impunity

You are not authorized to post comments.

Obama enshrining bush policies

...if you take a step back and you look more broadly at what the administration is doing on national security, in particular, what you see far too often is the administration endorsing policies that most of us recognize were extreme under the last administration. And, in fact, in some cases, you see this administration going even further than the last administration did...

some of the places we point to in the report include the endorsement of indefinite detention for some of the people who are now held at Guantánamo, the failure to hold accountable the people who endorsed torture. The last administration built a framework for torture, but this administration... is building a framework for impunity. Allowing those senior officials who endorsed torture to get away with it leaves torture on the table as a permissible policy option, if not for this president, then for the next president...

the decision to endorse torture was a decision that was made at the highest levels of the Bush administration... So the problem we have now is that there is... the Obama administration has initiated a criminal investigation, but the criminal investigation is very narrow. It examines only a handful of incidents in which contractors or CIA interrogators went beyond the authority that was invested in them. And nobody, as far as we know, is looking into the responsibility and the criminal liability of the people who endorsed torture and authorized it. And that seems indefensible to us...

guantanamo bay prisoners were known to be innocent

In a sworn declaration ... Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, who was chief of staff to former Secretary of State Colin Powell during George W. Bush''s first term in office, said he would be willing to state, under penalty of perjury... that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and others knew the "vast majority" of prisoners captured in the so-called War on Terror were innocent and the administration refused to set them free once those facts were established because of the political repercussions that would have ensued.

"By late August 2002, I found that of the initial 742 detainees that had arrived at Guantánamo, the majority of them had never seen a US soldier in the process of their initial detention and their captivity had not been subjected to any meaningful review," Wilkerson''s declaration says. "Secretary Powell was also trying to bring pressure to bear regarding a number of specific detentions because children as young as 12 and 13 and elderly as old as 92 or 93 had been shipped to Guantánamo. By that time, I also understood that the deliberate choice to send detainees to Guantánamo was an attempt to place them outside the jurisdiction of the US legal system."

He added that it became "more and more clear many of the men were innocent, or at a minimum their guilt was impossible to determine let alone prove in any court of law, civilian or military."

TORTURE MEMOS

Based on our understanding of the relevant case law and the CIA's descriptions of the interrogation program, we conclude that use of the enhanced interrogation techniques, subject to all applicable conditions, limitations, and safeguards, does not 'shock the conscience'.

From the 3rd Bradbury Memo to John Rizzo, May 2005

I have glued together some extracts from the recently released 'torture memos'. The contents are horrifying, not just in the details of the procedures they sanction, but also in the tortured logic they display. I doubt that everyone will bother to read the 124 pages of dense and other-worldly legal argument, so I have picked out some of the more Orwellian passages and placed them next to what was actually happening.

This other-world of the memos is one where torture is 'unacceptable'; so we need the legal advice to make sure we are not torturing. But it is also a world where methods of torture are elaborately excused and justified, and where - so we are told - such methods do not even 'shock the conscience'. The other-world is one where legal advisers can argue that it is perfectly acceptable to hold a person in captivity for 7 years, uncharged with any crime, nude and shackled, squeezed into a box and battered against walls, deprived of sleep and tied to a board with water poured into his lungs; and it is one where all those things, apparently, are made consistent with a world where human beings have a conscience and a moral sense.

ch-ch-ch-ch-changes

This is a time for reflection, not retribution... At a time of great challenges and disturbing disunity, nothing will be gained by spending our time and energy laying blame for the past. The national greatness that you so courageously and capably uphold is embedded in America’s ability to right its course in concert with our core values, and to move forward with confidence.

A letter to the officers of the CIA, from the king of change

Well. I should think those former torturers have by now completely stopped all those naughty things that they were doing. The king of change has said we don't do torture any more. The king of change has said that we must look forward not backwards, heads held high. That is, after all, what makes us american, and that is what makes us Special. We torture with dignity, we torture with capability and courageousness - and we also torture with impunity.

we smashed up his bicycle

There were a lot of times where we would be out on foot patrols, and, you know, we were ordered to not allow people to pass through our patrol formation. And unsuspecting villagers would try to pass through or cut through the formation, and we would butt-stroke them, jab them with the muzzle, you know, kick them or whatever, you know, just get them out of the formation. And one time, there was a guy on a bicycle with a basket full of groceries, and he tried to, you know, just roll through. And, you know, we clotheslined him and smashed up his bicycle. For what? You know, passing through the formation. And—but this is like what we were expected to do.

an Iraq War Veteran speaking at the Winter Soldier hearings

we were congratulated on our first kills

On April 18, 2006, I had my first confirmed killed. This man was innocent. I don’t know his name. I called him “the fat man.” He was walking back to his house, and I shot him in front of his friend and his father...

We were all congratulated after we had our first kills, and that happened to have been mine. My company commander personally congratulated me, as he did everyone else in our company. This is the same individual who had stated that whoever gets their first kill by stabbing them to death will get a four-day pass when we return from Iraq.

Former Marine speaking at the Winter Soldier hearings

Syndicate content