CIA employees won't be tried for waterboarding

[joeybee12]

Source: MSNBC

WASHINGTON - The Obama administration on Thursday informed CIA officials who used waterboarding and other harsh interrogation tactics on terror suspects that they will not be prosecuted, senior administration officials told The Associated Press.

Even before President Barack Obama took office in January, aides signaled his administration was not likely to bring criminal charges against CIA employees for their roles in the secret, coercive terrorist interrogation program. It had been deemed legal at the time through opinions issued by the Justice Department under the Bush administration.

But the statement being issued Thursday by Attorney General Eric Holder, the nation's chief law enforcement officer, is the first definitive assurance that those CIA officials are in the clear, as long as their actions were in line with the legal advice at the time.



Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30249847/

[global1]

1. Blanket Immunity For The Little Guys - We Were Only Following Orders Guys......

all fingers should be pointing up then. Will the Obama Administration have the guts to go after the ones that formulated the opinions and gave the orders? And I mean all the way to the top?

[rcrush]

2. I dont see a president going after the CIA.

They know better.

[mod mom]

7. How about Cheney, bush, Addington, Feith, Yoo, Gonzales et al?

We will lose credibility in the world and will carry a burden of shame until prosecutions occur.

[katty]

21. we've lost credibility, other countries bring our crimes to trial

this is a total joke.

[glinda]

10. Flotus and VP were threatened in so many words.

[DS1]

4. Fucking hell

He's just decided to release the documents, and some impatient tool always pipes up on DU "When will Obama have the the guts/spine/balls/take your pic" to do exactly what I want RIGHT FUCKING NOW?

Give the man time and he typically gets it right. When will you people learn this?

[doctor jazz]

13. So does "will not be prosecuted" actually mean "we might prosecute sometime in the future"?

If so, they're weasel words.
:shrug:

[DS1]

18. That's not what I was addressing

[EFerrari]

22. So, what has the new administration gotten right in this area?

Please remind me because I'm not seeing it and it would be nice to have something to hang onto.

[katty]

24. yes, what?! I don't want a high speed train-need some justice FIRST

[EFerrari]

27. Obama is in a horrible position.

I hope his Hawaiian zen is going full strength right now. :(

[bdamomma]

38. we need our laws to be restored that should be number 1.

and accountability, the Bush Administration is doubling over with laughter, and if they get off, they will do it again and it will be worse.

[DS1]

39. Today's release of the torture documents, for one

However, that's all I'm bothering to give you, as nothing will make you happy anyway

[EFerrari]

44. Make ME happy? What are you talking about?

[grahamhgreen]

49. You mean the REDACTED DOCUMENTS WITH THE GRAPHIC TORTURE REMOVED???

This is it for me. Torture is wrong. Did you know?

[EFerrari]

56. Is there a document dump? I can't find anything. n/t

[grahamhgreen]

152. Whoa - the graphic torture is in there!

[TheEuclideanOne]

70. It's all you are giving, because that's all you got!

You start with this argument that Obama is somehow holding out and that we should be patient and are jumping the gun, but when pressed for details, you cop out pretty quickly acting as though you have some secret knowledge that nobody else has and are simply holding back. Obama has never said that he would prosecute for past crimes because he is "looking forward", so I don't know why you are acting as though this is somewhow in his plans. Based on his words and lack of actions, it seems pretty clear that he will let these people get away with their crimes. Even Spain is taking the lead on this because it is pretty clear that we will do NOTHING!

[DS1]

73. Wow, you're desperate. I never said anything of the sort.

Good day, sir!

[No More Bushbots]

81. +10 Internets to you!

[tomm2thumbs]

119. agreed - the outrage at this point is leveled at the messenger, not the criminals

after not-even-100 days in, look at the daily infected overflow that is still spewing from the bush/cheney sewer of the last 8 years.

As for Obama, let's let the guy, who I don't believe has a hidden agenda to ruin our country, feed our economy to the world, or undermine our moral foundations... and who is a constitutional lawyer with grace and smarts... let him do what he feels is right and we can argue in a year should those things become transparently horrid. I don't believe there is anyone OTHER than Obama I would like in this position right now, given the circumstances.

[Iowa]

138. What a load of bullshit...

"Fucking hell...some impatient tool always pipes up on DU "When will Obama have the the guts/spine/balls/take your pic" to do exactly what I want RIGHT FUCKING NOW? Give the man time..."

-----

What the hell are you talking about? This is f*cking TORTURE we're talking about, and it's very telling that you didn't use that word in your post. Here's basically what you are saying with the word "torture" included:

"Citizens should not insist that torturers be prosecuted. They should just trust our President."

But that's not what you said. You didn't use the word "torture" and you puffed up your words with lots of bravado and bluster so your words wouldn't come off sounding quite so servile and depraved.

Torture isn't a gray area. It's non-negotiable, crystal-clear, black and white, and doesn't require "time to get it right". Getting "torture" right is about as easy as anything a human-being could possibly do. If the heinous crime of torture is committed, you hunt down and prosecute the offenders. No dilly-dallying and no hand-wringing. You just do it. Because if you don't, absolutely anything goes, and we are no longer a civilized society. This isn't the least bit difficult.

And by the way, the definition of "tool" (the word you used to describe DUers who prefer to hold their civil servants accountable) is this: "A person used as an instrument by another person". I think you have it exactly backwards.

[joeybee12]

5. Dont' bet on it...n/t

[tavalon]

31. Name names then, names of those who gave you those orders.

[pocoloco]

120. Didn't work at Nuremberg.........

or at Andersonville.

We really picked a winner.

[xxqqqzme]

128. in a word NO they do not have the guts to do it.

It leaves it wide open for these abuses to be repeated in the near future, if yesterday's whining is any indication. When these abuses are repeated, no if but when, it will be citizen's w/i our borders that are rounded up. Thanks for all that hope and change we could have believed in. It seems we are NOT the people we have been waiting for.

[mod mom]

3. Does this imply that we WILL go after those who ordered it but not those who carried out the orders?

[global1]

46. That Is My Reading Of The Original Message.......

....CIA officials who used waterboarding and other harsh interrogation tactics on terror suspects that they will not be prosecuted.

....Even before President Barack Obama took office in January, aides signaled his administration was not likely to bring criminal charges against CIA employees for their roles in the secret, coercive terrorist interrogation program.....

In both cases it cites CIA officials & CIA employees. It doesn't say those that formulated the torture policies or those who ordered the torture be done.

So my thinking is this leaves the door open to go right to the top and get them - using those that used the techniques to point the blame where it should be.

[Duende azul]

137. Arrgh. "harsh interrogation tactics on terror suspects" They use Cheney-speak

How can they not name it by its name.
And they managed to put the t-word in.

Brainwash the public.
And the so much praised release of the documents - limited hangout anyone?

Regarding the "employees": They knew what they did. How could they not know?
And why should they point fingers at anybody, now that the have their impunity promised by Holder?

[ima_sinnic]

80. nah, he's also too cowardly to tell We The People that the perpetrators are also off the hook

I would love to be proven wrong.

[bdamomma]

6. oh crap, looks like the Bush Crime Family is above the law.

when is justice ever going to be done. Looks like they are letting the criminals go, first Spain now this. Can we please restore the law!!!

[rcrush]

8. They own you.

They own the government. Their friends own the other world governments. Anything that is done is done for show.

[FiveGoodMen]

9. That's what 'Ownership Society' really means!

[saigon68]

29. Looks like 4 more YRS

[aquart]

11. What a useful sentiment.

Lie down in the road so they can run over you.

[closeupready]

58. That's exactly right.

n/t

[Cronopio]

110. GAME OVER MAN! GAME OVER!!!!

[Pirate Smile]

12. This is for the agents, not the people who made the policies.

[doctor jazz]

14. The Nuremburg defense?

Bah.

[dflprincess]

93. Except it didn't work at Nuremburg. (eom)

[Lilith Velkor]

111. That's because the Nazis lost the war.

Why do you think we only attack defenseless countries?

[EFerrari]

15. This is for the people who physically committed war crimes by torturing other human beings.

Let's be plain.

The only reason to immunize them is to obtain their testimony. I hope that's where this is going.

[grahamhgreen]

51. But it's not what was announced.

[EFerrari]

54. Correct. n/t

[atreides1]

40. The Agents

Fuck the agents, what makes them any better then Demjanjuk, he was following orders too.

By the way what ever did happen to the young sons of Khalid Sheik Mohammed, or were they just the victims of those who made the policies also?

I never liked Bush or Cheney, but they didn't do the waterboarding, head slamming, or other things that were done. That was carried out by evil men and women who truly believed that by torturing someone they were protecting this country.

Like someone said the Nuremberg Defense, which only works with American personnel.

[Duende azul]

129. Yes. Demjanjuk comes to mind.

Although there is a difference in magnitude,in the sheer number of the deeds.
On the other hand, if you cross the line to torture perhaps the number of crimes committed may only be limited by orders, situation, opportunity. So the difference in magnitude may be smaller than one could assume.

Serious stuff. Giving immunity to the actual perpetrators without getting nothing from them in exchange. Nothing. Or does anyone assume they will spill the beans out of gratefulness for not being prosecuted?
Hell, with so much people involved they could have gotten evidence against the whole chain of command. They higher up you go in the structure, the more experts at CYA you'll find. So if it were a serious endeavour to get them, now it´s harder to accomplish.

And since this admin has a lot of sharp minds in its ranks I can´t convince myself to believe they were not aware of this.
The incompetence excuse worked in Bushtimes - not now. Evidentially, they don´t want to punish the whole bunch responsible.


"but...but.... America got the evil pirates shot!!!!"

[primavera]

16. Of course not

This is America, the land of no accountability. No accountability for corporate crooks, no accountability for corrupt politicians, no accountability for mass murdering administrations, why should the CIA be any different?

[Amonester]

65. Yep. The only accountability is for the little guy who enjoys a puff

of canabis here and there, who never does anything wrong to anyone, and who ends up carrying a criminal record for the rest of his living days, even if he decides to stop smoking for good reasons.

All the big billionaire crooks who screw millions of people over and over always get away scot-free.

And they call that the Department of Justice!

[katty]

17. and again, no accountability necessary...a dead body politic

sickening

[barbtries]

19. then go after their bosses

gawd FUCKING damnit

[TheCoxwain]

20. THIS SUUUUKKKKKKS!!!!!

[Wizard777]

23. I don't mind this one bit as long as they go after those generating that legal opinion tooth & nail

If Obama allows the Bush Administration to get away with their crimes. I don't care if Obama creates heaven on earth. I will not vote for him again. At that point it will be the duty of every American to shut down our Courts and Legislature. We'll just have an Executive Branch to pay the bills. If we can't prosecute Bush & Cheney we cannot prosecute anyone. In the purest spirit of equal protection of law. If Bush and Cheney are above the law. So are all Americans. We won't need courts or a legislature in the new Law Free America of OBAMA'S creation.

[katty]

25. thank you - agree!

[TheCoxwain]

26. I dont think this is implied .. I think Blanket immunity for everyone is more like it

I would love to be wrong

[driver8]

28. I'm with you.

This is absolute bullshit.

[EFerrari]

30. It makes no sense to give the actual torturers a pass.

If those people were just following orders, then CIA needs to be shut down completely because they don't have enough common sense to work for our government.

[Wizard777]

72. I kinda agree with that for several reasons. I also understand Obama's point.

Government employees have to be able to rely upon legal opinions by legal authorities such as the DOJ. As long as they going to go after the people issuing the Intentionally erroneous legal opinions to enable an other wise illegal policy. Then I don't have a problem with this. But I'm only willing to over look their part in the crimes if the charge goes straight to the top.

But I also see your point. This pretty much Nullifies our laws that basically say just following orders is not a legal defense to criminal charges. This creates a paradox that dictates that in theorem it's not a valid defense. But in Practicum it is a very valid defense.

Also I know people that have asked police officers if it is legal for them to do something. The officers have told them absolutely it is. They do it and they arrested by another officer with an entirely different legal opinion. So in this instance obtaining opinions from a legal authority was not a valid defense in theorem AND in Practicum. We simply can not have a set of laws for the people and a separate set for the government. That's when we begin to have a Government of the government by the government for the government and let the people be damned. Because at the hands of this Government they surely will be damned.

Many States have adopted provision of the US Constitution for their own Constitutions. I think it's time for the US Constitution to Adopt a provision from the Maryland Constitution.

Art. 44. That the provisions of the Constitution of the United States, and of this State, apply, as well in time of war, as in time of peace; and any departure therefrom, or violation thereof, under the plea of necessity, or any other plea, is subversive of good Government, and tends to anarchy and despotism.

Art. 9. That no power of suspending Laws or the execution of Laws, unless by, or derived from the Legislature, ought to be exercised, or allowed.


This is basically what Obama and Holder are doing. They are suspending the Execution of Law. This should not be tolerated. If Article 9 of the Maryland Constitution was adopted or Co opted into the US Constitution. They still could have conducted the tortures without being prosecuted. But only after Congress had suspend the law regarding torture. But under equal protection that law would be suspended for everyone. If someone kidnapped a woman, tortured raped and murdered her during the suspension. They could be be prosecuted for the kidnapping Rape and murder. But not the torture because that law had been suspended by Congress. It would even provide Congress with a second chance to provide a protection for those who violated the law that had not been suspended in the best interests of the nation. They could suspend the execution of torture laws for that period, But once again that guy gets away with torture because they can only suspend the execution of the law. Not the execution of specific cases. So with Article 9 of the Maryland Constitution added to the US Constitution. Without a suspension from Congress. Holder would be required to execute the law and could be removed from office for not doing so.

[EFerrari]

74. When we signed onto the Geneva Conventions, it became a crime

not to prosecute torture. :shrug:

[Wizard777]

90. Yes and that demands investigation from the top down. Not the Bottom up.

The second tortured was discovered. That should have triggered an investigation of the President to determine if he had authorized that.

Article 12

Prisoners of war are in the hands of the enemy Power, but not of the individuals or military units who have captured them. Irrespective of the individual responsibilities that may exist, the Detaining Power is responsible for the treatment given them.


That means Bush's butt is on the hot seat for any mistreatment. As Commander and Chief he is the detaining Power.

[pat_k]

105. Hear, Hear! There's a reason that those who torture under color of law. . .

. . .are subject to the ultimate penalty. Presumably, the prospect of facing death for ones actions -- even if "following orders" -- would motivate EVERY government official to refuse to go anywhere near "the line." They blatantly crossed that line and knew it. The fact they sought "assurance" of "legality" demonstrates consciousness of guilt.

[jamesbolton]

33. You have to vote for him...

because he is the better choice. Your post is irrational.

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

41. There is a third party

and I to will not vote for him again, Mr. Bolton.

What's not rational is coming here trying to start something.

[dcindian]

67. supporting torture is irrational.

And voting for the irrational is irrational.

[Wizard777]

77. Is he really the better choice or just the lesser of two evils?

If we continue to vote for the lesser of two evils we will NEVER be given a better choice. Don't get me wrong. I voted for Obama. I'm also 77 years old. That vote was the first time in my life I actually felt like I was NOT voting for the lesser of two evils. It was the first time in my life I actually felt like I was voting for something and someone that was good. After that amazingly wonderful experience. I really can't go back to voting for the lesser of two evils. I cannot and will not do it. I will no longer help to perpetuate even the lesser evil in any way. I will only vote for what is good. This is part of the Obama Change I will not part with. From this day forward I will only vote for good. I Sincerely hope Obama does not allow the ways of this wicked world to drag him down to being the lesser of two evils. Because I would really love to vote for him again.

[ima_sinnic]

79. well said--and what I know I am feeling but did not have the words to say

I plan to vote 3rd party in 2012 if this blatant kowtowing to the crime syndicate isn't resolved.

[grahamhgreen]

52. Right, "Sovereign Immunity" immunizes We The People from all prosecutions!

[Wizard777]

82. We the People actually are the Sovereign entity of this county.

The Government is merely our Representatives empowered to conduct our business for us. That's another thing I love about the Maryland Constitution. It makes that quite clear.

Article 1. That all Government of right originates from the People, is founded in compact only, and instituted solely for the good of the whole; and they have, at all times, the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their Form of Government in such manner as they may deem expedient.


The Maryland Government exists in Compact (the Maryland Constitution) only. Everything outside of the Constitution. Including our Governor, Legislature, military, and police are extremely expendable. We have the right to Abolish our Government and reform it for no other reason than it's the quickest way to solve the problem we face. We maybe doing exactly that soon. Maryland is becoming one of the most oppressive tax hells in existence. We had a billion dollar budget deficit. We have received billions in stimulus funds on top of raising taxes. Some were 100% increases and we STILL have a one billion dollar budget deficit. It's becoming apparent that Annapolis has placed an armed guard on that deficit with orders to shoot to kill anyone trying to get near it with a payment. Because they'll need that reusable excuse for the next round of tax increases. At that point every paycheck in Maryland will say Pay to the Order of: Maryland State Comptroller. They're gonna leave us no other alternative than to Abolish the government. You're all fired! From the Governor right down to the street sweepers. You're all fired! Every last one of you!

[grahamhgreen]

150. None of us could be prosecuted for anything Obama is allowed to claim "Sovereign Immunity"

[ima_sinnic]

75. exactly. everything else he is doing is just a facade over a cancer

he always does "just enough" to make it look like he's a REAL "consitutional scholar." but not enough that anybody ever pays for their crimes.

He uses the word "retribution," like that's what it's about. No, Barack, it's about JUSTICE. It's about RULE OF LAW--remember that? it's about the fact that there are CONSEQUENCES FOR BREAKING THE LAW--you know, like weed smokers have to do time for "breaking the law"? I know that being a "constitutional scholar" and all, you must have a terribly hard time remembering those elementary, 4th-grade concepts, with your head in the lofty academic air of "constitutional law." Try to find the time to review your Cliff Notes on Constitution 101. It might clear up your confusion about exactly what to do about this.

pfffft. Never again will I vote for this person--unless Bush et al. are brought to justice. So far, he's just a well-paid toady tool of the rotten underbelly string-puller ghouls.

[katty]

78. he's got his NLP down-but it is about 'breaking the LAW'

can't smooth it over with empty words.

[Wizard777]

94. Obama is beginning to come off like Bush post 9/11.

Everyone is energized and behind him. But what he says and what he does are two totally different things. Obama saying, No one is above the law is becoming like Bush saying that he will use every resource of this government to bring those responsible for this attack to justice. Then Bush turns around and uses every resource of this government to make Cheney rich beyond his wildest dreams. What they say and what they do are two totally different things. Next will be Obama saying he really isn't concerned with the Bush Administrations crimes. Like Bush was able to reach a point where he was no longer concerned with Usama bin Laden and his crimes against us.

[ima_sinnic]

127. oh god, that is just too horribly true. "no one is above the law" = cheap, meaningless words

-- and there will always be something "more urgent" that has to be done "first."
and just as the easily compliant people fell back asleep after the initial shock and awe of the Iraq Conquest, so in a few months or a year will they be lulled into forgetting about the need to hold war criminals and traitors accountable.

[Wizard777]

149. It's a great and noble Theorem. But now we need to see the Practicum.

If he's gonna talk the talk. He's gonna have to walk the walk. That means Bush & Cheney are gonna have to do the frog march.

[gratuitous]

32. The United States might not try them

But someone else might decide to try them, find them guilty, and assess a punishment all in one fell swoop. Of course, summary judgment has a way of scooping up a few or a lot of innocents along with the guilty, but you don't mind being killed because of the torture inflicted on suspects, do you? I thought not! So, let the good times roll. Until they don't. Then we can get all scared and mad again when the next atrocity is inflicted on us (for no good reason!), and start it all over again.

Heck, we've been dancing this dance for centuries. Why stop now?

[pat_k]

112. "someone else" (Italy) is already is going after 26 of them. . .

in relation to the abduction of Egyptian cleric Abu Omar. No confirmation that they are CIA operatives (not a status that tends to get confirmed), but the prosecution of 26 Americans and 7 Italians http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-italy-cia13-2009mar13,0,5248749.story">is still moving forward.

[gratuitous]

125. Which is fortunate

Because Italy and Spain and other countries doing this through the orderly procedure of international treaties will not only work toward a just verdict, but assure that the rights of the accused are as protected as they can and should be. I just hope that in the meantime, some folks don't let their justifiable anger get the better of them and decide to start dealing out justice in a rough and ready fashion that cares little for the proper adjudication of these crimes and that the punishment meted out doesn't fall on the innocent as well as the guilty.

[lebkuchen]

34. This is what happened at Oradour sur Glane

The Waffen-SS and a bunch of Alsacian recruits entered Oradour sur Glane, in France, murdered 642 men, women and children and burned the village down. What remains of the buildings and what the Nazis didn't loot stands as a reminder today that this tragedy happened in our lifetime, and it could happen again. In fact, it did, in Viet Nam and Iraq, with much more loss of life and property. The perpetrators of Oradour, or those who could be found, were given amnesty in an effort to "look forward."

Obama won't get another dime from me. He's just another Gerald Ford and will surely be a one-termer.

[bdamomma]

35. I think at Obama's next Town Hall someone must get up and

ask if the Bush Administration will ever be prosecuted, just come out and say it.

[No Elephants]

36. Bloody hell.

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

37. Why even tell them they will not be prosecuted unless

prosecutions are being considered?






Rule of Law
Our Values
Injustice to one is injustice to all

Hope?

[Baby Snooks]

42. Hope?

There is no hope and that has been made very clear by the president who offered us hope. There will be no justice. Here or anywhere else.

[katty]

43. I've had it with HOPE-I want some ACTION

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

45. I'm sure not going to argue that point. I agree with you.

sadly.

[winyanstaz]

47. so its only a war crime when the japanese and nazis did it?

Didn't we hang some japanese dude for water boarding during world war 2? Didn't we hang a whole bunch of german soldiers for "just following orders?"
Why was it wrong for germans and not for our own cia? Just wondering how that is rationalized is all.
Too bad it wont bring back the dead..or America's honor.

[katty]

53. apparently, ONLY a crime when done by other countries

America and Israel share this interpretation of "the law", it is very convenient.

[dcindian]

66. Only the losers get tried for war crimes.

For the aristocrats of this country it's a full paid retirement from the little people. You know.... the one's who have to follow the law.

[grahamhgreen]

48. Obama defends torture... OMFG, I was had!

[grahamhgreen]

50. And what are these torturers giving us in return for this plea bargain???

[LynneSin]

55. These aren't the people we want - we want the policy makers

And perhaps if there is immunity involved they'll speak up and help us get the ones who created these policies.

[grahamhgreen]

57. Please promote our little anti torture movie teaser trailer, if you have time... (warning - scary)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcl-uofCzRc

[Danger Mouse]

59. Hmm...I wonder what will come of this?

[Deep13]

60. Bottom line, Obama needs the good will of the CIA...

...so no prosecution. Who cares about the rule of law when you can hold the president and the safety of the nation hostage. The whole department should be run out on a rail and replaced with people actually loyal to the United States of America.

[dgibby]

87. The last President who took on the CIA was JFK.

'Nuff said!

[Baby Snooks]

124. So let Congress take care of the CIA

I think we would actually see another revolution if suddenly all of Congress died in plane crashes, automobile accidents, and "random acts of violence." Plus a couple of "suicides" thrown in for good measure.

The CIA may be able to assassinate a president. They can't do the same with Congress. Congress needs to put an end to Murder, Inc. And if it won't we need to get rid of Congress at the polls. Which we should have started doing last November. Starting with Nancy Pelosi.

Seems quite a bit was off the table. Not just impeachment.

[Nihil]

145. Don't hold your breath on that one either.

> I think we would actually see another revolution if suddenly all
> of Congress died in plane crashes, automobile accidents, and
> "random acts of violence." Plus a couple of "suicides" thrown in
> for good measure.
>
> The CIA may be able to assassinate a president. They can't do the
> same with Congress.

The fact is that they don't need to.

Two reasons for this:

1) You wouldn't see another revolution if someone locked the doors
of Congress and set fire to the place with 90% of the people inside.
It would be on the TV and then used as a reason to rush through some
more "anti-terrorist" legislation by the "fortunate survivors" and
anyone who disputed the validity of it would be branded a "Conspiracy
Theorist" (or worse).

2) They don't even need to kill a single person, just scare them.
The anthrax letters achieved everything that was required without anyone
(other than a personal non-Congress hit and a few "little people") being
killed. The effect however is very well known. And it could happen again
tomorrow if they wanted it to.

Can you *really* put your hand on your heart and say that the above is
not the most likely outcome in the USA today?

:shrug:

[dgibby]

146. You'll get no argument from me on that.

[frog92969]

61. Give us their names!

If mob justice is our only recourse then so be it!

[downindixie]

62. I hope that Obama brings charges against Cheney,Gonzales,and

the rest,but I'm so heart broken about all this.I just don't know what to say except I'm completely devastated by what Obama has been doing.I may never vote again!

[democrank]

63. I don`t give a damn if I`m the only Democrat left standing on

the anti-torture, arrest these barbarians side. I will not budge a millimeter on this one.

Torture isn`t something a civilized person supports and it certainly isn`t something a principled leader has to mull over before deciding yea or nay. If the CIA has Obama backed into a corner over torture, he needs to remind them who the president is. This isn`t an issue I can be lukewarm over. Obama better deliver on this one.

[pjt7]

68. Obama is a political

animal.

Nothing more,nothing less.

[EFerrari]

84. This is what exploded my head: he called these torturers

courageous.

"The men and women of our intelligence community serve courageously on the front lines of a dangerous world."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8347766

I feel completely lost at the moment. :shrug:

[Solly Mack]

96. Yeah..that did it for me too

How courageous is it to torture someone?

[Cronopio]

113. We have ways of making you believe it is courageous. :)

Obama and O'Brien - such strange bedfellows.

[Solly Mack]

114. No doubt. Been reading about those ways for 7 years now

Still reading about them tonight

:(

[dcindian]

64. I cannot even put into words how dissapointed I am in this.

Even some of my co-workers are deeply upset about this type of injustice. One a democratic mayor of a local village says he may even leave the party over this. This is nothing more than the same type of legal barbarism practice by the Germans in the 30's and 40's.

Deeply disturbing. What's next burning witches? As long as someone gives advice that it is legal this administration seems to be ok with it.

[bullimiami]

69. sorry but nuremburg removed the 'just following orders' defense.

are we a country of laws or not?

apparently. not.

[DebbieCDC]

71. I hate to say this, but I think Obama is consigning himself to a one-term presidency

The progressives and other people who want to see justice in this country and losing the "hope" we thought we won in November 2008. Every day I see more and more cover up of 8 years of horror in this country. I don't think I can support Obama again 2012. It breaks my heart to say this, but he and the Dem congress are doing nothing to bring bushco to justice. I'm sick of this "let's move beyond it" crap. For me this is it. It give me no joy to say this -- just the opposite.

[L0oniX]

97. Yea ...the next time I get a traffic ticket I'll tell the cop "let's move beyond it".

[Solly Mack]

76. America protects and defends...war criminals

Nice. I feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Course, everyone knows it was just those "bad apples" who committed torture anyway.
Everyone else just engaged in "harsh" interrogations.

[babsbunny]

83. That's Okay cause all these Mother Effers are going to hell!

They will live out their sad little lives wishing they were dead!

[Bluenorthwest]

85. Holder and Obama are cowards

This makes America no longer America. That prick Holder wants to come after people for possesing marijuana, and he can not stomach prosecuting torturers? What kind of back assward man is that? I have to tell you, this jerk has some kind of nerve calling this country cowardly. He is giving the blanket Nurmemberg defense to the worst criminals of all. He is redefining America.

[dcindian]

86. Well I am no troll and I cannot identify myself with these torture supporters.

So I am out. See ya all next time the Democrats get some moral values.

[mvd]

88. "dangerous world" and "protecting America" are not valid excuses for not seeking justice

so I can't agree with this.

[Midniteagle]

101. To me, it has just...........

brought everything crashing down. I used to have hope that something would be done about:

1. The Stolen Elections
2. The 9/11 conspiricy
3. The Illegal war in Iraq
4. The War crimes they created and carried out....
8. All the young American lives this crap cost........
7. All the young, and not so young lives, American, and otherwise,
brutally ruined and/or lost in the 2 wars that no one wanted
8. The Second Stolen Election,
9. The Illegal open end contracts overseas with all the "missing" Money
10. The Bailouts, the Bankrupting of our country,
11. The destroyed Constitution we used to have,
12. The fascist police state that we are becoming.......

I used to think that we had hope......

I used to think there was change we could believe in.......

I don't think so any more, and I wish I knew what to think, and who or what to believe in anymore...

[mvd]

104. Welcome to DU

I hear you. The President hasn't been all bad on these issues, and it's early, but I was hoping for more.

[ima_sinnic]

130. welcome! there are a lot of disillusioned people here, so stick around

-- good list from the tip of the iceberg.

[Smith_3]

89. Well shit. What is next? Concentration camp guards were not doing anything wrong either then?

What about slave owners? Guess it was perfectly fine for those cops to arrest Rosa Parks too.

Stupid and wrong decision.

[mvd]

92. And Hayden was complaining about even releasing the memos!

There's obviously a strong force there that's intimidating and doesn't want to be upset. But I don't understand ruling out prosecutions just like I didn't understand ruling out impeachmen.

[antimatter98]

91. These CIA criminals should be killed, not tried. n/t

[pat_k]

121. The penalty of death is what they risked when they approached "the line". . .

They knew they were crossing "the line" -- the fact they looked for "assurances" of legality (CYA memos) shows consciousness of guilt.

There is a reason that one who tortures under color of law is subject to the penalty of death if the tortured person happens to die (and we know that at least 100 who were held DID die). Presumably, the prospect of the ultimate penalty would motivate any rational person to "Just Say No" to any "questionable" act.

Whatever Obama and Holder might say, some will never be "off the hook." There is no statute of limitations in cases where the "subject" died.

[L0oniX]

95. Good luck to them if they travel abroad.

Doing it to protect America ...or to protect their jobs? We are a nation that uses torcher and sadly it has the approval of you know who now. Very disturbing.

[madrchsod]

98. they were following orders of the president of the united states

of course they knew it was morally wrong , they knew none of the information was creditable,but since it was legal the really sick sadistic mother fuckers used torture to fulfill their fantasies.

their greatest fear is being tortured as they tortured others.

[EFerrari]

100. It was NEVER legal.

We never rescinded our agreement with the Geneva Conventions.

PLEASE don't forward the meme that this was ever LEGAL.

[Solly Mack]

103. Exactly. NEVER legal.

[mvd]

134. Good point there

And I'm hoping this isn't the end of the investigation.

[pat_k]

123. No memo or order can make a blatant war crime "legal"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3834913&mesg_id=3835418

[LaPera]

99. Another BushCo victory given to them by uh....whom?

[Sarah Ibarruri]

102. Fine. The little guys were taking orders from the 2 big guys. Are they being brough to justice?

Hmm? I don't see any sign of it. Don't get me wrong. I'm not one of the Obama-haters. I do, however, want to know what kind of deal he made with the pigs and why. If not, there should be prosecution of Bush-Cheney going on.


:argh:

[EFerrari]

144. I'm not an Obama hater, either. But there is no way someone who

slams a head thirty times against a wall is a "little guy" in all of this. :shrug:

[tomm2thumbs]

106. my opinion is that this is triage on the problem which will be dealt with later - not ignored

at some point, if you try to deal with every piece of crap that Bush did over the last 8 years, we'd be spending 24 years on all of it and getting NOTHING done to fix the country. I do believe he will take care of this and make sure folks are held accountable - in time, but if we added this to the long list of horrors that we DON'T know about with Bush's 8 years, I think the country would literally stop operating.

Given the nature of the legal maneuvering the Cheney 'legal' memorandums gave, I could see how people who actually were committing bad acts were given a false sense of legality to their actions. They were culpable, but in a way were given not-entirely-unreasonable & believable arguments not to consider their work actual torture. Let's face it, the press and democrats bought in to it too. No one in mass objected in a way that caused any change during the Bush years.

It's like that old adage - how to you eat an elephant - one bite at a time. The bite that Bush left us is so big it would choke the government right now but it is to be cut up and dealt with as time moves forward. Given the record, I believe President Obama is the last person to literally shove something under the carpet permanently, but in triage, you have to prioritize and treat the biggest ills first. He is working on an economic, international, social and political quadruple bypass right now and to try to open up a recent scar on the body and do plastic surgery on it at the same time will have to wait until the life-threatening surgery is over.

Now, a year from now if something has not begun over this issue, then folks can raise their attacks and go after the administration full throttle.

[librechik]

132. agree-this seems like more or less standard immunity in exchange for testimony

i can live with this if it means thorough investigation w transparency, which i believe is implicit here

[and-justice-for-all]

107. unreal...

people caught with a dime bag get jail time; but not these fucks.

[NoSheep]

108. But the justice dept has not been excused.

[Name removed]

109. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Cronopio]

117. Let's not overgeneralize, please.

It's not saying much to say that Obama is better than G.W. Bush, but you have to be noticing some real improvements. Even if Obama is screwing up on this issue big time.

[PSPS]

136. It isn't like this is his only failure

In so many areas, from torture to wiretapping to foreign gulags to economic policy, Obama is just another Bush. He's turned out to be exactly what his nickname implies: President Milquetoast.

[joeybee12]

147. He talks about hard choices, but really hasn't made any yet....

...I'd like to see one and then I'd be happy.

[Cronopio]

153. There is one crucial difference.

G.W. Bush had nothing better to offer than what he did. On one hand, Obama should know better and from earlier statements of his, it's clear he did know better a short time ago, so from that standpoint he's worse than Bush. On the other hand, he at least has the potential to rethink his decisions unlike Bush.

So I'm still not regretting my vote for Obama given the alternatives.

[iamthebandfanman]

115. Why uphold any laws?!

if people in the government can break the law, with absolutely no fear of repercussions... then why should i follow the laws?



this is a huge mistake.

i agree its not the best time to go throwing people in jail from the other side of the isle, but its not about partison politics...

its about the rule of law.



who gets to decide what laws are allowed to be broken and whether or not someone should get in trouble for it ?

this is a slippery slope.


want to let people blatently break a law? then dont expect ANYONE to follow not only that law, but ANY law.

[EndElectoral]

116. ACCOUNTABILITY is DEAD!!!!!!

[uberblonde]

118. Of course not!

But hey, did you see American Idol last night?

[Joey Liberal]

122. Obama caved

While the Tea Baggers were calling for a revolution Obama caved. We should be prosecutiong everyone from the top down who was involved in torture.

[edc]

126. The CIA

is the covert enforcement arm of the WASP Mafia and always has been. Its fortunes rise and fall with theirs. It has not been this powerful since the 1960s.

[Vidar]

131. Obama is looking more & more worthless. The only thing he does well is talk.

[lynne]

133. How could you try someone for something that was deemed legal at the time?

If they change the speed limit from 65 to 55 tomorrow, do you think you should be given a ticket for doing 65 last week? Like it or not, as long as they were acting within the letter of the law at the time, there is absolutely nothing to try them for.

[PSPS]

135. Sorry, but torture has never been "legal."

[lynne]

139. So, is the article wrong then? -

- As it states their actions were within the law according to the Justice Department. Which is it? :shrug:

[grahamhgreen]

151. A statute does not override the laws set forth in the constitution, so the 'law' is null and void, n

nor does a statute override our treaty obligations on torture.

ie, the constitution and treaties take precedence. Therefore laws were broken.

Serious crimes involving the torture and murder of innocent people.

Make sense?

[jewishlibrl]

143. The Convention Against Torture says the CIA must disobey orders o torture

An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture.

http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/h_cat39.htm

[jkilvik]

140. Are Repatriations now in order?

Does this mean we should begin paying repatriations to to the families of German and Japanese whom we hung following WWII for performing some of the same acts on our soldiers and sailors?

[noamnety]

141. Congress CAN'T prosecute because congress was complicit

They saw the videos, they continued to vote to fund operations there.

[Mark Twain Girl]

142. True, that. Congress knows it shares the crimes. There was plenty of evil to go around. nt

[Liberalynn]

148. Between this decision and failing to stand up for the women of

Afghanistan, I am really starting to loose belief that any one and I mean anyone who gets into power in Washington will be any more likely to fufill their oath to the Constitution, equality, democracy, and just plain human decency, than the BushCo criminals were.


We might as well admit it the rule of law is dead in this country.

[lovuian]

154. Last I heard the President wasn't allowed to

protect people who violate the law of country