They need to go to jail

andrew_sullivan

I don’t quote him often, but when I do, it’s a doozy. Andrew Sullivan:

This is evidence that Obama’s weakness and vacillation on the question of torture has done great damage. Hayden is using the Obama DOJ’s own white-washing report to minimize the war crimes in the Senate report. One of the ironies in this, of course, is that Hayden has been criticizing the Senate Report’s failure to interview the CIA torturers themselves, even though the Durham investigation legally precluded that for three years. But the Senate Report had an obvious alternative to such interviews: it had the CIA’s own internal documents, its very internal conversations, in which it is perfectly clear that as they were practicing torture, they knew what they were doing could not be described by anyone as “humane”. These documents alone are more than sufficient proof of the claims made in the report. They are definitive. More to the point, no documents were included from any other source – either to buttress or to contradict the findings. But in the Durham “investigation”, the torturers were interviewed but not the victims – a clearly rigged process designed to exculpate the war criminals.

There should, in my mind, be no debate about prosecutions for war crimes. Seriously, can you imagine the US opposing such prosecutions if they were in a foreign country? Besides, the US’ clear international and domestic legal obligations admit of no exceptionfor the prosecution of those credibly accused of torture – let alone of those, like Cheney, who have openly bragged about it. It specifically bars any exception in the case of national emergency. Not to prosecute because of such an emergency is therefore to end the Geneva Conventions – which is what Obama has effectively done. He must not be let off the hook for that fateful step – and what it does to the core meaning of the United States.

From now on, the US is a human rights violator of the first order under international law, a rogue state that has explicitly tortured innocent people and never held anyone legally responsible. I know that sounds terribly harsh. But how is it untrue? And to refuse to prosecute war crimes is to condone war crimes. Not burglary or robbery – but the gravest crimes against humanity that we can imagine. The perpetrators walk among us, many still in the CIA, and some holding presidential Medals of Freedom. Whatever absurd self-congratulations about this report, we should be in no doubt that this makes us no better in this respect than some South American junta before the transition to democracy.

And the fact that we are the most powerful country on earth makes this about much more than just us. It casts a dark and long shadow over humanity. It makes torture everywhere more likely, and more pervasive. It legitimizes evil. It removes from us any moral standing when it comes to Americans being tortured by these very same techniques – as they already have been in Syria, and as they will be in the future. When an American prisoner is tortured by an enemy power in the future, we will have no grounds to complain. Can we just face up to that instead of engaging in so much avoidance and denial? We didn’t just break Iraq; we broke the very structure of basic human rights that this country fought two world wars to establish.

John McCain

The only Republican I know of who came out against torture yesterday. Think about that:

The release of a Senate report on the CIA’s former interrogation program brought both political division and shock on Tuesday. While the shock was more universal, the division fell mostly along partisan lines with one notable exception: Senator John McCain.

In a nearly 15-minute speech from the Senate floor, McCain offered what is arguably the most robust defense so far of the report’s release, referencing hisown experience as a prisoner of war in Vietnam and rebuking his Republican colleagues by endorsing the study’s findings.

It is a thorough and thoughtful study of practices that I believe not only failed their purpose—to secure actionable intelligence to prevent further attacks on the U.S. and our allies—but actually damaged our security interests, as well as our reputation as a force for good in the world.

His longtime amigo Senator Lindsey Graham was one of many politicians and intelligence officials to say that the report—which contained graphic accounts of physical and psychological abuse—could damage American interests abroad and that the timing of its publication was “politically motivated.”

“The timing of the release is problematic given the growing threats we face,” Graham said on Tuesday. “Terrorism is on the rise, and our enemies will seize upon this report at a critical time. Simply put, this is not the time to release the report.”

McCain responded directly to the claim. He condemned the use of misinformation to garner support for past CIA practices and linked this history to the current campaign to keep the Senate report under wraps. “There is, I fear, misinformation being used today to prevent the release of this report, disputing its findings and warning about the security consequences of their public disclosure.”

Torture report

The word “rectal” appears 48 times. Anal “rehydration,” anal “feeding” that consisted of putting the guy’s dinner in a blender and shoving it up his rectum.

Page 50: “This group of officers included individuals who, among other issues, had engaged in inappropriate detainee interrogations, had workplace anger management issues, and had reportedly admitted to sexual assault.”

The White House press secretary was advised to avoid using the term “humane treatment” when discussing the detention of al-Qa’ida and Taliban personnel.

Page 100 – Majid Khan’s lunch tray, consisting of a meal of hummus, pasta with sauce, nuts, and raisins was “pureed” and rectally infused. Mustafa al-Hawsawi … was later diagnosed with chronic hemorrhoids, an anal fissure, and symptomatic rectal prolapse.

Missing voices

20-3-2003

Oh sure, we all remember this. I think that’s why I got wiretapped by the Bushies — I was interviewed in the Philadelphia Inquirer right before the war started, and I called Bush et al “war criminals”. I know that doesn’t sound so unusual now, but most people were cowed into silence and saying things like that back then was unusual. Even when it was really obvious that I was being tapped, I still couldn’t quite believe it. Like, “Really? One person with a small blog?” But even my mother could tell. “Susie, are they bugging your phone?” “Yes, mom, say hello to the nice man from the NSA.”

A new analysis of mainstream TV news has found there was almost no debate about whether the United States should go to war in Iraq and Syria. The group Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, or FAIR, found that of the more than 200 guests who appeared on network shows to discuss the topic, just six voiced opposition to military action. On the high-profile Sunday talk shows, out of 89 guests, there was just one antiwar voice — Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor of The Nation.

Here is a link to the actual study, published by FAIR
Nov 14, 2014
No Debate and the New War
Study finds little opposition to US attacks on Iraq, Syria

And so it continues

Not unexpected — the Israelis have been even more blatant in land grabs lately, several Palestinians have been seriously injured and one bus driver was found hanged in his bus. (Officials said it was a suicide.) Now we have this horrendous attack on people praying at a synagogue, and of course it will be used as a reason for more violence:

JERUSALEM — Two Palestinians armed with knives, axes and a gun stormed a synagogue in an Orthodox Jewish neighborhood on Tuesday, killing three Americans — including a prominent rabbi — and a British worshiper in one of the deadliest attacks in years in Jerusalem.

The attackers — identified by Palestinian media as residents of mostly Arab East Jerusalem — were then killed by police in an aftermath that vividly showed the razor-edge tensions in Jerusalem after weeks of bloodshed and clashes.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accused Palestinian leaders of inciting violence and promised to “respond harshly.” In the Palestinian-controlled Gaza Strip, calls over loudspeakers praised the attackers.

In East Jerusalem, crowds hurled stones at Israeli police fanning out around the neighborhood where the attackers lived.

The Associated Press, citing Israeli police, said those killed included one Briton and three Americans — among them Rabbi Moshe Twersky, who taught at an English-speaking religious school in Jerusalem and was a member of one of the most respected families in Orthodox scholarship.

Will Mark Udall release the CIA torture report?

Fellows at the Mark Udall rally

I sure hope so. And I hope they don’t kill him first:

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. Mark Udall has seven weeks left in office, but the Colorado Democrat isn’t prepared to go quietly — especially when it comes to the twin issues of CIA torture and government snooping.

In his first interview since Election Day, Udall told The Denver Post that he would “keep all options on the table,” including a rarely-used right given to federal lawmakers, to publicize a secret report about the harsh interrogation techniques used by CIA agents in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

He also vowed to make one final push to curb the National Security Agency and its power to gather information on ordinary Americans.

“Trying to run out the clock … is not an option,” Udall said Thursday of the long-hidden CIA report. “The truth will come out.”

Udall’s pledge to make a last stand comes amid a chorus of pleas from media outlets and civil libertarians.

Mere hours after Udall lost his re-election bid to Republican Cory Gardner, one columnist with The Guardian newspaper — the British publication made famous in the U.S. for its coverage of the Edward Snowden-NSA affair — urged Udall to ” go out with a bang” and make public the CIA torture report.

For months, members of the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, which includes Udall, have feuded with the administration over the release of the committee’s own review of CIA tactics following al-Qaeda’s strikes on New York City and the Pentagon.

Here’s some cheery news

#Israel's Human Rights Commission Report.

If it’s true. I’d love to see Obama drop the hammer on Israel over these illegal settlements:

US President Barack Obama has threatened to lift the ban on the veto given to Israel, a decision that many view as a threat to Israel’s existence, Israeli news sites reported today.

The Israeli newspaper Maariv reported that Netanyahu supporters are worried at what they feel is Obama’s betrayal of Israel at the United Nations. The Israeli newspaper went on to describe the current tensions as “quite shocking and something that negatively affects relations between Tel Aviv and Washington”.

Maariv quoted an Israeli politician as saying: “Obama intends to abandon Israel as it faces the UN Security Council in an effort to block Israel’s decision to build on Palestinian territory that has been occupied since 1967.”

It was also reported that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told only a small number of his confidants about the true nature of this impending threat including Jewish Home members Naftali Bennett and Uri Ariel among others in his circle.

According to the newspaper, Netanyahu told his political circle that Obama plans to abandon Israel at the United Nations and that this will have many consequences. “This step was what Israel feared the moment Obama was re-elected and here it is happening today,” Netanyahu added.

The paper said: “Obama intends to destroy the most sacred of holy relationships between Israel and the United States and he intends to use the US veto against Israel at the UN. Without the power of the US veto, Israel would not be able to stay.”
It is unknown whether or not a proposal is even on the Security Council’s table or if any discussions are being had that could potentially block Israel’s decision to build settlements in the occupied territories.

Israeli cop fires on AP photographers

Ni'lin

They must hate witnesses:

JERUSALEM (AP) — Two photographers, including one working for The Associated Press, were struck by rubber-coated bullets fired at close range by an Israeli border policeman. Neither photographer was seriously hurt in Sunday’s incident, which came during protests that followed the funeral of a 14-year-old Palestinian boy killed in a clash with Israeli soldiers.

It was the latest incident in which journalists have been injured by tear gas, stun grenades and rubber bullets fired by border police, a paramilitary unit often sent in to quell violent demonstrations. AP said it planned to protest to the Israeli military, police and government. John Daniszewski, senior managing editor for international news, said the shooting showed “reckless disregard for the safety of journalists who were doing their job in a lawful way.”

AP photographer Majdi Mohammed said he was among several photographers who took up positions near the protests in the West Bank town of Silwad. Mohammed said they were not ordered to leave and the area had not been declared closed.

As he was taking pictures, an armored jeep pulled up behind him, a border policeman stepped out and fired directly at him from a distance of 10 to 20 meters (10 to 20 yards), Mohammed said.