Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

RawStory: Senate report: Bush admin. solicited torture ‘wish list,’ ordered ‘communist’ tactics

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Norquist Nemesis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-22-09 12:42 AM
Original message
RawStory: Senate report: Bush admin. solicited torture ‘wish list,’ ordered ‘communist’ tactics
This goes along with what we're getting about the SERE program...

http://rawstory.com/08/blog/2009/04/21/senate-report-after-soliciting-torture-wish-list-bush-admin-ordered-chinese-communist-techniques/

Senate report: Bush admin. solicited torture ‘wish list,’ ordered ‘communist’ tactics

A report by the Senate Armed Services Committee released Tuesday night says that torture techniques used at Abu Ghraib prison and approved by officials in the George W. Bush administration were applied only after soliciting a “wish list” from interrogators.

President George W. Bush made a written determination that Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, which would have afforded minimum standards for humane treatment, did not apply to al Qaeda or Taliban detainees. This act, the committee found, cleared the way for a new interrogation program to be developed in-part based on “Chinese communist” tactics used against Americans during the Korean War, mainly to elicit false confessions for propaganda purposes.

The committee’s report was made available in Dec. 2008, but was delayed by the Pentagon’s declassification program. Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) concluded that the findings were enough to warrant serious consideration by the Department of Justice.

“There is still the question, however, of whether high level officials who approved and authorized those policies should be held accountable,” he wrote. “I have recommended to Attorney General Holder that he select a distinguished individual or individuals – either inside or outside the Justice Department, such as retired federal judges – to look at the volumes of evidence relating to treatment of detainees, including evidence in the Senate Armed Services Committee’s report, and to recommend what steps, if any, should be taken to establish accountability of high-level officials – including lawyers.”

(cont. at link above)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Aqaba Donating Member (781 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-22-09 12:55 AM
Response to Original message
1. Holy shit
I'm speechless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-22-09 12:55 AM
Response to Original message
2. Ooooh! But we have to protect those
interrogators because they were only "following orders".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-22-09 01:01 AM
Response to Original message
3. Well wasn't it nice to try and get the matter dismissed before this was released.
But instead they just managed to focus attention on it.

I want Bush/Cheney/Gonzales/Yoo/Bybee/ et al to die in prison.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RoyGBiv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-22-09 01:03 AM
Response to Original message
4. One line in that article ...

... has to be utter horse shit.

"Even George J. Tenet, the C.I.A. director who insisted that the agency had thoroughly researched its proposal and pressed it on other officials, did not examine the history of the most shocking method, the near-drowning technique known as waterboarding," which I gather is a quote from the Senate Armed Services Committee report.

The notion of the damn director of the damn CIA not knowing the history of waterboarding is either patently absurd or indicative of rank incompetence or perhaps astonishingly willful ignorance.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-22-09 01:29 AM
Response to Original message
5. Is there any precedent for indicting lawyers in these circumstances?
Edited on Wed Apr-22-09 01:29 AM by JDPriestly
I mean is there any precedent in U.S. law?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 06:41 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC