If the orders came from the administration and his justice system that the police could come and drag you out of your bed in the middle of the night, and later these orders were found unconstitutional, do you really think that each policeman following the orders should be prosecuted, or wouldn't it be the power who ordered up this as a policy (the President) be the one to prosecute.

[seemslikeadream]

21. Hey I have a novel idea...How about refusing an illegal order?

[FrenchieCat]

28. Sounds easy enough......

Reminds me of the mentality of those pro-life extremists who would want to prosecute any and all doctors who performed abortions when they were legal, if they ever succeeded in overturning abortion laws.

Or Prosecuting anyone who administered the death penalty during the time that it was legal, if it were ever overturned.

[EFerrari]

22. If your government ordered you to slice a prisoner's penis with a razor blade

would you do it, FrenchieCat? Because it was an order that you thought was LEGAL?

No reasonable person can claim that they tortured another human being because they thought it was LEGAL. That's just baloney.

[seemslikeadream]

23. and you are living in denial

[EFerrari]

15. That's wrong. This gives immunity to the actual torturers.

You know, the ones who did the waterboarding and who smashed heads against walls, and who sodomized their prisoners and who hung them by their arms from the ceiling for days. You get the general idea.

Does that sound like a good idea to you?

It only makes sense IF it's in exchange for their testimony.

[cascadiance]

32. I support this, though I think we still need a form of "truth comission"...

Now with real state secrets potentially in the mix here too, there has to be found a way for them to communicate what they did do that was illegal and screwed up and how they got told to do it, and yet still not reveal any potentially really damaging information. The effort should be to get at the truth as to how these sorts of policies got enacted, and who was responsible for ordering their being carried out, and prosecuting those that are the real authors and persons of authority carrying them out.

Maybe some sort of independent investigator that could get the review and blessings of people like Sibel Edmonds, Ray McGovern, and/or Daniel Ellsberg to vouch for such an investigator's indpendendence and trustworthiness that he won't be an instrument of a coverup but will be responsible to avoid truly damaging information for our national security from getting out. This person or persons if a commission is involved could serve as an initial screener for a "truth commission" to ensure that people can talk about the truth of what went and give us the truth without fear of damaging our country in the process.

And if like the South African truth commissions, the truth comission feels they are being lied to, they can be brought up on charges for perjury, etc. or if they are guilty of real heinous acts where they even went beyond what they were ordered to do, they could also be prosecuted.

[bdamomma]

9. oh crap, more bad news, first Spain now this.

Bushie and his crime family must be smirking away along with the POS Cheney. WTF!!!

[EFerrari]

16. There is no real bad news from Spain. The AP headline was misleading.

The judge could still go forward with the case, just like he did with Pinochet.

[bdamomma]

24. I hope the judge goes ahead with this.

[EFerrari]

27. I hope so, too. The Obama administration has to be weighing

which would be a bigger political hit -- to move forward here or risk Spain or some other venue moving forward.

It's infuriating that this was left on Obama's plate but, this is one consequence of not impeaching the Torture President.

[seemslikeadream]

11. What about the fucking doctors? They get a free pass on torture also?

[Greybnk48]

13. Well, if you're somehow affiliated with the Govt. the odds of you being punished

FOR ANYTHING, are pretty slim. I love Obama. But I sure hope someone is held accountable for something soon. This is absurd.

[w4rma]

18. Good! (nt)

[Zodiak]

29. Obama was threatened by the CIA in a roundabout way

It was mentioned on Keith last night. They "warned" him about releasing the memos.

Even though I think we have doomed ourselves to be a mistrusted nation in perpetuity because of this, I think that we should take a CIA threat against the President very seriously. I really do not want Obama to be the next American martyr sacrificed for Empire.

A CIA that would slice your penis with a razor would have no compunction about getting behind a grassy knoll against the President.

I know that sounds crazy, but the spooks are really that spooky.

[slipslidingaway]

30. DOJ statement...

http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2009/April/09-ag-356.html

"Department of Justice Releases Four Office of Legal Counsel Opinions

In connection with ongoing litigation, the Department of Justice today released four previously undisclosed Office of Legal Counsel ("OLC") opinions – one that OLC issued to the Central Intelligence Agency in August 2002 and three that OLC issued to the CIA in May 2005.

"The President has halted the use of the interrogation techniques described in these opinions, and this administration has made clear from day one that it will not condone torture," said Attorney General Eric Holder. "We are disclosing these memos consistent with our commitment to the rule of law."

Holder also stressed that intelligence community officials who acted reasonably and relied in good faith on authoritative legal advice from the Justice Department that their conduct was lawful, and conformed their conduct to that advice, would not face federal prosecutions for that conduct.

The Attorney General has informed the Central Intelligence Agency that the government would provide legal representation to any employee, at no cost to the employee, in any state or federal judicial or administrative proceeding brought against the employee based on such conduct and would take measures to respond to any proceeding initiated against the employee in any international or foreign tribunal, including appointing counsel to act on the employee’s behalf and asserting any available immunities and other defenses in the proceeding itself.

To the extent permissible under federal law, the government will also indemnify any employee for any monetary judgment or penalty ultimately imposed against him for such conduct and will provide representation in congressional investigations.

"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," Holder said.

After reviewing these opinions, OLC has decided to withdraw them: They no longer represent the views of the Office of Legal Counsel."

[malaise]

31. Time to go after those in the Justice Department

and those above them who sanctioned torture.

[slipslidingaway]

34. Sounds good to me :) n/t

[EFerrari]

36. There's no way torturers should get a pass.

That's exactly like immunizing a hitman before you begin to prosecute the don.

[malaise]

38. It's problematic I agree

Just because my boss tells me he has rewritten the law for me to kill does not give me the right to kill

[EFerrari]

42. It's a ridiculous premise. And if it isn't, we have to shut down CIA

because those agents don't have the common sense to work for the government. I don't see what other conclusion can be drawn.

They either didn't know torture is WRONG and ILLEGAL and should be fired because they are dangerous sociopaths or they are GUILTY of a war crime.

[slipslidingaway]

39. We should go after both, either we have laws or we do not....

OT, I heard that Joe Nacchio just went to jail for insider trading, he was the Qwest CEO who refused to go along with the spying program.

[EFerrari]

43. Thank you -- I hadn't heard that. The inertia from BushCo is still at work. n/t

[EFerrari]

33. What does that last sentence mean? I got lost there.

Oh, and contrary to Mr. Holder's statement, we have reports that conditions have gotten worse for some prisoners at Gitmo, not better.

I will believe no one is being mistreated or tortured when the International Red Cross says so, not the department that provided cover for torturers.

[slipslidingaway]

37. That they disagreed with the previous opinions of the OLC...

yes I saw the new Gitmo story and we should not forget Bagram.

[EFerrari]

40. It's not even new. Binyam was trying to get this out when he was released.

Guantanamo worse since Obama election: ex-detainee

Mar 7, 2009
LONDON (AFP) — A freed Guantanamo prisoner has said conditions at the US detention camp in Cuba have worsened since President Barack Obama was elected, claiming guards wanted to "take their last revenge".

Binyam Mohamed, the first detainee to be transferred out of Guantanamo Bay since Obama took office, also said British agents "sold me out" by cooperating with his alleged torturers, in his first interview since release which was published Sunday.

Mohamed, a 30-year-old Ethiopian-born former British resident, gave further details of what he has called the "medieval" torture he faced in Pakistan and Morocco, as well as in a secret CIA prison in Kabul and at Guantanamo.

"The result of my experience is that I feel emotionally dead," he told the Mail on Sunday newspaper. "It seems like a miracle my brain is still intact."

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5ifIr1uCPmjbJrjlnr20okZpghUcg

[Canuckistanian]

44. Greenwald: "notably, does not extend to Bush officials"

Glenn has a new post up about this.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/radio/2009/04/16/aclu/index.html