Obama might create a new unit for interrogations

The Wall Street Journal reports this, via Jurist:

The Obama administration may create a special unit of interrogators to handle certain terror suspects, the Wall St. Journal reported Saturday, citing unidentified government officials. In creating the unit, the administration would reduce the role of the Central Intelligence Agency in interrogating suspects as the CIA has faced criticism for its interrogation techniques during the Bush administration. It is not clear which agencies the team would draw members from, but it is expected that members of both the CIA and the FBI would be included . The interrogation team would reportedly not use certain controversial interrogation techniques like waterboarding. A spokesperson for the White House refused to comment on the report.

It can't be a bad thing...right? The WSJ got the exclusive... Wow wee.

Human Rights groups give Obama a piece of their collective minds..

Why shouldn't they? He has flipped on several key issues lately. It was a private off the record meeting so there isn't any news to report other than a few leaks or statements from attendee's, like HuffPo's piece or CBS new's article and Michael Isikoff's appearance on Rachel Maddow's show this evening discussing the meeting:

From the HuffPo piece:

In an interview with the Huffington Post, Massimino detailed what she described as a "lively and detailed and serious" discussion on some of the days most vexing national security issues. Over the course of roughly an hour and fifteen minutes, Obama, along with Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, Attorney General Eric Holder, advisers Valerie Jarrett and David Axelrod, foreign policy hand Dennis McDonough, and counter-terrorism chief John Brennan, held court with a group of academics, as well as officials with the ACLU, Human Rights Watch, and the Center for Constitutional Rights.

As for whether the discussions got heated or Isikoff's statement that Obama was compared to Bush, Massamino said:

"I think that many of us were disappointed by the announcement about the military commissions and wondered what the reasoning was behind that. And to be honest, I am still wondering having been in this meeting today. I don't think that this fits the overall framework that the president had articulated about using our values to reinforce a counter terrorism strategy against al Qaeda."

Isikoff was much more negative on Maddow's show, stating Obama wasn't pleased with the Bush/Obama reference. The NYT writeup of the meeting contained this:

The discussion, in a 90-minute meeting in the Cabinet Room that included Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. and other top administration officials, came on the eve of a much-anticipated speech Mr. Obama is to give Thursday on a number of thorny national security matters, including his promise to close the detention center at the naval base in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

Human rights advocates are growing deeply uneasy with Mr. Obama’s stance on these issues, especially his recent move to block the release of photographs showing abuse of detainees, and his announcement that he is willing to try terrorism suspects in military commissions — a concept he criticized bitterly as a presidential candidate.

The two participants, outsiders who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the session was intended to be off the record, said they left the meeting dismayed.

*snip*

“He was almost ruminating over the need for statutory change to the laws so that we can deal with individuals who we can’t charge and detain,” one participant said. “We’ve known this is on the horizon for many years, but we were able to hold it off with George Bush. The idea that we might find ourselves fighting with the Obama administration over these powers is really stunning.” (emphasis mine)

Stunning? I would say it's extremely friggin ironic..

Philip Zelikow testifies before Congress on torture.

Mr. Zelikow is the individual that wrote the memo outlining what was wrong with the BushCo shill's logic, with regard to the torture memo's Jay Bybee and John Yoo scripted.

Mr. Zelikow appeared again exclusively on Rachel Maddow's show last night after his day on the stand in congress. That video is below.

Then watch the idiot known as Lindsey Graham badger the shit out of a witness yesterday. Sweet-friggin-jaysus-in-a-speedo, Graham is still trying to justify torture. There is never a justification for torture. Never, ever. Morally and legally there is no justification, I don't give a rat's ass what Lindsey Graham, The Big Dick Cheney™ or Jay Bybee say.

Et tu Obama?

Well, I couldn't stay away from Countdown. Nope, and lemme tell ya..today was one helluva doozy. I learned all about the newly released torture memo's (courtesy of TPM Muckraker) and how Obama has no interest what so evah in prosecuting those who tortured. I will look at the redacted memo's shortly, but let me say this...

President Obama is going down the same road President Ford did, only Obama refuses to go after those who tortured. At least the underlings were prosecuted in the Nixon administration. No such luck with the Obama administration. So no one will be held accountable for torturing..no one.

KO's Special Comment follows, as does his interview with John Dean on the subject. I am horrified that Obama wants to take this route.

But I am not surprised. President Obama has signaled he would lean this way, you just had to pay attention to hear it.

There are people out there that will be able to justify this newest fresh hell brought to us by President Obama..but I am not one of them. I find Obama's decision unconscionable and wrong on many levels. I salute him for releasing the memo's, and allowing us to see into the black hearts of the Bush Administration.

But I damn him and curse him for wanting to walk away from doing the right thing.

Professor Turley on the Spanish Inquisition.

He also talks about the failure of torture as a method to gather evidence..and the Big Dick Cheney and how Obama and Holder might be protecting The Shrub and the Big Dick from prosecution.

Major Irony alert!

From Jurist:

Son of Liberia ex-leader Taylor sentenced to 97 years in US prison for torture

The son of a former president of Liberia now on trial at The Hague for crimes against humanity was sentenced [DOJ press release] to a 97-year jail term in the US Friday by US District Court for the Southern District of Florida for committing torture in Liberia. Charles Arthur Emmanuel, son of Charles Taylor was found guilty by a jury in October on charges that he was the head of a paramilitary group which tortured and killed opponents during the presidency of Emmanuel's father. District Judge Cecilia M. Altonaga handed down the sentence to Emmanuel, a US citizen born in Boston. Acting Assistant Attorney General Matthew Freidrich of the US Department of Justice Criminal Division Criminal Division said of the sentence:

The lengthy prison term handed down today justly reflects the horror and torture that Taylor Jr. visited upon his victims. This case was made in no small part by the courage of individual victims who had the mettle to come forward and speak the truth about what had been done to them . . . Our message to human rights violators, no matter where they are, remains the same: We will use the full reach of U.S. law, and every lawful resource at the disposal of our investigators and prosecutors, to hold you fully accountable for your crimes.

Emmanuel was the first person to be indicted under the 1994 extraterritorial federal anti-torture statute [18 USC §2340A text] permitting US federal courts to charge US citizens or those present in the US for torture that took place overseas.

Hopefully, the incredible irony of the charges and the sentence isn't lost on anyone that reads this blog. I damn near bit a hole in my bottom lip to keep from laughing at what the idiot Freidrich had to say...

Gates, torture and Obama's choices..

Gates is staying on as we now know...but... Before you get your panties in a wad, read this article by Steve Clemon's, a progressive. An excerpt from his Washington Note piece:

After speaking to some other national security policy experts very close to Bob Gates and General Brent Scowcroft, I changed course and began to see the value of Gates staying at DoD.

My hunch is that Gates wants a chance to make the kind of leaps in the Middle East I have been writing about for some time. He wants to try and push Iran-US relations into a constructive direction. He wants to change the game in Afghanistan -- and the answer will not be a military-dominant strategy. He wants to try and stabilize Iraq in a negotiated, confidence building process that includes Saudi Arabia, Iran, Turkey and other regional forces. And he wants to support a big push on Israel-Palestine peace and reconfigure relations between much of the Arab League and Israel.

I hope Clemon's hunch is right. Christ, I hope he's right.

As for torture...and whether Obama's administration will go or should go after the war criminals in Bush's cabal..check out this column by Jack Goldsmith at WaPo. Personally, I don't buy into Mr Goldsmith's logic...but it never hurts to listen to the other side of the argument.

My problem with his logic is the pov that charging people with crimes will hinder future presidents in getting opinions and options from smart intelligent individuals.

Horseshit.

Extraordinary Rendition and Torture are war crimes plain and simple. Never in our modern history has an administration been so callous in ignoring the rule of law and the Geneva Conventions. The people that allowed these heinous things to happen and indeed supported them, need to be held accountable. We need to show the world that we will never again allow criminals such as those in the Bush Administration to run rough shod over common sense and common decency.

Navy into torture as well.

From Jurist:

Six US sailors have been charged for allegedly abusing Iraqi detainees held at Camp Bucca. The six are said to have physically assaulted at least two detainees whom they were guarding, and locked eight others in a cell that had been covered with pepper spray. Seven other sailors reportedly faced non-judicial punishment for their involvement in the incidents. Al Jazeera has more. CNN has additional coverage.

Camp Bucca was at the center of controversy in 2003 when the so-called Taguba report (pdf) detailed instances of detainee abuse and found that the detention camp was well over its carrying capacity. Many former Abu Ghraib detainees were transferred to Camp Bucca after reports of detainee abuse in the Baghdad prison surfaced. In July, four former Abu Ghraib detainees filed lawsuits against two private US military contractors and three of their employees, alleging torture, war crimes and civil conspiracy. The former detainees said that employees of CACI International and L-3 Communications, which performed interrogation and interpretation work for the US military, violated the Geneva Convention, the Army Field Manual and US law by torturing and conspiring to torture the detainees. They also alleged that CACI and L-3 were negligent in failing to prevent the torture.

Torture a United States military tradition....across all branches apparently.

Tags: Camp Bucca, CACI, L3

Report from British Government doubts Bush is truthful on torture.

From Jurist:

The Human Rights Annual Report 2007 [PDF] released Sunday by the UK House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee recommended that the UK not rely on any assurances made by the US that it does not use torture. The report also calls on the UK to fully investigate US interrogation tactics to ensure that no torture techniques are being used on US detainees. The report's section on torture focuses on waterboarding and the disconnect between US statements that the practice does not constitute torture and testimony by UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband that "water-boarding amounts to torture." The Foreign Affairs Committee wrote in the report:

We conclude that the Foreign Secretary's view that water-boarding is an instrument of torture is to be welcomed. However, given the recent practice of water-boarding by the US, there are serious implications arising from the Foreign Secretary's stated position. We conclude that, given the clear differences in definition, the UK can no longer rely on US assurances that it does not use torture, and we recommend that the Government does not rely on such assurances in the future. We also recommend that the Government should immediately carry out an exhaustive analysis of current US interrogation techniques on the basis of such information as is publicly available or which can be supplied by the US. We further recommend that, once its analysis is completed, the Government should inform this Committee and Parliament as to its view on whether there are any other interrogation techniques that may be approved for use by the US Administration which it considers to constitute torture.

BBC News has more. I really don't have anything to add this early in the AM on a Monday. Its just the wonderful start to another week of BushCo bullshit.

But WAIT!!! It gets better:


Earlier this month, the Foreign Affairs Committee denounced what it termed "false US assurances" about rendition flights through the UK Indian Ocean territory of Diego Garcia. The committee also said the "failure of the United States Administration to tell the truth resulted in the UK Government inadvertently misleading" the committee and House of Commons about US operations on a military base located on the island. Lawyers for Reprieve, a UK legal charity representing some of the detainees at Guantanamo Bay, alleged (PDF) last year that UK overseas territories have been used "to support illegal interstate transfer, enforced disappearance and torture in the context of the 'war on terror'" and urged UK lawmakers to question US and UK officials about the allegations. In 2005, UN Special Rapporteur on Torture Manfred Nowak said there had been allegations that the US was secretly detaining prisoners on military vessels at the Diego Garcia naval base.

Have a good week!!! ;p