Page 8 of 14 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 139

Thread: Criminal investigation into CIA treatment of detainees expected [edited]

  1. #71
    Sage
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    08-27-09 @ 08:41 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,344

    Re: Criminal investigation into CIA treatment of detainees expected [edited]

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    You know me better than that. I firmly believe that if there is credible reason to suspect wrongdoing, it should be investigated, no matter who it is. Stop obfuscating the issue. The wrong way to handle possible wrongdoing is to point to some one else doing something wrong and use that as a justification.
    No obfuscation this time, just pointing out the politically convenient nature of Holder's "investigation".

    If the Bush Administration's policies violated the law, then Dear Leader's current policies violate the same laws, because they are the same policies. That's the double standard Holder is applying here--investigating the Bush Administration for "crimes" while not also investigating the current Administration for the same "crimes".

    If the interrogation methods used and approved by the Bush Administration were criminal, then why is Dear Leader promoting men like Stanley McChrystal? This is the officer who ran Camp Nama, which Human Rights Watch highlighted in their 2006 report "No Blood, No Foul". Dear Leader is the one who promoted him--rewarded him for his conduct in Iraq and Afghanistan. Congress, in his confirmation hearings, scrupulously avoided asking any questions about any of this, even though McChrystal's name has been linked in the media to both Camp Nama and Bagram Air Base:

    Stanley McChrystal on Torture - New Afghanistan General Approves Torture? - Esquire
    TASK FORCE 6-26: Inside Camp Nama; In Secret Unit's 'Black Room,' A Grim Portrait of U.S. Abuse - New York Times

    Only Holder won't be examining any of this, will he? No, according to the article in the OP:
    A senior Justice Department official said that Holder envisioned an inquiry that would be narrow in scope, focusing on "whether people went beyond the techniques that were authorized" in Bush administration memos that liberally interpreted anti-torture laws.
    Holder plans to investigate Bush Administration "crimes", while carefully skirting around anything that might link Dear Leader and his Administration's involvement in acts identical to these "crimes" in every legal particular.

    Frankly, I don't see any of it as being a crime. Terrorists have no legal protections they may claim as their own, and I'm quite at ease with the idea of both the military and the CIA literally squeezing every last bit of useful intel out of captured terrorists before tossing the broken carcasses on the garbage heap. However, if folks are going to piss and moan about these things being crimes, then they had better get their brains around the reality that these policies have not been ended, have not been altered in any substantive way (excluding the CIA from their continuance is not a substantive change), and that these "crimes" are the policy and practice of the current Administration just as much as they were of the Bush Administration.

    If Holder isn't going to investigate Dear Leader, then investigating Bush is a political persecution and a criminalization of policy that is absolutely not in the best interests of this country.

  2. #72
    Guru
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Northeast
    Last Seen
    11-03-11 @ 08:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    2,834

    Re: Criminal investigation into CIA treatment of detainees expected [edited]

    Quote Originally Posted by celticlord View Post
    Obama’s Torture Loopholes

    Interestingly enough, Dear Leader's executive order, applied during the Bush administration, would not have precluded the use of waterboarding. So Dear Leader should be investigated for continuing to permit the use of such techniques, thus becoming party to what, following your reasoning, must be regarded as a criminal conspiracy?

    Dear Leader wants Gitmo closed, but not Bagram Air Base. So should Holder be investigating the doings at Bagram?

    Seems like Dear Leader is directly thumbing his nose at SCOTUS and the Hamdan and Boumediene decisions. When does AG Holder plan on issuing a subpoena to Dear Leader to explain himself?

    Obama To Revive Military Tribunals For Gitmo Detainees, With More Rights

    More thumbing of nose at SCOTUS. Such a scofflaw Dear Leader is.

    Obama Endorses Indefinite Detention Without Trial for Some Now at Guantanamo - washingtonpost.com

    Even more.

    So why is what Dear Leader doing ok when these things were crimes under Bush? Why is only a crime for it to have been done by the Bush Administration?

    You're all over the map once again. First you claim its not torture then you post information saying things are torture. Make up your mind. The executive order clearly said anything not covered by the Army Field Manual is prohobited. Splitting words doesn't change the fact that the so-called EITs are against the army field manual and the executive order.

    So tell me why do you call him dear leader?

  3. #73
    Professor
    WillRockwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    07-10-10 @ 09:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,950

    Re: Criminal investigation into CIA treatment of detainees expected [edited]

    Quote Originally Posted by celticlord View Post
    No obfuscation this time, just pointing out the politically convenient nature of Holder's "investigation".

    If the Bush Administration's policies violated the law, then Dear Leader's current policies violate the same laws, because they are the same policies. That's the double standard Holder is applying here--investigating the Bush Administration for "crimes" while not also investigating the current Administration for the same "crimes".

    If the interrogation methods used and approved by the Bush Administration were criminal, then why is Dear Leader promoting men like Stanley McChrystal? This is the officer who ran Camp Nama, which Human Rights Watch highlighted in their 2006 report "No Blood, No Foul". Dear Leader is the one who promoted him--rewarded him for his conduct in Iraq and Afghanistan. Congress, in his confirmation hearings, scrupulously avoided asking any questions about any of this, even though McChrystal's name has been linked in the media to both Camp Nama and Bagram Air Base:

    Stanley McChrystal on Torture - New Afghanistan General Approves Torture? - Esquire
    TASK FORCE 6-26: Inside Camp Nama; In Secret Unit's 'Black Room,' A Grim Portrait of U.S. Abuse - New York Times

    Only Holder won't be examining any of this, will he? No, according to the article in the OP:
    Holder plans to investigate Bush Administration "crimes", while carefully skirting around anything that might link Dear Leader and his Administration's involvement in acts identical to these "crimes" in every legal particular.

    Frankly, I don't see any of it as being a crime. Terrorists have no legal protections they may claim as their own, and I'm quite at ease with the idea of both the military and the CIA literally squeezing every last bit of useful intel out of captured terrorists before tossing the broken carcasses on the garbage heap. However, if folks are going to piss and moan about these things being crimes, then they had better get their brains around the reality that these policies have not been ended, have not been altered in any substantive way (excluding the CIA from their continuance is not a substantive change), and that these "crimes" are the policy and practice of the current Administration just as much as they were of the Bush Administration.

    If Holder isn't going to investigate Dear Leader, then investigating Bush is a political persecution and a criminalization of policy that is absolutely not in the best interests of this country.
    The truth in a nutshell, I think, is this. While the Bush laws remain on the books, no one is being tortured. As for the excuses Bush made to abrogate the Geneva Convention, they were never legal, are not being used, and are no longer honored.

  4. #74
    Guru
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Northeast
    Last Seen
    11-03-11 @ 08:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    2,834

    Re: Criminal investigation into CIA treatment of detainees expected [edited]

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    You know me better than that. I firmly believe that if there is credible reason to suspect wrongdoing, it should be investigated, no matter who it is. Stop obfuscating the issue. The wrong way to handle possible wrongdoing is to point to some one else doing something wrong and use that as a justification.

    I don't get the point he's trying to make. He seems to think we're hyperpartisans like he comes across. We both want torture investigated no matter who does it.

  5. #75
    Sage
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    08-27-09 @ 08:41 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,344

    Re: Criminal investigation into CIA treatment of detainees expected [edited]

    Quote Originally Posted by PogueMoran View Post
    I don't get the point he's trying to make.
    My point is obvious and simple: Holder is investigating Bush while pointedly not investigating Dear Leader when both Administrations have the same policies and activities. The same "evidence" that presumably makes Bush's policies a crime makes Dear Leader's policies a continuation of that crime.

    You claim this investigation is not political--until parts of Dear Leader's Administration are mentioned as targets of investigation, it is not and cannot be anything but political.

  6. #76
    Guru
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Northeast
    Last Seen
    11-03-11 @ 08:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    2,834

    Re: Criminal investigation into CIA treatment of detainees expected [edited]

    Quote Originally Posted by celticlord View Post
    My point is obvious and simple: Holder is investigating Bush while pointedly not investigating Dear Leader when both Administrations have the same policies and activities. The same "evidence" that presumably makes Bush's policies a crime makes Dear Leader's policies a continuation of that crime.

    You claim this investigation is not political--until parts of Dear Leader's Administration are mentioned as targets of investigation, it is not and cannot be anything but political.

    Same policies? Torture has been stopped thus far. Executive order specifically states that they must follow the army field manual. Doesn't seem like the same policy. You had people on the top in the past administration ordering torture. Until such time that you can show that these torture practices have been carried on and people have been tortured I'd say you lack a point.

    It's not political. This isn't a witch hunt over a policy or ideology as it was with your McCarthy witch hunt investigation. This is an investigation over a crime that was carried out willingly and knowingly in contravention of US and International Law.

    Again why do you call him dear leader it just sounds ridiculous everytime you take the time to type it.

  7. #77
    Sage
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    08-27-09 @ 08:41 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,344

    Re: Criminal investigation into CIA treatment of detainees expected [edited]

    Quote Originally Posted by PogueMoran View Post
    Same policies? Torture has been stopped thus far.
    Oh? Really?

    Do Gitmo Abuses Still Continue? - ABC News
    In early February, a delegation from the Pentagon arrived to inspect detention conditions at the camp. The officials did not see Boumediene, the supposedly "free" detainee, because he had been placed in solitary confinement in Camp 3's so-called "Oscar Block" the day before. Of the acquitted detainees, he was the only one on a hunger strike.

    "They put him in a terribly cold cell with 50 degrees Fahrenheit (10 degrees Celsius)," says Kirsch. "For the first days he had no running water, and he had to sleep on a pad less than one-centimeter thick visibly stained and smelling of food, vomit and feces." According to Kirsch, Boumediene was "kept isolated there" for 10 days, until Feb. 10, and was "not permitted to shower, pray or change his clothes. He was force fed using violent methods that were intended to and did injure him, and there was no medical treatment" for a foot injury.
    This was earlier this year...after the new "policies" were implemented.

  8. #78
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:28 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,331
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Criminal investigation into CIA treatment of detainees expected [edited]

    Quote Originally Posted by celticlord View Post
    No obfuscation this time, just pointing out the politically convenient nature of Holder's "investigation".

    If the Bush Administration's policies violated the law, then Dear Leader's current policies violate the same laws, because they are the same policies. That's the double standard Holder is applying here--investigating the Bush Administration for "crimes" while not also investigating the current Administration for the same "crimes".
    The investigation is into alleged CIA abuses committed during the interrogation of terrorism suspects. Not the policy, but the acts. There is no evidence that I know of that these acts are happening under President Obama. Therefore your whole argument is in fact obfuscation. You are drawing attention away from what is really happening with vague accusations.

    If the interrogation methods used and approved by the Bush Administration were criminal, then why is Dear Leader promoting men like Stanley McChrystal? This is the officer who ran Camp Nama, which Human Rights Watch highlighted in their 2006 report "No Blood, No Foul". Dear Leader is the one who promoted him--rewarded him for his conduct in Iraq and Afghanistan. Congress, in his confirmation hearings, scrupulously avoided asking any questions about any of this, even though McChrystal's name has been linked in the media to both Camp Nama and Bagram Air Base:

    Stanley McChrystal on Torture - New Afghanistan General Approves Torture? - Esquire
    TASK FORCE 6-26: Inside Camp Nama; In Secret Unit's 'Black Room,' A Grim Portrait of U.S. Abuse - New York Times

    Only Holder won't be examining any of this, will he? No, according to the article in the OP:
    Holder plans to investigate Bush Administration "crimes", while carefully skirting around anything that might link Dear Leader and his Administration's involvement in acts identical to these "crimes" in every legal particular.
    You have not shown that any one in the Obama administration or the military under him have committed identical acts. You talk about the promotion of some one who was in charge of a unit where abuses are alleged to have taken place, but not during Obama's administration. See how you mislead people?

    Frankly, I don't see any of it as being a crime. Terrorists have no legal protections they may claim as their own, and I'm quite at ease with the idea of both the military and the CIA literally squeezing every last bit of useful intel out of captured terrorists before tossing the broken carcasses on the garbage heap. However, if folks are going to piss and moan about these things being crimes, then they had better get their brains around the reality that these policies have not been ended, have not been altered in any substantive way (excluding the CIA from their continuance is not a substantive change), and that these "crimes" are the policy and practice of the current Administration just as much as they were of the Bush Administration.

    If Holder isn't going to investigate Dear Leader, then investigating Bush is a political persecution and a criminalization of policy that is absolutely not in the best interests of this country.
    Again, you confuse policy with acts. What Holder is investigating is things people have done. It's not his job to investigate policy I do not believe. Personally, I think any policy that allows for torture/EIT and indefinite holding of prisoners without trial is bad policy, and acting on them may be illegal. If so, I have no problem with any investigation, though as I have stated, I think any prosecutions are bad, except in the situation I outlined in an earlier post in this thread.

    To repeat, and summarize: there is a difference between having a policy, and acting on a policy. This investigation is into acts, not the policy itself, though I hope this will spark action on any improper policy.

  9. #79
    Sage
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    08-27-09 @ 08:41 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,344

    Re: Criminal investigation into CIA treatment of detainees expected [edited]

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Not the policy, but the acts.
    Yeah, there's a small problem with that though.

    The acts were illegal only if the policy was illegal. If the policy is not illegal than the acts cannot be criminal because the actors were operating under color of law.

    As to the policy:

    Court Of Appeals Rules Detainees are not ?Persons? in Guantánamo Torture Suit | Center for Constitutional Rights

    Regardless of how you personally feel about the interrogation techniques (you and I are never going to agree on that point, so I'm not going to waste energy rehashing it), the unavoidable reality is that the current Administration publicly bashes Bush's policies while privately endorsing and continuing them. Those policies produced the actions that Holder now claims a desire to investigate. Those policies produced a presumption of legality on the part of the actors Holder now desires to investigate.

    To prosecute the act and not the policy, because the policy is being continued and supported, is nothing more than a political persecution.

  10. #80
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:28 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,331
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Criminal investigation into CIA treatment of detainees expected [edited]

    Quote Originally Posted by celticlord View Post
    Oh? Really?

    Do Gitmo Abuses Still Continue? - ABC News


    This was earlier this year...after the new "policies" were implemented.
    Let's take a closer look at this article:

    Believing that nothing would change and that his acquittal had been false, he launched another hunger strike. And, once again, he was force-fed. This entailed having a nurse insert a pencil-thick tube into his nose and snaking feeding tubes down into his stomach. It was a painful procedure, and Boudediene claims that he complained about the nurse taking more than 15 minutes to perform it -- long enough to make his nose bleed. He believes that she deliberately took her time and claims that, despite the new president's claims in faraway Washington, such actions were par for the course in Guantanamo.
    So to keep him alive, he had a painful procedure inflicted upon him. This is somewhat different than torture for information.

    The US Department of Defense denies all these accusations; it claims that they are unfounded and that procedures at Guantanamo have been reviewed. But Kirsch is convinced that the treatment of detainees like Boumediene violates the Geneva Conventions.
    Interesting, we have no corroboration of the claims of torture, just claims that have been denied. Enough to raise questions, but certainly far from a sure thing.

    Ironically, the delegation that the Pentagon sent to Guantanamo came to similar conclusions about the conditions there, noting that abuse and mistreatment had, in fact, occurred. But the Pentagon officials insisted that the soldiers in question were disciplined, ordered to undergo special training or discharged. Otherwise, its report was positive.
    Oh wait, it looks like something may have actually happened, and those responsible punished. Yes, that certainly is just like the Bush policy. This adds a little more credibility to Boumediene's story, but still makes it far from credible, especially since part of his claim involved life saving procedures.

    Other reports about the mistreatment of prisoners at Guantanamo have also emerged since Obama became president in January. Mohammed el Gharani, who was released and returned to his native Chad in April, claims that, until his last day at Guantanamo, soldiers beat him with sticks and used pepper spray on him whenever he refused to leave his cell. Another detainee has corroborated Gharani's claims.
    Now we have another claim that soldiers used force to make him leave his cell. Note again this is significantly different from systematic torture for information. Also note that this claim is made by one detainee, and corroborated only by another detainee...in other words, it's not fact yet, far from it.

    In point of fact, there is no evidence that the systematic use of EIT's is continuing, and evidence that those who have abused prisoners are being punished for it. This is a change in policy.

Page 8 of 14 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •